View Full Version : Tachihara 4x5 F vs Horseman 45 HD

7-Jan-2010, 07:33

I am looking for my first flatbed field camera in order to start large format photography. I would be shooting mainly landscapes. After researching for a while I have short-listed :

1) Tachihara 4x5 F which sells used for about 455 USD

2) Horseman 45HD which sells used for about 510 USD

Both seem in good conditions. Though the Tachihara seems slightly lighter, I appreciate the Horseman for being very compact (other than built in metal). The Horseman, however, lacks back movements (in particular tilt and swing): I was wondering whether the back movements (where needed) can be effectively obtained by tilting (or swinging) the front standard and then tilting the flatbed over the tripod in the opposite direction until the front standard is straight. If possible, I would think that this limitation can be acceptable.

As far as the Horseman 45HD's limited bellows extension (249mm), I find this a little bit more disturbing. I have heard that there are some bellows extension but I guess they will be pretty expensive.

I have also seen a Wista 45 DX in rose wood (which seems slightly heavier then the two mentioned above) which sells used for about 585 UD, but I can't really see which advantages it has then justify its price and heavier weight.

If you were in shoes, what would you do?


7-Jan-2010, 08:13
moving the back tilt and swing causes practically no change in the placement of the image circle of the lens and that is the main reason why they are useful.

they're also needed sometimes to drop the bed for wide angles

a combination of back tilt and front tilt or back swing and front swing can be used as a pseudo rise/fall/shift

7-Jan-2010, 08:44
As Nate said, back swings and tilts, especially if centered, require no excess lens coverage. If you're shooting "only" landscapes and backpack or hike with your gear you may want to buy the smallest lightest lenses that will cover 4x5. The only other movement you may want for landscapes is rise/fall and this can be on either the front or the back... doesn't matter except back rise/fall usually adds too much weight to the camera... or use pseudo rise/fall as Nate suggested. Portraiture and architecture are completely different animals.