Using Horseman 980/985/VH-R to shoot 4x5: experiences and advice please.

[Jan Becket]

I’ve used a VH-R with the newer 4X5 focusing adapter, which works well and accepts standard film holders, including grafmatics. However, the large adapter makes access to the rangefinder extremely awkward, so the gg must be used to compose/focus.

The Tech III I used for a few years worked beautifully with cams, although a Tech IV would be a better choice. It is still possible to have cams cut and fit by a competent photo machine shop. If you want to work on the tele end of the scale, then the Linhof accommodates far longer focal lengths than either the Graflex or the VH-R. Mine came with a cammed 360mm. In practical terms, if you want a technical RF camera, then you also need the accessory viewer. No sense composing on the gg and then switching to a rangefinder to focus the lens.

Like the VH-R, though, you wouldn’t pick a RF technical field camera if you also want to use wide angle lenses, or want a system that doesn’t weigh like a tank. I travel to Europe with a 4X5 system (3 lenses, 12 film holders, etc.) and migrated to a wooden field camera because of weight issue. As it is, I barely get everything into the carry on. The smaller airlines in Europe have even stricter weight limits for carry ons.

Mick Jagger: You caint always git wat you want.

[MonkeyBrain]

Peter, thanks for the suggestion. I'd come across the idea of two lens and 2 rangefinders before on graflex.org (most likely it was you?), and, as i could probably get by with just 2 lenses for most purposes, it seems like a v. good idea. The problem is a) it requires finding the extra rangefinder and then fitting it, and then b) getting lucky with lenses and cams (and I havent had much luck in that department so far...I have a 180mm thats been sitting here for some months getting no love).

I'm sure it's not a huge amount of work to fit the extra kalart, and even a technophobe such as myself could probably muster the resolve to do it, but its yet another bit of f$%&¥€g around when really I should be making pictures (it's my job...though recently not a very lucrative one, admittedly). And thats on top of all the other hassles I've had getting a fully functioning Crown kit running up to now.

Basically if there was a nice fully functioning Crown with a 150 and say a 240 lens, with 2 cammed rangefinders, sitting here now, I'd probably be happy enough just to use that and forget the idea of switching systems. But there isnt, and I know that to get to that point will be long, frustrating and tedious, and in the meantime I have projects to finish up.

But yes, the alternative is paying a huge amount of money for a Linhof...and given that even if I do go that route I'm not about to buy a new one, there's no guarantee I wont just end up with a bunch of hassles there as well (perhaps less likely with German engineering, but not out of the question, depending on where I buy the camera from).

[MonkeyBrain]

In practical terms, if you want a technical RF camera, then you also need the accessory viewer. No sense composing on the gg and then switching to a rangefinder to focus the lens..

yep, using GG is out of the question. And the Linhof multi-viewer looks amazing.

Like the VH-R, though, you wouldn’t pick a RF technical field camera if you also want to use wide angle lenses, or want a system that doesn’t weigh like a tank.

Wide angle I don't care about (a 90mm is already much wider than I like in 99% of situations), but weight can be a pain for sure.

Its likely the price I'll have to pay though...

Mick Jagger: You caint always git wat you want.

"...but if you try sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need..."

Looks like I need to scrape together some real money for German engineering

[MonkeyBrain]

Jan, first time round I somehow missed the bit where you said you've successfully used a VHR with the 4x5 adapter. Important information. Thanks.

However the fact that this bulky contraption renders the rangefinder unusable is the final nail in the coffin for Horseman as far as I'm concerned.

Anyway, this makes my choice much simpler now (if considerably more expensive), so thanks everyone for your help.

[Oren Grad]

...but weight can be a pain for sure.

Do think carefully about what your limits are, especially if you're intending this for hand-held work. A Technika with all the trimmings - lens, anatomical grip, multifocus finder, holder inserted - will probably come out somewhere in the range 8-9 pounds. (The body itself is more than 6.) I can't safely hand-hold one for more than a few moments at a time.

You can save a bit by skipping the grip and getting by with a wire-frame finder; whether that changes the handling for better or worse is a subjective judgment. But the bare minimum of body + lens + holder is still going to be at least around 7 pounds, or more depending on the lens.

[Peter York]

Adding a Kalart is not difficult provided it is complete and made for the 4x5 Pacemaker. I'm not a technical person and I was able to do it. However I went through the pacemaker manuals from Graflex to make sure every required piece (inifnity adjustment screw, follower arm, etc.) was included in the one I bought (which was attached to a mediocre pacemaker crown). No doubt this sort of thing will take time. It took me about 6 hours to attach and adjust the kalart.

Optars and Raptars often appear with the cam on ebay (check the pictures, a cam is often attached to the back of the lens board via a wire clip-thinggy even though it isn't mentioned in the description). The Kalart can be set for the longer lens; use the top rangefinder for the lens and cam that came with the camera (I bought a speed with the cam for the included 135mm). Know that the Kalart is limited for use up to a certain focal length, around 8.5" See this post: http://www.largeformatphotography.in...x+focal+length

[MonkeyBrain]

Do think carefully about what your limits are, especially if you're intending this for hand-held work. A Technika with all the trimmings - lens, anatomical grip, multifocus finder, holder inserted - will probably come out somewhere in the range 8-9 pounds. (The body itself is more than 6.) I can't safely hand-hold one for more than a few moments at a time.

You can save a bit by skipping the grip and getting by with a wire-frame finder; whether that changes the handling for better or worse is a subjective judgment. But the bare minimum of body + lens + holder is still going to be at least around 7 pounds, or more depending on the lens.

well, i could look at it this way: the extra expense of getting a linhof will be offset by all the savings I'll make on gym membership

But yeah, good advice.

I've held a super tech 3 before (no film holder, finder or grip though) and it wasnt light. Ive got an audio speaker here which is a little bigger than a viewcamera and weighs 11 pounds. Lifting it isnt a problem, but contorting my body into weird positions in the search of the perfect composition for any length of time with something this heavy in my hands could be pretty unpleasant.

Like I said though, I'm not thinking of walking around with this thing; a few moments at a time (well a couple of minutes, max) without a break is all I need. I have to put it down after shooting 6 sheets anyway, in order to swap over the grafmatic...(and I burn film). And if your estimate is correct a Linhof comes in a couple of pounds lighter, which would make all the difference...

Yes, if you havent detected it, I'm trying hard to convince myself. Doesnt look like there's much other option though anyway. Unless I give up on the idea of long lenses and go for a Wista 45RF. Ive also held one of those though, and it wasnt a whole lot lighter than the Linhof tbh.

[MonkeyBrain]

Adding a Kalart is not difficult provided it is complete and made for the 4x5 Pacemaker. I'm not a technical person and I was able to do it. However I went through the pacemaker manuals from Graflex to make sure every required piece (inifnity adjustment screw, follower arm, etc.) was included in the one I bought (which was attached to a mediocre pacemaker crown). No doubt this sort of thing will take time. It took me about 6 hours to attach and adjust the kalart.

Optars and Raptars often appear with the cam on ebay (check the pictures, a cam is often attached to the back of the lens board via a wire clip-thinggy even though it isn't mentioned in the description). The Kalart can be set for the longer lens; use the top rangefinder for the lens and cam that came with the camera (I bought a speed with the cam for the included 135mm). Know that the Kalart is limited for use up to a certain focal length, around 8.5" See this post: http://www.largeformatphotography.in...x+focal+length

Well, I think even I could find 6 hours in order to fix this problem

I'm going to give this solution serious consideration now. My current crown has a cammed Optar 135. Ideally I'd switch it for a 150mm, and then also add a 240mm, but maybe it'd be safer to keep the 135 on, as some indoor shots would be nigh-on impossible with anything longer.

One slight issue is that I currently use a graflite flash grip (minus flash head) as right-hand grip with electronic shutter. Though I guess I could get myself a Linhof grip and learn to trigger with the left hand instead (as I'd have to if I went with a Linhof kit anyway).

Still, my ideal set-up would be a 135, a 180 and then something like a 360 or whatever. Still got some thinking to do...

Thanks again


EDIT: I started looking at the thread you linked regarding maximum focal length with a kalart. and before I even got that far the talk of calibration problems was enough to put me off the idea again. I really dont want to have to deal with calibration. Ever.

[Greg Y]

"4X5 is not quite 2X the size of 2X3, not gaining a tremendous amount." ( Randy M ) 4x5 is 20 sq. inches of film....as opposed to 2x3's 6 sq. inches. That's more than 3x. I do think the difference is significant. In a pinch I get great results from a Rolleiflex and a Fuji 6x8.....but when it really counts I prefer 5x7. I can see exactly why the OP is looking to use 4x5.