Linhof Rangefinder Field vs Linhof Technikardan

[Greg Liscio]

Hello,

I realize I'm sacrificing movement if I get the filed camera over the rail model. I realize this is very subjective, but could I get some opinions on the flexibility I lose with the filed camera.

I assume the field camera can also be focused from the screen when I'm using tilt/shift, etc.
Thankee

[Ed Richards]

Four reasons to go for the field camera:

1) you will use the rangefinder - the best reason to own a Technika.

2) you want a really rigid camera (with shorter lenses) that will resist the wind.

3) you want a camera that will fold into a box does that not need case.

4) you want a camera to pummel muggers or bears.

Movements work on the Technika, but they are limited with shorter lenses, and anything less than a 90 is really hard to use. There is no front fall unless you hang the camera upside down. Unless you need a bullet proof box or plan to use the rangefinder, there are cameras that are a lot easier to with movements. I use a Technika because I do use the rangerfinder at times, but I will probably get a second camera to use with 90mm and wider lenses.

[Frank Petronio]

A lot of people who are attracted to the Technikardan seem to end up with an Arca-Swiss in the end. I tried a TK and it was really nice -- a mechanical marvel really -- but the folding process requires "attention" lest you mess up the bellows. And the L-shaped standards, at the same extension as a Technika, do not feel as solid.

The Technika is probably as bullet-proof as a large format camera can be, but compared to a monorail type of camera the movements, esepcially for the back, are less "accessible." Not that you can't use the movements fully and get exactly the same results as a monorail, but (like all Field cameras IMHO) you are less apt to use the movements because they require a few more steps than a silky, easy to manipulate monorail. I am sure I will catch hell from a few for saying that but I am only speaking from my own experience... with a monorail I tend to try larger, bolder moves because I can experiment easier and faster.

I guess you need to ask yourself what kinds of photos you hope to do. If you are just starting out you may want to try a used monorail and a folding field camera (both of which can be easily resold on eBay for about what you paid for them) and learn what works for you.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I agree with Frank's assessment, and I use a Tech V among other cameras.

You don't need to hang the camera upside down to get front fall. On the Tech V and later you can remove the accessory shoe and there is a tripod screw underneath it, so you can just mount the camera upside down on a tripod in the same way you would mount it right side up. If I'm generally working in view camera mode, rather than press camera/rangefinder mode, and if I think I'll be needing the front fall frequently (usually hiking at some elevation or shooting from a tall building), then I'll put a QR plate on the top screw so that I can quickly mount the camera upside down or right side up as needed. The back rotates 360 degrees, so you can always orient it however you like it (and with a strong tripod head you can tilt the camera 90-degrees so that shift becomes rise/fall), and there are focus knobs on both sides, so focus won't feel backward with the camera upside down.

I like the versatility of the Technika when I'm traveling. I like the option of going handheld when I want to or when a tripod isn't possible or practical, but I still have all the view camera movements when I want to shoot that way. The rear movements on a Technika take some getting used to, but the more you use it, the easier it gets.

[Leonard Metcalf]

I have owned and extensively used both, a Technica III and a TK45. Both were beautifully made cameras, each with its wow factor (I always appreciate beautiful machining work) and its limitations as described. As for my personal opinion I would buy a Technica again over the Technikardan any day. Why? Because I love the fact that it folds up into a solid box which I can throw into my backpack, I love the floating back for rear movements, I appreciate rangefinder focusing, I like the speed with which it can be used (the TK is rather fiddily and requires attention to centre the shifts every time you unfold it). Mind you the range of movements of the TK spoilt me, though I did go through one bellows in about seven years of use.

Both cameras served me well, produced stunning (in my humble opinion) images, and to be honest I wouldn't hesitate to recommend either. When it came time to replace them another brand won me over... Yet every time I see a Technica, my hip pocket quivers...

Regards,

Len

[CXC]

If you really want to hand hold, ever, then go Technika. If not, consider the non-rangefinder Technika instead. If you haven't yet, I would strongly advise taking a stab and hand holding before assuming it is something you will be doing. Concept and practice are not identical.

The Technika is easier to handle when not actually shooting, that is, when storing, carrying, setting up and tearing down. The more time you spend doing this, the bigger the advantage of having a Technika. But the more patient and methodical you personally are, the less important the issue is.

If you are shooting only landscapes, out of town, go with the Technika; the Technikardan would be preferred for architecture and stuff in town.

I believe the Technikardan has a much longer bellows, so it would be the choice for long lenses and macro work. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, quantify if I'm right, please.

The aesthetics of the two are quite different; when other things are equal, go for the one you find attractive and more of a pleasure to handle.

[robc]

The answer to your queston is dependant on what you want to use the camera for and you haven't told us that.
I have a technikardan and there is no doubt that it is a very vesatile camera. But if you are a landscape photographer doing only occasional studio work then I would opt for the Technika as it is a far more robust camera for use in the field. On the other hand, if you are doing architectural work where you need to use short focal length lenses and shift, then the Technikardan is a better option. So buy the one which is best suited to your primary use. i.e Technika for landscape with occasional architecture/studio work or Technikardan for architecture/studio with occasional landscape.
The Technikardan is more versatile overall but in my view it is not a great Landscape camera.

[Huib]

Greg,

Yes, the technikardan is not as rugged as the technika
Yes, (un)folding a technikardan is not as easy as unfolding the technika
Yes, it is less stable than a monoreal or technika in windy conditions

I choose the technikardan as I wanted a camera that more or less 'does-it-all': compact enough to stuff it in a backpack and still enough movements for things like architecture.

After I bought the TK a friend bought a technika and while shooting side-by-side I noticed that he much more often had to walk around the camera to operate it. I can shift/raise/tilt while standing behind the camera looking through the reflexviewer.

It confirmed that for me the TK was the right choice.

Huib
www.huibsmeets.com

[Ed Richards]

One real problem with the Technika is that the front rise does not lock and I have displaced it several times when trying to add tilt or swing. I am much less impressed with mounting the camera upside down than some folks are, and the drill of turning it on its side to shift as drop does not work with lenses shorter than about 120 because the front standard is wedged between the struts that hold the bed. There is also a way to drop the bed and tilt lens back to get drop, but again it is a problem with wider lenses. While I have used my Technika a lot, I can not recommend it unless you need a cast iron box or want to use the rangefinder. There are lots of good field cameras for what a good used Technika costs.

[Greg Liscio]

Thanks for the all the good input. I will primarily use the camera out in the field, where, as you all know, getting the shot you want occasionally has a time factor. I realize that I need to slow down from my "medium format mentality" (Rolleiflex 2.8 Fx and Mamiya 7II).
And the thinking goes on. BTW, I am truly in awe of the portfolios I have seen since joining this forum - truly inspiring.
Greg