Camera & Equipment
UPDATED 17 July 2019:
For those who are interested I just thought I’d write an update on equipment used to photograph on this website. Since 1992 (or maybe even 1991) I have used the same camera, a Wista Cherrywood field camera. It has done me proud. I had no idea I would ever keep it this long. When first purchased I was horrified at the expense and was almost certain I’d never get to grips with using such a cumbersome, heavy, large camera. Of course, after so many years, I was wrong. It has worked hard, a camera is, do not forget, a tool. It has dealt with a lot of rain, a lot of condensation, a lot of knocks and dust and dirt. I’ve never really used it on a beach to any great extent but it has seen a lot of drizzle. It has been altered very little over the years. It has had one set of new bellows and that is about it. It is covered in scratches and dents and screw holes where I’ve added sprit levels, flash attachments, new straps. The brass is tarnished somewhat but there’s no crack in the wood and all dials and locks still work.
So, after 27 years or so, I have decided to buy something different. I purchased an Ebony RSW45 non-folding camera. The advantage of this new camera is that a lens can be left on the camera at all times, which means it is much quicker to set up. With the Wista I needed to open the camera, pull out the front standard and lock various dials (front standard, back standard, rear shift dials, front lift dials… It also had to be done by eye to align at right angles and put a lens on, then I could focus). All this takes a minute or so. With the Ebony all I need to do is put the camera on a tripod and focus. It saves time, it also means there’s less chance of any errors, of dials being knocked and the focus plane being out. The Ebony is a very solid camera, with little to go wrong with.
There are a few disadvantages with the Ebony. It has less movements than the Wista. It does have front rise which is the only movement I use on a regular basis. It also has front tilt. Something I do use but not often. Other than that it lacks, compared to the Wista, front shift, front swing, back sing, back shift. Of these movement I only ever used the back swing and I do feel I might miss that movement especially in tight situations where I am unable to move the tripod. But time will tell. The Ebony is lighter by 400grams.
The weight of camera equipment has never really been a primary problem for me. I used to carry around 13 – 16kg with effort, but a manageable effort. However, the older I become, I am 48 years old, the less able I seem to be to walk all day with such weight. With this in mind I have tried to make my load a little lighter. The last time I went out with my camera and normal tripod the whole weight was 13kg. I took two lenses and only 8 dark-slides. Once I took 16 dark-slides and three lenses.
The tripod I used was a Manfrotto 055. This, with added head and quick release plate came to almost 4kg. After 27 years of using Manfrotto 055’s (I’ve had two in those years) I’ve just purchased a third 055 but with Carbon Fibre legs. It’s almost 1.5kg lighter. Along with this tripod I have also purchased another carbon fibre tripod which weights over 2kg’s lighter again. It isn’t quite has sturdy as the Manfrotto but I think it will be used a lot on longer hikes. Overall, the camera equipment is nearing on 3kg’s lighter. I am not saying this will allow me to walk further! I’m just saying hopefully I’ll not be quite so lumbered down with heavy equipment and therefore may be tempted to go out a little more and for a little longer.
I use two lenses, a Sinaron (rebadged Rodenstock) 90mm F4.5 in copal 1 shutter and a Rodenstock 150mm Sinaron-n F5.6. The 90mm is a heavy lens. I did consider swapping with a Nikon 90mm F4.5 which was about 150grams lighter but I preferred and trusted my Sinaron too much to part with it. The 150mm lens is very small and lightweight and most importantly, very sharp.
So, this equipment change, is a somewhat forced move. Another issue with the Ebony is that is has shorter bellows. This is something I’ve yet to test especially since I do like to take a lot of close-up macro shots of abstracts on walls but it seems to be to bellows draw should be more than adequate. I will be sad to let go the Wista camera and it will need to be sold – I believe I paid around £700 for it back in 1991/92. The second-hand price, even for mine which is very well worn, is around £270-£300. At least recouping some of the £800 back for the Ebony. I have never been particularly sentimental over camera equipment, it is equipment after all, but after so many years there’s definitely some sadness in saying goodbye to a trusty companion....
Ebony RSW45
The Camera:
The camera I use is Wista field 5x4 inch field camera – so called because it folds up and can be taken out into the landscape. I have owned and used this camera constantly since I purchased it in 1992. It is somewhat battered but trustworthy.
Lenses:
Like many photographers I tend to buy and sell lenses as I go along... if I feel dissatisfied with any particular lens then I usually sell it and try something else...
Up until recently (2017) my trusted and frequently used lenses were:
Schneider Super Angulon 90mm F5.6 (Used the most often)
Schneider Super Angulon 75mm F5.6
Sinaron-s 150mm F5.6
But these had to be sold and now I use only one lens 90% of the time:
Sinaron-w (Rodenstock Grandagon) 90mm F4.5 which I like very much.
Many bemoan the size and weight of this lens but for the sake of only a few hundred grams I find this a very small price to pay for the amount of movement (I mostly only use front rise) and the brightness of the groundglass - F4.5 is only half a stop brighter than the Super-Angulon 90mm F5.6 but this often permits me to fore-go a darkcloth and therefore a quicker exposure.
I am often on private land and work quickly. More often than not an image is composed and captured within two minutes (this included setting up tripod, fixing camera, opening up camera, fixing a lens and cable release, opening up lens to focus, compose, close lens, select a darkslide, make an exposure reading - often a three or four, set lens shutter speeds and aperture and then, finally, an exposure is made). None of this is superfluous. It cannot be avoided and must be done precisely and quickly. I have done this routine thousands of times and has become a second nature. Nonetheless, mistakes are occasionally made - incorrect exposures, accidental fogging of film, incorrect setting of lens shutter speeds/aperture but fortunately these errors are few and far between.
I currently only own two lenses,the 90mm and another Rodenstock lens, 150mm Sironar-s F5.6 which is also lovely and sharp with good coverage.
I should also mention that the bellows on my Wista camera are narrower than the official bellows and this allows for greater movement.
This was a fortunate accident. I needed new bellows and these Linhof fit ones seemed correct for the Wista - and thus they proved.
I find all these lenses cover 99% of my needs and am happy with their coverage and sharpness.
Previously I've used Apo Ronar's (150mm), G-claron (150mm, 210mm 240mm), Apo-Lanthar's (150mm), Xenar's and Xenator's (100mm, 135mm, 150mm, 180mm, 210mm), Geronar's (90mm, 150mm), Fujinon's (150mm) and various Grandagon's, Symmar's and Apo-Symmar's - some of these lens have been superb (notably, and surprisingly, the Geronar 90mm - my first large format lens which I had for fifteen years before being rendered useless) and the modern version of the Xenar 150mm F5.6 and have been disappointed with some of the so-called superior pieces of glass (Apo-Lanthar, Grandagon 90mm F6.8)...
Of course, most of my failures have been my own doing, badly exposed/processed/focused/camera blur etc etc...
Occasional Transport:
...otherwise an old beat-up estate car... correction, old beat up ford focus...
Benefits:
The main benefit of using such a camera is the quality of the finished image. The negative size is 5 x 4 inches. Such a large negative means that it does not need to be enlarged as much as other formats (35mm, medium format) to make a finished print. Other larger cameras are available, most commonly the 10x8inch camera but these are much larger and weightier, the film much more expensive.
My camera has something called ‘camera movements’ where I am able to tilt/rise/swing the lens to adjust focussing on the subject and, most importantly for architecture photography, to control perspective. To control perspective the front part of the camera with the lens attached to has to ‘lift’ - this will correct the convergence of parallel lines when photographing tall buildings.
With ‘lift’ to control converging parallel lines when photographing buildings
With front and rear tilt
Extending the bellows allows for extreme macro-close up work
The camera half folded
The camera fully folded
Downfalls:
One of the downsides of using these type of cameras is also a positive, the size of the camera and cumbersomeness when setting it up. It must be tripod mounted every time. The image is upside down and back to front in the ground glass. Its slowness of setting up is however also one its greatest strengths. The slower one works, the more care and attention one takes composing.
The price of film is becoming very expensive (approx £30 - £35 for a box of 25 sheets). Again, this too means one is much more careful with what one takes photos of.
It’s weight. Without any other provisions, the weight of my equipment, including tripod, two lenses and around 12 darkslides (which hold the sheets of film in) weighs around 15 kg. Walking all day becomes tiring but is manageable and often worth all the effort.
Composition:
I was recently asked at a talk how I composed my images. I struggled to answer such a seemingly basic and simple question. I aim with the mansion houses and the farms for three basic exposures.
The first is an image, wherever possible (sometimes not due to obstructions such as other buildings, trees or occasionally a forest of brambles), of a building as the architect of that building first envisaged the blueprint. An image of the façade, photographed straight on, using perspective control (‘lift’) on the camera.
The second; An image taken internally of a ruined property, wherever possible (sometimes not due to unavailable light, inaccessibility or simply because there is nothing of note within). This can range from a simple exposure of a fireplace, an internal fragment of the fabrics used in building a house (ie a cruck frame exposed) or indeed perhaps recent graffiti carved into damp soft plaster work.
The third, and I believe more importantly, an image which captures not just an element of a house but also some of the character of its surroundings. These images are often the most hard fought.
There is a simple rule in photography called ‘the rule of thirds’ when a photograph is composed by simply dividing the rectangle framing on the ground glass into approximate ‘thirds’.
For example, this can be achieved simply by a landscape image. One third of the image is taken up with the land, another third with the sky and final third with a tree. Many images are taken using this simple technique, and it’s a technique that many photographers compose automatically, without much needed thought or attention. This is not a criticism. I do this myself in the majority of my images.
Quite often this ‘atmospheric’ third shot I seek is stepping outside the ‘rule of thirds’ and adding extra elements of the subject, pulling apart the rule of thirds whilst pushing together, within the confines of the ground glass, what I consider essential elements of the scene before me.
This is where, on location, it becomes a challenge. A house may have grand façade, gnarled trees planted around it circumference, tumbled blocks of dressed stonework laying chaotically around in amongst the debris of other stonework and rampant foliage. All these elements may be present but to fit together a coherent picture with just one or even two of these elements can be impossible.
Sometimes I am fortunate, a rhododendron bush may have recently died and before other plants take advantage of this, that may be the time I visit a house and exposing more of a house than has been exposed for many a year.
Others times, not so fortunate. I have had on a list of properties to photograph a small cottage and barn. I have had this in mind to photograph for over three years. I visited last month to find the cottage roof (corrugated iron) had blown off, not a total disaster, but it had fallen across the most interesting part of the cottage and was obscuring the pre-visualized latent image I had in my mind for over three years.
The compositions that are the most successful are the ones when I am able to think outside the box. Sometimes these are found because I’m feeling tense, other times when I am at comfort. Each property throws up its own problems. Sometimes these compositions are not properly seen until I compose under the ground glass.
I have recently found myself composing an image using a digital camera beforehand and playing back the image immediately. I have stopped this temptation. It feels a lazy way of seeking a ‘truthful’ composition and could, arguably, destroying my skill of seeing. Without sounding too obvious, there is no better feeling when an image comes together, whilst peering under a darkcloth, totally absorbed within the view.
For those who are interested I just thought I’d write an update on equipment used to photograph on this website. Since 1992 (or maybe even 1991) I have used the same camera, a Wista Cherrywood field camera. It has done me proud. I had no idea I would ever keep it this long. When first purchased I was horrified at the expense and was almost certain I’d never get to grips with using such a cumbersome, heavy, large camera. Of course, after so many years, I was wrong. It has worked hard, a camera is, do not forget, a tool. It has dealt with a lot of rain, a lot of condensation, a lot of knocks and dust and dirt. I’ve never really used it on a beach to any great extent but it has seen a lot of drizzle. It has been altered very little over the years. It has had one set of new bellows and that is about it. It is covered in scratches and dents and screw holes where I’ve added sprit levels, flash attachments, new straps. The brass is tarnished somewhat but there’s no crack in the wood and all dials and locks still work.
So, after 27 years or so, I have decided to buy something different. I purchased an Ebony RSW45 non-folding camera. The advantage of this new camera is that a lens can be left on the camera at all times, which means it is much quicker to set up. With the Wista I needed to open the camera, pull out the front standard and lock various dials (front standard, back standard, rear shift dials, front lift dials… It also had to be done by eye to align at right angles and put a lens on, then I could focus). All this takes a minute or so. With the Ebony all I need to do is put the camera on a tripod and focus. It saves time, it also means there’s less chance of any errors, of dials being knocked and the focus plane being out. The Ebony is a very solid camera, with little to go wrong with.
There are a few disadvantages with the Ebony. It has less movements than the Wista. It does have front rise which is the only movement I use on a regular basis. It also has front tilt. Something I do use but not often. Other than that it lacks, compared to the Wista, front shift, front swing, back sing, back shift. Of these movement I only ever used the back swing and I do feel I might miss that movement especially in tight situations where I am unable to move the tripod. But time will tell. The Ebony is lighter by 400grams.
The weight of camera equipment has never really been a primary problem for me. I used to carry around 13 – 16kg with effort, but a manageable effort. However, the older I become, I am 48 years old, the less able I seem to be to walk all day with such weight. With this in mind I have tried to make my load a little lighter. The last time I went out with my camera and normal tripod the whole weight was 13kg. I took two lenses and only 8 dark-slides. Once I took 16 dark-slides and three lenses.
The tripod I used was a Manfrotto 055. This, with added head and quick release plate came to almost 4kg. After 27 years of using Manfrotto 055’s (I’ve had two in those years) I’ve just purchased a third 055 but with Carbon Fibre legs. It’s almost 1.5kg lighter. Along with this tripod I have also purchased another carbon fibre tripod which weights over 2kg’s lighter again. It isn’t quite has sturdy as the Manfrotto but I think it will be used a lot on longer hikes. Overall, the camera equipment is nearing on 3kg’s lighter. I am not saying this will allow me to walk further! I’m just saying hopefully I’ll not be quite so lumbered down with heavy equipment and therefore may be tempted to go out a little more and for a little longer.
I use two lenses, a Sinaron (rebadged Rodenstock) 90mm F4.5 in copal 1 shutter and a Rodenstock 150mm Sinaron-n F5.6. The 90mm is a heavy lens. I did consider swapping with a Nikon 90mm F4.5 which was about 150grams lighter but I preferred and trusted my Sinaron too much to part with it. The 150mm lens is very small and lightweight and most importantly, very sharp.
So, this equipment change, is a somewhat forced move. Another issue with the Ebony is that is has shorter bellows. This is something I’ve yet to test especially since I do like to take a lot of close-up macro shots of abstracts on walls but it seems to be to bellows draw should be more than adequate. I will be sad to let go the Wista camera and it will need to be sold – I believe I paid around £700 for it back in 1991/92. The second-hand price, even for mine which is very well worn, is around £270-£300. At least recouping some of the £800 back for the Ebony. I have never been particularly sentimental over camera equipment, it is equipment after all, but after so many years there’s definitely some sadness in saying goodbye to a trusty companion....
Ebony RSW45
The Camera:
The camera I use is Wista field 5x4 inch field camera – so called because it folds up and can be taken out into the landscape. I have owned and used this camera constantly since I purchased it in 1992. It is somewhat battered but trustworthy.
Lenses:
Like many photographers I tend to buy and sell lenses as I go along... if I feel dissatisfied with any particular lens then I usually sell it and try something else...
Up until recently (2017) my trusted and frequently used lenses were:
Schneider Super Angulon 90mm F5.6 (Used the most often)
Schneider Super Angulon 75mm F5.6
Sinaron-s 150mm F5.6
But these had to be sold and now I use only one lens 90% of the time:
Sinaron-w (Rodenstock Grandagon) 90mm F4.5 which I like very much.
Many bemoan the size and weight of this lens but for the sake of only a few hundred grams I find this a very small price to pay for the amount of movement (I mostly only use front rise) and the brightness of the groundglass - F4.5 is only half a stop brighter than the Super-Angulon 90mm F5.6 but this often permits me to fore-go a darkcloth and therefore a quicker exposure.
I am often on private land and work quickly. More often than not an image is composed and captured within two minutes (this included setting up tripod, fixing camera, opening up camera, fixing a lens and cable release, opening up lens to focus, compose, close lens, select a darkslide, make an exposure reading - often a three or four, set lens shutter speeds and aperture and then, finally, an exposure is made). None of this is superfluous. It cannot be avoided and must be done precisely and quickly. I have done this routine thousands of times and has become a second nature. Nonetheless, mistakes are occasionally made - incorrect exposures, accidental fogging of film, incorrect setting of lens shutter speeds/aperture but fortunately these errors are few and far between.
I currently only own two lenses,the 90mm and another Rodenstock lens, 150mm Sironar-s F5.6 which is also lovely and sharp with good coverage.
I should also mention that the bellows on my Wista camera are narrower than the official bellows and this allows for greater movement.
This was a fortunate accident. I needed new bellows and these Linhof fit ones seemed correct for the Wista - and thus they proved.
I find all these lenses cover 99% of my needs and am happy with their coverage and sharpness.
Previously I've used Apo Ronar's (150mm), G-claron (150mm, 210mm 240mm), Apo-Lanthar's (150mm), Xenar's and Xenator's (100mm, 135mm, 150mm, 180mm, 210mm), Geronar's (90mm, 150mm), Fujinon's (150mm) and various Grandagon's, Symmar's and Apo-Symmar's - some of these lens have been superb (notably, and surprisingly, the Geronar 90mm - my first large format lens which I had for fifteen years before being rendered useless) and the modern version of the Xenar 150mm F5.6 and have been disappointed with some of the so-called superior pieces of glass (Apo-Lanthar, Grandagon 90mm F6.8)...
Of course, most of my failures have been my own doing, badly exposed/processed/focused/camera blur etc etc...
Occasional Transport:
...otherwise an old beat-up estate car... correction, old beat up ford focus...
Benefits:
The main benefit of using such a camera is the quality of the finished image. The negative size is 5 x 4 inches. Such a large negative means that it does not need to be enlarged as much as other formats (35mm, medium format) to make a finished print. Other larger cameras are available, most commonly the 10x8inch camera but these are much larger and weightier, the film much more expensive.
My camera has something called ‘camera movements’ where I am able to tilt/rise/swing the lens to adjust focussing on the subject and, most importantly for architecture photography, to control perspective. To control perspective the front part of the camera with the lens attached to has to ‘lift’ - this will correct the convergence of parallel lines when photographing tall buildings.
With ‘lift’ to control converging parallel lines when photographing buildings
With front and rear tilt
Extending the bellows allows for extreme macro-close up work
The camera half folded
The camera fully folded
Downfalls:
One of the downsides of using these type of cameras is also a positive, the size of the camera and cumbersomeness when setting it up. It must be tripod mounted every time. The image is upside down and back to front in the ground glass. Its slowness of setting up is however also one its greatest strengths. The slower one works, the more care and attention one takes composing.
The price of film is becoming very expensive (approx £30 - £35 for a box of 25 sheets). Again, this too means one is much more careful with what one takes photos of.
It’s weight. Without any other provisions, the weight of my equipment, including tripod, two lenses and around 12 darkslides (which hold the sheets of film in) weighs around 15 kg. Walking all day becomes tiring but is manageable and often worth all the effort.
Composition:
I was recently asked at a talk how I composed my images. I struggled to answer such a seemingly basic and simple question. I aim with the mansion houses and the farms for three basic exposures.
The first is an image, wherever possible (sometimes not due to obstructions such as other buildings, trees or occasionally a forest of brambles), of a building as the architect of that building first envisaged the blueprint. An image of the façade, photographed straight on, using perspective control (‘lift’) on the camera.
The second; An image taken internally of a ruined property, wherever possible (sometimes not due to unavailable light, inaccessibility or simply because there is nothing of note within). This can range from a simple exposure of a fireplace, an internal fragment of the fabrics used in building a house (ie a cruck frame exposed) or indeed perhaps recent graffiti carved into damp soft plaster work.
The third, and I believe more importantly, an image which captures not just an element of a house but also some of the character of its surroundings. These images are often the most hard fought.
There is a simple rule in photography called ‘the rule of thirds’ when a photograph is composed by simply dividing the rectangle framing on the ground glass into approximate ‘thirds’.
For example, this can be achieved simply by a landscape image. One third of the image is taken up with the land, another third with the sky and final third with a tree. Many images are taken using this simple technique, and it’s a technique that many photographers compose automatically, without much needed thought or attention. This is not a criticism. I do this myself in the majority of my images.
Quite often this ‘atmospheric’ third shot I seek is stepping outside the ‘rule of thirds’ and adding extra elements of the subject, pulling apart the rule of thirds whilst pushing together, within the confines of the ground glass, what I consider essential elements of the scene before me.
This is where, on location, it becomes a challenge. A house may have grand façade, gnarled trees planted around it circumference, tumbled blocks of dressed stonework laying chaotically around in amongst the debris of other stonework and rampant foliage. All these elements may be present but to fit together a coherent picture with just one or even two of these elements can be impossible.
Sometimes I am fortunate, a rhododendron bush may have recently died and before other plants take advantage of this, that may be the time I visit a house and exposing more of a house than has been exposed for many a year.
Others times, not so fortunate. I have had on a list of properties to photograph a small cottage and barn. I have had this in mind to photograph for over three years. I visited last month to find the cottage roof (corrugated iron) had blown off, not a total disaster, but it had fallen across the most interesting part of the cottage and was obscuring the pre-visualized latent image I had in my mind for over three years.
The compositions that are the most successful are the ones when I am able to think outside the box. Sometimes these are found because I’m feeling tense, other times when I am at comfort. Each property throws up its own problems. Sometimes these compositions are not properly seen until I compose under the ground glass.
I have recently found myself composing an image using a digital camera beforehand and playing back the image immediately. I have stopped this temptation. It feels a lazy way of seeking a ‘truthful’ composition and could, arguably, destroying my skill of seeing. Without sounding too obvious, there is no better feeling when an image comes together, whilst peering under a darkcloth, totally absorbed within the view.