Monorail vs Flatbed for Outdoor Field Work

[Scott Mittelsteadt]

I am planning for my eventual jump to LF photography. I have done a lot of read ing, and spent a good amount of time browsing this web site...so I think I have pretty good knowledge of what's out there. Only I still have one point of indec ision. I'd like to hear some arguments for or against the use of Monorail camer as for outdoor landscape/nature, etc photography....and what cameras will do the trick. Right now I'm leaning towards a Wisner 4x5, but would like to other vie ws.

Thank you in advance!!

[Glenn Kroeger]

Well... here is my story...but I should warn that I am not a fan of most wooden cameras and will explain why later...

I started out with a Sinar F, mainly due to attending a Sinar seminar on large format photography. The asymmetric tilts and angle finders seemed to make tilts effortless. That was in a studio! In the field, I found that tilt angles were often so small that the angle dials were useless. The camera didn't pack up very small, and the standard bellows length was limiting.

I switched to a Wista VX field camera. I didn't like the lack of zero detents on tilts. In the field, if you overshoot in tilt, it is nice to be able to quickly go back to zero, and start over. So I got a Toyo 45A which I used for nearly 15 years. I still love that camera for reliability, ruggedness and packability. The only limitation I found was limited bellows length and a bit more vibration than I liked at maximum extension.

So I have recently switched to an Arca-Swiss 45F Field which is a monorail camera. This camera seems to have all of the capabilities and none of the limitations of the other cameras I have owned. It packs up very small, with lens in place, and is very fast and easy to set up. It is spectacularly rigid and precise in movements, yet has simple, easily identified controls.

Here is the upshot. I think you need simple controls that can naturally be identified by touch. Most of the wooden, and many of the metal fields I have tried have have gobs of small identical knobs. After a tedious process of unfolding the thing and tightening the myriad of knobs, you are faced with trying to adjust the camera while looking at the ground glass and you have twenty small brass knobs on both sides of the camera most of which you don't want to touch. You also need a positive yet unrestrictive zero detent so you can manipulate the camera back to "zero" without taking your eye off the groundglass but also without battling the zero detent for small movements. The toyo as pretty good in these respects, the Arca-Swiss is better.

As far as rail vs flatbed, its mostly a matter of system expandibility and extreme movements. The latter are mostly unused in the field unless you are into architecture. Long extension rigidity is often better with monorail designs, but there are some flatbeds with good extension (Linhof and others). Flat beds can be a problem if you like really short lenses and don't want the bed in your images.

Both will work for most shots.

[Sean Billy Bob Boy yates]

Try and get your hands on one of each and try them out. You always take a new car for a test drive, right? if you don't live near an l.f. stocker, e-mail Wisner and see if he knows of any owners in your area. You could always post an add or something, see if the local studio has one.

As far as knobs go, the Deardorff was built with knobs of different size and shape for specifically that reason. I think it's reallly a matter of familiarity anyway - you get used to where the gear shift is and what pattern your car uses and then you get in your friends car and turn the windshield wipers on when you're trying to signal for a left.

Bear in mind, although it's nice to get it perfect the first time, it's not always possible. Look at the divorce rate in the U.S. for example. Sometimes you really have to put some time in to find out if it's right for you.

[james mickelson]

Most photographers I've seen working any distance from their cars with a monorail camera weren't happy. They can be a pain to set up and take down and are very hard to pack unless you take them apart. They don't compress any more than a flat bed camera so a wide angle lens is just as problematic as a field camera. I own a Gandolfi Varient 4x5 and have 18" bellows draw and it takes a 90mm/f8 lens with some tilt and swing. It weighs in at 7 lbs but I haven't had a bit of problem with it even in the rain. My buddy had a GraphicII and switched to an Osaka after using my camera. It only cost $550 new and although it only has 12" bellows it will take a 90mm/f6.8 with movements. It is very ridgid and weighs in at 4.5 lbs. Very nice camera. Movements in the field are very small so the advantage of a monorail is inconsequential. The main problem witha monorail in the field is the rail arrangement. Some folks don't mind and some do. Try both but make sure you pack it a ways and use it before making up your mind. James

[James Chow]

I chose a monorail since I think it's more intuitive to use, especially with rear back movements since there's no box to get in the way. There are several monorails that are quick to setup/take- down and have a reasonable weight (Toyo VX125, Arca Swiss F-line, Linhof Technikardan). Plus if you ever decide to shoot architecture, you won't find yourself limited on movements. If I were to go with a field camera, I'd probably get something with generous movements for greater flexibility. From what I've seen, the Linhof Mastertechnika has the most of any field camera, but it also weighs as much as some lightweight monorails.

[Ellis Vener]

One of the reasons I chose the Canham DLC is that is a hybrid of monorail and fl atbed design. If you are using very wide angle lenses like a 65 mm or a 58mm you have no problems. likewise if you are using longer focal length lens 30 0mm or longer the rails extend far enough out (550 mm to be exact) that you have enough bellows even for closeup work, and it will do both the wide angl e and the long focus work without changing bellows. It is also very rigid. My other camera is an Arca Swiss F-line that is very good for exactly the reason s Glenn listed. You really should try to handle the cameras you are considering, modern ergonomic designs like the Arca F-line and the Canham DLC ma ke the experience more enjoyable. If you are looking at the Wisner because you want a wood/metal camera also look at the Phillips and the Canham wo od/metal 4x5 (different from the DLC).

[Doremus Scudder]

Might as well add my two cents worth. I've used both monorails and folding cameras in the field and my experiences with both were positive. I'm currently using a Wista 45DX and love it because of its small size and light weight. On the other hand, I do miss axis tilts from time to time and could also use a bit more bellows draw even though I have extended lensboards for my longer lenses. As for movements, you can always use more. In contrast to many people's experience, I routinely overstretch my field equipment's capabilities in the field (the monorail too!). I've crinked the bellows, vignetted and compromised composition because the darn thing just wouldn't twist into a pretzel! The deciding consideration for me (and maybe for you) was: How much will my camera choice hinder/help me to take the pictures I want? For me, since I hike, climb, clamber and crawl through everything from coastal underbrush to narrow desert canyons, size and light weight were of prime consideration. Being able to get everything into or onto a fanny pack and fishing vest leaves both hands free for saving my life when I slip on steep slopes, scrambling, etc. My monorail is great on the trail carried unfolded on the tripod but there are some places where it doesn't let me go, so I usually carry the wooden folder. The Wisner Pocket Expedition 4x5 that I saw seemed to be a fabulous camera (and maybe my next) and I don't think you would be unhappy with it. However, you should assess carefully (and honestly) where you will be carrying and using your camera and weigh the trade-offs (there are always some), especially the weight/size/performance(/price) balance. If you never plan on getting more that 10 yards from the car, then get the biggest monorail you can afford. If you are climbing mountains with a 4x5, you'd better consider size and weight. I agree with the above posts as well: get your hands on some cameras and see what you like, and what likes you, before purchasing. Hope this helps a little, ;^D)

[Sergio Ortega]

Scott,

I used both a 4x5 wood field and a Toyo monorail for years. I now use a Canham DLC, for many of the reasons given by E. Vener. The camera combines most of the advantages of both flatbed wood field and studio monorail designs.

I just came back from a month-long trip where I used the Canham daily, setting it up and taking it down repeatedly, long distances away from the vehicle. The camera is a real joy to use. Very solid and rugged, extremely light and compact, flexible enough for any situation, simple to manipulate, and handled all my lenses (long to short) with ease.

I particularly appreciated the T-type locking knobs on the front and rear base tilts and front rise/fall, and the cam lever locking devices on the focus tracks and all other movements/adjustments. Very sure and solid once set up and locked down, even with gloves on, and easy to identify behind the darkcloth. I recall the confusion of the many little, round, brass locking knobs on my previous wood field. Not only did they require you to remove your gloves to gain enough purchase to lock them down properly, but their similarity often had me reaching for one knob when I meant to use another. And loosening one of these round brass things, if locked down too tightly, had me screaming and looking for a pair of visegrips.

To me, a good camera design is one that you literally forget while using it, leaving all your concentration for the task at hand. Good luck, Sergio.

[Daniel Taylor]

if you can, find a Linhof Technikardan 45s, and spend a few minutes with it. notice the unique design, with attributes of both monorail and flatbed. pay attention to the precision, stability, quality, and unlimited movements available. note the zero detents and partial detents, linear markings on all adjustments, 30 second setup and takedown times .. leaving the lens attached.

true, it is $800 more than some of the above mentioned cameras. however, if you view this as an investment or a lifetime purchase, the extra is inconsequential compared to your photographs and the joy you'll garner from working with such a well-crafted camera.

[Dave_958]

In reply to comments by James: "Most photographers I've seen working any distance from their cars with a monora il camera weren't happy. They can be a pain to set up and take down and are very hard to pack unless you take them apart. They don't compress any more than a fl at bed camera so a wide angle lens is just as problematic as a field camera...Mo vements in the field are very small so the advantage of a monorail is inconseque ntial. The main problem with a monorail in the field is the rail arrangement. So me folks don't mind and some do." I own a 4 x 5 monorail camera, the Linhof Technikardan, which I find a joy to c arry. The camera weighs about 6-1/2 lbs and folds up quickly (1/2 minute) and co mpactly (8 x 10 x 4 in.) without having to be disassembled. The only inconvenien ce is having to use a bag bellows with wide angle lenses of 115 mm focal length or less. By positioning the lens at the tip of the monorail, the rail does not p rotrude into view. Because I use a 210 G-Claron for 1:1 closeups at an extension of 420 mm, I find the TK's monorail extension capabilitiies relatively advantag eous. Very few flatbed cameras can attain such an extension. The TK has centimet er markings on the monorail that aid me in determining how much extra exposure i s needed for closeups. Because lens tilt of 5-10 degrees might obstruct the imag e due to the lens shade, I often use the degree markings on the front and rear s tandards to transfer some of the needed tilt to the rear standard, eliminating t he drawn curtain effect. To attain rear standard tilt with flat bed cameras typi cally is achieved by additional and more complex movements: dropping the bed and adjusting the front standard. Stability and free lens movement are preserved wi th wide angle lens. Flat bed cameras typically have less lens movement with wide angle lenses because of the necessity to drop the bed down and tilt the front s tandard backwards. I do not know how commonly flat bed cameras become less stabl e with bed tilt, but I have read of a comment to that effect as to one flat bed camera. My knowledge about comparative impact resistance is limited. My camera h as fallen to the ground several times, sustaining only minor damage (an abraded knob and a loosened bellows that was repaired with glue). I have seen wooden fla t beds that developed impact-related cracks but remained fully functional. Aesth etically, many wooden flat bed cameras are more attractive, with their brass har dware, leather bellows, and reflective hardwood finishes, especially when combin ed with a well made wooden tripod. I associate the TK with precision engineering and life-time durability. I do not think of it as the best choice for a profes sional photographer in need of a portrait camera or camera for table top photogr aphy, spare no expense and ignore the weight, because it cannot be upgraded to 5 x 7 or 8 x 10, lacks geared movements, and does not have dials to quicken attai nment of the desired depth of field. If I were to buy a flat bed camera, I would give serious consideration to either a used Master Technika (going for about $2 000) or a new MT or MT 2000 from some foreign distributor offering it at much le ss than the prices commonly charged by USA distributors. The MT camera weighs ab out 6 lbs and folds up to about 7 x 7 x 4.5 inches and does not need a bag bello ws for wide angles. It has a 360 mm extension and can be used with 500 mm teleph oto lenses. It is easier to set up and close than the TK and I assume that it is extremely durable and resistant to impact damage. Both the TK and the MT use th e same size lens board, a relatively small 96 x 99 mm board, that eases storage of lenses in the pockets of a camera bag. Both use center axis lens tilt rather than base tilt for sharpness adjustment and I regard that to be advantageous to base tilt for landscape photography where yaw-free movement is not needed. The T K has independent levers for lens rise and tilt, while some flat beds have a sin gle knob controlling both rise and tilt. Regards, David