Help me choose 4x5 camera to buy in 2022

[hiroh]

When I was entering film photography, I was looking for the best camera to buy for myself. Among hundreds of choices and price variations, I ended up liking Leica MP the most, and still till this day, I use that camera.

Then I got interested in medium format due to its superior resolution comparing to 35mm, and I ended up buying wonderful Rolleiflex 2.8F which is dear to me till this day and I still use it frequently.

With large format, I must say, I'm hesitating for a long time. I always think, you don't need a new distraction, you have enough cameras, lenses, and generally lots of choices already, you don't need new complications in your life. But now I feel I really want to try it, and as always, I want to choose the best camera for me that I'll like it from day one and that will draw me outside to go and actually use it.

There are lot of reviews and opinions online. Some are based on the prices of the camera, some are based on what's best for beginners, and I can say, I don't care any of these, I simply want something that I'll like. So, based on my previous camera choices in two different film format, what do you think would be the perfect match for me in LF world?

[paulbarden]

Chamonix.

[Peter De Smidt]

Decide what you want to photograph. For example, a camera that's good for long hikes won't be as ideal in a studio as a specialized camera..... Figure out, generally, what kind of lenses you want to use, super wide, wide, normal, long......

[xkaes]

Another factor to consider is new or used. Some people won't touch used gear -- for whatever reasons. There are plenty of great new cameras, and plenty of great used ones too. Pretty much this is not an issue with lenses, as they are pretty much all used -- but NOT used up!!!

And the camera you get depends a lot on the lenses you will use. Don't put the cart (camera) before the horse (lenses).

[hiroh]

I don't have a particular subjects that I usually photograph. I photograph studio portraits and landscapes, street photography and more-abstract-less-real subjects. Really everything that I feel photographing that day. And I use both 35mm and MF cameras in almost all scenarios. Deciding factor is 1) the look I want for the particular photograph, and 2) the weight I'm willing to carry that day, as my Rolleiflex kit is heavier that 35mm, so if I'm going with kids on a local beach, I'll most likely bring 35mm (but not always), or if I'm going alone outside in the woods and I know I have a whole afternoon, I'll most likely bring Rolleiflex with the tripod (but not always).

So, I understand the questions about choosing what to photograph, but that will vary from day to day. Maybe over time, I'll figure out in what situations I'll bring 4x5 camera, but at the moment, I don't know, I guess it will be the situations where I need tripod, where I have time and where I don't have anything else to carry. But then, I have a studio where I shoot portraits, so why not use LF camera for that too?

[hiroh]

Another factor to consider is new or used. Some people won't touch used gear -- for whatever reasons. There are plenty of great new cameras, and plenty of great used ones too. Pretty much this is not an issue with lenses, as they are pretty much all used -- but NOT used up!!!

And the camera you get depends a lot on the lenses you will use. Don't put the cart (camera) before the horse (lenses).

I love nice vintage cameras! My Rolleiflex (from 1960) was used, but in pristine condition.

But also if the new cameras are as good as the old ones (or even better), I wouldn't mind consider it.

Although, I prefer the old ones in a good condition that can serve me for a long time.

[Greg]

Leica MP and Rolleiflex 2.8F... high camera standards to follow through with a 4x5. Personally would choose either a Chamonix field camera or a Sinar (older Norma (classic) or a newer F (I think very underrated). I'd steer clear of an older (small rail) Calumet or a cheap wooden field. Both are not bad cameras and I'm sure thousands of excellent photographs have been made with them, but they can be frustrating to use (and definitely on par with the Leica or the Rollei).

[Bernice Loui]

Camera choice ~Completely~ depends on your image goals, how-where-what Your specific image making goals-needs are. This coupled with what lenses are required to meet these needs/goals will essentially fix the camera choices..

Keep in mind, any view camera is essentially not a lot more than a light tight box that is flexi in the middle.

What is most importaint has much to do with the camera's ability to support the lenses of choice.. This LF view camera stuff is nothing like a Leica 35mm or digital where there are absolute limits on what can and can never be used with with any Leica camera body...

If your into hiking/back packing/travel and such a set of light weight-small lenses with a light weight field folder could be your ideal camera as an outfit like this will be easier to deal with than a monorail. Trade off will be the camera's total inability to support extensive camera movement needs, long telephoto or macro images, BIG lenses in barre and such... where a modular monorail camera meets these needs FAR better than any lightweight field folder camera.

The belief/idea/habit of the "best camera" is often born from roll film or digital camera conventions, habits, beliefs, ways as there is a foto status symbol tied to specific brands and what they are percieved to offer to any given image maker.

Keep in mind there are a pile of associated items that are manditory and unescapable with this LF view camera stuff like, film holders, dark cloth or similar ground glass viewing aid, light meter, tripod_tripod head, ground glass magnifying loupe, tape meaure, case for all this ... stuff... Adding up all this stuff, it becomes enforced that the idea of focusing on just the camera is short sighted with the image goals out of focus in too many ways.

Then there is budget/cost/investment of this foto gear...

We begin with your image goals..


Bernice

[hiroh]

One silly question — what is the most desirable camera in the LF world? I'd like to look at those cameras, as there is usually a reason for that.

When I was looking for the MF camera, I ended up buying Rolleiflex 2.8F which is considered the most desirable Rolleiflex TLR, or maybe even TLR in general by many folks. I didn't know that at the time, and I purchased the camera just because I liked it, but years after I've seen many other TLRs and saw few advantages in 2.8F model. So, I can say I was lucky by choosing this camera, so with that experience, I'd like to look at the cameras that are considered most desirable in LF.

[Peter De Smidt]

I suppose Linhof.....For studio, Sinar and Arca Swiss. Given what you're doing, I'd get a new Chamonix. It's lighter than some of the older cameras. Use it for a year or two, and see if you run into limits.

Personally, I use a Toyo 45AX for most landscape type things, and a Sinar P2 monorail for studio and architecture. Both are great cameras, but they are heavier than the Chamonix.

[maltfalc]

a field or press camera with a rangefinder if you want to do any handheld stuff. speed graphic, crown graphic, linhof master technika, wista rf, beseler type c-6...

[Greg]

I'd get a new Chamonix. It's lighter than some of the older cameras. Use it for a year or two, and see if you run into limits.

Big plus... If you turn out not liking it in a year or two, you will most probably be able to sell it for almost if not all of what you paid for it. I'd also definitely get the Chamonix 4x5 reflex finder. Bigger question is what lens or what two or three lenses to acquire with the camera. I'd start another post as to what first lens to initially get with the camera... I'm sure that you would get many opinions and recommendations on that subject. When I was a student at RIT in the 1970s, a 210mm was recommended. After many years of shooting, I'd beg to differ... depends on what the photographer wants to concentrate on shooting.

[Tin Can]

Order now

[Bob Salomon]

LInhof Master Technika.

[Mark Sampson]

I'd like a Linhof Master Technika 4x5 myself, but B&H lists it at $12000 or so. I won't say it's not worth that much, but I can't afford it.
Nor can I advise the OP about which camera to buy, although the many posts in this thread may help his decision-making. Best of luck!

[hiroh]

Hmm, I like the look of Linhof Master Technika, but there are several models, with a very big price range difference.

[hiroh]

I'd like a Linhof Master Technika 4x5 myself, but B&H lists it at $12000 or so. I won't say it's not worth that much, but I can't afford it.
Nor can I advise the OP about which camera to buy, although the many posts in this thread may help his decision-making. Best of luck!

Yeah, I also checked quickly checked the internet and saw that B&H lists 3000 model for $12K+ and then there are several other Masters on eBay for less than $1000, so I'd really have to dig into this and see what's the difference and which one is the right for me.

And the fact that it's German (being Leica and Rolleiflex fan and user), I have not to look further :)

[Bernice Loui]

More questions, more to ponder on..

35mm and 120 MF roll hand held camera needs already addresses and experiences and own/used. These hand held cameras simply work for "decisive moment" images. No need for a tripod, quick to react then create an image based on serendipity.. This image making goal and need should be addressed given the current 35mm/MF cameras available to be used.

This LF view camera stuff is much about crafting images, essentially the opposite of "decisive moment" images. Before even considering any of this LF sheet film stuff. What are your expectations from creating sheet film images.. how might these sheet film images meet a need/goal that your current 35mm/MF cameras cannot do or achieve? LF view camera images require a tripod majority of the time does this add or subtract from your image creative style?

Yes, indeediee there are hand held_range finder 4x5 sheet film cameras easily available. They are more a niche sheet film camera that fits into a very specific need within this LF view camera image making universe..

~Does this far slower way, process, technique, process of image creation add or subtract from your image goals/needs?

~This is a question only you can answer as to why LF view camera and it this method of image making has specific benifets for your needs.

Adding more to this LF view camera stuff, what about post process? Film processing, print making via wet darkroom or scan/digital or ?


Once the entire LF view camera image creation process-system is considered, the camera is a tiny aspect of the much greater whole..
Bernice



I don't have a particular subjects that I usually photograph. I photograph studio portraits and landscapes, street photography and more-abstract-less-real subjects. Really everything that I feel photographing that day. And I use both 35mm and MF cameras in almost all scenarios. Deciding factor is 1) the look I want for the particular photograph, and 2) the weight I'm willing to carry that day, as my Rolleiflex kit is heavier that 35mm, so if I'm going with kids on a local beach, I'll most likely bring 35mm (but not always), or if I'm going alone outside in the woods and I know I have a whole afternoon, I'll most likely bring Rolleiflex with the tripod (but not always).

So, I understand the questions about choosing what to photograph, but that will vary from day to day. Maybe over time, I'll figure out in what situations I'll bring 4x5 camera, but at the moment, I don't know, I guess it will be the situations where I need tripod, where I have time and where I don't have anything else to carry. But then, I have a studio where I shoot portraits, so why not use LF camera for that too?

[hiroh]

More questions, more to ponder on..

35mm and 120 MF roll hand held camera needs already addresses and experiences and own/used. These hand held cameras simply work for "decisive moment" images. No need for a tripod, quick to react then create an image based on serendipity.. This image making goal and need should be addressed given the current 35mm/MF cameras available to be used.

This LF view camera stuff is much about crafting images, essentially the opposite of "decisive moment" images. Before even considering any of this LF sheet film stuff. What are your expectations from creating sheet film images.. how might these sheet film images meet a need/goal that your current 35mm/MF cameras cannot do or achieve? LF view camera images require a tripod majority of the time does this add or subtract from your image creative style?

Yes, indeediee there are hand held_range finder 4x5 sheet film cameras easily available. They are more a niche sheet film camera that fits into a very specific need within this LF view camera image making universe..

~Does this far slower way, process, technique, process of image creation add or subtract from your image goals/needs?

~This is a question only you can answer as to why LF view camera and it this method of image making has specific benifets for your needs.

Adding more to this LF view camera stuff, what about post process? Film processing, print making via wet darkroom or scan/digital or ?


Once the entire LF view camera image creation process-system is considered, the camera is a tiny aspect of the much greater whole..
Bernice

Bernice, yes, I'm very well aware of that it's a slower process, requires more thinking and time (and tripod), than 35mm and 120 formats. I don't plan to shoot decisive moment type of photography on the street with LF cameras. I love to shot scenes that I've created in my studio, or portraits, or even landscapes and these are all perfect for LF. When not using digital, I prefer my Rolleiflex for this type of images, but sometimes square format is not ideal. Yes, I can crop, but I'd rather try different camera. I never crop my images and 100% of my photos has visible borders (not to show my framing abilities, but because I love the look with the border). And after all, LF provides a different look than MF, which I like for years but hesitated to make a move.

Also, one more reason why I want LF is that I can develop for one shot only, rather than the whole roll of different exposures. Sometimes I need that. I need to add more contrast to the particular shot, but not the whole roll, etc.

I mostly digitize my film these days. I have Negative Supply pro kit, and I already have everything needed for scanning 4x5 format.

[Peter Lewin]

You have been given excellent advice by quite a few experienced LF users. I think every single one has, as I have, owned a number of different view cameras, both field cameras and monorails, before working out which compromises work best for us. I use the word compromise intentionally, since every view camera is a compromise between weight, precision, flexibility, and probably a few more criteria. And that is before we even discuss lenses. For what it’s worth, my smaller format cameras are a Leica M6 and a Rollei 6006, a similar set to yours. But if you really want us to short circuit the process for you (which I think is a really bad idea), the view camera brand that I think offers the greatest precision of feel (sort of like a Leica) it would be Arca Swiss. They make a collapsible monorail system (their f-line) which is a good set of compromises. Linhoff makes a similar series, and you are probably arguing Rolls Royce vs. Bentley. And predictably my camera is neither, it is a metal Canham DLC. But you asked …

[Robert Opheim]

It all depends on what you want to take images of - and how you are taking those images. I would look for a camera that handles the lenses that you want to use - (they generally run from 47mm to 450mm or 600mm for 4x5) Do you need a bag bellows for wide angle lenses (some cameras have them some don't). If using a long lens do you have a long enough bellows on the camera? Does weight and size matter? does it fold up well? how far are you going carry the camera? it is a systems camera - are there added accessories that you might want to use now or in the future? Is the camera able to be hand-held (as maltfalc says above). It does come down to what you are taking photographs of, on or off the tripod and how much you want to carry and its weight. I have very heavy 8x10 equipment - it stays within a few hundred yards of the car. My 4x5 equipment is in a pack-sack and can travel with me further. My 4x5 camera is always on a tripod. There are many very fine 4x5 cameras made, new and used. Only you can select what fits your needs. You need to handle them to see how you work with them - and what feels right to you. They are all different tools.

[hiroh]

Guys, I watched couple videos about Lihof and read about the history and I pretty much already fell in love with the company and their cameras, I just need to research a bit and see what model suits me the best. Thank you all for your helpful advices. I hope I'll become an active member of this forum very soon!

Oh, btw, is there any particular place where should I look for Linhof cameras? Except eBay and Craigslist, which I avoid for anything valuable. I tried KEH, but they don't have any Linhof cameras on stock.

[Willie]

"One can never own too many Deardorffs", Tillman Crane

[Two23]

After owning several different brands, I settled on a Chamonix and haven't felt any urge to change. Really though you are being distracted by the wrong thing when it comes to LF. It's lenses that are important. You can use lenses from any age on a LF camera. I have one set of lenses I use that are from the 1840s and 1850s, another set that's from 1905-1925, and a set of modern lenses from the 1980s -2000. The other thing you're not yet aware of is all the different mediums you can use. No doubt you're aware of color and b&w film, but there's also wet plate, dry plate, x-ray film, calotype, and more. LF is very versatile. The camera is the least important thing. I started shooting color E6 film in the 1990s, moved to b&w film ten years ago, then dry plate four years ago, and for the last three years I almost exclusively shoot wet plate. Also looking to get into calotypes. My favorite LF camera is my Chamonix 4x5 but I also shoot a Gundlach Korona 5x7 and a Kodak 2D 8x10. And yes, I have a Rolleiflex, Leica IIIc, and a couple of dozen other very nice cameras from 1905 to 1960.


Kent in SD


Below photo:

My technical adviser, Annie the Cat, doesn't think the 1862 Voigtlander Petzval is going to fit on the little Chamonix 4x5.

[Two23]

Guys, I watched couple videos about Lihof and read about the history and I pretty much already fell in love with the company and their cameras, I just need to research a bit and see what model suits me the best. Thank you all for your helpful advices. I hope I'll become an active member of this forum very soon!




The important thing in LF is lenses. The cameras all basically work the same and rarely make any difference in your photos. You seem to be more after "prestige," and if so right now that's Gibellini cameras, not Linhoff. Prestige is much more attached to lenses than cameras in LF.

https://www.gibellinicamera.com/cameras/

Below photo:
pre-1844 Horne & Thornewaite FL=7 inch Petzval. (H&T supplied lenses to Fox Talbot.) Very desirable lens.



Kent in SD

[Jim Jones]

Hiroh -- When I chose a Leica rangefinder as a primary 35mm camera in 1953, I had to base that selection on far less information than you can get on LFPF. It was a fortunate choice. The Leica was supplemented with Nikon gear for photography beyond the capability of a practical Leica outfit. Upon retirement, LF became practical. Rather than search for the best, I settled for whatever camera would do at a low cost almost everything that the very best cameras manage. That turned out to be a used flat bed Burke & James 5x7 at a time when many photographers were moving down to handier 4x5 cameras, and 5x7 was becoming "Old Fashioned." I've taken more LF photos with that camera than with all of the several other LF cameras acquired before and since then. Certainly some of today's cameras are more precise and convenient to use. They also may be too valuable to risk in capturing some photographs. I don't regret losing one 4x5 due to carelessness. After all, it was only a Newton New Vue. Also, my battered Toyota Corolla gets me to places I'd never take a BMW sedan.[p]
It is the lens, not the camera body, that forms the image. Today's multi-coated lenses capture urban night scenes far better than anything available when I first used LF. However, there are almost infinite subjects that don't demand such fine lenses. Uncoated lenses took all of the finest photographs before the Second World War. I've used them with success. Others can direct you to sites for comparing modern lenses.
The equipment you have is far less important than how you use it. If you are mainly interested in B&W photography, the book Way Beyone Monochrome by Lambrecht and Woodhouse may be a better investment than much of your equipment. Be warned, it is fairly technical. In my day, View Camera Technique by Leslie Stroebel might have been the best. A good manual on photography should have answers for questions one might never think to ask. And you can always ask here. There's not a single bit of photographic knowledge that someone on this site doesn't know far better than I've learned in 90 years.

[Peter De Smidt]

Most flexible Linhof for field or studio work: Technikardan. Most bomb proof: Master Technika.

[Tin Can]

Most likely buying in 2023

I am waiting 2 months for a new very lightweight 8X10 Intrepid Model 3

https://intrepidcamera.co.uk/products/intrepid-8x10-camera

Right after that I will want Chamonix H1

https://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/cameras/45h1

I have too many heavy cameras

[Tin Can]

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?q=4X5%20camera&sts=ma

I bought a perfect Wista RF from Japan for way less

[Bob Salomon]

Guys, I watched couple videos about Lihof and read about the history and I pretty much already fell in love with the company and their cameras, I just need to research a bit and see what model suits me the best. Thank you all for your helpful advices. I hope I'll become an active member of this forum very soon!

Oh, btw, is there any particular place where should I look for Linhof cameras? Except eBay and Craigslist, which I avoid for anything valuable. I tried KEH, but they don't have any Linhof cameras on stock.

Check Cameras West

[Scott Davis]

I'll put in another dissenting vote for a Canham, if you want something to take into the field, but can also be used in the studio. I have one of the Canham wood field 5x7s (works as a 4x5 with a reducing back). I like Keith's wood field cameras so much I have four (5x7, 5x12, 8x10 and 14x17). I've not used one of the DLC all-metal models, but everyone who has one seems to love it.

If you want to shoot stuff in the studio, a Sinar Norma is a thing of beauty. Just so precisely machined, everything (at least on a well-maintained one) just glides into place with just the right amount of tension. And they're expandable/configurable - want to go up in size? easy. Need a longer bellows for macro work? easy. Want to use exotic antique lenses that don't have a shutter? easy. The only thing they're not is lightweight.

[Jeff Keller]

If you go down the Linhof path and you like taking really wide-angle photos, check out the specifications for camera you are considering. Some Technikas aren't the most wide-angle friendly nor do they handle really long focal lengths.

The Canham cameras have a very nice bellows. The camera can be used for a very wide range of lenses using only the standard bellows. The cameras are also relatively light, making them a good choice if you carry the camera around a lot. The company is still in business and is great to do business with. If you need something repaired, you can talk to the designer/builder and get first class work.

jeff

[xkaes]

One silly question — what is the most desirable camera in the LF world? I'd like to look at those cameras, as there is usually a reason for that..

It's silly only because you will get a million and one answers -- just like you will if you are asking about any other film format. And don't forget LARGE FORMAT has LOTS of different formats.

[Scott Davis]

It's silly only because you will get a million and one answers -- just like you will if you are asking about any other film format. And don't forget LARGE FORMAT has LOTS of different formats.

And it changes over time, too... I remember when I was just getting in to large format, the Carbon Infinity was the Rolls Royce/Ferrari of 4x5, but you almost never hear them mentioned any more. Phillips cameras were also quite the hot thing while he was making them, and they still command interest and respect, but after Chamonix basically stole his design, they (Chamonix) have been very popular and the Phillips are left to the cognoscenti. Wehman 8x10s were all the rage for a hot minute because they were one of the lightest 8x10s out there. But you almost never see them on Ebay any more.

At this point, given the OP is starting out in LF from scratch, my strongest recommendation would be to get something that is part of a large, well-supported system, so that if you need parts or service or just want some fancy accessory, you don't have to have a whole bunch of creative searches saved on Ebay and wait for three years to find one.

[xkaes]

At this point, given the OP is starting out in LF from scratch, my strongest recommendation would be to get something that is part of a large, well-supported system, so that if you need parts or service or just want some fancy accessory, you don't have to have a whole bunch of creative searches saved on Ebay and wait for three years to find one.

Another approach -- that makes sense to me -- if the OP is simply interested in "testing the waters" to see it LF is the way to go, just get a simple set-up with a basic lens -- so that the fundamentals can be learned, and obstacles understood. Very usable studio 4x5" cameras and lenses sell on EBAY all the time for under $200 each -- sometimes MUCH less. It's much better -- and easier -- to unload an inexpensive setup than to sell something expensive or esoteric, if need be. And if large format proves to be "the right stuff", the OP can quickly upgrade knowing exactly what's needed.

How many of us are using the same gear we started with? I know I'm not.

[Scott Davis]

Another approach -- that makes sense to me -- if the OP is simply interested in "testing the waters" to see it LF is the way to go, just get a simple set-up with a basic lens -- so that the fundamentals can be learned, and obstacles understood. Very usable studio 4x5" cameras and lenses sell on EBAY all the time for under $200 each -- sometimes MUCH less. It's much better -- and easier -- to unload an inexpensive setup than to sell something expensive or esoteric, if need be. And if large format proves to be "the right stuff", the OP can quickly upgrade knowing exactly what's needed.

How many of us are using the same gear we started with? I know I'm not.

Oh, absolutely, I agree. I've bounced around a LOT in LF, and now have multiple cameras to solve different problems. Just given the OP's expressed interest in "the best", and his past camera choices in smaller formats (Leica, Rollei), I suspect he will not be happy with a $200 Calumet CC-401 with an Optar 135.

[Peter De Smidt]

Yeah, don't get a CC-401. There are ton of better cameras, from Linhof, Toyo, Horseman, Cambo, Sinar.......that aren't expensive at all. Keh, for example, has a Sinar F1 for $170, a toyo G for $270....

[paulbarden]

One silly question — what is the most desirable camera in the LF world?

The answer(s) to that question will have very little to do with making good photographs.

[xkaes]

Just given the OP's expressed interest in "the best", and his past camera choices in smaller formats (Leica, Rollei), I suspect he will not be happy with a $200 Calumet CC-401 with an Optar 135.

The OP can easily get a very expensive LF "Leica" -- only to discover that LF is not the way to go. That can be determined just as easily "with a $200 Calumet CC-401 with an Optar 135".

[Bernice Loui]

IMO and base on decades long observation of foto folks -vs- artist/creative image makers..

This idea-belief of the "best camera" or best anyting for that concept comes out of the belief the best camera or similar techno widget WILL produce the "best" images... as the tech or device can and will do it ALL for "you"...

Ponder and consider the results of a beginning violin student playing a Stradivarius or Guarneri violin.. will the Stradivarius or Guarneri violin "make" beautiful music all on their own or _?_

This brings up a very real aspect of this foto image making stuff that permeated across all forms of this foto stuff, those who are into "gear & process" -vs- those who are focused on creative image making with little care about the "gear or process".. while there is overlap between these two, at it's essence the division is very real in very real ways..

~Too many times posted, FAR too much focus is put and placed on the camera... with all of the other creative image making factors often ignored.. All this camera/lens/film/digits/print maing and ... are and always be mere tools and means to and end.. with the harsh reality of the tools and means never being the producer of any creative/expressive image.

What folks new to this LF view camera stuff is often completely un-aware of.. how vastly differnt this LF view camera image making universe really is..
and it has a extremely steep learning curve. For those starting out on this LF journey, it often involved acquiring some variant of view camera, then lens, then learning how to operate the newly owned camera.. then loading film, viewing, composing, focusing that upside down/backwards image on the ground glass, processing film and... more than enough to overwhelm any image maker new to this view camera stuff.. Just learning how to be competent at these basic view camera fundamentals takes time, practice and much more... Not even begun to apperciate or greatly apply camera movements in all their possible ways yet.. or explore the vast range of lens personalities and how they can be best used for any given image goal..

All mentined above places little if any demands on the view camera.. Most any basic view camera in good mechanical/working condtion can easily meet these requirements and needs.

We move on to the current crop of image makers doing this view camera stuff. IMO, the majority have come from digital cameras-image making or 35mm roll film then 120 roll film with a strong enough curiosity/interest in this view camera stuff.. with all their previous image making/camera habits fully intact which is often projected on to this LF view camera stuff.. Except not a lot of these habits/camera habits do not apply to this LF view camera stuff.. Which the newly minted LF view camera image maker.. with consequences and possible lessons learned.. and if the lessons that needs to be learned are not learned, the cycle will be repeated until the lesson is learned..

Second expectation/requirement of the newly curious LF view camera image maker, camera MUST be Lowest Possible Weight.. as "Im" going to take this camera out and about and do Not Want to be Lugging around A Big-Heavy camera.. But, want Big Sheets of Film.... Well, this is a trade-off at best.

On the plus side, landscape images most often do not need extensive camera movements or a camera that has extreme precision/accuracy. This is rooted in the way and very nature of these images. Majority are often at infinity focus or close up with limited need for extensive camera movements. Folks that design/build light weight fielf folder cameras are extrmely aware of this and how this group of image makers will use these light weight field folder cameras.. They design, build offer cameras that meet these speficic market/customer/image maker needs.

~This is the current majority of the LF view camera market and user-base. This also drives on-line (web) and social media opinions on what a view camera must be.

What has essentially died and become a view camera of the past are monorail view cameras as a group. Too heavy, Too bulky, Too clunky, Too complex to use, Too much metal, Too much.... (fil in the blank).. Yet, during the prime hey-day of LF view camera image making when busy studios would burn hundreds of sheets ot film daily the high quality monorail view camera was it.. and the majority of view camera brands focused their best efforts at offering the best possible monorail as their user/customer base was often extremly demanding and knew precisely what was needed. A lesser monorail failed in sales then died.
Light weight field folders were a niche market during this time/era.

All this text to basically say, no such thing as the "best" view camera.. just a long list of trade-offs to meet specific image making needs and why any view camera will always be a servant to the lenses to be used and the image maker's goals..

Give up on the idea/belief of the "best view camera" as it does not exist or can every make creative/expressive images on it's own for the image makers fantasy.

Bernice

[Bernice Loui]

That would be a yes, here...

Still have the Sinar F bits and Kodak 8 1/2" f6.3 Commercial Ektar in Ilex shutter from circa mid 1980's. The Sinar F bits got incoperated into the now MUCH larger Sinar system from Norma to P2.. The Kodak 8 1/2" f6.3 Commercial Ektar in Ilex shutter is now used on the Linhof TK23s..

Example of why I'm such a Sinar System fan as it is not just a monorail camera, it is modular camera system that can be built up, configured as needed based on image making needs.

Between the decades of mid 1980's to now, been and done a number of view cameras..

Wista SP, Wisner Technical field, Toyo 810M (remains the fave 8x10 field folder), Toyo & Horseman 45A.. None passed the passage of time test.
Then came a long series of Linhof Technika both 4x5 and 5x7. From Technika iV to Master in 4x5. Nice camera to use (when in proper GOOD condition) for semi wide to semi tele lenses. Meh for wide angle lenses.. Eventualy, none of these Linhof Technikas survived the passage of time test.. Solid, precise, accurate and in many ways nice to use.. Limited camera movements, absolute pain in the !_!_!_! to use with wide angle lenses.. and like nearly every field folder, limited camera movements with wide angle lenses (this means preciseincrements and absolute control of camera movements front & rear). The Technika does have enough camera extension and bellows (400/430mm) for about a 14"/360mm non-telephoto lens on the 4x5 variants which is a good thing. Except the tripod mount does not allow centering of the camera/lens combo's weight to aid and promote system stability.. So, they all went to other homes..

The current Linhof Technikardan 23s (TK23s) came after using an Arca Swiss 6x9 for many years. Neither camera is ideal, they both have specific trade-offs. The TK23s is not as stable/rigid as the Arca Swiss or they Linhof offers a "macro stabilizer" for the technikardan. This is most problematic with the telescopic rails fully extended with a BIG lens on the front and significant camera movements applied. Plus for the technikardan, the super rollex film holders and the Linhof specific roll film holder system flat works good. The Super Rollex has excellent film flatness, really durable, reliable and nice to use... except the system is "heavy" IMO, too heavy for some image makers.. Arca Swiss 6x9, nice modular monorail, precise-accurate, extensive camera movements and all that. Greatly dislike the geared rail as it is not alway a good thing. It does impart the ability for front and rear focusng which is GOOD. The Arca Swiss 6x9 uses the standard 2x3 back allows using Horseman and similar roll film backs. They work ok, but the means and process of removing the ground glass holder then attatching the roll film back is Meh...

All this cycling of other cameras with the Sinar being the solo survivor all these passing decades of view camera image making..

Given the way any view camera is used, light weight field folders simply do not agree with me.. View camera images are very specific and there Must be a very Good reason to apply any view camera for image making.

~Know this view camera stuff is much about Lenses/Optics, camera movement capability, then print making process.. The camera will always be much lesser to these realities and of lesser importance then these realities.

For light weight travel, far better to bring a canon digital or 35mm roll film or "Texas Leica" ala GW or GSW690 for 120 roll film as they are plenty good enough.


More examples of all view cameras are trade-offs, none being ideal.
Bernice





How many of us are using the same gear we started with? I know I'm not.

[Bernice Loui]

Before doing anything with Linhof Technika.. Read this written by Austin at Laflex camera..
http://www.laflexcamera.com/linhof-technika-buyers-guide

"Buy the best camera you can, keep it working properly and concentrate on your photography."

Take the time to chat with Austin a Laflex camera before doing anyting Linhof Technika or Linhof in general.

Know Technika's have very specific limitations and offerings. Again, mixed bag of trade-offs at best.


Been and done with the Technikas..
Bernice




Yeah, I also checked quickly checked the internet and saw that B&H lists 3000 model for $12K+ and then there are several other Masters on eBay for less than $1000, so I'd really have to dig into this and see what's the difference and which one is the right for me.

And the fact that it's German (being Leica and Rolleiflex fan and user), I have not to look further :)

[Tin Can]

I am about to sell SINAR

As camera educational pogam

I am listening to a topical political novel

I broke down for parts the briefcase SINAR as I won't sell that mistake, even new

[David Lindquist]

Yeah, I also checked quickly checked the internet and saw that B&H lists 3000 model for $12K+ and then there are several other Masters on eBay for less than $1000, so I'd really have to dig into this and see what's the difference and which one is the right for me.

And the fact that it's German (being Leica and Rolleiflex fan and user), I have not to look further :)

I have had very good experience buying Linhof items from Linhof & Studio in England. And their prices are much less than US sellers.

David

[xkaes]

Give up on the idea/belief of the "best view camera" as it does not exist..............

"Buy the best camera you can, ...................."

Again, mixed bag of trade-offs at best.

Bernice


It looks like we've gone full-circle, and are back to square one. I can see why a lot of people would opt for the "Buy the best camera you can" line -- unfortunately.

[Joseph Kashi]

Perhaps I've missed the point with all of the to-and-fro, but it seems that the OP as a new LF user initially has two decisions:

1. Studio use only, or frequent field use away from home or a vehicle? That will affect whether to go with a lightweight, easily portable field rig or a less-portable monorail view camera.

2. New or used? There are many excellent used cameras out there on Ebay, etc. and we all have our favorites, but for a new LF photographer may want to get a decent used camera to determine whether they want to pursue LF photography and, if so, what flavor of it?

The finer points or one camera or another will gradually sort out for each person with increasing experience.

[B.S.Kumar]

I'm not old enough to give advice. My suggestion runs counter to what most people have said above. Buy a cheap monorail camera and learn movements. That is the essence of large format photography. If you just want a big negative, build a box camera for the cost of some wood and your time. Something like a Toyo D series, Sinar F1, etc would be ideal. They are bulkier than field cameras, but can be folded up quite compactly, particularly with a short rail. In a year or so, you'll figure out which movements you use most, and decide if a field camera suits your image goals and budget. You can either sell the monorail or keep it for those times when a field camera simply won't cut it.

My suggestion comes directly from my experience. My first 4x5 camera was a Linhof Super Technika V with 65, 90, 150 and 210mm lenses. At that time, I did all kinds of photography to pay the rent - industrial, still life, architecture. I read everything on large format photography that was available pre-internet and spent all my spare money shooting and learning. Two years later, I saved up enough to buy a Sinar F2 and a Linhof adapter lens board. I read the Sinar Know How book cover to cover and did all the exercises. Suddenly, all the setups I struggled with the Linhof became simple and took minutes instead of hours. I sold the Linhof camera, and didn't touch a field camera until I moved to Japan, where I bought a Wista 45D. It has its place as something that I'll use when I know the images I'm looking for will not need the capabilities of the Sinar.

As always, YMMV.

Kumar

[Alan Klein]

Another factor to consider is new or used. Some people won't touch used gear -- for whatever reasons. There are plenty of great new cameras, and plenty of great used ones too. Pretty much this is not an issue with lenses, as they are pretty much all used -- but NOT used up!!!

And the camera you get depends a lot on the lenses you will use. Don't put the cart (camera) before the horse (lenses).

When dealing with 4x5, lenses are not new.

[Alan Klein]

Bernice, yes, I'm very well aware of that it's a slower process, requires more thinking and time (and tripod), than 35mm and 120 formats. I don't plan to shoot decisive moment type of photography on the street with LF cameras. I love to shot scenes that I've created in my studio, or portraits, or even landscapes and these are all perfect for LF. When not using digital, I prefer my Rolleiflex for this type of images, but sometimes square format is not ideal. Yes, I can crop, but I'd rather try different camera. I never crop my images and 100% of my photos has visible borders (not to show my framing abilities, but because I love the look with the border). And after all, LF provides a different look than MF, which I like for years but hesitated to make a move.

Also, one more reason why I want LF is that I can develop for one shot only, rather than the whole roll of different exposures. Sometimes I need that. I need to add more contrast to the particular shot, but not the whole roll, etc.

I mostly digitize my film these days. I have Negative Supply pro kit, and I already have everything needed for scanning 4x5 format.

I started with LF equipment two years ago during Covid to do something new. I had shot a lot of MF before. I bought a Chamonix 45H-1 with 4 lenses. 4x5 scans nicely. You can get an idea looking at my FLickr page to compare the different films and also compare 35mm vs 6x7 vs 4x5 for the scans. 4x5 scans the best of the three.

[Alan Klein]

Buy expensive, quality equipment if it will inspire you to do better.

[B.S.Kumar]

Buy expensive, quality equipment if it will inspire you to do better.

Quality used equipment is very inexpensive now. The Sinar F2 I bought after two years of saving my pennies can now be bought for a day's wages in the US...

Kumar

[JMO]

Hmm, I like the look of Linhof Master Technika, but there are several models, with a very big price range difference.

I took the LF plunge about 12 years ago when I purchased a used late-60s Linhof Master Technika (since sold in favor of a really nice used MT 2000), a nice used Technikarden 45S purchased thru this Forum (which I don't use much) and, for studio work in my basement, a beautiful used Kardan Master GTL - all in 4x5 format. So I don't have any experience with other brands mentioned in this thread, but one thing I have learned is that Austin Calhoon at LAFLEX in La Jolla CA is an outstanding resource for servicing and restoring anything Linhof and if you might decide to go with one of the Linhof options you would not regret purchasing one of his refurbished Linhof cameras for much less than the new ones cost. Austin's standards for restoring Linhof cameras are outstanding (they come out like new and functioning perfectly), and so you can keep an eye on his website for ones that become available.

I have visited Austin at his shop and he has a good selection of parts, and quite a few cameras, tripods and other Linhof gear items in various stages of repair (that he plans to refurbish and sell on as his time permits). If his website doesn't list what you're thinking about as available, I'd suggest you give him a call if/when you might decide on a model that you'd like to start with. Ask him if he has one (or some) in his shop that he can refurbish and then send you. He did a wonderful job refurbishing my MT 2000 that I had purchased from an eBay seller in Japan, and the Kardan Master GTL he had refurbished has been an absolute joy to own and use for the past 3 years.

[David Lindquist]

I took the LF plunge about 12 years ago when I purchased a used late-60s Linhof Master Technika (since sold in favor of a really nice used MT 2000), a nice used Technikarden 45S purchased thru this Forum (which I don't use much) and, for studio work in my basement, a beautiful used Kardan Master GTL - all in 4x5 format. So I don't have any experience with other brands mentioned in this thread, but one thing I have learned is that Austin Calhoon at LAFLEX in La Jolla CA is an outstanding resource for servicing and restoring anything Linhof and if you might decide to go with one of the Linhof options you would not regret purchasing one of his refurbished Linhof cameras for much less than the new ones cost. Austin's standards for restoring Linhof cameras are outstanding (they come out like new and functioning perfectly), and so you can keep an eye on his website for ones that become available.

I have visited Austin at his shop and he has a good selection of parts, and quite a few cameras, tripods and other Linhof gear items in various stages of repair (that he plans to refurbish and sell on as his time permits). If his website doesn't list what you're thinking about as available, I'd suggest you give him a call if/when you might decide on a model that you'd like to start with. Ask him if he has one (or some) in his shop that he can refurbish and then send you. He did a wonderful job refurbishing my MT 2000 that I had purchased from an eBay seller in Japan, and the Kardan Master GTL he had refurbished has been an absolute joy to own and use for the past 3 years.

Thank you for this JMO. I think this is very useful information for anyone looking to buy a Linhof camera.

David

[Alan Klein]

Quality used equipment is very inexpensive now. The Sinar F2 I bought after two years of saving my pennies can now be bought for a day's wages in the US...

Kumar

My point is that a craftsman cares about his tools. If he buys crap, that's all he's going to get from his work. If someone can afford $200, spend $300. If they can afford $800, spend $1000. Up your game. Care about your tools and work; you'll get better results.

[Daniel Unkefer]

During covid I picked up four more 4x5 Sinar Norma cameras, all in the $250-$350 price range. Beautiful camera, not much more expensive than a Calumet!

Many parts on this camera were made by Arca Swiss. Even a basket case Norma can be restored. Properly adjusted it is incredibly smooth and a delight to use.

They made nearly a hundred accessories, I own most of them. And they are out there, (available) and not too too expensive. This availability can be a big factor.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52274349214_0588f2991a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nDiGP1)Rocky Mtn Park 1992 4x5 Norma 90 f8 SA HP5 (https://flic.kr/p/2nDiGP1) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52287699802_e91b20a4fa_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nEu8ty)1992 Great Sand Dunes No 3 (https://flic.kr/p/2nEu8ty) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

IMO the Norma is an excellent location camera.



https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51934419089_682dc37c41_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2n8gtqM)Testing Shanghai 220 Wedding Flash Mamiya C22 105DS (https://flic.kr/p/2n8gtqM) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

You will not be limited regarding configuring the Normas; This is my 5x7 Twin Lens Norma, which I leave set up in my studio. Wonderful for portraiture and action photography

[Salmo22]

Many years ago a Wista SP was my first LF camera. After a hiatus from all photography, that included selling my Wista, I got back into LF and purchased an Arca-Swiss F Metric Field w/Micro Orbix camera. It has been a splendid creative tool that appeals to my desire for craftsmanship and precision. I also think the Linhof Master Technika series is wonderful, but limited, movement wise, when compared to my Arca-Swiss. The Linhof is certainly a smaller package, especially when backpacking. However, I find the Arca-Swiss to be surprisingly portable.

[B.S.Kumar]

My point is that a craftsman cares about his tools. If he buys crap, that's all he's going to get from his work. If someone can afford $200, spend $300. If they can afford $800, spend $1000. Up your game. Care about your tools and work; you'll get better results.

Perhaps I should have emphasized both words - Quality used. I don't think any of the cameras mentioned in this thread can be called "crap", though I could name some others. But let's not go there. Each camera has its strengths and weaknesses. My first 4x5 camera (Linhof Super Technika V) was certainly not crap. It simply wasn't the right tool for the images I wanted to create. And as for spending $1,000 when I could afford only $800, my accounting training obliges me to differ...

Kumar

[paulbarden]

My point is that a craftsman cares about his tools. If he buys crap, that's all he's going to get from his work. If someone can afford $200, spend $300. If they can afford $800, spend $1000. Up your game. Care about your tools and work; you'll get better results.

I think you could just as easily say that if someone can only afford an Intrepid 4x5 and not a Chamonix, as long as they care about the tool they've chosen, they will care about what comes out of it. You can choose to care about any of your tools, regardless of their cost/value. All I have for 4x5 is a first gen Intrepid, and I love it, in part because I won it in a competition five years ago, so I still feel like its a prize every time I use it.

While its nice to have the best tools you can afford, it can become toxic to your creativity to tell yourself that only the ultra-expensive (insert brand name here) camera can get you where you want to go.

I recall in an interview with Sally Mann that she stated that her favorite lenses were often the oldest, more damaged/compromised ones, because they added their own unique flavors to the work. Sally ain't no princess when it comes to tools.

[neil poulsen]

After reading some of your responses, I also would suggest getting a relatively inexpensive camera and a couple of lenses, and giving LF a try. If you like LF, then you can easily expand your kit.

I've been a Sinar user in the past, and it's an excellent system with which to begin. I would recommend a Sinar F, which is relatively light weight. Yet, it's been built to professional standards. If you go in this direction, it'll be a bit clumsy. But, if you're willing to do a little handiwork, Sinar F cameras can be customized to not be clumsy and fit conveniently into a backpack.

For lenses, I'd recommend beginning with a 180mm. I've gone with Schneider lenses (Apo Symmar, Super Angulon, etc.); but, Nikon lenses are also good choices, as well as Fuji and Rodenstock lenses. A 180mm is a moderate focal length. It's a little longer than normal, where "normal" in 35mm would be a 50mm. A moderate wide angle lens choice would be a 120mm SW, like a 120mm Super Angulon. For quite wide, a 90mm is a good choice.

In my opinion, the best 4x5 available is an Arca Swiss, which is the system I currently use. But a LInhof Master, which like Arca, has excellent build quality, might also be a good choice. There are also some outstanding wood, clamshell cameras.

Don't be afraid to purchase used. In all my photographic decades, I've rarely purchased LF equipment new. I've occasionally purchased new accessories; but, never a new camera.

As for the customizations I mentioned, I summarized these in a thread begun on the Photrio site:

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/sinar-f-4x5-as-a-viable-field-camera.172997/

[jnantz]

My point is that a craftsman cares about his tools. If he buys crap, that's all he's going to get from his work. If someone can afford $200, spend $300. If they can afford $800, spend $1000. Up your game. Care about your tools and work; you'll get better results.

Some fantastic images have been pulled out of cameras and lenses that do not cost very much money. Generalizations like if one buys crap one's going to get crap results.. don't really hold water since lots of images people turn back to saying they were "great" were taken with equipment that these days costs very little and people poo poo as crap equipment. I have seem utter cr@p photos from expensive formerly professional equipment. If someone can't drive well in a rusty Dodge Dart they won't drive well in a new Porsche.

[Peter De Smidt]

" Originally Posted by B.S.Kumar View Post
Quality used equipment is very inexpensive now. The Sinar F2 I bought after two years of saving my pennies can now be bought for a day's wages in the US..."

Kumar


My point is that a craftsman cares about his tools. If he buys crap, that's all he's going to get from his work. If someone can afford $200, spend $300. If they can afford $800, spend $1000. Up your game. Care about your tools and work; you'll get better results.

A Sinar F2 is crap? I'm pretty sure Kumar's point was that really good tools in LF can be quite affordable at the moment. It's also bad advice to spend more than you can afford. No hobby is worth that.

[John Kasaian]

If the OP could use some Linhof inspiration, here's what Roman Loranc can accomplish with his Linhof:
https://www.romanloranc.com/

And here's what John Sexton can do with his Linhof:
https://shop.anseladams.com/collections/john-sexton

To paraphrase Bernice what posted, the camera ain't the one taking the pictures so keep that in mind.

Years ago I went out to buy a new tennis racket, knowing nothing about how tennis rackets have changed, so I asked a local tennis instructor what I should look for. He told me:
"Find one in a color you like and get it." He told me.
"If you like how it looks, you'll take it out more often"
If you don't like how it looks, it'll sit in your closet, and that won't do you any good."

It sounds like the OP likes the color of Linhof cameras.:)

[Drew Wiley]

Basically, you need to home in on the distinct category of 4x5 potentially most useful to you before deciding on a specific model. And as per pricing, lots of very expensive items new are fairly common on the used market at far lower pricing. First, you have simple PRESS CAMERAS designed mainly for handheld or otherwise quickie work, with a minimum of features except possibly a rangefinder. Second, there are metal TECHNICAL CAMERAS like the Linhof Technkia and Horseman FA, which are more versatile, but still limited in a number of ways. Third, you have the broad category of MONORAIL CAMERAS which can be reconfigured in multiple manners relative to specific application, of which the Sinar system would be particularly obvious among many alternate choices. Then fifth, you have FOLDING FIELD CAMERAS, predominantly of wood or now composite material, which in the past were sometimes heavy, but now offers quite a few excellent lightweight options. This latter variety seem to hold it value best at the present because there are so many outdoor photographers out there who value optimal portability.

My brother went the Technika route back when those were popular among outdoor photographers. I went with the Sinar monorail system instead for its much greater versatility. But I've supplemented that with a couple of field folders - a Phillips 8x10 and Ebony 4X5 for their greater portability when required. In other words, there is no one ideal choice, and different people obviously have many different opinions depending on what they do, can afford, and frankly, just what they are accustomed to.

As far as dissing Sinar F2 field monorail cameras, I used that system for over three decades on hundreds on mountain and desert bacpacking trips, and it held up superbly with a little periodic maintenance, and allowed me to use the long focal length lenses I prefer in a manner no technical camera like a Technicka would. Also weighs less IF you factor in how easy it is to balance a monorail on a tripod. You want to consider the CUMULATIVE WEIGHT of your system, not just the bare camera weight. Likewise, if you need a long 400 mm focal length for a Technika, for example, you require a relative bulky heavy telephoto design, whereas with a monorail you just screw on an extra rail section, which takes less than a minute, and then can use a small conventional lens.

But I currently prefer a vintage Sinar Norma monorail rather than the F system, though that former heavily used gear of mine is still in fine operational shape. One reason Sinar used pricing is so affordable now is that it's so abundant. And that can be important in term of obtaining extra components for sake of either a more flexible system, a format change (like from 4x5 to 8X10), or critically, for sake of convenient replacement and repair components if needed.

Anything Sexton or Loranc did with a Technika could have been done equally well with any number of 4x5 cameras of significantly different design. But once you do jump into the water, take time to get really familiar with the equipment you have chosen, so that operation of it will be spontaneous and second-nature. That is often far more important than nitpicking model specifics.

[Bernice Loui]

This is extremely good and prudent advice for those new to this LF view camera stuff..

Fact remains, the two primary features and advantages of using a view camera today (film or digital) remains as:

~Lens/optics choices with few limits. This is not true to cameras with a fixed lens mount and fixed to the camera box image recorder be it digital or film.

~Ability to move the lens and imager relative to their once fixed or reference position.

These to facts and features are the primary items that differentiates a "view camera" from a fixed to the box camera. With these features comes a cost, that cost is often complexity, size-weight-bulk and ...

There was a time when photography was taught as a profession and using a view camera was a topic of learning. The most common view camera learning tool back then was a modest monorail camera. This was often used due to it's ability to easily illustrate and facilitate learning and understanding how camera movements work and applied. Little if anything has changed since then. Thus the recommendation to get a high quality and modular monorail (sinar F) at an absolutely bargain $ today is excellent advise. This coupled with proper ways and means for learning how camera movements goes a far long ways to fully and properly understand what much of this view camera stuff is about. This also figures into the universe of optics, how they work, what they can and can never do..

Take the time to read this content on camera movements from a Linhof view camera book:
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?164126-Importance-of-camera-movements-gt-Alan-amp-others-long-amp-Linhof

~Until a full and proper understanding and enough mastery of camera movements is learned, the view camera becomes essentially a larger sheet of film camera and not a lot more..

This is IMO why there are SO many new to this LF view camera stuff that are driven to hand held foldable like Technika, Graphic, Toyo/Horseman 45A and ... with uber full aperture lenses like f2.8/f3.5 Xenotar/Planar and similar with just enough image circle that covers 4x5 at full aperture (there was a time and place not long ago when these large aperture lenses were not desirable due to their limited image circle as view camera folks back then placed image circle ability and performance above large lens aperture) . This image making outfit is much an extension of the fixed lens to the box camera with a sheet of film instead of a digital image sensor or roll film. In many ways outfits like these are being used as they were designed and they will continue to produce the images they are designed to produce.. A specialized sheet film image. Except outfits like this do Not fully take advantage of all a view camera can offer for camera movements and lens/optics possibilities... pinching the image makers set of image making tools and possibilities for creative/expressive image making.

Personally, the view camera experience is mostly opposite from B.S. Kumar. It was coached learning on a Sinar F in a controlled studio environment by more than one highly experienced view camera photographer. Learning to view the GG image, basic focusing then camera movements (extensive), exposure and studio lighting. Countless Pull_A_Roids and sheets of 4x5 film were burned in this learning process. As with many things and skills, practice, practice, practice, practice, practice... after a few years of using the same Sinar F with a variety of lenses/optics in studio, outdoors and any place that outfit can follow, enough of this view camera stuff was learned and understood.. That was decades ago.. This foundation also became why the tolerance for field folders is limited. This the same foundation as to why the Technika_s (4x5 & 5x7) eventually found new homes. Nice to use, nicely made, but the camera's movement and lens capabilities made them a no thanks.. IMO, there are far Better field foldable cameras today than the Technika like the Canham DLC..

The current Linhof Technikardan 23s is tolerated due to it's ability for camera movements front and rear, good roll film back system and moderate size/weight (never folded for transport, too much hassle). It is not as rigid/stable as a really good view camera can be, not quite enough camera/bellows extension, no camera shutter system, inability to balance the camera based on camera extension...
Why roll film 6x9 view camera instead of 4x5 or other sheet film.. Ability for camera movements on 120 roll film is a significant plus over any fixed lens to the camera body camera.. Much about camera movements and variety of lenses to be used again, greatly less about the camera being a Linhof as the Arca Swiss, Cambo, Toyo or similar high quality 6x9 view camera will do much similar to meet this need.

Prime view camera system remains Sinar.. along with pile of barrel lenses and few in shutter lenses for this Sinar system.

Lowest weight foldability, portability, camping_ability or backpacking_ability are non-considerations. Camera system abilities are the prime reason for using a view camera. For travel, there are other fixed lens box cameras that easily do FAR better than any view camera..


After all this text, images made, images created is much about and by the individual image maker.. Far more important and significant than any camera is light, form, composition which is the basic vocabulary of expressive images.

Bernice










I'm not old enough to give advice. My suggestion runs counter to what most people have said above. Buy a cheap monorail camera and learn movements. That is the essence of large format photography. If you just want a big negative, build a box camera for the cost of some wood and your time. Something like a Toyo D series, Sinar F1, etc would be ideal. They are bulkier than field cameras, but can be folded up quite compactly, particularly with a short rail. In a year or so, you'll figure out which movements you use most, and decide if a field camera suits your image goals and budget. You can either sell the monorail or keep it for those times when a field camera simply won't cut it.

My suggestion comes directly from my experience. My first 4x5 camera was a Linhof Super Technika V with 65, 90, 150 and 210mm lenses. At that time, I did all kinds of photography to pay the rent - industrial, still life, architecture. I read everything on large format photography that was available pre-internet and spent all my spare money shooting and learning. Two years later, I saved up enough to buy a Sinar F2 and a Linhof adapter lens board. I read the Sinar Know How book cover to cover and did all the exercises. Suddenly, all the setups I struggled with the Linhof became simple and took minutes instead of hours. I sold the Linhof camera, and didn't touch a field camera until I moved to Japan, where I bought a Wista 45D. It has its place as something that I'll use when I know the images I'm looking for will not need the capabilities of the Sinar.

As always, YMMV.

Kumar

[Tin Can]

As a lifelong jack of all things mechanical

I used to watch car racing most at Road America

The years of Paul Newman Racing were long https://www.skoda-motorsport.com/en/paul-newman-star-who-kept-racing-until-80s-celebrities-racing/

I met him and others

I have seen the same cars become very valuable and hobby raced by fools

I gave what I could and raced anywhere as they did

A few cameras are nothing dangerous

Just do it

Time is short for us all

[Daniel Unkefer]

I read the Sinar Know How book cover to cover and did all the exercises. Suddenly, all the setups I struggled with the Linhof became simple and took minutes instead of hours. Kumar

Yes. This is important, especially specifically with Sinar F. I too started 40+ years ago with an F+, I still have my original copy of "PHOTO KNOW HOW", filled with the B&W prints I mounted inside as I completed each exercise. This is a fantastic way to learn the Sinar F+, Learning by doing! Sinar had great "software" support in the day. They were great educators. Learning to use the angle swing/tilt calculators, and the depth of field calculators, can be intimidating and confusing.

Anybody using a view camera will benefit from getting this book (used) and COMPLETING the exercises, not just reading them. Make the prints and put them in the book to refer to.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/185487577541?epid=1801457387&hash=item2b2febd1c5:g:HrcAAOSwsX1iwpLe&amdata=enc%3AAQAHAAAAoLqqiWv9Yp%2FdfMRmjYKJ2b1cFVkD1wSQ4ckuQVZVsWCETDv17wNeuLvalVemCcWA2YJ9mF%2Bd6OeWHH%2FIUCLFIS0SW6ZnRe1nfD2KeVTTdNUce7%2BGLBY6o6r7GQmxCzYXFExuMBcuWkwX1L%2FdiqvDe3bFmHs6S5RrbvF8LBX%2BISaJKpWMWm4NSmtYBi85tHYQtdFq7gi%2FnsoMbmKx%2FqZKGq8%3D%7Ctkp%3ABk9SR7qKw92CYQ

[John Kasaian]

I think a cheap old monorail is a great tool for learning what a LF camera can do.
In fact I have a Graphic View II around here someplace which I stubbornly refuse to part with.
For an economical point of entry, I agree with B.S. Kumar.
The OP doesn't seem too troubled over cost though, and good for him.
Perhaps we can coax him into starting with an 8x10.:o

[Drew Wiley]

My brother drove around in a Porsche with his Linhof cases in the trunk. Rounding a corner near Painted Cave adjacent to Jane Fonda's ranch, a big garbage truck came directly at him in the wrong lane. He would have been better off in a rusty Dodge Dart. His back was messed up ever since, and the Porsche was of course totalled. Price doesn't tell you everything.

I probably know more about fine tools than 99.999 % of the people in this country. But I also know when to leave them alone when what you really need is an ordinary rusty old crowbar. It's called the right tool for the job, whether that means expensive or downright cheap.

[Tin Can]

I had a close friend squashed dead by garbage truck

Not the fault of the truck driver

I used to visit his grave


so many now dead I lose track

I find it strange we bury and remember

Then archeologist dig up many others

sacred ground my ass


I want my ashes tossed to the wind ASAP

[r.e.]

Guys, I watched couple videos about Lihof and read about the history and I pretty much already fell in love with the company and their cameras, I just need to research a bit and see what model suits me the best. Thank you all for your helpful advices. I hope I'll become an active member of this forum very soon!

Oh, btw, is there any particular place where should I look for Linhof cameras? Except eBay and Craigslist, which I avoid for anything valuable. I tried KEH, but they don't have any Linhof cameras on stock.


Bob Salomon suggested Camera West (https://www.camerawest.com), but if its website is accurate it no longer carries Linhof although it has one used Linhof in stock.

I can recommend Foto Care (https://www.fotocare.com) in New York City. It's an excellent dealer. Its website doesn't show any large format, but in fact it regularly carries used large format gear including lenses. Just phone.

I agree with the earlier recommendation for Linhof Studio (https://www.linhofstudio.com) in the U.K., and would add Teamwork Photo (https://www.teamworkphoto.com) in London for used gear. I've done business with, and like, both vendors. On export to the U.S. you won't pay UK VAT.

My experience purchasing used equipment from B&H (https://www.bhphotovideo.com) has been uniformly good. I've also had very good experiences using the classified section here.

[Alan Klein]

Perhaps I should have emphasized both words - Quality used. I don't think any of the cameras mentioned in this thread can be called "crap", though I could name some others. But let's not go there. Each camera has its strengths and weaknesses. My first 4x5 camera (Linhof Super Technika V) was certainly not crap. It simply wasn't the right tool for the images I wanted to create. And as for spending $1,000 when I could afford only $800, my accounting training obliges me to differ...

Kumar

Hold off on the purchase until you saved the $1000. ;)

[Alan Klein]

I think you could just as easily say that if someone can only afford an Intrepid 4x5 and not a Chamonix, as long as they care about the tool they've chosen, they will care about what comes out of it. You can choose to care about any of your tools, regardless of their cost/value. All I have for 4x5 is a first gen Intrepid, and I love it, in part because I won it in a competition five years ago, so I still feel like its a prize every time I use it.

While its nice to have the best tools you can afford, it can become toxic to your creativity to tell yourself that only the ultra-expensive (insert brand name here) camera can get you where you want to go.

I recall in an interview with Sally Mann that she stated that her favorite lenses were often the oldest, more damaged/compromised ones, because they added their own unique flavors to the work. Sally ain't no princess when it comes to tools.

I've found that the more skin in the game a person has, the more they care how it comes out. They work harder to get better results.

[Alan Klein]

If the OP could use some Linhof inspiration, here's what Roman Loranc can accomplish with his Linhof:
https://www.romanloranc.com/

And here's what John Sexton can do with his Linhof:
https://shop.anseladams.com/collections/john-sexton

To paraphrase Bernice what posted, the camera ain't the one taking the pictures so keep that in mind.

Years ago I went out to buy a new tennis racket, knowing nothing about how tennis rackets have changed, so I asked a local tennis instructor what I should look for. He told me:
"Find one in a color you like and get it." He told me.
"If you like how it looks, you'll take it out more often"
If you don't like how it looks, it'll sit in your closet, and that won't do you any good."

It sounds like the OP likes the color of Linhof cameras.:)

This works with a camera you're proud to own.

[Drew Wiley]

Well, there you have it. Bernice has a totally different concept of an ideal "travel camera" than I do. Why would I tote a "box camera" when it's VC movements and long lens extensions I needed all along. Sinars aren't just for studios! Yeah, I supplement that system with the P67 kit and Fuji 6x9 RF's at the smaller end, but also an 8x10 folder at the upper end. Haven't even decided what I'll take out into the hills tomorrow, but it will probably be the Norma. One just needs to learn how to innovate carrying one. No need for a big metal chest or a dedicated camera pack with six pounds of rubber foam alone in it. And I've carried all the above cameras way up high peaks and ridges in all kinds of weather. If one finds that concept intolerable, well, there are always cell phone cameras, plus selfie sticks in lieu of ice axes and trekking poles. But when it comes to image quality, size does matter. Why go to all the effort and come back with compromise results? We've got it easy. Look up Vittoria Sella.

[xkaes]

For travel, there are other fixed lens box cameras that easily do FAR better than any view camera..

Bernice


After years of lugging a GREAT RB67 all over the Rockies, I am still so glad I moved on to my Toko 4x5". The RB was great, but my 4x5 is so much better -- and so much lighter, mainly because of the lenses!

[paulbarden]

I've found that the more skin in the game a person has, the more they care how it comes out. They work harder to get better results.

I don't believe this is how ALL photographers function. I certainly don't.

[r.e.]

One silly question — what is the most desirable camera in the LF world? I'd like to look at those cameras, as there is usually a reason for that.

When I was looking for the MF camera, I ended up buying Rolleiflex 2.8F which is considered the most desirable Rolleiflex TLR, or maybe even TLR in general by many folks. I didn't know that at the time, and I purchased the camera just because I liked it, but years after I've seen many other TLRs and saw few advantages in 2.8F model. So, I can say I was lucky by choosing this camera, so with that experience, I'd like to look at the cameras that are considered most desirable in LF.


Bob Salomon suggested Camera West (https://www.camerawest.com), but if its website is accurate it no longer carries Linhof although it has one used Linhof in stock.

I can recommend Foto Care (https://www.fotocare.com) in New York City. It's an excellent dealer. Its website doesn't show any large format, but in fact it regularly carries used large format gear including lenses. Just phone.

I agree with the earlier recommendation for Linhof Studio (https://www.linhofstudio.com) in the U.K., and would add Teamwork Photo (https://www.teamworkphoto.com) in London for used gear. I've done business with, and like, both vendors. On export to the U.S. you won't pay UK VAT.

My experience purchasing used equipment from B&H (https://www.bhphotovideo.com) has been uniformly good. I've also had very good experiences using the classified section here.


Hiroh,

I'd like to add to my comment above about vendors. My impression from your post is that you give a lot of weight to how a camera feels in your hands and in use. I do myself, and I'd like to suggest that you try out more than one model of Linhof and at least one other make of camera if you're still open to other brands. It can be difficult to arrange this, but it's worth the effort. I'm sure that there are many participants in this forum who would be willing to spend an hour while you get a feel for their camera. If you live near New York, I'd be happy to show you an Arca-Swiss 4x5. Arca-Swiss only makes monorails, but there are reasons why many people, myself included, use them as field cameras. No doubt there are others who can show you Linhof bed and monorail cameras, and of course other brands such as Sinar. You could simply start a thread asking who lives in your general area and say what cameras you'd like to see.

On specs, one really basic, but important, issue is whether the bed or rail will accommodate the shortest and longest lenses that you plan to use, and whether the camera will accommodate, inherently or via modular addition, shorter or longer focal lengths that you may want to use in the future.

Modern technology can help reduce the weight and bulk of a large format camera, lenses and film holders. If you're prepared to scout and plan photographs in advance, a smartphone app like Artist's Viewfinder (https://www.artistsviewfinder.com) can dramatically reduce the amount of gear one carries. Alternatively, one can opt for the self-discipline of carrying one lens and adjusting to it. As I'm sure you know, that has worked quite well for some very accomplished photographers.

[Michael R]

Best, easiest to use LF camera I’ve had was the first one I ever owned, a Sinar A1, which was the entry level Sinar back in the early 1990s. Dumbest thing I ever did was sell it for peanuts and start looking for something better. What a mistake.

[r.e.]

Best, easiest to use LF camera I’ve had was the first one I ever owned, a Sinar A1, which was the entry level Sinar back in the early 1990s. Dumbest thing I ever did was sell it for peanuts and start looking for something better. What a mistake.

I can relate to that :)

I purchased an Arca-Swiss Discovery as my first large format camera. There's a B&H catalogue page about it, from about 20 years ago, below. The Discovery was sold at an attractive price (US$1345 according to the catalogue), with photography students as the target market. I didn't sell it because the Arca-Swiss system is fully modular. The Discovery became the skeleton of the Arca-Swiss 8x10/4x5 that I have today. However, the original, simple Discovery configuration, which weighs about 6lbs/2.7kg (second photo below), will handle most of the 4x5 photography that I do. I'm quite sure that I could have stuck with this configuration without my photographic world ending.


B&H Arca-Swiss Discovery Catalogue Page

232132

My Arca-Swiss Stripped Down to a Discovery
(except that the rail carriers here are geared, not friction-based as on the Discovery)

232131

[Alan Klein]

Perhaps I've missed the point with all of the to-and-fro, but it seems that the OP as a new LF user initially has two decisions:

1. Studio use only, or frequent field use away from home or a vehicle? That will affect whether to go with a lightweight, easily portable field rig or a less-portable monorail view camera.

2. New or used? There are many excellent used cameras out there on Ebay, etc. and we all have our favorites, but for a new LF photographer may want to get a decent used camera to determine whether they want to pursue LF photography and, if so, what flavor of it?

The finer points or one camera or another will gradually sort out for each person with increasing experience.

I'm a new LF photographer. I bought a new camera. Who wants someone else's headache? If you buy a camera that has issues, it may turn you off completely with LF photography. It's bad enough I have to buy used lenses where the seller claims they tested the shutter speeds and they sound OK.

[r.e.]

Perhaps I've missed the point with all of the to-and-fro, but it seems that the OP as a new LF user initially has two decisions:

1. Studio use only, or frequent field use away from home or a vehicle? That will affect whether to go with a lightweight, easily portable field rig or a less-portable monorail view camera.

2. New or used? There are many excellent used cameras out there on Ebay, etc. and we all have our favorites, but for a new LF photographer may want to get a decent used camera to determine whether they want to pursue LF photography and, if so, what flavor of it?

The finer points or one camera or another will gradually sort out for each person with increasing experience.

I realise that the sentence that I've emphasised in bold reflects a widely held view. I think that it is factually incorrect in the case of some monorail cameras. For example, Arca-Swiss monorails are used by many people as field cameras. Indeed the company makes a monorail specifically for field use, although I think that its standard cameras work just fine in the field. I don't believe that field cameras of comparable quality are lighter, or break down more compactly, than the Arca-Swiss in the photo two posts up, especially since the changes in Arca-Swiss standard/lens board size. As far as I know, there is also no field camera that offers anything close to Arca-Swiss's degree of modularity.

When purchasing a camera, I think that it's a good idea to compare cameras of comparable quality, regardless of construction style, rather than summarily dismiss an entire class of camera. I also think that it's useful to consider overall bulk and weight of the system, not just the camera.

[Dugan]

I've found that the more skin in the game a person has, the more they care how it comes out. They work harder to get better results.

"Skin", in this context, is relative.
$1000, to me, is a lot of money...I'd think long and hard before spending that much on anything.
To someone else, it's chump change, maybe picking up the tab for dinner for 4 at a nice restaurant and thinking nothing of it.
So, I agree, and disagree...
It's not the volume of $ involved, it is the value of the $ involved.

[Louis Pacilla]

"Skin", in this context, is relative.

It's not the volume of $ involved, it is the value of the $ involved.

Well said & I totally agree with you Dugan.

[paulbarden]

Who wants someone else's headache? If you buy a camera that has issues, it may turn you off completely with LF photography.


Tell that to every Deardorff user! LOL

[jdurr]

Have you considered a K B CANHAM 4x5? Light weight, beautiful design with natural walnut.
And you can buy a 5x7 back to have a two format camera.
Check them out

[xkaes]

I bought a new camera. Who wants someone else's headache? If you buy a camera that has issues, it may turn you off completely with LF photography.

Just because someone sells some used gear doesn't mean they had a problem with it. It might not even be their gear. I've sold lots of stuff that was in perfect condition, not because it had a problem -- or it gave me a "headache".

Most of my gear was bought used, and 99% of it was in GREAT shape, just what I wanted, and at a SUPER discount over new.

Plus, for a lot of great gear there is no other option, except used. Call it "Pre-Owned" if that makes you feel better about it. If your snobby friends POO-POO it, tell them it was once owned by AA.

[r.e.]

Further to Alan Klein's posts starting with #72, and the responses...

@Hiroh says in a 2020 post that he had just started using a film camera. Given that he has a Rolleiflex 2.8F (post #1) and that Rollei stopped making that camera 40 years ago, it would appear that he's happy to purchase used gear. His Rollie and Leica MP (still in production) are expensive cameras, suggesting that he also isn't terribly limited on price.

Hiroh said way back in post #22 that he has tentatively decided on a Linhof. My only point (post #77) is that he should have a look at Linhof models in person as part of deciding which to get, and maybe also look at one or two other brands in person if he hasn't made a final decision. I've also questioned the accuracy and utility of an oft-repeated field vs monorail distinction (post #81).

[Greg Y]

Alan, I agree w XKAES, used does not mean abused or having issues. Since there are fewer builders, this limits your choice. For example, Deardorff, Ebony, Wehman, Phillips, are no longer being made, & I would choose any one over the Intrepid.
For many years I used a no-front-swing 1938 Deardorff 5x7 which i bought for $600 (Cdn). It was a terrific camera and I only sold it when i down sizec to 4x5.
Unlike the common 'gear-head' 35mm (film or digital) users who constantly change cameras and 'upgrade,' many LF users are more interested in the process and the print than the equipment. Jay Dusard still uses his 8x10 Kodak Masterview, Craig Richards still has his old Linhof & set of Fujinon lenses.
"Best camera?" asks more questions.... for what? & for whom?

[paulbarden]

FWIW, Hiroh stopped participating in this discussion three days ago. I think he's gotten all he needed from this thread.

[Peter De Smidt]

FWIW, Hiroh stopped participating in this discussion three days ago. I think he's gotten all he needed from this thread.

:)

[r.e.]

FWIW, Hiroh stopped participating in this discussion three days ago. I think he's gotten all he needed from this thread.

He said that he'd pretty much settled on Linhof 69 posts ago :)

[Bernice Loui]

To that was reply# 42
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?170711-Help-me-choose-4x5-camera-to-buy-in-2022&p=1660152#post1660152

Contact Austin at Laflex and read the advice link to the Laflex page on Technika.. which equally applies to Linhof and other cameras in general.

OPN, myopic to decide on any view camera before knowing how to use a view camera. This is much a learned thing and as needs and skills are developed, demands on gear tends to change and alter as needed. Camera "feel" as an aspect of ergonomics, without enough view camera skills properly developed and practice, practice, practice, practice , practice ... proper view camera skills never fully develop or grow. This tends to mute and distort the perception of proper view camera ergonomics and "feel"..

Oh, there was the "German" thing mentioned ala Leica-Rolleiflex being tops.. not convince of this in any way as Leica-Rolleiflex and _ are and never will be "perfect" they are like any other foto camera a fixed-given set of trade-offs with bad_good or just another image making tool and nothing more.


Bernice




He said that he'd pretty much settled on Linhof 69 posts ago :)

[Dugan]

He said that he'd pretty much settled on Linhof 69 posts ago :)

Let's not let that get in the way of a good discussion!
:)

[Alan Klein]

"Skin", in this context, is relative.
$1000, to me, is a lot of money...I'd think long and hard before spending that much on anything.
To someone else, it's chump change, maybe picking up the tab for dinner for 4 at a nice restaurant and thinking nothing of it.
So, I agree, and disagree...
It's not the volume of $ involved, it is the value of the $ involved.

I said that it's relative in one of my posts. If your budget is $200 spend $300. If your budget is $800, spend $1000. Buy up from whatever level you're at. You'll treat your camera with higher regard, take care of it better, and shoot better pictures. Because you care more.

[Alan Klein]

Just because someone sells some used gear doesn't mean they had a problem with it. It might not even be their gear. I've sold lots of stuff that was in perfect condition, not because it had a problem -- or it gave me a "headache".

Most of my gear was bought used, and 99% of it was in GREAT shape, just what I wanted, and at a SUPER discount over new.

Plus, for a lot of great gear there is no other option, except used. Call it "Pre-Owned" if that makes you feel better about it. If your snobby friends POO-POO it, tell them it was once owned by AA.Y

Your insult was not appreciated. Take it somewhere else.

[Scott Davis]

I said that it's relative in one of my posts. If your budget is $200 spend $300. If your budget is $800, spend $1000. Buy up from whatever level you're at. You'll treat your camera with higher regard, take care of it better, and shoot better pictures. Because you care more.

Gear does not make better pictures. Knowing how to use gear does. While I appreciate fine equipment as much as the next person, I'm also a huge fan of "the right tool for the job". There are times when a $400 Kodak Chevron is a better tool than a $1500 Rolleiflex. And there are times when a $40 Holga is a better tool than a $400 Kodak Chevron. There are thousands and thousands of dentists and lawyers with babied Leicas and Hasselblads who have taken very sharp pictures of absolutely nothing anyone wants to look at to prove it.

[paulbarden]

Gear does not make better pictures. Knowing how to use gear does. While I appreciate fine equipment as much as the next person, I'm also a huge fan of "the right tool for the job". There are times when a $400 Kodak Chevron is a better tool than a $1500 Rolleiflex. And there are times when a $40 Holga is a better tool than a $400 Kodak Chevron. There are thousands and thousands of dentists and lawyers with babied Leicas and Hasselblads who have taken very sharp pictures of absolutely nothing anyone wants to look at to prove it.

Absolutely correct.
I've seen way too many photographs made on large format gear that have no redeeming qualities other than the fact that the user is pleased to be making large format photographs (usually on expensive equipment).
If someone wants to spend $3500 on equipment because they LIKE well engineered, beautifully crafted equipment, that's fine - its their prerogative. But that's NOT going to automatically make their photographs better.

Frankly, I think there's something wrong if a person feels they cannot care about the equipment they've acquired unless it comes with a certain price tag. Its an even more serious problem if that photographer isn't going to care about the photographs they make if the equipment they use isn't $$$$$. As Scott says, there's the right tool for every job. Sometimes that's a Holga, and sometimes that's a Chamonix. That's fine either way - just don't tell people they have to spend loads of money before they're going to care about what they're doing.

[r.e.]

OPN, myopic to decide on any view camera before knowing how to use a view camera. This is much a learned thing and as needs and skills are developed, demands on gear tends to change and alter as needed. Camera "feel" as an aspect of ergonomics, without enough view camera skills properly developed and practice, practice, practice, practice , practice ... proper view camera skills never fully develop or grow. This tends to mute and distort the perception of proper view camera ergonomics and "feel"..

Oh, there was the "German" thing mentioned ala Leica-Rolleiflex being tops.. not convince of this in any way as Leica-Rolleiflex and _ are and never will be "perfect" they are like any other foto camera a fixed-given set of trade-offs with bad_good or just another image making tool and nothing more.

As always, your advice in this thread is impeccable, but I'm going to deviate a bit on this.

You have to start somewhere and that's normally before one has a lot of view camera experience, if any at all. I suggested in post #77 that one should try out candidates for handling before making a decision, and in post #81 that one should avoid disqualifying a whole class of view camera for artificial reasons. Beyond that, it seems to me that it's a matter of one's budget. One reason that I started with an Arca-Swiss Discovery (post #79) was that I had only a rough idea of what I was getting into, which meant that the camera's modularity, and probable resale value if I decided that I wanted a different camera or didn't want to pursue large format, were very attractive. As it worked out, that Discovery is now the basis for a camera that I can configure for both 4x5 and 8x10. If anyone has the 5x7 components, I'm interested :)

As for "the German thing"... If I could keep only one of the cameras that I own, it would be the 66 year old Leica M3 double stroke. No contest. I love how it handles, I love rangefinder focusing and I love the lenses. I even prefer the double stroke over the later and more desirable (in the marketplace) single stroke because the first stroke is sort of a physical "get ready" that helps me focus on what I'm doing. I also have an M6 and a digital M (Typ 240), but from a handling perspective I prefer the M3 to both.

A long time ago, a photo store salesman told me to pick a camera that feels right in my hands and in physical operation. It was very good advice.

[Vaidotas]

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/chasing-magic-bullet.html

There is more of long reading on LF home page.

[Alan Klein]

Gear does not make better pictures. Knowing how to use gear does. While I appreciate fine equipment as much as the next person, I'm also a huge fan of "the right tool for the job". There are times when a $400 Kodak Chevron is a better tool than a $1500 Rolleiflex. And there are times when a $40 Holga is a better tool than a $400 Kodak Chevron. There are thousands and thousands of dentists and lawyers with babied Leicas and Hasselblads who have taken very sharp pictures of absolutely nothing anyone wants to look at to prove it.

I'm not talking about lawyers and doctors but people who want to shoot artistically and will care about it with their hearts. Spending hard-earned money makes some people try harder.

[Bernice Loui]

Not all foto image makers are motivated by $ or similar monetary instruments..
There are plenty of artist that are not motivated by $ or similar monetary instruments over the course of humanoid history.. Answer is easily found in the universe of Art History..

"Hard Earned $....".... Vast volumes of $ are not "earned" it comes from _?_
Think you know the proper answer to this question.


Bernice



Spending hard-earned money makes some people try harder.

[Michael R]

I'm not talking about lawyers and doctors but people who want to shoot artistically and will care about it with their hearts. Spending hard-earned money makes some people try harder.

That’s a very strange statement. Presumably anyone honestly motivated by the artform and wanting to make the best pictures they can will want to make the best pictures they can whether or not a relatively substantial amount of money was spent on equipment. If the effort is in any way proportional to the relative amount of money spent on equipment, the individual wasn’t motivated by photography in the first place, and was just fooling him/herself. I can’t imagine anyone interested deeply in making art not trying their best with whatever gear.

[xkaes]

Having hard-earned money doesn't mean you have a lot of it.

From the working people I've known, the ones that worked the hardest had the least of it -- that's the reason they were working so hard.

[Daniel Unkefer]

Right Allen has his opinion and it fits in some cases. Not in mine either, I prefer to find the olde and busted and clean it up. Then I have the chance to use something that deserves to be saved. Often I buy broken cheaply and take it in for repair or I fix it myself. Two broken items can often be made into a good working unit. If anything I am not as happy when I have to pay a lot to get something, even if it is rare. But you know sometimes I'm OK with that depending. Finding new uses for what I already have, the other side of the coin if you will. To me it's part of the fun of it. Then hopefully comes producing some good work for my efforts. YMMV

[Drew Wiley]

Just depends. I sold millions and millions of dollars worth of power tools to contractors before I retired, and can firmly state that many of the old ones, even somewhat beaten up, are still going to last a lot lot longer than the current renditions of allegedly the same product, even if brand new, and even if more expensive than ever. One has to understand how such things are specifically made, and not just outwardly branded, as well as the specific corporate philosophy in play at the time of manufacture, and whether parts are even still available today. Many current tools are deliberately down-engineered to be disposable, not repairable. But there are certain notable brand exceptions, particularly from German manufacturers, if one is willing to pay their deserved premium.

Likewise, selecting a vintage old Norma camera, I obviously bought the best one I could find within a reasonable price range, particularly since it had been in a studio all along and still had an almost like-new bellows. But those rigs were so well made to begin with, and were designed with easy user tune-up in mind, plus easy component interchangeability, that minor mechanical issues are not likely going to be a barrier to restoring full functionality. With wooden cameras, you have to be more aware of serious handicaps like warpage or splits, or old worn-out brass gearing. Many people don't even realize that there are dramatic differences between cheap melt-cast brass hardware and much denser die-cast and machined brass. Yet neither are equal to stainless steel or titanium. So a bargain could either be a real bargain or a real headache. If you know key distinctions in advance, then you're odds greatly improve. But not everyone is shop oriented.

[Alan Klein]

Don't you think the guy shooting expensive 8x10 takes more time and deliberates more about his shot than when he shoots 4x5, MF or 35mm? Not for everyone, but for many, higher costs motivate them to try harder.

[Alan Klein]

Right Allen has his opinion and it fits in some cases. Not in mine either, I prefer to find the olde and busted and clean it up. Then I have the chance to use something that deserves to be saved. Often I buy broken cheaply and take it in for repair or I fix it myself. Two broken items can often be made into a good working unit. If anything I am not as happy when I have it pay a lot to get something, even if it is rare. But you know sometimes I'm OK with that depending. Finding new uses for what I already have, the other side of the coin if you will. To me it's part of the fun of it. Then hopefully comes producing some good work for my efforts. YMMV

It doesn't have to be higher monetary costs. Your efforts to fix stuff adds value to them so you try harder. You respect the repaired instruments more, maybe more than the guy who pays a lot for new. Value can be measured differently. The point is when things are cheap to us, monetarily or emotionally, we treat them as such.

[Michael R]

Absolutely not, if he’s really interested in photography. If he is varying his effort based on format or price of equipment, he’s fooling himself. Certainly none of the best photographers I know of would ever think that way, and anecdotally I never would either. I put as much effort into my 35mm photos as I do into my 4x5.

Honestly I think this is really just coloured by your own market economics views.


Don't you think the guy shooting expensive 8x10 takes more time and deliberates more about his shot than when he shoots 4x5, MF or 35mm? Not for everyone, but for many, higher costs motivate them to try harder.

[r.e.]

I have a seasonal home in Atlantic Canada on a salmon and sea-run trout river. By law, fishing requires a fly rod and a hook that doesn't have a barb, and with few exceptions a salmon has to be released. I have a graphite Orvis fly rod and a Hardy reel, names that some will recognise as not inexpensive.

I've been working for a few years now on improving my skill. Luckily I have a great fishing buddy. I've fly fished in Canada, the U.S. and England, and one of my year-round neighbours on this river is the finest fly fisherman that I've ever come across. He's been fly fishing for 50 years, and knows that there's a lot more to it than skill with a rod and reel. He knows how to read a river. He gets his fly rods and reels from Canadian Tire, which in U.S. terms is sort of a cross between Tiger and Walmart. He does like to have a go with my gear from time to time, but he's quite content with his own kit; and he regularly out-fishes me when we're on the river :)

[xkaes]

All that sounds fishy to me.

[Dugan]

I've always had to do more with less, and still do.
I currently have an Omega 45D, and 2 B&J 5x7's.
My Apo Raptars are the equal of RD Artars at a fraction of the price.
Sooo...it's not what you have, it's what you do with it.

[Alan Klein]

Absolutely not, if he’s really interested in photography. If he is varying his effort based on format or price of equipment, he’s fooling himself. Certainly none of the best photographers I know of would ever think that way, and anecdotally I never would either. I put as much effort into my 35mm photos as I do into my 4x5.

Honestly I think this is really just coloured by your own market economics views.
I didn't say for all photographers. I said: "...Not for everyone, but for many, higher costs motivate them to try harder."

[BrianShaw]

I hope the OP has figured out what camera turns him on, buys one, and takes some pictures that makes him satisfied. Maybe coming back to this forum in the future is possible.

[r.e.]

All that sounds fishy to me.

He's a pretty good accordion player too :)

Not far from here:

232175

[xkaes]

I've got to assume that the photo was taken with a very expensive camera -- because it's so nice!

[r.e.]

I've got to assume that the photo was taken with a very expensive camera -- because it's so nice!

I have the impression that my post #109 maybe wasn't as clear as I thought about my views on this subject :)

In any event, doesn't matter what camera it was shot on. It's a 78KB jpeg from another jpeg, and I only added it to give a sense of "place" to the story in my post.

[John Kasaian]

My brother drove around in a Porsche with his Linhof cases in the trunk. Rounding a corner near Painted Cave adjacent to Jane Fonda's ranch, a big garbage truck came directly at him in the wrong lane. He would have been better off in a rusty Dodge Dart. His back was messed up ever since, and the Porsche was of course totalled. Price doesn't tell you everything.

I probably know more about fine tools than 99.999 % of the people in this country. But I also know when to leave them alone when what you really need is an ordinary rusty old crowbar. It's called the right tool for the job, whether that means expensive or downright cheap.

It's interesting that when it comes to crowbars, the rusty old ones are more often heavier duty than the shiny new ones.
At least that's been my observation.
The same thing with Pulaskis. My late Uncle Al's WPA-era Pulaski is a beast!

[daisy9]

I own a Toyo Field Camera. I don't use it all that often because of the price of buying and developing film, but it's a great camera that does its job. I reccomend it, and it seems from a quick search that they're not all that hard to find for sale.

[xkaes]

I have the impression that my post #109 maybe wasn't as clear as I thought about my views on this subject :)

I guess I should start adding an acronym at the end of some of my posts. For that one, it would have been "TIC!" -- Tongue in Cheek!

[Bernice Loui]

Having used the Omega 45(fill in the letter) in years past, it is a FAR more capable monorail camera than most would know or believe at a very modest $..
Does what is demanded or expected within it's design limits and in many ways better than a light weight field folder... attributes of a monorail -vs- flat bed folder.

APO raptar are same process lens design formula as APO artar.. optical performance would be similar if not identical in many ways to the APO artar, APO ronar, APO nikkor...
232184

Bernice



I've always had to do more with less, and still do.
I currently have an Omega 45D, and 2 B&J 5x7's.
My Apo Raptars are the equal of RD Artars at a fraction of the price.
Sooo...it's not what you have, it's what you do with it.

[Bernice Loui]

Having been down the Leica road years ago.. the M6 would be the fave, think you know why having own-used the M6.
M3 "feels" like a precision measurement tool used for machine tool made parts. It is flat solid, tight, precise and ...

Leica rangefinders comes with specific limitations and strengths.. which on balance caused all the Leica rangefinders to find new homes years ago..


Bernice





As for "the German thing"... If I could keep only one of the cameras that I own, it would be the 66 year old Leica M3 double stroke. No contest. I love how it handles, I love rangefinder focusing and I love the lenses. I even prefer the double stroke over the later and more desirable (in the marketplace) single stroke because the first stroke is sort of a physical "get ready" that helps me focus on what I'm doing. I also have an M6 and a digital M (Typ 240), but from a handling perspective I prefer the M3 to both.

A long time ago, a photo store salesman told me to pick a camera that feels right in my hands and in physical operation. It was very good advice.

[xkaes]

M3 "feels" like a precision measurement tool used for machine tool made parts. It is flat solid, tight, precise and ...
Bernice

One man's Leica is another man's brick -- TIC!

[John Kasaian]

I'm fully confident that if I had the latest and most expensive Linhof in my hands, I'd still be fully capable of making lousy photographs with it :rolleyes:

[Tin Can]

I tested a dozen Leica

No thanks

Same with Texas Leica

Top VF my choice








One man's Leica is another man's brick -- TIC!

[esearing]

I think most of us that have making photographs for a while have a collection of various cameras we love and hate because they inspired us at the time. I shot ooodles of rolls on my Minolta 135, got bit by the Leica RF bug and have a M3 made near my birthdate. Skipped over the MF desires and went straight to 4x5 monorails , then 4x5 wooden field cameras and significantly reduced my captures. Now I am enjoying 5x12 but produce even less (mainly due to life's other demands on my time). I tried several brands for 4x5 and the Chamonix line fits me the best. I like the larger knobs and focus better than the Japanese models (Shen Hao / Anba) and the Canham just seemed odd to me when you have to promote videos on how to fold it. Ebony is beautiful, but so is a Ferrari. I now dislike all my 135 cameras and the small format work flow. As I age I will likely move to MF and invest in a Hasselblad system.

And like John Kassian - Price of camera or lens has no influence on my ability to screw up an image.

[jnantz]

I'm fully confident that if I had the latest and most expensive Linhof in my hands, I'd still be fully capable of making lousy photographs with it :rolleyes:


I know. I stick to junk cameras and inexpensive cars too, I'm a lousy driver.

[Rolfe Tessem]

I second the Chamonix recommendation. This is a high quality product with lots of thought given to its design. And, it is one of the few good deals left in photography...

Rolfe

[Bernice Loui]

IMOP experience from using Hasselblad for decades.. never again.

Over priced, Zeiss lenses are good but not THAT good.. They bust more that expected and $$$$ to fix and these days support for their film cameras is not what it once was..

The 6x6 square format is Meh, but excellent for others.

There are simply better and more cost effective medium format cameras available. Hasselblad much like Leica and other Social Status Symbol devices are often not the reality of their fantasy or social/marketing reputation.


Your exposed film experiences could easily vary from what was written,
Bernice




As I age I will likely move to MF and invest in a Hasselblad system.

And like John Kassian - Price of camera or lens has no influence on my ability to screw up an image.

[xkaes]

I must admit, I've been tempted, at times -- fortunately only a few -- to get a medium format view camera. Like 4x5", there are several to choose from, new & old, field & studio. Many (most?) are probably lighter than your typical medium format SLR camera with lens -- and offer the swings & tilts of a view camera.

[Peter De Smidt]

Just as an aside, if you need a studio roll film system, I highly recommend the Fuji GX680. They are super cheap. The bodies, lenses and accessories are very high quality. You can use multiple frame sizes.....What you don't want to do is to carry it around. Mine is twice as heavy and bulky as my field 4x5,and that's not counting the lenses....

[Bernice Loui]

2x3 ala 6x9 view cameras are a mixed baggie... Weight/size wise they are about the same or heavier/bulkier than a light weight 4x5 field folder or some of the lowest weight 4x5 monorail cameras. The TK23s all up weights and is about as bulky as a 4x5 Sinar Norma..

~Why bother with a 2x3 or 6x9 view camera..

Having been at this 120 roll film view camera thing for many years now, it comes down to camera movements and the ability to use 120 roll film instead of film holders. Lenses can be more available than lenses for 4x5 as many that can work good in 6x9 does not work on 4x5, but vast majority of 4x5 lenses easily works on 6x9.. There remains the hard limit of not being able to easily use lenses in barrel that the Sinar does not have..

The difficulty with using 120 roll film on these 2x3 ala 6x9 view cameras has much to to with the roll film back. There are slide in 120 roll film backs such as the Linhof Rapid Rollex and Toyo, they have a different set of issues.. Most of these view cameras use the 2x3 graflok/international standard back which often means removing the ground glass frame/holder to install the roll film back. Very real hassle here.. This was an irritating issue with the Arca Swiss 6x9 and other roll film view cameras prior to the Linhof TK23s.. While the Linhof back system is much their own, it is easy to use, precise/accurate with absolute repeatability and the Linhof Super Rollex has proven to be the best 120 roll film holder used to date. Except the Super Rollex is Big and Heavy...

There ya have it, none ideal, always a trade-off..

BTW, ++ on the Fuji GX680 as a studio 120 roll film camera. It is Good in many ways. Fuji made three version of the GX680. First version used nicads, later versions had lithium or AA batteries to power the camera. The Fujinon optics are Good, has modest front camera movements and overall IMO better than the RZ/RB of similar.. For studio use, easily better than Hasselblad in every way.



Bernice



I must admit, I've been tempted, at times -- fortunately only a few -- to get a medium format view camera. Like 4x5", there are several to choose from, new & old, field & studio. Many (most?) are probably lighter than your typical medium format SLR camera with lens -- and offer the swings & tilts of a view camera.

[Daniel Unkefer]

~Why bother with a 2x3 or 6x9 view camera.. The difficulty with using 120 roll film on these 2x3 ala 6x9 view cameras has much to to with the roll film back. Bernice

I have recently bought a couple of 2x3 Monorails, I would agree with all you say. For me, the 1958 era Plaubel Peco Junior fits my bill with no downsides. I bought a "Jim Galvin 2x3 Spring Graflok" from Glenn Evans, and grafted it to the back of a Peco Jr rear board. It opens very wide wide enough to fit my Graflex Roll Backs, as well as just about every other kind of back I have. Also it is as beautifully made as my Normas. The price of the Peco Junior is quite reasonable, and as solid as my Normas in all ways. I can easily carry it with one hand, everything fits in a small Monorail Soft Bag, without causing any strains. In fact Plaubel made a viewfinder front and back so it can be shot handheld! Imagine a hand held baby monorail camera. Recently I bought a very decent shape one from Adorama for seventy dollars. My first one was $200 with some very desirable original accessories. YMMV

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52343289476_0a9b8cd704_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nKp3md)SONY DSC (https://flic.kr/p/2nKp3md) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

[Bob Salomon]

I have recently bought a couple of 2x3 Monorails, I would agree with all you say. For me, the 1958 era Plaubel Peco Junior fits my bill with no downsides. I bought a "Jim Galvin 2x3 Spring Graflok" from Glenn Evans, and grafted it to the back of a Peco Jr rear board. It opens very wide wide enough to fit my Graflex Roll Backs, as well as just about every other kind of back I have. Also it is as beautifully made as my Normas. The price of the Peco Junior is quite reasonable, and as solid as my Normas in all ways. I can easily carry it with one hand, everything fits in a small Monorail Soft Bag, without causing any strains. In fact Plaubel made a viewfinder front and back so it can be shot handheld! Imagine a hand held baby monorail camera. Recently I bought a very decent shape one from Adorama for seventy dollars. My first one was $200 with some very desirable original accessories. YMMV

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52343289476_0a9b8cd704_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nKp3md)SONY DSC (https://flic.kr/p/2nKp3md) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

When we released the first TK 23 LInhof I received some photos from a customer in Honolulu who bought the first one. He was using it handheld with a 47mm Super Angulon and a LInhof Multifocus Finder 23 that he grafted onto the rear L standard. Worked for him.

[Drew Wiley]

6X9 roll film backs made perfect sense to me once the handwriting was on the wall that Quickload and Readyload holders were doomed to extinction. I was taking two week backpacking trips into the mountains right up till the pandemic and huge forest fires hit, which also was when I was entering my 70's. Sure glad I had taken the trouble to fine-tune roll film holder operation in advance under those conditions. Of course, one can, if they wish, still pack along a few full-sized 4x5 holders for those special images worthy of significantly bigger enlargements.

[Daniel Unkefer]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52398341648_b29afba291_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2nQgcrA)SONY DSC (https://flic.kr/p/2nQgcrA) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

I have completely finished grafting the Jim Galvin Graflex Back 2.5"x3.2.5" to a Plaubel Makiflex flat rear board. I hold it together with tiny brass hobby screws on both sides. I had to light proof foam after assembly all seems to be good to go. I have six 2x3 Graphmatics, right now loaded with Fuji HRU XRay film. Also have about ten Graflex type sheet film holders. I stocked up on the film so that's another option. Camera completely ready and I've been shooting some tests on 120 Makina film backs. The Graphmatics are quick.... I did attach a custom sized fresnel to the rear of the film back. I prefer fresnels for viewing on my cameras. Camera shown with the Sinar Symmar 210mm f5.6 which is about as long as you can go especially closer up. The 180mm f5.6 Symmar has been working good too. Both lenses Compur shutters

[Tin Can]

I never use roll film with my 2X3 rail bellows boxes

I prefer to focus and use either Grafmatics or normal DDS

I also like DDS on my Mamiya RB, the Mamiya DDS holder does film or glass plate

I shot a few sheet film in my Hasselblad, glad it's gone

[Havoc]

I'm fully confident that if I had the latest and most expensive Linhof in my hands, I'd still be fully capable of making lousy photographs with it :rolleyes:

Same here. Doesn't matter what camera I use, it comes out lousy.

[sharktooth]

So true. Nowadays, I save money on film by "pre-visualizing" all the lousy stuff I might have taken. No need to lug around a heavy camera and tripod either.

[xkaes]

Are you here just to provide moral support for those of us who lug around a heavy camera and tripod?

[sharktooth]

Are you here just to provide moral support for those of us who lug around a heavy camera and tripod?

Gimme an "L", gimme an "A", gimme an "R" .......

O.K., maybe I'm too old for this now.

If you were visualizing this with spandex and pom-poms .... I'm sorry.

[xkaes]

If you were Stacy Keibler, I'd try.

[sharktooth]

Stacy Keibler would certainly be welcome to lug around my 4x5 camera and tripod, but I can't really envision it.

[xkaes]

Neither can she, I'm sure!