Field or View Camera?

[Bob Salomon]

Sorry Bob. I must be screwing up somehow since I seem to be able to manage to get adequate tilt and rise out of my poor little old press camera to keep my landscapes working well.

As for architecture then I would most certainly recommend that the OP opt for the much more capable Cambo SC if he intends to use the types of movement that may be necessary for that type of photography.

Of course I am pretty sure that you would recommend that we all go out and spend our life savings on some version of a Linhoff. I apologize wholeheartedly for not making that recommendation immediately.

But...I could be wrong.

You are wrong, you do know that we were the Wista and Linhof distributor at the same time don’t you? A Wista would be far better then a Graphic and it is also available in the RF version which besides having back and front movements has a rangefinder and viewfinder.

Also Linhoff was a camera repairman in MI. Linhof is a camera company.

[AuditorOne]

You are wrong, you do know that we were the Wista and Linhof distributor at the same time don’t you? A Wista would be far better then a Graphic and it is also available in the RF version which besides having back and front movements has a rangefinder and viewfinder.

Also Linhoff was a camera repairman in MI. Linhof is a camera company.

Great!

I just love being wrong...especially twice.

As for the double-f sometimes my finger stutters when it gets to the end of Linhof. (It just did it again.)

As always, thanks for your knowledgeable and valuable feedback. I'll stay with my little Crown Graphic for now, or my little Intrepid which is much easier to pack around.

If I were personally intending to become more serious about large format, especially if I had intentions of doing large format professionally, then I would really consider either Wista or Linhof. As I already mentioned, there are many cameras available, some that cost a little more, some that cost a lot more. It all depends on what you are personally willing to spend.

[Mark Darragh]

+1 for monorails.

If you can afford one, a newer Arca-Swiss, Linhof or Sinar are all great cameras but there are plenty very capable older monorails which can be found at a pretty reasonable price. For example, the older Arca-Swiss Oschwald era cameras and Sinar Norma can often be a bargain compared to their more modern siblings.

[agregov]

A possible alternative to the monorail type cameras for architectural work is something like the Chamonix 45H-1. It's not a folder thus (likely) has smoother movements. I haven't tried it myself. But Richard Sexton has written about the benefits of non-folders. He was previously an Arca F user.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120201...SU.Sexton.html

My experience with folders mirrors feedback in the thread about them not being ideal for architectural work. Folders movements are not as smooth and less precise as rail cameras. That said, the fixed back cameras like the Chamonix and now discontinued Ebony 45SU might be worth considering as they likely fall somewhere in the middle.

[LabRat]

One should start on a monorail if using movements is a goal, as you can clearly operate the controls in a straightforward way...you can see what you are trying in real time, so you clearly learn/see what movements do...

A field camera has movements, but often they are not laid out as logically, so prior knowledge of movements can be adapted to the more portable field or technical cameras...

Getting a monorail with on-axis tilts is better than a base tilt camera as you don't have to fiddle with the focus every time you change the tilt, so better to see the effect directly...

Don't spend a lot on your first camera, as you will learn and evolve, and make more informed choices later...

You might even love your first camera, cheap and cheerful as it is!!!

Have fun,

Steve K

[Peter Lewin]

You are getting two different types of answers. The first batch, and I was one of them, named the "best" cameras if you want something which is easily transportable, but still has the flexibility for serious architectural work. The second, especially those about Intrepids and Graphics, stressed inexpensive cameras as an introduction to large format (you mentioned sporadic use in your original post).

The first 4x5 I owned was a Sinar F (similar to the later, slightly improved, F1 and F2 models). The "F" was Sinar's lightest model at the time (I don't know how it compares to the earlier, discontinued Norma) and was meant to be their "Field" model. It is a monorail, very easy to use, part of a modular system if you want to add even more functionality, and reasonably transportable. Ultimately I traded it for a lighter wooden Wista folder, which was more easily transportable for hiking, but not as rugged or flexible, and ultimately settled on the metal Canham as the best compromise for me. So, if I had to recommend one camera meeting the various requirements, I would look for a used Sinar F/F1/F2 as a starter model.

[frias]

Guys, thank you for the answers, valuable suggestions!

Ricardo

[frias]

Unfortunately here in Brazil there are not many cameras of these for sale, and imports from eBay cost more than 60% of taxes.

I found the sale a Toyo 45 AII (only the body for about 675 dollars) and a Sinar F2 complete, with lens 75 and 150mm, bellows bag, back 6x7 for about 1200 dollars...

The F2 is in a neighboring city, I will mark to see it in person, the Toyo is in another state, making it impossible.

Tks for all
Ricardo

[Mark Sawyer]

A "real" large format photographer would have two or three field cameras, a press camera, a Graflex SLR, a monorail, a couple of studio cameras, for each format size...

[Bob Salomon]

A "real" large format photographer would have two or three field cameras, a press camera, a Graflex SLR, a monorail, a couple of studio cameras, for each format size...

That would, of course, depend on what type of work the photographer does!

Kind of like lawyers or doctors, some are specialists in some area and others are more general in their practice.