4x5 for the city - a monorail or .. ?

[Matus Kalisky]

Hello,

when I entered the realm of 4x5 photography some 2 years ago , my main was landscapes so I got a Tachihara 4x5 mainly because of the weight and enjoyed a lot (and still do for that purpose). But nowadays I tend to photograph architecture more. I also found out that usage of my recently acquired Grandagon N 75/4.5 is rather limited with the Tachi.

My current lense are : 75, 125, 210 and 400 tele (Osaka). I would like to replace the last one at some point with some non tele 400 - 450 but this is a distant future.
I use Benro copy of Gitzo 1227 and LInhof 3D pan-tilt head.

So here I am - considering two ways - would love to get bellow $500 of expense wither either of them. Would be very thankful for your insights.

1) Selling the Tachi and getting some other field camera that would to be much heavier, would allow the use of 75/4.5 with full movements and would be a bit more precise than the Tachi. Maybe Chamonix 4x5 comes to my mind (I do not want to start a Chamonix thread here, I just want to give an example) Maybe a lightweight monorail would be an option here too (if anything like that exists apart from the Toho).

2) (do not tell my wife) getting one more camera - some simpler monorail that should not be too heavy (definitely under 10 pounds, preferably under 8) as I would like to get the small geared Manfrotto (410 I guess) later. Some more geared movements would be nice, but not the main requirement - as long as the movements are smooth and well adjustable. I have to admit that I do like the Arca Discovery with the small(er) standards (like the one Jack Dykinga is using) though they are not very abundant on the used market.
Please, try to mention approximate weights (if possible) along with your candidates.

---------------------
Solution (1) would be preferable as I think one 4x5 camera is enough, but the (2) may just be more flexible ....
---------------------

and last but not least ... A Happy New Year

[Bjorn Nilsson]

A Sinar F is a sturdy camera which can be set and adjusted in precise movements. They are also cheap to get these days. You can either get an older model F or a newer F1 or F2. Try to find an adapter plate so that you can use your existing lens plates on the Sinar.
With at least the F2 the back is made to facilitate the use of a film plane light measuring probe, like the Sinar Booster 1 which is used with a Minolta light/flash-meter. (There are equivialent devices for Gossen meters.) This can come in quite handy for architecture.

//Björn

[BrianShaw]

I'd go with option 2. While Sinar may be coming down in price and offer precise movements there are other options that might work out just as well. The Cambo/Calumet SC series is what I use... and I haven't "outgrown" its capabilities since the 1980s. For architecture I'd suggest getting one with a revolving back for maximum convenience. Also invest in a bag bellows and recessed board. I bought a short rail (11 inch) but prefer using the longer rail even with short lenses. You can get all of this, and maybe even a carrying box, for your $500. It weights 11 pounds (I think) and is friction drive, not gear drive... but that has never been an issue for me.

If I were you I'd keep the field camera. There will be times when you'll want a lgiht-weight camera, I'll bet. You might regret getting rid of it.

Get over the guilt of owning more htan one LF camera!

[David A. Goldfarb]

A Sinar F/1/2 with a bag bellows is great for architecture in terms of functionality. Field cameras are a bit easier to transport and quicker to set up. If you're driving to your locations, have time and space to work or an assitant/companion to watch your back, then the Sinar will do fine. If you travel by public transportation and shoot in busy areas or potentially dangerous areas where you need to keep your eyes open all around you and work quickly to get the shot, then a field camera or dedicated architectural camera, ideally with infinity stops, is easier.

In New York I tend to use my 4x5" Tech V when I'm on my own. If I've got someone to help keep an eye on things, then I'll use my ultralight 8x10" Gowland PocketView, which is a monorail, or possibly a larger camera.

[dwhistance]

I'm not sure whether you can get one for less than $500 - probably not - but I think you should look at the Linhof Technikardan. They are not to everyone's taste, however it does everything you want, folds up small and is not too heavy. I've had mine for three years now and am still delighted with it.

David Whistance

[David Karp]

I agree with Brian. On a budget, you can pick up an SC and a bag bellows and probably make a case for keeping the Tachi too. A great accessory would be a Cambo/Technika lensboard adapter. This keeps the boards small and allows you to move back and forth between cameras. (But this will not work with the wide angles you use for architecture.)

An even nicer, if somewhat more expensive, alternative is a Cambo SC, whose virtues I have been singing lately to another member. You would not need to buy recessed boards with this camera, and could use all of your lenses on flat boards, including with the adapter board mentioned above. When these show up on the market they are usually priced quite reasonably. Sometimes so reasonably that you might still be able to keep the Tachi.

[Matus Kalisky]

Hmmm, I knew that you all will puch me to buy another camera

I have been thinking about the Sinar F/F1/F2 - any idea on the size and weight?

I am living in relatively paceful part of northerh Germany so I do not have to worry to go shooting alone with some more delicate gear (though once unde the darkcloath I do feel sometimes a bit "blind" and try to keep the rest of the gear underneath the tripod)

-- dwhistance --
What is so particular about the Technikardan?

-- David Karp --
David, you mentioned twice the Cambo SC - once as a relatively cheap camera and once as a more expensive one. Didn't you mean some different model in the latter case (I guess the 45SF after searching a bit on your posts)?

-------
Nobody to comment on the Arca Swiss Discovery? For some reason I like the design of that camera - especially with the very small front standard (or is it the 4x5 F ? - should be relatively light)

[aduncanson]

Contrary to BrianShaw, poster #3, I suggest that if going with the Cambo SC or the newer, simpler & cheaper Calumet 45N, you should consider one of the non-rotating back options. They are cheaper, lighter, and, I believe, less bulky than the rotating back. They still let you switch between horizontal & vertical orientations, but provide no intermediate positions.

My Calumet 45N on a 12 inch rail is bulky, but weighs less than 6 lbs. I would guess that you could equip yourself with the camera, short rail, Technika board adapter & bag bellows for less than $500.

[BrianShaw]

Contrary to BrianShaw, poster #3, I suggest that if going with the Cambo SC or the newer, simpler & cheaper Calumet 45N, you should consider one of the non-rotating back options. They are cheaper, lighter, and, I believe, less bulky than the rotating back. They still let you switch between horizontal & vertical orientations, but provide no intermediate positions.

I'm embarrassed... I recommended that based on personal experience. I only have a revolving back. If I knew the non-revolving backs allowed swtiching between landscape and portrait I never would have said anything about the back. I'm sure that you are correct about the price and weight difference. I've never shot a picture in whatever one calls the positions between horizontal and vertical. Perhaps Buzby Berkeley would, but not me.

[dwhistance]

Matus

You asked what is so particular about the Technikardan.

I like it because it can take a huge range of lenses on flat boards - I use 58mm to 360mm - and has all of the movements on both standards you could possibly want. You will run out of lens coverage long before you use all of its movements with the majority of 4x5 lenses. It is also very easy to switch between the normal and bag bellows, the latter being necessary if you want to use all of the movement potential of wide lenses. I believe that it was originally designed with architectural photographers in mind and it works outstandingly well for that purpose, however it is of course pefectly usable for landscapes and other areas suitable for LF photography.

Negative points are the control levers, which take some getting used to but are great once you do, and the difficulty in folding it up, which again takes practice but is easy once learned. There are also no geared movements which would be a nice addition, however Linhof have engineered it to their usual high standards so everything works well.

As you are in Germany I suggest you find a Linhof dealer and have a look at one, even borrow one if you get the chance, as it is different enough from most other LF designs to polarise opinions, however if you like its controls then I don't think there are many better 4x5's.

Have fun choosing your new camera.

David Whistance