A ridiculous question but I couldn't resist

[BABartrug]

Back into large-format after a hiatus of ten years or so. Previous experience using large format photography was largely confined to landscape work, first using a Speed Graphic with the front standard reversed to get both front rise and front (forward) tilt. Then I had a Wista for a couple years but sold it to buy digital equipment. Lens options currently limited to a Nikkor W 180mm/f5.6 in a Copal 1.

I made one of those accidental semi-fateful decisions a year or so back and bought a Panasonic GF-1 with 20/1.7 lens and a Novoflex adapter to allow use of Pentax lenses (of which I have a slew, including primes form 15 to 400mm.) I bought the GF-1 as a travel camera, and it works quite well in that capacity. But.....it dawned on me that the low weight might now allow me to take a medium format along on travels, so bought a GA645, which, paired with my venerable Rollei has rekindled an interest in architectural photography. I even have leads on work in that area. OMG.

That leads to ridiculous question number 1: Can someone compare the Sinar F1 with the Horseman LE for quality, portability, and durability? I have local options for purchasing both. I'm impressed with the Horseman, but the Sinar is lighter.

I would like to use both a 6x9 film back and 4x5, so I'm looking for wide angle lens options that could accommodate both. I appreciate the f/4.0 of the Nikkor SW 65mm for viewing in dim interiors, but I'm thinking a 75mm lens might be better for 4x5 work, just because of the larger image circle, accommodating more movements. There are similar options here among the big four manufactures. A 75mm gives a 135 film-equivalent on 6x9 of about 32 or 33 mm, while a 65mm gives that of a 28mm. Second ridiculous question: is that difference significant for architectural work? (My 2x3 film back actually measures closer to 6x8cm.)

Third ridiculous question: where can I find a SuperAngulon 47 for less than $400? One that works I mean.

OK, forget the last question .

BAB

Any advice welcome, and thanks in advance.

[Frank Petronio]

For paid architectural work, why not use a digital camera with a tilt-shift lens? The practical advantages are overwhelming for all but the highest caliber of clients with largest budgets. Otherwise film and processing will hamper you unless you are low-balling for fun, in which case you are depriving a legitimate photographer from a decent job. I'm not saying not to do it, everyone starts somewhere and we're all adults, but you might take a moment to consider the big picture and where you want to go with it.

For 4x5, the heavier and better built the camera, the better in my opinion. But then you also need a sturdier tripod, etc. so think in terms of building a balanced system within a reasonable budget. Nothing worse than putting a heavier Horseman onto an undersized tripod. A Sinar F is still a serious and capable professional camera. Then again, a Sinar P would be even more robust than the Horseman....

Also for 4x5, the ultra wides aren't that fun or practical... the actual subject gets really small in the image. Most architectural photographers use their 90mm lenses the most on 4x5. Don't forget that you can always stitch two frames together if you need an ultra wide. It often looks better too.

If you're committed to using roll film backs, the 6x12 backs are really nice and will work well with lenses chosen primarily for 4x5 rather than medium format. For example, a 6x12 shot with the 65 or 75 will be a lot nicer than a 6x7 shot with the 47. You might also consider that even though the 4x5 film is more expensive, if you don't use the ultra wide much it may be less expensive overall (cost of doing business) to get a 65 or 75 for the 4x5 than to get a 47 for the medium format.

If you have to use a 65 or 47 on 4x5 then be sure to check that the Horseman can physically draw its standards close enough. I know the Sinar can practically zero out so it wouldn't be a problem with a bag bellows. But most cameras can't do that.

[Joshua Dunn]

Bab,

I have several Sinar F2’s, multiple formats for the Sinar P and one Horseman L. The Sinar F2 is much lighter and overall a better camera than the Horseman L. The Sinar system is easy to grow and change to your shooting needs. The Horseman is solid but very heavy. Listen to Frank carefully on what he said about putting the heavier Horseman on an undersized tripod. If you don’t mind the additional weight, have a heavy enough tripod and if it’s a lot cheaper than the Sinar then it may be a good way to go.

One good thing is both of these cameras use the same size lens boards. So if you go with a Horseman and later decide you want a Sinar then you just have to buy a different camera and use the lens boards you already have. With the Horseman the monorail is pretty long, not so great for architecture. They are rare but try to find a short rail for the Horseman if you can. It will be easier to work with and save you some weight. With either camera you will probably want a bag bellows. The original Horseman bellows are a few inches longer than a standard Sinar bellows (the bellows are interchangeable between the two systems so someone could have swapped the Horseman bellows for a shorter Sinar one) which is good for longer lenses or macro work.

As far as lenses start with a 90mm and slowly go wider. Borrow or rent wider lenses if you can before you buy any ultra wide angle lenses. I own all of the Schneider Super Angulon XLs and do 95% of my architecture work with my 90mm and 72mm.
I hope this helps. I have been meaning to list my Horseman (along with some other equipment) on the forum for sale. If you are interested PM me and I’ll send you some pictures.

-Joshua

[Old-N-Feeble]

I haven't read the answers to the OP yet so I'm just trying to be funny and helpful at the same time...

I haven't seen many "ridiculous questions" over my many years reading numerous forums covering many topics... but I've seen a heck-uv-a-lot-a ridiculous answers.

Okay... I read the OP. My choices for lenses would be...

47mm SA XL
72mm SA XL
110mm SS XL
150mm Apo Symmar or similar
210mm Apo Symmar or similar
300mm Nikkor-M or Fiujinon-C or similar

Okay... after seeing prices posted by the OP maybe my suggestions are ridiculous.

[BABartrug]

For paid architectural work, why not use a digital camera with a tilt-shift lens? The practical advantages are overwhelming for all but the highest caliber of clients with largest budgets. Otherwise film and processing will hamper you unless you are low-balling for fun, in which case you are depriving a legitimate photographer from a decent job. I'm not saying not to do it, everyone starts somewhere and we're all adults, but you might take a moment to consider the big picture and where you want to go with it.

For 4x5, the heavier and better built the camera, the better in my opinion. But then you also need a sturdier tripod, etc. so think in terms of building a balanced system within a reasonable budget. Nothing worse than putting a heavier Horseman onto an undersized tripod. A Sinar F is still a serious and capable professional camera. Then again, a Sinar P would be even more robust than the Horseman....

Also for 4x5, the ultra wides aren't that fun or practical... the actual subject gets really small in the image. Most architectural photographers use their 90mm lenses the most on 4x5. Don't forget that you can always stitch two frames together if you need an ultra wide. It often looks better too.

If you're committed to using roll film backs, the 6x12 backs are really nice and will work well with lenses chosen primarily for 4x5 rather than medium format. For example, a 6x12 shot with the 65 or 75 will be a lot nicer than a 6x7 shot with the 47. You might also consider that even though the 4x5 film is more expensive, if you don't use the ultra wide much it may be less expensive overall (cost of doing business) to get a 65 or 75 for the 4x5 than to get a 47 for the medium format.

If you have to use a 65 or 47 on 4x5 then be sure to check that the Horseman can physically draw its standards close enough. I know the Sinar can practically zero out so it wouldn't be a problem with a bag bellows. But most cameras can't do that.

Thanks, Frank. Good advice about the weight of the Horseman. Which does give me pause even though I have a tripod that weighs more than the Horseman. I also would prefer to work with a 90mm as a first-choice lens, but that's not very smart if I'm using a roll-film back. I might as well use my Rollei.

The roll-film is for quick processing and turn-around, and for paying work will only be used in those situations that require back movements to get a decent final image. Yes, I will be using digital equipment but without a tilt/shift lens because there isn't one for Pentax APS-C. There is a 28mm tilt/shift but I'm feeling that's much to narrow (on an APS-C sensor) for average interior space. The only other option is pasting images together made with a 15mm prime.

I'll be charging the going rate.

Thanks for writing. I appreciate the input.

BAB

[BABartrug]

Bab,

I have several Sinar F2’s, multiple formats for the Sinar P and one Horseman L. The Sinar F2 is much lighter and overall a better camera than the Horseman L. The Sinar system is easy to grow and change to your shooting needs. The Horseman is solid but very heavy. Listen to Frank carefully on what he said about putting the heavier Horseman on an undersized tripod. If you don’t mind the additional weight, have a heavy enough tripod and if it’s a lot cheaper than the Sinar then it may be a good way to go.

One good thing is both of these cameras use the same size lens boards. So if you go with a Horseman and later decide you want a Sinar then you just have to buy a different camera and use the lens boards you already have. With the Horseman the monorail is pretty long, not so great for architecture. They are rare but try to find a short rail for the Horseman if you can. It will be easier to work with and save you some weight. With either camera you will probably want a bag bellows. The original Horseman bellows are a few inches longer than a standard Sinar bellows (the bellows are interchangeable between the two systems so someone could have swapped the Horseman bellows for a shorter Sinar one) which is good for longer lenses or macro work.

As far as lenses start with a 90mm and slowly go wider. Borrow or rent wider lenses if you can before you buy any ultra wide angle lenses. I own all of the Schneider Super Angulon XLs and do 95% of my architecture work with my 90mm and 72mm.
I hope this helps. I have been meaning to list my Horseman (along with some other equipment) on the forum for sale. If you are interested PM me and I’ll send you some pictures.

-Joshua

Thanks for the advice on the lenses. If I weren't thinking of using primarily roll-film I'd be happy with a 90mm. Unfortunately, with a 2x3 that's like using my Rollei. I'm beginning to believe the Sinar is a better option than the Horseman. Although I do like the rigidity of the latter. Light and transportable is the reason I bought the GF-1. Thanks much.

BAB

[BABartrug]

I haven't read the answers to the OP yet so I'm just trying to be funny and helpful at the same time...

I haven't seen many "ridiculous questions" over my many years reading numerous forums covering many topics... but I've seen a heck-uv-a-lot-a ridiculous answers.

Okay... I read the OP. My choices for lenses would be...

47mm SA XL
72mm SA XL
110mm SS XL
150mm Apo Symmar or similar
210mm Apo Symmar or similar
300mm Nikkor-M or Fiujinon-C or similar

Okay... after seeing prices posted by the OP maybe my suggestions are ridiculous.

I know precisely what you mean .

Great suggestions for lenses. The 72 SA XL is my single best choice for a wide angle. And I have a 180. So that leave something in the middle, like a 90 to 110. Thanks for writing. I noticed you didn't ask why I wasn't using the digital equipment I acquired. Well, I will be, but I like back movements. Photoshop will only do so much correcting.

BAB

[Old-N-Feeble]

If I wanted to limit my lenses to three with a 72mm at the wide end and a 180mm at the long end then I'd be looking at a 110 SSXL or 115 Grandagon to fit in the middle. IMO, 90 is a bit too close to the 72. After those you may want to consider a longer lens in the 270-300mm range.

That would be a darned fine 4x5 four lens kit...
72 SAXL
110 SS XL or 115 Grand. or 120 SA
180 whatever you have
270 or 305 G-Claron or Nikkor-M or Fujinon-C

If you want an ultra-wide for 6x12cm then you could add a 38 SA XL... but the shortest lens that will also cover 4x5 is the 47 SA XL.

[BABartrug]

That would indeed. I've always liked the G-Claron lenses.

I've decided the Sinar F system is more what I'm looking for. It weighs about half the Horseman L series. Don't quite know about forum rules (maybe I should read them?) but if anyone has an F1 or F2 they really want to part with, please write me a private message.

Thanks much for the input from all those who wrote.

BAB

[Old-N-Feeble]

^^^ If that's what you want then I suggest you start a new WTB thread for a Sinar F1 or F2 system.