PDA

View Full Version : What 4X5 folder with LOTS of rear shift other then KB Canham DLC?



koh303
25-Mar-2014, 11:01
After working with a technika V for a while, i am thinking about getting something that is more solid then my DLC.
Weight not important - but a large rear shift is what i am after (which the DLC has plenty of).

Bob Salomon
25-Mar-2014, 11:02
TechniKadan 45.

djdister
25-Mar-2014, 11:07
A somewhat unusual requirement, but my thought is you should get a 5x7 camera with good movements and a 4x5 back. That should give you plenty of movement possibilities.

Ed Bray
25-Mar-2014, 13:53
A somewhat unusual requirement, but my thought is you should get a 5x7 camera with good movements and a 4x5 back. That should give you plenty of movement possibilities.

Why would that give you more movements than a 4x5 camera with good movements? The 4x5 back would just be in the middle of where the 5x7 frame would be, you can't offset it to get the effect of more movement.

Oren Grad
25-Mar-2014, 15:46
If you've got the money, Arca-Swiss 4x5 F-Line Field, in the "C" configuration.

evan clarke
25-Mar-2014, 16:04
Does it have to fold? Shenhao and Ebony have some nice cams with good shift and you don't have to unfold it..Just take it out and drop it on the tripod.

koh303
25-Mar-2014, 16:09
I can carry a monorail camera as well... but would prefer a folding camera.

Kuzano
25-Mar-2014, 16:17
Have had a couple of new Shen Hao's with many shifts...

I know that may not constitute "good" shifts depending on what you may be looking for, but it had a ton more rear action than I ever considered needing. New under $1000. Beautiful 5.5 to 6 pound camera with back cover on GG.

EdSawyer
25-Mar-2014, 17:02
Horseman L series folds quite flat, very rugged, tons of shift.

Richard Wasserman
25-Mar-2014, 17:05
+1 for a Technikardan—great camera.

koh303
25-Mar-2014, 18:52
I guess its just as much hassle to fold the kardan as it is to fold the DLC - but - is it more stable then a DLC?

Mark Sawyer
25-Mar-2014, 19:12
Why would that give you more movements than a 4x5 camera with good movements? The 4x5 back would just be in the middle of where the 5x7 frame would be, you can't offset it to get the effect of more movement.

Having a larger bellows makes it easier to keep from intruding into the image area.

If the OP doesn't mind an older camera, a Burke and James Commercial View is quite solid, and offers as much movement as your conscience thinks the bellows can handle, front and rear.

Kirk Gittings
25-Mar-2014, 19:57
As long as you have sufficient front and rear swing you can get a ton of shift by employing what shift you have and the swings. IMHE the Canhams are not the most rigid of cameras though they are certainly fine cameras. The most rigid folder I have ever used or owned is a Phillips in whatever way you want to employ the movements.

John Berry
25-Mar-2014, 22:25
As long as you have sufficient front and rear swing you can get a ton of shift by employing what shift you have and the swings. Beat me to it.

Rollinhofuji
26-Mar-2014, 04:47
+2 - The Technikardan 45S folds compact, is rigid and lightweight. The movements are fantastic - except shift and rise/fall everything comes with zero detents.
I prefer the folding of my MT 3000 (it can be set up extremely fast due to the infinity stops and the rock-solid mechanism), but the TK is also very fast. I always remove the bellows.
For architecture, the direct movements are extremely convenient. For landscape work, I prefer my MT. It feels even more solid.

Rollinhofuji
26-Mar-2014, 05:37
I would like to add that folding a TK isn't a hassle. It's done in less than 10 seconds if the bellows are removed (costs another 5 seconds), including setting all movements to zero.

Noah A
26-Mar-2014, 06:41
I'd also recommend the Technikardan. Just because a few online reviewers couldn't fold it properly doesn't mean it's hard to fold. It actually folds and unfolds very fast, even with the bellows. I usually remove the bellows, but mostly because my usage of the regular and bag bellows is split about 50/50 so I never know what I'll use next.

The TK isn't as rock-solid as a Technika, but from my experience it's more rigid than the Canham. And it's much more precise. It is worth the price premium to go for the newer "S" version, which has beefier standards and center detents on swings and tilts, which makes setup even faster. I think it's much easier to set up than the Canham. To be fair, I've only played with the DLC briefly, but I owned an 8x10 JMC for a few years and the design is similar.

The TK isn't as fast to unfold as the Technika, but the TK is faster to use once it's set up due to the easy, direct movements.

The other logical option would be an Arca-Swiss. A while back I planned to trade my TK45S and MT2000 for an Arca F-Metric. I wanted to downsize to one camera that could do it all. But the F-Metric came new from the factory with a few serious problems. Those could have been fixed, but I also found that it's not as solid or fast as the Technika and not as small as either the Technika or the Technikardan. So I sent it back. They're great cameras though, I just prefer the Linhofs.

The Linhofs are great cameras and the TK45S in particular is available used for a very reasonable price. I'm not sure from your post if you still have the Technika V, but if so, The Technika and the TK make a great set because they complement each other very well.

Like Jan, I use my TK45S for architectural work as well as studio work and some portraits since the movements are faster, mostly because I can get direct lens fall. I use the Technika for traveling light, landscapes, long-exposure night work, etc.

Rollinhofuji
26-Mar-2014, 07:42
Noah exactly describes how I feel about the combination of a MT and a TK. It is true that the direct movements (fall is great!) allow an extremely fast and reliable setup of the TK. I do prefer the MT anyhow because of its ultimate rigidity and the feel of its movements. It is somehow more fun to work with the MT, but the TK is in general the faster (and perhaps better) allround camera.
I bought mine used (definitely not in mint condition), and it needs some service now. There is some slight left/right play on the focus track, and the standards are not 100% parallel. Anyway, that's the great thing about Linhof: Really everything can be re-adjusted. I should also mention that the spirit levels on the TK are very helpful and very precise.

Doremus Scudder
26-Mar-2014, 08:04
As long as you have sufficient front and rear swing you can get a ton of shift by employing what shift you have and the swings. ...

... and it can be just as fast as using shift. I've made a mark on my front standard where it is parallel to the back when the back is at maximum swing. When I have a subject that I see will need a lot of shift, I simply set up the camera with the back at max swing and the front swing positioned at the parallel mark (takes no more time than setting up the camera in zero position). Then I can use the shift to fine-tune the framing; sometimes I even have to shift the opposite direction a bit :)

Best,

Doremus

Bob Salomon
26-Mar-2014, 09:04
I guess its just as much hassle to fold the kardan as it is to fold the DLC - but - is it more stable then a DLC?

To fold a Linhof Kardan you just unclip the bellows from either the front or rear standard (not both), release the fraont nd rear swing controls and swing the standards so they are parallel to the monorail. Nothing is faster and they are very stable cameras.

To fold a TechniKardan you slide the rails together, set all movements on the front and rear standardws to 0, unlock all the red levers (4), lock all green locks (4) and rotate the focusing knob in the direction of the arrow on the focusing scale. Takes about 10 seconds, or less to do this. To unfold the camera make sure that all 4 green locks are unlocked and rotate the focusing knob opposite the arrow on the focusing scale. This is even faster then closing the camera.

Movements:
Front
360° of swing and tilt on the optical axis limited only by the bellows
shift (total) 2.35"
rise (total) 2.75"

Rear
360° of swing and tilt on the optical axis limited only by the bellows
shift (total) 2.35"
rise (total) 2.75"

Maximum extension 20"
Shortest lens 35mm Apo Grandagon on 001035 lens board
Size 10 x 8 x 4"
Weight 6.5 lbs

Noah A
26-Mar-2014, 09:30
...
To fold a TechniKardan you slide the rails together, set all movements on the front and rear standardws to 0, unlock all the red levers (4), lock all green locks (4) and rotate the focusing knob in the direction of the arrow on the focusing scale. Takes about 10 seconds, or less to do this. To unfold the camera make sure that all 4 green locks are unlocked and rotate the focusing knob opposite the arrow on the focusing scale. This is even faster then closing the camera. ...

It probably takes longer to describe than to actually do it. It's really a brilliant design.

Bob Salomon
26-Mar-2014, 09:34
It probably takes longer to describe than to actually do it. It's really a brilliant design.

Takes much. much longer to describe it. With practice, with the bellows attached, it is as fast as opening and squeezing an accordian, literally 4 or 5 seconds.

Kirk Gittings
26-Mar-2014, 10:51
I had a student once with one of those-sheer genius. How much does one of those puppies weigh?

Bob Salomon
26-Mar-2014, 11:16
I had a student once with one of those-sheer genius. How much does one of those puppies weigh?

If you mean the TK45S 6.5 pounds.

Weihan
26-Mar-2014, 11:35
Another vote for the Linhof Technikardan. You can't find a camera for field use that offers more movements. Just be prepared to pay through the teeth for any original Linhof accessories. The TK is an engineering marvel.

koh303
26-Mar-2014, 12:58
indeed this is something to look into.
I just had a glance, had no idea they were that expensive.
I remember some years ago a colleague offered me to buy him out of LF as he moved to digital. I think he wanted 1000$ for the whole setup, i looked at on ebay at the time, and said to myself - eh, not worth the money, ill get one for less. I feel the hurting now... But even then i had the DLC, it has more then paid for itself over the years i have had it.
In fact i only bought the canham at the advice of one of Frederick Brenners assistants, who after a couple of jobs was paid with "the best 4X5 camera in the world" (as Brenner called it) - a DLC, and he said if i have any doubts, i should just buy one and find out for myself.
It is indeed a marvel of craftsmanship, and i have shot many thousands of sheets with it all around the world, but it is not the most rigid camera out there.

Perhaps a clean trade with someone who wants a DLC for his TK?

EdSawyer
26-Mar-2014, 13:55
I have a DLC too, it's definitely a great camera, I agree the back in particular could be more rigid but within that confine I think it's excellent. For the ultimate folding camera, I think a Carbon Infinity would have to be considered too. ;-)

jose angel
27-Mar-2014, 05:09
Another DLC owner here, but mostly a Technika user. If you look for a higher handling precision and better feel, I agree the TK could be an upgrade.

The DLC is a very capable and extremely lightweight foldable camera. For this reason it does`t handle like a monorail.

pasiasty
27-Mar-2014, 06:06
OP: why do you need rear shits? Only reason that comes to my mind is not to change camera's viewpoint even by an inch or so while shifting. Macro works? If so, you'd also need rear focusing (unless you've got a focusing rail).

Rollinhofuji
27-Mar-2014, 06:13
I had a student once with one of those-sheer genius. How much does one of those puppies weigh?

Kirk, it is considerably lighter than my MT 3000. The MT is more compact, the TK is thinner but a lot higher due to the monorail construction.

Rollinhofuji
27-Mar-2014, 06:15
OP: why do you need rear shits? Only reason that comes to my mind is not to change camera's viewpoint even by an inch or so while shifting. Macro works? If so, you'd also need rear focusing (unless you've got a focusing rail).

I think it is a question of convenience. If the OP means rear rise, it definitely makes sense.
The TK has rear focussing, by the way.

koh303
27-Mar-2014, 09:02
OP: why do you need rear shits? Only reason that comes to my mind is not to change camera's viewpoint even by an inch or so while shifting. Macro works? If so, you'd also need rear focusing (unless you've got a focusing rail).

So that i can shoot 2 plates without moving the lens and then stitch them without having to change the perspective.
http://omerhecht.blogspot.com/2011/04/panoramas.html

Ari
27-Mar-2014, 09:27
Agree with everything said about the TK-45S, only I fold mine with the regular bellows attached; it is indeed fast to set up/take down.
The generous movements, stability and design make it a world-class camera.
My only beef is with the GG assembly; Linhof' design is a little too finicky and delicate, IMO.
I wish they would borrow a page from Toyo in that regard, but that is a minor quibble on one of the best 4x5s ever made.

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
27-Mar-2014, 10:09
Canham's cameras may not be perfect, but I love the fact that the massive rear shift allows for shooting multiples. On my wooden 5x7 I can line up three verticals to create a 7x15 triptych.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-xk82Jd_vVI0/UzRcAnCY8yI/AAAAAAAACNA/URB86ND9-as/s800/Kamakura%2520Triptych.jpg

Rollinhofuji
28-Mar-2014, 03:39
Agree with everything said about the TK-45S, only I fold mine with the regular bellows attached; it is indeed fast to set up/take down.
The generous movements, stability and design make it a world-class camera.
My only beef is with the GG assembly; Linhof' design is a little too finicky and delicate, IMO.
I wish they would borrow a page from Toyo in that regard, but that is a minor quibble on one of the best 4x5s ever made.

Do you mean the two metal pieces which secure the GG? I thought that Toyo uses the same concept?

David Schaller
28-Mar-2014, 06:28
Great work Jason! Now I understand the desire for massive rear shift. Thanks for posting this.
Dave


Canham's cameras may not be perfect, but I love the fact that the massive rear shift allows for shooting multiples. On my wooden 5x7 I can line up three verticals to create a 7x15 triptych.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-xk82Jd_vVI0/UzRcAnCY8yI/AAAAAAAACNA/URB86ND9-as/s800/Kamakura%2520Triptych.jpg

Bob Sawin
5-Apr-2014, 13:25
Look at the Toyo 45a/45aii specs:

Specifications
CameraBack 360° revolving
Manual Front Rise 41mm
Manual Front Shift 7+7mm
Swing front/rear 8°+8°/8°+8°
Base Tilt front & rear 90°+15°
Tapered bellows Yes
Double extension dropbed design drops 15°
Maximum bellows drawwith rear extension 324mm
Maximum draw with (2)4" extension backs 524mm
Longest Lens withmaximum bellows draw 300mm / 400T
Minimum focuswith 210mm lens 3 feet
Shortest Lens with flatLens Board 90mm
Shortest Lens with Recessed LB 58mm
Weight 6.2 lbs.
Folded Dimensions 7.5x 8 x 4"

Greg Y
5-Apr-2014, 14:00
Unless I'm reading the specs wrong...the Canham traditional has 7" of rear shift, & the all metal DLC2 has 1.375" in each direction...

jbenedict
5-Apr-2014, 14:11
So that i can shoot 2 plates without moving the lens and then stitch them without having to change the perspective.
http://omerhecht.blogspot.com/2011/04/panoramas.html

I hear ya but...

Swings on front and back can equal a *lot* of shift and the desired perspective can be retained.

Jeff "You can learn many things with old wiggly B&J cameras" Benedict

Bill_1856
5-Apr-2014, 14:38
Wista 45DX3

koh303
5-Apr-2014, 14:44
I hear ya but...

Swings on front and back can equal a *lot* of shift and the desired perspective can be retained.

Jeff "You can learn many things with old wiggly B&J cameras" Benedict

Its almost impossible to keep the lens in the same place if you have to move the front standard and or tripod to get this.

Traditional canham might be a good idea, but oh so expensive.... :( I wonder if it is more rigid then the DLC?

Oren Grad
5-Apr-2014, 14:48
Traditional canham might be a good idea, but oh so expensive.... :( I wonder if it is more rigid then the DLC?

No.

koh303
15-May-2014, 09:14
Just got a technikardan.
I can safely say this is by far the best camera i have ever seen, and i think when comparing to my canham its just no competition.
Now i have to learn how to use it but i feel like it might be easy as cake.

When i bought my DLC i paid close to 1800$ (it did come with a couple of extra bits like a delta 1 50X60 cloth OMG, and a harrison pup tent), this linhof was about 35% less then the canham, and is in the same new condition the canham was when i got it.
I guess it will not fit in the neat little tenba Canham case but hey - who cares.

Now - some lens boards and so long suckers :) grin from ear to ear.

bruce cahn
21-May-2014, 14:13
Ebony SV45U2.

koh303
21-May-2014, 15:12
Ebony SV45U2.

Sure, a wooden camera which is only 4 times more expensive then this techinkardan... :)

koh303
9-Oct-2014, 06:55
after a short run with the technikardan, i decided it was not the camera for me and the DLC rocks on as my main camera... i guess a slightly wider lens is also in order.
120mm SW 5.6 anyone?

Luis-F-S
9-Oct-2014, 09:25
Just swing the front standard and rear frame and get on with it........L

Regular Rod
9-Oct-2014, 09:46
MPP Mk VII or Mk VIII

RR

djdister
9-Oct-2014, 10:23
after a short run with the technikardan, i decided it was not the camera for me and the DLC rocks on as my main camera... i guess a slightly wider lens is also in order.
120mm SW 5.6 anyone?

An interesting development. But for those of us who haven't laid hands on the TK45S, what were its detractors? On paper (and in its design) it looks like a far superior camera. Interestingly enough I have seen several of them for sale, and in at least two cases, they mention that the bellows had to be replaced on what does not look like a very old camera. Makes one wonder...

koh303
9-Oct-2014, 11:01
The 45tk i had came be a brand new bellows (chinese, but better then the original in my opinion).
The down sides were a very long time to set up. I guess this can be learned to be done faster but at this point in time in my life, i am not that much interested in learning a new tool, whereas the DLC is pretty much an extension of my arm by now.

The other issue was a SUPER dark ground glass and a super expensive and hard to find fresnel option.
The non centralized motion of the standards meant it was not easy to figure out the starting position, though again i am sure that is easily gotten used to.
At extreme shifts, the front/back tapered bellows were not as easy to use as with the canham standard bellows, i think a bag bellows in both cases would solve this, and they are both equally not cheap in the grand scheme of things.

It is about twice as heavy as the DLC and folds down somewhat larger.

It is indeed a great camera and i am sure if it was my first real camera i would not have ever seen the DLC as superior. So at the bottom line mostly just my being used to the DLC too much is what made the final decision.