PDA

View Full Version : Soliciting comments on 3 field cameras



David Karp
6-Oct-2004, 09:37
Hi all,

I know, here we go again with a "what kind of camera should I buy" post. I have done a lot of investigation, and have narrowed down my potential choices. I have been thinking about purchasing a field camera (my main camera is a monorail), and have limited the candidates to three. Budget is a significant factor for me, since I really don’t “need” this camera. I can always use my monorail, or if necessary, my Crown Graphic. It is just that I miss the front and rear movements when using my Crown, and there are times when the monorail just can't make the trip with me. I cannot justify spending more for another camera than these cameras cost.

Lenses used are from 75-450mm. I don’t use the 75 or 90 as much in the field as I do with my lenses from 125-450mm. My “normal” and most used lens is a Fujinon W 125mm. I have been looking for a camera that will allow me to use the 450mm Fujinon when needed. It is my least used lens, but when I need it, I am glad to have it available, and have missed it at times when using my Crown Graphic. I would also like to be able to use the 90mm without difficulty.

Based on my requirements and budget, I have come up with the following possibilities:

-Ebony RW45 with universal bellows: This seems like a fine camera, and I think I can get used to working in the field without shift. It is supposed to be rigid, so it could be used at full extension. And I do mean full extension, because I would have to use it with front and rear tilts to get to the full 410mm extension. I am thinking that I could use a top hat lensboard with the 450mm Fujinon, which has a 425.3mm flange to focal distance. The question here is, has anyone tried to use this camera with this lens? Will this be a problem for me? By the way, the more expensive Ebony cameras are out of my price range. An advantage here is that I use Technika type lensboards with an adapter on my monorail, so would not have to buy any more lensboards.

-Zone VI Ultralight: This camera seems to have all of the movements, and plenty of extension for use with the 450mm, and can work with a 90mm with no problem since it can take a 58mm lens at infinity focus with the standard bellows. A bag bellows is available if needed. How does this camera handle the 450mm? Is it stable? (I know it won’t be as stable as my monorail.)

-Walker Titan SF: This camera has 430mm of bellows extension, plus another 43mm if tilts are used to gain additional length. A top hat lensboard on the 450mm would seem to work fine with this camera. The Titan SF seems to have all the movements, plus the advantage of durability due to the materials use in its construction. This camera also uses Technika type boards, and a bag bellows is also available for this camera. I read Roger Hicks’s review on this camera, which was positive, and many posts which basically say “I like it” but would appreciate it if any users could pass on their experiences, especially if they use it with a 450mm Fujinon. Also, if there is anyone in the Los Angeles area with one of these, I would appreciate a chance to look at this thing.

Canham KBC or DLC, Wisner cameras, and others in this price range are too expensive for me, so they were ruled out.

As always, I appreciate your input. If I have missed a camera that you think will fit the bill, please let me know.

Mark Sampson
6-Oct-2004, 10:31
I have an older (non ultra-light) Zone VI camera. It won't focus a 480mm Artar- and at max extension I would doubt the 450. I have used a 500mm Nikkor-T successfully, though. Rigidity will be compromised on any field camera when fully extended and a heavy lens stuck on the front. The Z-VI is quite workable with a 75mm and the bag bellows, but movements would be difficult with a wider lens- the standards are very close together then. I'm going to figure out a recessed board to make my 75 easier to use.

Steve Hamley
6-Oct-2004, 11:19
David,

Jerry Greer uses a Fuji 450 with a "top hat" on an RW45. I assume it's working O.K.

http://www.jerrygreerphotography.com/

I use the SV45U and it works very well in the range you mention. It will just barely focus a 480mm lens at infinity - the bellows is tight as a drum and anything closer than infinity will not be in focus. The 450mm Fuji is quite usable. The camera has front shift and the SV45U2 has rear shift in addition.

Steve

Gem Singer
6-Oct-2004, 11:33
Hi David,

I recently went through the same decision making process. I ended up purchasing a 5X7 Tachihara, a 4X5 reducing back, a few 5X7 film holders, and an adapter lensboard, so that I can use my lenses mounted on Linhof Tech type lensboards. Our mutual friend Jim, at Midwest, gave me a very good deal on the package.

The camera is larger, and slightly heavier, than my former 4X5 field camera. However, I can use my Fuji lenses, from 90mm. to 450mm., on flat lensboards. The 5X7 Tachi will also allow me to use the Canham 6X17 roll film back, if I desire. The 4X5 reducing back allows the use of my Polaroid 545i holder and Type 55P/N film. Since I no longer do any backpack hiking, the additional size and weight are of no concern. I refer to it as my "old geezer" camera.

Ted Harris
6-Oct-2004, 12:50
Hi David,



I recently went through the same analysis as c-5/c-6 compression and attendent loss of a bit of feeling in two fingers on my left hand had made my beloved Horseman FA more and more difficult to use iwth its small knobs. Since I knew I had to switch anyway I decided I would include in my wish list easier to use rear movements and I ended up with the RW45. I strongly considered the SV series but ruled it out as I just could not justify the additional expense for shift and even mor eexpens for asymetrical movements. I thought hard about the shift and realized that I very seldom use it when shooting landscapes or other reasonably uncomplex subjects in the field. If really necessary I can always frag the rail camera to the scene (I do that anyway for things like interior architecture and food shoots). I also ruled out the non folding Ebony's because i need the packability of of the folder and want both the axis and ase tilt they give.



I have now been putting the RW45 through its paces for two weeks including one intensive two day period in the Great North Woods of New Hampshire shooting fall foliage in a variety of terrain, including some significanttreks and definite offroad situations. My impressions follow:



1) Absolutely rigid, no problems at all with lenses from 75mm through 360mm. Nor any wiggle or tilt problems with lenses in a #3 shutter. Impressive in this regard. I can't comment on the 450 since I have not tried to use a 450 with it yet. The movements are all smooth and easy to use, lock down easily and tightly. Is it less precise than a metal field, sure. Does it bother me, not a bit. It is definitely more precise than other wood fields I have used (Wisner, Tachihara, Wista).



2) No problems at all using a 90 conventionally. Using the 75 required using tilts, putting the camera to use Ebonys' words into "wide angle mode." Once done I had plenty of room to use movements with the 75 on a flat board. Important note which they don't tell you .... you have to pu tthe camera into the wide angle mode befor eyou mount the lens or you won't get sufficient initial tilts. Once I figured this out it was not a problem and I had sufficient movements for all my needs (strictly landscape shooting).



3) The camera sets up and breaks down at least as fast as other wood fields I have known. It is light, and that is a joy, another reason why it was at the top of my list.



4) I wasn't going to add this last until I got an answer back from the factory but since you asked ..... the fit and finish of the camera is good, no doubt about i, but it is not quite up to the standard I expected. There are a bunch of marks on the bottom plate and there is a longish scratch on one of the metal bed standards and a couple of other little picky things. It could be jsut this camera or they could be slipping in their QA/QC with the high demand. No negative implied here till we see what the factory says.



Overall impression it was the right choice for me and I think it will be for you as well, although the Walker may alos work for you. I wouldn't recommend the Zone VI Ultralight. I have only seen it in the store but it impressed me as being too flimsy for my taste.

Luck,

Ted

michael Allen
6-Oct-2004, 13:05
Danny Burk is also a big Ebony promoter. Check his web sight at www.dannyburk.com, He is one of the main reasons I decided the Ebony SVTE model. I haven't tried the U model so I really don't know what I'm missing with this feature, although I'm told it's worth the extra coin.

Dan Dozer
6-Oct-2004, 15:57
David,

I assume that the cameras you listed were your choices as new cameras rather than used ones. I just purchased a used Linhof Technikardan as opposed to a traditional field camera. I haven't even had a chance to use it yet, but I am very impressed with it. Used Technikardan's are close to the same price range as those you listed if new. The Technikardan has all the movement (and more) and has the bellows draw that you're looking for. They're not all that easy to find used, but there is a Technikardan S on E-bay right now. Unfortunately, the owner has separated out the bag bellows as a separate bid item. You would probably need the bag bellows if you're shooting wide angle. There are also several technikardan users on this forum who have been very helpful to me.

I'm not in LA directly, but if you wanted to drive out to the Palm Springs area (La Quinta), I would be happy to show it to you. One other thing, the Technikardan is a type of monorail camera and if you went that way, you might not need your old monorail (I'm getting ready to get rid of mine).

Ben Calwell
6-Oct-2004, 17:27
Eugene,

If you're still monitoring this post, I'm thinking of getting the same outfit you have. Can you focus a 90mm lens on the 5x7 Tachi with a flat board? I currently use a Linhof 5x7, which is a bit heavy for me, and a 4x5 Wista DX. My thought is to consolidate with the 5x7 Tachi and a 4x5 reducing back. Is the 5x7 Tachi well made? Thank you, sir.

Frank Petronio
6-Oct-2004, 18:32
If you want to consolidate, and can be patient, start looking for a Wista Rittereck 5x7 and its 4x5 reducing back - like a lighter weight 5x7 Linhof Technika with more movements - can take a 75mm to a 450mm. Rigid and well made. Very rare - the last one was made in the 1980s - but they do show up on eBay. I had one, and kick myself twice for selling it.

Seeing a Zone VI and Tachi in the field (never used them) gives me doubts about build quality - I'd start investigating the Shen Hao 5x7, which might be better made and less expensive too.

ronald moravec
6-Oct-2004, 19:15
You can focus a 90mm on the Zone 6, but you need the bag bellows for movement. A 450mm or 18" should focus at infinity and very slightly closer.

All LF seems to be some sort of comprimise. The Canham DCL has a very flexible bellows that may meet your needs. I ended up with an older Zone 6 and a bag bellows. The 90 goes way off axis and my 300 works well.

Gem Singer
6-Oct-2004, 20:09
Hi Ben,

To answer your inquiry, as far as I'm concerned the build quality of the Tachi is at least as good as the Zone VI, the Wista DX, the Wisner, and the Shen Hao. I have owned each of them during the past twenty-five years, as well as the Ebony, which I consider to be better build, with higher quality materials. Of course, the Ebony comes with a considerably higher price tag.

Shen Hao cameras have more features than most wooden folding flat bed field cameras in their price range. However, the 5X7 Tachihara has ample movements for landscape work. (See Anthony's elegant description on the www.fineartsphotosupply.com website). By using a combination of base tilt backwards and axis tilt, to place the lensboard into the vertical position, I have been able to focus my 90mm. lens at infinity, but the bellows is fully compressed and rise and fall movements are limited. The 5X7 Tachi does not seem to be a camera designed for wide angle lenses. However, it is a great camera to use with longer lenses. The 4X5 reducing back places the groundglass about 30mm. backwards, and that has to be taken into account when figuring the minimum focusing distance.

Ed Pierce
7-Oct-2004, 06:49
It seems that there are often Zone VI's available on the auction site, for very reasonable prices. Mine has held up well for 12 years. I've never tried a 450 lens on it, but I do use a 305 a lot at close range, and have never had problems with not enough bellows extension. The camera actually seems to be more rigid when it's racked out like that.

On the other end, I use a 90 which works fine with the standard bellows allowing tiny movement. You'd probably want to get the bag bellows, also readily available used. Check with Jim at Midwest Photo.

I've heard, from a knowledgeable source, that the new "ultralights" are not as well made as the older, pre-Calumet models.

Donald Hutton
7-Oct-2004, 08:00
I have only used the Ebony RW45 out of these three and I highly recommend it. One of the biggest plus-es for this camera is, that should you decide to sell it and get something else at a later date, Ebonies seem to really keep their value very well.

CXC
7-Oct-2004, 21:14
Hi, David,

My main camera is a Walker Titan SF. This year I have taken it to both Burma and Iceland, and it always performs impeccably. I chose it for its reasonable price and bombproofness and imperviousness to weather, and I am completely satisfied.

I also happen to own a Fuji 450mm. Until tonight it had never been on the Walker, only on bigger cameras, as my taste runs more to wide angle. But out of curiosity I just put it on. Yes, you have to front base-tilt forward and front center-tilt backward simultaneously, which gains a crucial inch and a half or so. In this position, it is not only easy to focus on infinity, it is also possible to focus in at least as close as 15 feet, and probably a little closer. With this lightweight lens, the long extension is no problem, the bellows is not stressed, and the camera remains plenty rigid. It's not even particularly awkward.

I have in fact shot this camera with lenses from 65mm to 355mm. The 355 is a G-Claron, which is a monster, and when focussed it taxes the rigidity of the camera. With extra care, it still produces fine results, but it is not an ideal combo.

If you like a lot of movements with your 90, you may benefit from the optional bag bellows.

Ed Candland
8-Oct-2004, 21:57
So Eugene, I haven't been around much lately. Did you get rid of your beloved Ebony for a Tachihara?

Gem Singer
9-Oct-2004, 08:24
Yes Ed,

I sold the entire Ebony outfit. As you already know, I had formerly traded my Toyo 45AII outfit for an 8X10 Tachihara and had been attempting to master the technique for developing and contact printing those larger sized negatives. It's been a steep learning curve for me, and I wanted to concentrate all my efforts on the 8x10 format.

I'm really impressed with the way Tachihara designs and builds their cameras. Good value for the price. Since I still had a large selection of Fujinon lenses for the 4x5 format, I decided to trade a couple of the super wide angles for a 4x5 Tachi. My lenses were worth more than I realized, and Jim, at Midwest, sent me a new 5x7 Tachi, with a 4x5 reduction back, as well as a new 4x5 Tachi for my wife to use. She really liked the 4x5 Tachi, so I got her a few boxes of Polaroid Type 55. She is planning on scanning and printing the negatives digitally. My darkroom is just not large enough for both of us. Besides, she doesn't enjoy the wet printing process.

I've been playing with the 5x7, with the 4x5 reduction back, both with 5x7 and 4x5 film. The camera is larger than the 4x5 and smaller than the 8x10. I haven't decided whether I prefer it to a smaller, lighter 4x5, as yet. I'll keep you posted. Nice to see you back on the forum.

David Karp
9-Oct-2004, 12:47
Thanks to all for your comments and suggestions. They have given me a lot to think about.
Eugene & Frank: I had not thought about using a 5x7 camera with a reducing back. Is it awkward to use a 90mm with the reducing back? Do you have to do a combination of back base tilt and axis tilt to realign the lens board with this combination? (The opposite of gaining extra extension for the 450!) I have been concentrating on a 4x5, but perhaps a smaller, lighter 5x7 might be worth investigating. Time for more research! Frank: I assume the Wista is a metal camera that collapses into a box, rather than folding up? I will check the Wista site. If I remember correctly, they have a section on their camera history and it will likely show one of these.

CXC: It is great to hear from an actual Titan user. Thanks for checking out the 450mm with your Titan SF. It really helps to confirm that camera as a possible choice. Also, your description of the camera's rigidity makes it clear that I could use my heavy 90mm f/4.5 Grandagon-N also. Maybe now you will have an extra lens in your kit when you go out with the Titan.

Dan: I had not thought about a Technikardan, because I just assumed (you know what that means) that they were not very available used. I have not qualms about buying used. All of my LF equipment, except for one lens, is used. I am used to a monorail and all of its movements, so this might just work. And like you, that might make it possible for me to sell my current monorail. I head out your way from time to time. I may just take you up on your offer. Thanks.

Steve, Ted, Michael & Don: Thanks for the information. It is good to know that the RW45 is useable with the 450m on an extended lensboard. And Ted, sorry about the accident. I hope you regain that feeling. And thanks also for the information on the fit and finish. Probably the first time I heard this about an Ebony. Perhaps it was sold, returned, and resold. Also thanks for the info on the Ultralight. I have played with one of them at the local Calumet store, but had no other wooden camera to compare it to that was capable of siimlar extension.

Mark, Ronald & Ed P.: Thanks for the information. It seems that if I go with a Zone VI, I should find a pre-Ultralight version.

Again, thanks to everyone. You all gave me food for thought while I finish saving up for this next purchase.

MikeK
24-Nov-2004, 17:50
I have the Tachihara 5x7 and the shortest lens I can use is my 120 mm Super Angulon. It is not a problem with bellows compression but with the focus knobs on the front and rear standards. They touch at around 120mm making further compression impossible.

To use a shorter lens you will need a recessed lens board. You can see my review of the Tachihara 5x7 and 8x10 on my site if you are interested.

The 5x7 review can be found at http://home.pacbell.net/mkirwan/tachihara_5x7_review.htm (http://home.pacbell.net/mkirwan/tachihara_5x7_review.htm)

The 8x10 review can be found at http://home.pacbell.net/mkirwan/8x10_tachihara_review.htm (http://home.pacbell.net/mkirwan/8x10_tachihara_review.htm)