OzWizard wrote:
. . . I am interested in purchasing one, but I would like to know more information on acquiring a lens . . .And any other information you think is useful.
Check ebay for a lens. A ‘normal’ lens would be 152 mm, but the common lens used was about 135 mm. There are many different brands and models available, and some are excellent deals.
Typical maximum aperture is f/4.5. A ‘fast’ lens would be f/3.5, and more expensive. Longer focal lengths (and wider) tend to be f/5.6 or even f/8.
Older lenses used on press cameras may not have a PC flash fitting, but rather a ‘bi-post’ (2-pin) flash connection. Adapters to fit standard PC connectors are available. Some very old lenses do not have any flash synchronization at all. These are sometimes very inexpensive.
For studio use, including portraiture. a slightly longer focal length, 180 mm or 210 mm works well.
For a quick and dirty approximation to compare these to focal lengths used with 35 mm full frame cameras, use a factor of 3.
For example: A 90 mm lens on a 4x5 is similar to a 30 mm lens on a 35mm camera. And a 135 on a 4x5 is about 45 mm—pretty close to a 50 mm ‘normal’ with 35 mm format.
An excellent addition to a 4x5 camera is a roll film adapter allowing the use of 120 (or 220) film. These are available in different formats, including 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, and 6x12 cm formats. The 6x7 shape comes closest to matching the proportions of a 4x5.
Sometimes these are referenced not by the image size, but by how many pictures you can get per roll of 120 film. An ‘RH12’ would be a roll holder for 12 exposures, and those would be square 6x6 (nominal) images. A 10 exposure back would give 6x7 images, and you would get eight 6x9 cm images (same proportions as 35 mm film). Graphlex also called those 2x3 or type 23 backs, referring to the images being roughly 2” by 3”.
While shopping for a lens, you might want to look at some used view cameras on ebay. You might find a better camera for about the same price. I’ve seen used Sinar field cameras offered at $500 or less.
I don’t suppose you happen to already have an enlarger that holds 4x5 negatives? Scanning the larger negatives is an option.