No love for Horseman?

[PureQuill Photo]

As a old guy re-entring the world of LF I have been checking out my options for a 4X5 to shoot landscapes with.
Much to my delight I find cameras that in 1981 I could only dream of now with in my budget.
Linhof is still forever out of reach...Some of us will never get to own a Rolls Royce.
But others Like Sinar , Swiss Arca & especially Horseman are down right affordable.
Especially when you consider that the $2k digital camera one buys today will be worth next to nothing in 10 years!
Obviously Deardorf & Linhof are more than just cameras they are an investment/commodity for collectors.(Similar to Lica’s)
Is the quality & availability of parts & accessories of Horseman just not up to par with Sinar & Arca Swiss hence the price difference?
Or is the deal a Horseman, you just have to be willing to take the extra time & effort to put together a proper system?
Part of me thinks I should be practical & buy one of the brand new chinese field cameras or a used Wista or Tachihara.
But another part of me always dreamed of owning a swiss 4X5 with Zeiss glass.
Am I just being nostalgic & silly?

[Daniel Stone]

Use what YOU like/want/need

I've owned Sinar, Arca Swiss, Deardorff(currently), Cambo, Calumet, and Kodak view cameras. All have produced good pictures, and all have produced enough "duds" in total to fill a few albums full!

A camera is JUST a box. But each box has a different way/method of getting to that same end exposure/shot. Some have axis tilts, some have base tilts. Some have both. Some will let you use multiple sizes of film back on the camera(modular systems like Sinar, Arca, Cambo, etc..)

If you like Horseman, use it! We're not the one photographing here, you are. You'll be the one to tote it(well, that's unless you have a caddy), use it, shoot with it, etc...
Only YOU can make the final decision of where you'll put your money.

My preference for a monorail system? Sinar. Cheap as chips for the quality you're getting(as long as it's fully working, duh), parts are quite plentiful, lensboards are super cheap, adapter boards are available easily, etc... My 2nd would be for Arca Swiss(much more $$$), as long as it's equipped with the "orbix"(axis tilts) feature. My mind can't work with base tilts. But that's me...

Horseman was a big name BACK IN THE DAY. Loads of people used them. 'Loads', because view cameras were used much more 'back then' than they are today in the photographic world.

Recommendation:
Write down a list of EVERYTHING you want to have in a kit
Write down WHERE you'll plan to go, and how you plan to get to those places
Write down the capabilities/features you want in your (to be) camera

Base your decision on what the [above] answered questions.


FYI, the only cameras (I) see these days as any potential "investment" would be the Phillips line of cameras made over the years. Check out recent ebay sale prices to see what I mean...
A camera is merely a means to an end. A piece of the puzzle. A tool. A blunt object that can be wielded any way you want to use it.

-Dan

[djdister]

To amplify Daniel Stone's response, you first need to determine your requirements or needs, before worrying about brand names. So, your first task is to determine if you need a FIELD camera or a MONORAIL camera. If you are unsure about what this decision might mean to you, you have a lot of reasearch to do. But in short, this decision gets to the heart of how "transportable" the camera outfit will be, as well as how much you will be able to manipulate your plane of focus, control converging lines, and etc.

A FIELD camera is more transportable, more self-contained when you fold it up, but generally will have a shorter (or non-existent) range of tilts, swings, and bellows extension. A field camera will probably have a smaller range of lenses available, or will be limited due to its shorter bellows extension. This type of camera would be more appropriate if you intend to hike/backpack to different sites.

A MONORAIL camera is generally more cumbersome to transport, but will have a wider range of tilts, swings and longer bellows extension, therefore it will be be usable with a wider range of lenses. This type of camera would be more appropriate if you are doing studio work, or short-distance (drivable) shooting, and would also be the best selection for architecture shots.

That said, you will find that many (but not all) of the brands will have both field camera models and monorail camera models - for example, you can find Horseman cameras in field or monorail types, just like you can find Linhof cameras in field or monorail models. So focus first on your needs (how you intend to use it), before fretting over brand names.

[BradS]

Lots of good advice already....but, I'll toss a few more logs on that fire.

(in my mind):
Horseman is the Japanese Sinar...just like Wista is the Japanese Linhof and Bronica is the Japanese Hasselblad.
That's not saying anything bad about Horseman. In all of the examples above, the Japanese offering has technological improvements at a lower price.

As others have said, first figure out what yu want to do with the LF camera...do you want to take it out into the field. If so, then I personally would recommend one of the lighter weight, wooden folding field cameras. If your going to stay in the studio, then a monorail might be better suited to your needs (but for portraits, very few movements are needed and so, we're back to a wood field or tailboard camera).

The Sinar F2 is Sinar's concept of a field camera...and while, it is a whole lot easier to pack it into the field than a big Toyo monorail for example, it is no joy....the Sinar F, F1 and F2 are not terrible rugged either. The early models are chronicly broken and best avoided altogether. They do not instill a lot of confidence perched up there on top of your tripod either. The Sinar Norma and the Toyo monorails feel like they could tumble out of the back of a truck on the freeway and after they stopped rolling, could be picked up, dusted off and used just fine....the F2...not so much. I suspect that the Horsemans are similar to the more fragile Sinar F...but, have never owned one. (

You'll find more, much more parts and accessories for a Sinar than for Horseman. Sinar seems plentiful and cheap today.

I've never owned an Arca Swiss...they look nice but it seems like parts - like lens boards are far more scarce than for Sinar for example.

If you're thinking of humping a LF kit into the field - even if your thinking you'll stay within a 100 yard radius of the car, the weight and bulk gets to be a big deal...at least for me it was. The difference between having a six pound camera and one that weighs just four pounds may not seem like much in the grand scheme of things but, for me it is the difference between taking the camera with me and leaving it home in the drawer.

There are so many other factors to consider....and it would be difficult for me to enumerate them all here....and what is important to me is perhaps, less so to you or anybody else. I can't stand the Chamonix for example, others love them. Shen Hoa seems to think every 4x5 camera needs rear rise....I disagree. Both make excellent cameras...just none of them are really right for me.

I've bought and sold a shit load of LF cameras in my ten years of using LF. One thing is certainly true: there is no perfect LF camera. They all involve some kind of compromise. I've settled on a few I can live with in peace...and it is good .

[Alan Gales]

I own a Sinar P. Like said earlier, there is just so much stuff easily available at a reasonable price for Sinar here in the United States.

Another advantage of Sinar is the Sinar Shutter. If you like using old lenses in barrel and want a shutter, you just can't beat it.

[Oren Grad]

FWIW: lens boards and bellows are generally interchangeable between Sinar and Horseman monorails.

Anyway, you'd have to pay me to lug my Sinars outside the house. When I'm on the move it's field cameras all the way. As always, YMMV.

[Vaughn]

I like the 4x5 Horseman Woodman field cameras. Light, simple, well-made. Certainly lasts a lot longer than the 4x5 Tachihara with student use.

[Richard Wasserman]

My travel kit is a Horseman 45FA and 3 lenses. It is very compact, lightweight, and when folded, being metal more or less bulletproof.

[Jonathan Barlow]

Sinar cameras and accessories are plentiful in the US because they were used by the majority of professional studios. They were never inexpensive when new (For example, a Sinar P2 8x10 was $13,000 in 1995.) but when the studios sold off their used equipment they flooded the market.

[Tin Can]

I really like my Horseman and I have a few. My 4x5 HD Field is simple. This week I am using a very good condition 4x5 L monorail, it is very sturdy, fully geared and works like butter. I can loosen the rail locks and simply push the 3 rail movements quickly into position. So does a Sinar, but this Horseman is smoother and quicker. The tripod adapter has both 1/4" and 3/8" which I really like. Horseman 4x5 monorail bellows and lens boards are the same as Sinar.

I sold my Sinar kit here, last month, because I prefer Horseman. It wiggles less.

I also use Horseman 4x5 frames adapted to old wood studio cameras so I can easily switch lenses among the lot. Sinar frames don't work as easily for that.

Horseman is very well made, but parts are impossible, I buy cheap ones to make better ones.