Horseman monorails in the field

[Ed Richards]

I am looking for a camera that will be easier to use with my 90mm for buildings than is my Technika IV. I would not mind being able to use a wider lens than the 90 with some movements, and nor would I mind something that is more rigid with a 400 tele. Cheap is also key, since this will be a second camera. There are great buys on Horseman monorails, which seem to well made cameras. How wide a lense will these handle? Are they too heavy/delicate for the field? Why are they so cheap?

[Alonzo Guerrero]

Ed, my introduction to monorail LF was the Horseman LE. It is the cheapest version mostly due to the fact that the standards do not pivot back and forth at the base as can be found on the more expensive versions such as the LX. I still have the LE and now own the LM (the not often seen predecessor to the LX that looks just like the LX and seems to be the same except for an added feature on the rear standard). IMHO, I don't think the LE suffers much from the fact that it does not contain such features in that you can achieve just about any position that you can with the LM,LX, etc... with just a little more work. In practical application, there may be easier cameras to handle in the field. But as for rigidity and pure ability you will have no worries or regrets. I have only tested a not so good 75mm lens, but if you have the recessed lens board and bag bellows you shouldn't have any issues. Either camera is great with lenses I own from 90mm to 300mm (I briefly owned a 360mm that I mounted on both cameras with absolutely no problem). With a little common sense and care in the field, these cameras will perform well although you will have to lug quite a bit of gear. Check out the LE, it is much lighter than the other models. If you like it, move along in your normal progression of buying gear towards what you want.

--ag

[Frank Petronio]

They are quite a good deal, as are the Sinars that they share many parts with. Just get a Sinar to Technika adapter board and keep your lenses mounted on the Technika boards.

With such a bulky camera, using a hard case is not unrealistic. In someways it can be much faster and more secure, and you can actually shoot faster working from a case rather than a floppy bag or backpack. You'll also be more inclined to use more movements since they are so easy to access with a monorail.

[Ed Richards]

Thanks Alonzo and Frank!

I do not backpack. I haul my stuff in the back of the car, then walk around with the camera on the tripod and over my shoulder. Most of my travel is by car, so a hard case is no great problem. I can still use the technika for travel or hiking. The LE is probably not that much heavier than the technika.

[Jack Flesher]

Thanks Alonzo and Frank!
The LE is probably not that much heavier than the technika.

Uhhh -- in comparison to the Technika, the LE is a tank; probably almost 2x the weight. Doesn't mean it can't be done, just don't expect a compact camera. On the plus side if you are only going to use for say 150 and shorter, then you could cut the rail in half to save some size and weight.

Another option, though not as elegant to adjust as a metal monorail, would be the Shen Hao 4x5 at $500 (and about 5 pounds) combined with the optional $100 bag bellows. It will easily handle down to a 65 on a flat board, but for a lot of rise you'll need a recessed board on the 65 or the top of the front standard may hit the inside top of the rear standard in some situations. And it uses Tech boards already. Just a thought.

[Ted Harris]

The previous post is right that the LE i a tank but you can do a lot to minimize sie and weigh by only carrying what you need. The rail is the best place to start. For general purposes your best bet for a rail is the adjustable one but if you are only using wide angle lenses with a ag bellows then go with the 100mm rail.

As long as you can handle the weight, and don'tkid yourself, it is substantial. I carry my frontand rear standards, a rail, bellows and tripod block in an anvil case when it needs to move out of the studio and the loaded case weighs over 30 pounds.

[Ed Richards]

The Shen Hao is a good thought. Does it need the bag bellows to work with a 90? As for the 65 - none of the 65s I have seen have enough image circle to worry much about movements. Wonder it it would support a 400 tele? It only needs about 240mm bellows at infinity, but it is heavy.

[Jack Flesher]

The Shen Hao is a good thought. Does it need the bag bellows to work with a 90? As for the 65 - none of the 65s I have seen have enough image circle to worry much about movements. Wonder it it would support a 400 tele? It only needs about 240mm bellows at infinity, but it is heavy.

1) You can get quite a bit of movement with a 90 on the standard bellows, but the bag would certainly be more convenient if you are pushing to the edges of the IC all the time.

2) Most 65's may indeed run out of IC before one mounted on a flat board had interference problems between the standards, but a recessed board would eliminate the issue totally.

3) I think it has enough rigidity at 240mm extension to support a 400 tele, but I also think it would start to get wobbly if you went much beyond about 275mm of extension with a heavy lens out front.