Canham Quality or ???

[Greg Liscio]

Hello Gents,

After a brief foray into Leica 35mm photography (don't ask), I'm back. On a tighter budget than before, but once again eager to get into LF Photography. I remember that this was one of the most helpful sites ever, so here we go.

Can't afford the Linhof Technikarden of my dreams, but have read quite a bot about Canham's metal 4X5. Could I please get some input on what I would lose/give up by getting the Canham instead of the Linhof Technikardan.

Thanks all.
Greg

[Walter Calahan]

Can't speak about a 4x5 metal Canham, but I know my 8x10 wood Canham is terrific.

No camera can do everything, but my Canham does everything I ask it to do.

Remember, a camera is just a device to keep the light out so that the film sees just want you let it see through the lens/shutter combo that's used.

Concentrate more on the lenses you'll put on the box, then the box itself.

Just get a camera and start making images you enjoy.

[Brian Vuillemenot]

If you're on a tight budget, look into one of the Chinese cameras, like Shen-Hao, Chamonix, Tachihara, or Osaka. A fraction of the price of a Canham or Linhoff. The camera is just a box to hold film- save the money for decent glass.

[Frank Petronio]

You could get an inexpensive older Technika that would have the tactial "fondelbility" of your Leicas...

[Peter Lewin]

Gee. I have a Leica and a Canham DLC45, and love them both. But all the posts are correct. All view cameras are compromises, and all of the options mentioned are wonderful cameras. I traded in a SinarF and a Wista to pay for the Canham, because it was lighter and more easily portable than the SinarF, and had more extension than the Wista, so I could use a wider range of lenses. The point was simply that you have to choose a camera for the features which are worthwhile to you. Personally, I love the Canham, and would easily recommend it, but you may well love a Chamonix or used Technika, etc., just as much. One thing to consider is how you like the way a camera works - a Technika back swings and tilts with a very different mechanism than most view cameras (not better or worse, just different) and a Chamonix uses a "central focus screw" (I don't know how to describe the Philips approach, which the Chamonix appropriated), again a rather unique and different approach. I never had a Technikarden, but I imagine the geared movements may feel more precise than the Canham's, but then its a heavier camera, again trade-offs and compromises. If cost becomes the limiter, I agree with earlier posts suggesting a less expensive camera than the Canham, use the money you save on lenses. But of course one can make a similar argument against buying Leicas, in the end it has to be whatever makes you happy.

[wfwhitaker]

...Chamonix uses a "central focus screw" (I don't know how to describe the Philips approach, which the Chamonix appropriated), again a rather unique and different approach...

It's a lead screw (as in "You can lead a horse to water, etc...", not as in "lead-based paint"). I have a Phillips 7x17 and my reaction to using the lead screw focusing the first time was that it felt like using a Leica - very smooth and with almost no backlash. It's an absolute delight. I just didn't want to stop focusing! I do not have a Chamonix and have never tried one, so I don't know if their version is as nice. But it may be something to consider. Perhaps someone here will offer their experience.

Can't help you with the metal Canham, but have used the wood 5x7 and was very impressed. Good luck!

[John Kasaian]

If you absolutely must wed yourself to a tripod dependent 4x5 I have to admit that I'm absolutely blown away by the Graphic View II. For $125 on the 'bay that leaves lots of money for glass :D

[Ted Harris]

If you're on a tight budget, look into one of the Chinese cameras, like Shen-Hao, Chamonix, Tachihara, or Osaka. A fraction of the price of a Canham or Linhoff. The camera is just a box to hold film- save the money for decent glass.

Just to keep the record straight, neither the Tachihara nor the Osaka are Chinese. Both are Japanese cameras.

[Brian Ellis]

Hello Gents . . . Can't afford the Linhof Technikarden of my dreams, but have read quite a bot about Canham's metal 4X5. Could I please get some input on what I would lose/give up by getting the Canham instead of the Linhof Technikardan. . . . Thanks all. Greg

You can buy a used Technikardan for about the price of a new Canham. Personally I'd rather have a Canham, I didn't care much for the Technikardan I owned, but many people like them a lot. They show up on ebay all the time, also on dealers' shelves, and last time I looked they were selling in the $2000 price range.

[Scott Davis]

Another vote for a Canham if you want to spend in that price range. I have the wood field 5x7/5x12 kit, and after working with it for a while, it is pretty much second nature to use for me. It works a little differently than the Shen/Tachi/Wisner style, so it takes a little getting used to, but then so does just about any other camera.

[russyoung]

I have the Canham wooden 5x7 which is accompanied by 4x5 and 4x10 backs as well. Had a Technikardan- weighed a ton and I failed to perceive the 'build quality' so widely discussed.

You need to make a list, very detailed, of what you want to use the camera for... and then work your way through the camera specifications against your criteria. No one else can do this for you. Perhaps you wisest decision could end up being a $125 Crown Graphic.

Good luck- you'll never go back after shooting LF.

Russ

[Juergen Sattler]

I have the Canham 4x5 metal and absolutely love it - it had to go through 5 different LF cameras until I found the Canham. It is lightweight, has huge bellows extensions, the bellows itself is very pliable and allows the use of my 65mm lens without a bag bellows (I don't have alot of movements with that focal length, but hardly any is needed anyway with the 65). The focsuing screen that comes standard with the camera is superb. Whenever I needed help or a part, I just called Keith Canham and he was always more than happy to help me out. I have found my dream 4x5 camera, ifthe same is true for your needs is a different matter.

[Greg Liscio]

Thanks for all the valuable input. Brings up a related question. May I please have your thoughts on a Wista vs Canham. The rangefinder on the Wista may be a desirable feature for the work I am contemplating.

Greg

[Clyde Rogers]

I can't speak to a metal Wista, I've only used the wooden ones. Fine cameras, very light and solid, but nowhere near the capabilities of a DLC.

The DLC is an extremely versatile camera. It can use many short lenses easily (often no bag is required, and the standards can be moved very close together). It handles long lenses equally easily. It sets up quickly, and locks down well. It can be twisted like a pretzel. No other camera provides such capability (bellows extension and wide angle capability) in such a relatively small, light, well-made package. And Canham's service is second to none in LF cameras.

Until later,

Clyde Rogers

[Ted Harris]

Greg, I have used most of the cameras discussed and I have to say that, beyond the fact that they will all do the job, it is almost thankless to try to compare them. Every camera is a compromise with some functions and design features emphasized and others played down or sacrificed. In the case of the Technikarden v. the DLC it is rigidity and precision v. weight and speed of adjustment (at least that is my feeling and there are other differences). The two cameras are as different as night and day. The same is true of the DLC and the metal Wistas. If you think the rangefinder will be useful then you have only the Wista RF and the Linhof Technikarden unless you want to go used. If the Wista doesn't have enough bellows draw for you then you need to think again.

My suggestion is to bite the bullet, buy the one that is closest to your needs and start taking pictures. I'm willing to bet that most of the posters on this thread are not on their first or even second camera. You have to try and see. I had a Speed Graphic in the dark ages, used a rail camera for everything through the 1970's then added a Technika for a decade then switched to a Horseman FA for 16 years. After i stopped using the Horseman, mostly because compressed vertebrae made using its tiny knobs annoying, I went through 3 different cameras before settling on a Toyo 45AII for 4x5. I have also used a Canham wood 5x7/4x5 for 11 years and can attest to the solidity of the build. For that matter, I'm willing to bet you can get everything you want out of a Shen Hao, just not the smooth feel.

Go make pictures.

[John Kasaian]

I don't know anything about either the Technikarden or the Canham, but I thought the Technikarden is a monorail while Canham made field cameras? If so, it would seem to me that you are attempting to draw a comparison between two very different animals. Whether or not that is the case, I'll suggest this (barring the possibility of a hands on inspection and trial) :
Get photographs of each camera and place them side by side (you've already determined that the bellows extension of either is adequate for your lenses, right?)

Ask yourself which one looks like the camera you'd be most comfortable with using---which one can you picture yourself using (pun intended :D )

That is the model you ought to start with, IMHO.

[Brian Ellis]

"I don't know anything about either the Technikarden or the Canham, but I thought the Technikarden is a monorail while Canham made field cameras? . . . "

Just for the record, the Technikardan is a hybrid monorail - the rail telescopes and and the camera rotates 90 degrees so that the rail ends up underneath and parallel with the base of the camera. It's billed by Linhof as a field camera and that's probably how most people use it. I also wouldn't say, as someone else did, that it weighs a "ton." It's about average for a metal field camera or many wood cameras (e.g. Shen Hao, Wisner, et al) - a little over 6 lbs.

[Frank Petronio]

The Technikardan is a really nice design and the workmanship is first rate. However the "L" shaped standards, while providing all the sturdiness you really need, still leave it feeling not as "solid" feeling as a similar 6 lb Technika or Arca... Also, many owners manage to misfold the bellows when closing the camera and a wrinkled bellows lowers the resale value (they become more prone to light leaks as they age.)

The strong point of the Technikardan is that it can go LONG and still be relatively compact and high quality.

In that price range of Canhams, Technikardens, etc. you might as well also consider an Arca, they get very few compliants...