Sinar F2, P, C, or Toyo 45G?

[jonbrisbincreative]

Besides at least $150 difference between the F2 and the P or C, is there a measurable benefit to springing for at least the C (which seems like a compromise between an F and a P) and going "whole hog" with the P?

I have an RZ67 and a Speed Graphic folder for the portable stuff already but I'm looking into monorails and I've narrowed it down to a Sinar or a Toyo 45GII. I will have to transport the camera no matter what as I have no studio. I do on-location Fine Art (yeah, I'm one of those ;), Environmental Portraiture, and Documentary style photography and I'm trying to put together a system I can use for urban and "field" street and environmental portraiture this summer. I'm looking for something I can drag around the streets of a disadvantaged neighborhood to do portraits for people on Fuji pack instant film, digital with Instax, and work my way into true 4x5 (and later 8x10). I'd really like to try paper negatives as well, so whatever I get needs to accommodate that as well.

The biggest drawback I can see to the Sinar from what I've read is that you can't really use the Polaroid back in the vertical position because of the standard. I haven't heard whether the F suffers from this as the comments I've read seem to be related to the P. I'm looking at maybe a C because I like the idea of the geared movements like the Toyo but I also think the Sinar might suit me better in that it seems to be more portable.

Any "field" shooters out there that can comment on using Sinars with instant and roll film backs in addition to the traditional 4x5 film (or paper) negative?

[Luis-F-S]

And you plan on using a Polaroid back often? I haven't used one in at least 18 years, and I've taken thousands of architectural shots........F2.

[jonbrisbincreative]

And you plan on using a Polaroid back often? I haven't used one in at least 18 years, and I've taken thousands of architectural shots........F2.

I use the FP100C instant film in my RZ67 and people are very enthusiastic when I hand them a real, physical print they can keep. It's a conversation piece and way to earn their trust that I'm not there to simply poach their image and leave them with nothing. The Polaroids cost me money and it's something unique they can keep if they want.

I get the same reaction with the Instax mini printer I carry in my ThinkTank bag along with my X-T1. It's great to be able to get a real, physical image in ~2 minutes that I can hand to people. The reaction is almost universally: "oh, cool! that is so neat!" It's a great conversation piece, just like the big bulky cameras I lug around when I've got a perfectly capable digital camera in my bag anyway.

[Peter De Smidt]

You can't use a polaroid back with a Sinar? If I can find my back, I'll check that for you. It sounds unlikely...

[jonbrisbincreative]

You can't use a polaroid back with a Sinar? If I can find my back, I'll check that for you. It sounds unlikely...

It's my understanding that on the Sinar C/P rear standard with the 405 back, the dark slide can't be pulled out easily because it points down toward the standard since the tabs point up and the slide is on the opposite side from the tabs, just like the back for my RZ67 is. I haven't heard about the whether that holds true for the F or not, which is what prompted my question.

I hate that I can't use the back on my RZ in vertical orientation (it won't even go on in that direction) but it doesn't make much difference anyway as the image is actually the entire size of the back opening, a little larger than 6x7 film. I was hoping to use the pack film in the 4x5 to get the entire image area filled up and used efficiently in either horizontal or portrait (but my main concern is portrait orientation since I do a lot of those).

[Peter De Smidt]

Got it. I had a different Polaroid holder, a 545, and it worked just fine in a Sinar P, but everything is done from the top with my holder.

[Luis-F-S]

Works with the 545......L

132863 132864

There's an entire thread on this:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?106879-The-Polaroid-405-film-holder-only-fits-some-4x5-cameras

[Drew Wiley]

Well if you can find a clean Sinar "P" for only $150 more than an "F", you'd better buy several of them. Or maybe you're just missing another zero behind $150?
But once you start lugging around a P outside the studio you might have serious second thoughts. You'll also need a lot beefier tripod to support the extra weight.
Don't bother with the "C" option. Those were never common to begin with, and most of the ones listed for sale nowadays are simply cobbled together with leftover mismatched standards. An F2 is a lot better than an F1, which in turn is way better than an F+ or Alpina. My own favorite for portability is the Sinar Norma. Better
build than any of the F's but only about a pound heavier. But these are older cameras, so finding them in good condition takes a bit of patience sometimes.

[jonbrisbincreative]

Works with the 545......L

132863 132864

There's an entire thread on this:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?106879-The-Polaroid-405-film-holder-only-fits-some-4x5-cameras

That thread is where I've gotten what little understanding I have about this. But I didn't see a Sinar F specifically mentioned as working with the 405, hence my question here to anyone who might have tried it.

I know the 545 works but since that film isn't available any more that doesn't do me much good. I'm really looking for people with direct experience with the 405 holder in a Sinar.

That said, I'm starting to lean towards the Toyo for the geared, repeatable movements and rotating back, which I will use. Not having either on the Graphic can be frustrating because it's hard to make precise adjustments for when I want to make minor changes in composition which I have a tendency to do.

I also have a Bogen 3050+3047 head on the way that I picked up for a good price, although I think my current setup would work. I just wasn't sure about the rectangular QR plate so opted to get one with the hex plate which should be stronger.

[Ari]

Honestly, if you're looking at monorails, you can't go wrong with a Toyo G/GII.
They aren't as sophisticated as a Sinar P, but they are every bit as precise and well-built, and they are a little lighter.
If you plan on using a head with any of these cameras, make sure it's a heavy-duty ball head or rock-solid 3-way head.

FWIW, I had problems using the 405 back on the Sinar; the 405 didn't fit under the GG (it did on the Toyo), and when it was attached, it interfered with the camera.
A Norma is also a good choice, but harder to find at a reasonable price.
The G-series is based on the Norma, and accessories are plentiful and inexpensive.

[Alan Gales]

I don't know why anyone would buy a C but if you buy a P you may end up with one. I own a P and bought an F cheap and parted it out and kept the bellows and front standard. The F front standard is nice for mounting between the P standards so you can use 2 bellows for long lenses.

The P series are heavy, all geared studio cameras and the F series are lighter for taking out into the field.

[Old-N-Feeble]

I agree with Ari and I'll add that a very nice Toyo will cost less than a Sinar. Any of the G series are fabulous cameras. I prefer the GX but to be honest I don't really need the yaw-free movements it offers. There's also the venerable VX125 but those are still very pricey on the used market.

[Jonathan Barlow]

You should be able to buy a clean Sinar F2 4x5 for $300-400, a P 4x5 for about $500, and a P2 4x5 for $700-800 in the US.

[Bernice Loui]

My highly biased opinion, Sinar System.

Most all the bits are interchangeable which allows mixing and matching of various parts to make up the camera best for a given image making requirement. This mean using what ever front, rear or in any combination with any amount of rail required. Bellows can be connected using an F front standard. There are bag bellows, tapered bellows and bellows can be made to order if needed. There are metering backs, non-metering backs, roll film backs, 4x5-5x7-8x10 or non standard film size backs that can be made to fit a Sinar rear standard bottom unit.

The Sinar shutter allows using barrel lenses or most any lens without a shutter.

There are filter holders, filters and a lot more. Basically, Sinar is a camera system with the fewest number of camera restrictions and IMO the best value for cost on the used market. It is a image-making problem solver with precision an durability.


Bernice

[erie patsellis]

The 405 fits well on a Sinar back. Just press the two silver tabs and slide the ground glass back off then use the Graflok slides to hold it.

[fishbulb]

The P series are heavy, all geared studio cameras and the F series are lighter for taking out into the field.

The F series are lighter than the P but still pretty heavy compared to a wooden field camera. Even the "lightweight" Sinar F 4x5 still weighs over 7lbs (3.3kg) (http://www.apug.org/forums/forum44/118849-sinar-f-weight.html). A field camera can be less than half that. But if you're only looking at monorails, sure, 3.3kg for the F is pretty light compared to a P for 13lbs (5.9kg).


My highly biased opinion, Sinar System. ... It is a image-making problem solver with precision an durability.

As long as you don't overtighten the front standard rail clamp on an F/F+/F1. Or just have an old one with brittle plastic.

[jonbrisbincreative]

Thanks for the advice!

I ended up winning a bid on a Sinar F system with bag bellows, extension rail, hard case, and bellows compendium. I also picked up a Fujinon 180/5.6 to start with. I'll probably be adding a Fuji 90/5.6 before long as well.

I debated whether the Toyo was the camera for me and opted to go for lighter weight. The rotating back and geared movements sound nice but I don't have a studio so every time I will be getting the camera out to use it, I will be "in the field". Weight and setup are important factors and the Sinar seems like it will fit that need for me.

That said, my Bogen 3050 tripod I think weighs more than this camera and case put together! I may have to sell it and get something lighter. But I do like it and it is a solid performer. The quick release for the legs is pretty nice and makes setting up in the field pretty easy. But it's just really, really heavy and at times unwieldy.

[Alan Gales]

Congratulations, Jon! If you live in the U.S. there is a lot of Sinar equipment on Ebay. You might want to look for a Sinar to Linhof Technika reduction lens board so you can use the small Technika style boards on your Sinar. They take up a lot less room in your camera bag. If you later get a field camera you can swap lenses back and forth between cameras too. Some take the Technika style boards. The ones that don't like Toyo do make reduction boards.

If you do change tripods and/or heads look for a used Sinar pan tilt head. They are pricey but worth the money. I have to really crank down my Sinar P onto my Ries head to keep the whole camera from spinning. The Sinar head has a pin that prevents this.

[jonbrisbincreative]

You might want to look for a Sinar to Linhof Technika reduction lens board so you can use the small Technika style boards on your Sinar. They take up a lot less room in your camera bag. If you later get a field camera you can swap lenses back and forth between cameras too. Some take the Technika style boards. The ones that don't like Toyo do make reduction boards.

Already done. The lens was on a Technika board so I went ahead and sprang for the adapter as well. :)


If you do change tripods and/or heads look for a used Sinar pan tilt head. They are pricey but worth the money. I have to really crank down my Sinar P onto my Ries head to keep the whole camera from spinning. The Sinar head has a pin that prevents this.

I've heard good things about the Sinar pan/tilt head. I'll keep an auction search saved for it.

The only thing I'm lacking for a complete setup is a dark cloth but I was going to try the black t-shirt trick to start with.

I'm also on the lookout for a Horseman roll film back. Haven't made up my mind between 6x7 (which I love with my RZ67) or 6x9 (which is the 2x3 I'm used to with my Fuji X-T1).

Anxious to get everything put together so I can shoot up some of this old paper I've got that I'm going to cut down to 4x5 to use as paper negatives developed in caffenol. Once I get movements figured out a little, I'll spring for some proper film to go in the Grafmatic I picked up.

[Alan Gales]

The black T shirt works fine.

I've got a BTZS hood/dark cloth for my Sinar P 4x5 and a Blackjacket for my Wehman 8x10. The BTZS is great. It gets really dark under the Blackjacket but it is fussier to use than the BTZS.

[Peter Lewin]

There is another current thread on roll film backs, my personal experience was using the Calumet 6x7 back on my Sinar F, and it worked perfectly, sliding under the GG just like a film holder. I don't have experience with the Horseman or other backs.

As for the Sinar F, I'm sure you will enjoy working with it, I traded mine for a field camera, and while the trade made sense, I wish I had kept the Sinar and bought a field camera in order to have both. (I am using a Canham DLC, which really does everything I ask of it, so maybe I don't really regret trading the Sinar in, but I liked it a lot and in retrospect wouldn't mind owning both!)

[jonbrisbincreative]

There is another current thread on roll film backs, my personal experience was using the Calumet 6x7 back on my Sinar F, and it worked perfectly, sliding under the GG just like a film holder. I don't have experience with the Horseman or other backs.

As for the Sinar F, I'm sure you will enjoy working with it, I traded mine for a field camera, and while the trade made sense, I wish I had kept the Sinar and bought a field camera in order to have both. (I am using a Canham DLC, which really does everything I ask of it, so maybe I don't really regret trading the Sinar in, but I liked it a lot and in retrospect wouldn't mind owning both!)

I think I'm leaning toward the Calumet back as well simply because it slides under the GG and I don't have to take it off and lay it somewhere while using the film back. This seems like a safer way to operate "in the field".

I don't have my lens yet, so I couldn't do much with the camera other than get familiar with how to take the bellows on and off (it came with both standard and bag), how to use the compendium shade (also going to try it on the back as a focusing hood), what all the locks and levers do, trying out the swings, shifts, tilts, etc... The Grafmatic fits beautifully and after I lubed it very gently, it works great in the camera. I can cycle through the frames without shaking the camera much at all.

All the controls feel great except for the rear swing/shift lock, which has apparently been Gorilla-glued onto the rod because the end screwed was stripped; but when they glued it, the lever is pointing backward, over the focus knob, which is a little annoying. I would have liked to adjust it forward to not obstruct the movement on the fine focus but I'll deal with it...just a minor annoyance.

I was really surprised just how light the camera is. I'm used to the RB/RZ67 and when you get those kitted with the back, lens, and hand grip, you're talking a good 12lbs. I noticed right away that the Sinar was lighter than the RZ. Even with all the "stuff" attached it's about the same weight (I didn't put it on the scale, just went by feel). The movements are super easy to adjust without having to look at them and I have a feeling that I'll find the RZ obsolete when I start shooting roll film.

My Bogen 3050 tripod weighs more than the Sinar, accoutrements, and case together. I tried it on the lighter Manfrotto tripod I've had forever and I think it'll support it weight-wise but the rectangular quick-release plate was a horrible fit with the rail clamp. There's just not enough solid area of contact between the clamp and the plate. The hex plate of the 3047 head, on the other hand, provides a beefy connection which is almost exactly the same size as the clamp bottom. This creates a really solid connection between the camera and the tripod.

Can't wait to get the lens in and start playing with it for real.