Architecture field camera, what woulb you recommend ? [Archive]

Stephan.in.Belgium

9-Jul-2008, 08:59

I'm looking for a portable little 4x5 camera with enough movements for some relatively serious architectural work and cheap enough to fit my very restrained "just finished my studies" budget, does anyone have suggestions ? I use a wista 45D right now but it's pretty old and although I've fixed everything up as well as I could it is'nt rigid enough for serious work and the front standard has been slightly bent so I'm never quite sure that my setup will hold when I put a film holder in. I'm thinking of a wista SP if I can find one cheap enough, what do you guys think ?
:)

Ole Tjugen

9-Jul-2008, 09:04

How about the Argentum Architec? http://www.argentumcamera.com/_angol/html_pages/architec.htm

Robbie Shymanski

9-Jul-2008, 09:20

I am a huge fan of the used Toyo 45G monorail I bought a few months back. It has been made all the better with a bag bellows and recessed lens board I added. I bought it all from KEH.com and I don't think I have put more than $500 for the set-up. This doesn't include a lens. I use a Nikkor SW 120. There isn't a position I cannot get that camera in with that lens. And it really isn't that heavy of a set-up either, in my opinion.

Antonio Corcuera

9-Jul-2008, 09:26

Stephan, you're looking for a camera for "relatively serious" architecture work with lots of movements, cheap and portable, ie field. I'm afraid those 3 request don't usually come together and you'll have to compromise. I'd recommend sacrifying portability and getting a monorail (Sinar F's and Norma's are cheap nowadays).

Ernest Purdum

9-Jul-2008, 10:10

The Calumet CC-402 wide angle view camera is not as portable as a field camera but has the movements needed for "relatively serious" architectural work. As view cameras go, thaey are light and portable. Even though they are now quite old, they stand up very well and Calumet still supports them. They show up on eBay fairly often.

cjbroadbent

9-Jul-2008, 11:34

An Ebony SW45. Mainly because it is sure-square fore and aft. Also good for short lenses and fast on the draw because it's non-folding. Nice combination with a Super Symmar 100mm.

Kirk Gittings

9-Jul-2008, 12:08

An Ebony SW45 That's your cheap camera recommendation?

I would suggest the Calumet Wide field as Ernest mentioned above for a real cheap but functional architecture camera. It will handle a 47 with full movements on a flat lens board and is still supported by Calumet. I used one as my primary business camera for many years and I think I paid $175.00 for it?

evan clarke

9-Jul-2008, 13:12

That's your cheap camera recommendation?

I would suggest the Calumet Wide field as Ernest mentioned above for a real cheap but functional architecture camera. It will handle a 47 with full movements on a flat lens board and is still supported by Calumet. I used one as my primary business camera for many years and I think I paid $175.00 for it?

Kirk,
Was it a field or the wide monorail? The wide monorail is a really neat, usable camera and has a rotating back and I'd like to find a clean one. I have the standard monorail in two guises just as collectables, one is a Calumet and the other is a Kodak, both in literally mint condition and I only paid around $125 for each. They are extremely functional cameras and the rail can be cut shorter to stow better if one doesn't need full extension..Evan Clarke

Kirk Gittings

9-Jul-2008, 13:23

Evan, it was (I still have it actually) a "Wide Field", which has the front standard reversed and the lens board recessed, a universal type short bellows, and a short rail. It is truely designed for architecture. I primarily used it with roll film backs. It was very functional. Over the years i bought a few more for parts, as we worked this one pretty hard, but never paid more than $200 for one and as little as $150. It kind of like the Volkswagon of architectural cameras.

evan clarke

9-Jul-2008, 15:10

Michael Nagl

9-Jul-2008, 15:50

Sinar Norma - cheap, well built and not too heavy. Or a Linhof Bi-Kardan, a bit heavier and even better built. It might be a bit difficult to get a bag bellows for the latter.

Stephan.in.Belgium

10-Jul-2008, 03:31

Ole Tjugen

10-Jul-2008, 04:13

Then the important question noone has asked must be very important: How much is "too expensive"? What's your budget?

Kuzano

10-Jul-2008, 04:49

the CC402 Calumet wide angle monorail IS very inexpensive and sturdy. It is differentiated from the CC401, which is the longer camera, in a few ways.
1) it has a reverse front standard which affects almost a recessed lens board
2) it has a shorter monorail
3) The bellows looks quite crumply because there are no rib stiffeners built in, so that it works a lot like a "bag bellows" you often see on other cameras to use short focal length lenses. The bellows is often tan or light grey on the CC402 wide.

The CC402 can occasionally be found on eBay for around $100 w/o a lens and twice that with a moderate lens. These cameras aging and are a bit bulky, but they do the job nicely. I had a CC402 and found it quite capable. The bellows looks odd when distorted for movements on a short lens, but it was well designed for the purpose as an alternative to the bag bellows. I bought my CC402 with 2 usable lenses, a 90 and a 135 for around $250. The bellows looked odd to me at first, but it was quite usable, being both light tight and very supple for the movements.

Here is a link to an original ad for the Calumet CC402. If you look at CC401s closely, of which there are 3 or 4 on ebay right now, you can see the differences I mentioned above.

http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/calumetb/p10.html

Stephan.in.Belgium

10-Jul-2008, 08:41

I'd say my budget is about 400E max. Thanks for all the input people, I'm going to be looking at a small monorail I think that looks like the way to go. That Calumet CC402 is damn cheap, I'm thinking of gettig one of those to try and see whether I get used to the monorail way of life :)

Emmanuel BIGLER

10-Jul-2008, 08:50

Hello from neighbouring France !

lugging even a small monorail around is not much fun

Are you sure that you are aware of the current offer of modern, efficient and lightweight monorail cameras ? ;)
(ahem well, there is also a question of budget, so I have to exit this discussion ;) )

Vick Vickery

10-Jul-2008, 08:56

Another monorail that can do the job is the Cambo (or Calumet rebrand)...with its short 12" rail and a bag bellows it works just fine and is often seen (with standard rail and bellows) for around $200 on eBay; bag bellows, long bellows, and rails of various lengths are readily available at very reasonable prices.

Frank Petronio

10-Jul-2008, 09:42

It really isn't that hard to carry a monorail if you can find or adapt one to have a short rail, and then use an add-on rail. Even a Sinar can be fairly compact if you know how to fold it right.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=15183

http://photo.net/large-format-photography-forum/00CfLY

And you can find used Sinar Fs for under 400E

raucousimages

10-Jul-2008, 09:55

The best compromise between a field and rail camera I know of is the Toyo 125VX. It is a colapsable rail camera just a bit larger than a field camera. The problem is the price. They are not cheep but you may get lucky on the used market. I use it for outdoor portraits.

My son backpacks my Toyo 45D with two rails. A short piece of rail when it is in the pack to hold the standards together then he uses the full size rail and the tripod block when photographing. Great price and the only downside has been I can set up with my field camera (45A) or the 125VX about one minute faster than him.

Scott Davis

10-Jul-2008, 10:11

I'd also suggest looking at a Shen Hao HZX 45A II- they're field cameras, so they have some limits as to movements (particularly front swings/shifts). However, it has a generous amount of front rise, and all the front and rear tilts you could ever need. It also offers an unusual amount of rear rise (something not offered on most field cameras at all). They cost about $600 USD new, and the bag bellows is $100 USD. With the bag bellows, it can take up to a 58mm on a flat board. Look around for a used one- there are enough of them out there now they should pop up from time to time second-hand.

lenser

10-Jul-2008, 10:24

Hi, Stephan.

Your concern about the difference between carrying a monorail or a field camera are quite understandable. I use both the Calumet 402 and a Zone VI for my architecture (the Cambo SCX stays at home). Both are terrific for my needs with the Calumet being just a bit more rigid due to it's design.

There is really very little weight difference and both can easily be hauled around a site on the tripod as they don't require a terribly heavy tripod to begin with. I can use a light weight Leitz Tiltall with either one and no worries unless I'm in a really strong wind or need extra height. Extra lenses and film holders, etc. are carried in a separate bag.

The one thing that other users of the 402 have not mentioned is another portability plus.....just like a field camera, it has a built in carrying strap or handle on top. So, it is the most portable of all the monorail cameras I've seen. It can very easily be carried by the handle if you choose to not have it on the tripod.

The one limitation is that you don't have much bellows draw if you want to use longer lenses, so reversing a recessed board, with a little machining on the board to ensure no light leaks, will allow you to use at least a 210-240mm range. Short lenses are no problem even without a recessed board.

Good luck.

Tim

mccormickstudio

10-Jul-2008, 13:36

When I was in school I bought a Sinar Alpa or A1 - not the best monorail, but light and very inexpensive. The Sinar F or P are much more well-constructed. Horseman and Cambo are both good values in the monorails also and on some the standards rotate to parallel the rail for portability.

The problem with many field cameras including the aforementioned 'Architet' is it's lack of front standard fall. I find myself scouting shots from adjacent buildings or parking garages often and the front standard fall is necessary to make the shot. IMO your best bet for a starter outfit is an inexpensive monorail with a bag bellows, a decent aluminum tripod stiff enough to aviod vibration (I use Induro), and at least one super angulon (the older 65mm probably the cheapest and wide enough for most needs).

I also do about half of my architectural shooting (depending on client needs, budget, time constraints) digital with a Nikon 28mm PC. I'm not familiar with the Canon, but the Nikon is not wide enough for many interiors on my D70 - When the cost of the D3 lowers or Nikon makes less-expensive full-frame-sensor bodies, the 28mm will be wide again and much more useful. Digital is quick, but nothing beats LF film for architectural.

Good luck!

Craig

Brian Ellis

11-Jul-2008, 09:33

The Architec looks really good but it's too expensive for me I'm afraid, it looks like I'me doomed to using a monorail. That's not much of a surprise I guess but it really is a nuisance since I don't have a car and lugging even a small monorail around is not much fun. I'm starting to think that I'd be better off with a canon digital setup with some ts-e lenses, sacrificing quality for portability :-/ That would be an expensive setup too but then I wouldn't be paying for slides and development...

I don't know how "serious" you are (i.e. are you going to have clients, are you going to do stock photography, are you a "serious amateur," etc.) but I've been using a digital camera a fair amount lately and I find that any adjustment I need to the shapes of buildings and other objects can be made pretty easily in Photoshop as long as I know at the time the photograph is made that I'll be needing to make an adjustment (which I virtually always do). Someone like Kirk who is a professional architectural photographer and who also uses Photoshop could speak with more knowledge about this than I can but for the architectural things I do (mostly building exteriors but some interiors) I find that the movements of a LF camera really aren't a necessity any more (the quality would be a different matter if I made really big prints which I don't). The only LF camera movement I miss when using a digital camera is front tilt (to change the plane of focus) but that's more for landscapes than architecture.

Kirk Gittings

11-Jul-2008, 10:14

Brian,

I'm doing 90% of my architectural photography with Canon DSLRs and t/s lenses now even for big national architectural firms. If the files are handled carefully through the whole process excellent quality is possible. In all honesty 4x5 quality is generally overkill as most images never ever get enlarged beyond 8x10 by architecture clients. I would guess that less than 1% of all the 4x5's I shot over the years ever were used larger than 8x10. As per perspective correction, IMO The smaller the file (IE 12mp dslr vs, say 400 mp scanned 4x5 film) the more noticeable PS artifacts are created with significant PS perspective correction. With DSLR files I find too many artifacts if I have to stretch the file 1/3 of the frame width (and more than that would often times be needed if you only used primes). On the other hand fully shifting a Canon 24 t/s will give you soft corners (the 45 and 90 t/s don't go soft in the corners). So the best files take all this into account and may use limited shift on the 24 plus some slight correcting in PS. I deliver a file that will cover a double truck spread in a magazine to my clients, that is 300dpi 11x16 MOL, which means I am uprezzing some. I use Genuine Fractals batch processed on all files for this. I am looking forward to the new 16 mp 5D for this (less uprezzing-if it ever shows up).

If I were buying equipment now, I would probably buy Nikon because their 24 t/s is slightly better than the Canon fully shifted (not better enough to bother switching brands if you already have Canon). And I tend to use the 24 t/s most of the time. These small incremental quality advances add up.

SAShruby

11-Jul-2008, 10:54

I intend to sell Arca Swisss model A, in very good price. An excellent camera for a budget owner, great for architecture work, precision, sturdiness so it doen't shake.

Think about it.

beegee

11-Jul-2008, 17:22

An old Arca Swiss (the silver ones) will do the job easy, they are light , they have smaller rails and interchangeable bellows and they don't cost much ( maybe $300-400) The Calumet "Wide Field" is a jewel of a camera but I think it would be hard to find. If you are limited at using w.a. lenses only ( 65mm / 75mm) the older Cambo wide's 4x5 are the best, perfect for architecural work , very compact and easy to set up ...but you can use only rise/fall and lateral shifts (no tilts or swings) . Tot ziens !

Ernest Purdum

20-Jul-2008, 15:03

beegee, the Calumet is not too hard to find right now. There's one on eBay.

John Kasaian

20-Jul-2008, 16:16

I've had a CC-402 and it is a wonderful camera for architecture. It will do everything you'll want from it.
My question is, if your Wista has been such a capable camera in the past, why buy a new camera? Certainly you should be able to have your Wista rebuilt and brought "up to snuff" reasonably? Perhaps not as cheaply as buying a $100 CC-402, but your post says want a field camera, right?:confused:

Ben Syverson

20-Jul-2008, 17:44

Peter Gowland has some insanely light monorail cameras in his Pocket View line... I just bought an 8x10 model.

Kirk Fry

20-Jul-2008, 18:52

Another vote for the old style ARCA Swiss. Try to find one that already has the bag bellows as the new ones will not fit. K

Stephan.in.Belgium

22-Aug-2008, 15:55

Thanks for all the replies :) I'm now on the lookout for a toyo 125 VX if I can get one cheap, but mostly waiting to see canon's new digital announcement's as that will have a major impact on my budget.

Gary J. McCutcheon

23-Aug-2008, 01:02

Thought I might put in my two cents even though I'm a bit late on this thread:
The Toyo cameras are underrated in my estimate and the 125VX would be an ideal choice even if a bit expensive. I've seen them for $2900 used at Midwest Photo Exchange and have considered buying one myself because I have a Toyo G and some accessories.
I could never really justify the cost, especially when the G already does everything. With a wide angle bellows and recessed board on a 10 inch rail, it is an ideal architectural camera. Weight isn't that bad and in a Zone VI soft bag it is portable, although heavier than the 125VX. The attractiveness of this camera is the geared movements and the price, you can pick up one that has little wear for about $500. The Toyo's are reliable, rugged and smooth.

Peter De Smidt

23-Aug-2008, 13:58

An Arca Swiss F-line is my favorite camera for architecture. I don't know what they go for used in Europe. You might try renting some of the options and seeing what you like best, or if you even like using a view camera.

Ole Tjugen

23-Aug-2008, 14:05

I was thinking of suggesting a Gandolfi Variant Level II, but then I realised that I wouldn't sell mine within you budget. even more so for the "perfect field monorail", the Carbon Infinity.

So I suggest you look for a cheap monorail. A Linhof Kardan Color should be possible.

tgtaylor

24-Aug-2008, 10:36

Toyo 45C. They have full movements which architecture will require, are relatively liteweight for monorails (9lbs), can be bought used in the $200 range, and spare parts for them abound.

Sitll considering the Toyo's, for a few hundred dollars more you can occasionally find a Robos which is fully geared monorail camera weighing in at 12lbs. If you ever decide to go digital with LF, you will want a fully geared camera. I bought a Robos a couple of years ago on E-bay in mint condition w/factory case for $795 - a lot less than what you would pay for the similar Sinar P2.

Finally, I don't think that weight is the important issue in architectual photography that it is in landscape photography where off-road travel is usually required. I just put the case containing the camera, lens, etc., on a collapsible 2 wheel dolly that I purchased new for $40 and roll down the street and onto the location that I want to photograph and set-up. Why put everything on your back when you can comfortably roll it all day with 2 fingers?

rjbrine

27-Aug-2008, 11:11

The old Arca Swiss model C with wide angle bellows is perfect for architecture. It's light, easy to use and affordable. What ever brand you settle on it is vital that the camera has rear standard movements and the ability for plenty of rising front if you are shooting architecture.

jnantz

27-Aug-2008, 12:02

toyo field view ...
not too expensive,
takes short and longer lenses,
and is easy to pack and set up.

when 4x5 is needed, i take its grandfather ( speed graphic )
and a toyo cx on every job. they get along very well.

tgtaylor

27-Aug-2008, 19:24

Frankly, I don't think that the Toyo Field Camera's, or any, if not all, field camera's would be a good choice for architecture.

Make no mistake, I'm a big fan of Toyo Fields and own two - the AX, which is a "technical" field camera and the lite-weight CF. While the "technical" fields have front rise and fall (usually 25mm in both direction), front tilt and swing, and back swing and tilt, the movements in themselves are limited in comparision with those available with a monorail.

As I wrote earlier, weight is not as an important issue in architecture as it is in landscape. IMHO, if I were in the market for a large format camera for architecture, I would look for a monorail camera (view camera) as opposed to a field camera because of the movements the former offers.

A technical field would be a portability compromise that would work on landscape and a lot of archiitecture.

Thomas

jnantz

28-Aug-2008, 07:09

A technical field would be a portability compromise that would work on landscape and a lot of archiitecture.

Thomas

i was referring to the (technical) field-view cameras, not the cf.

GSX4

28-Aug-2008, 07:37

If you are after a field camera for wide angle architectural work, then a Walker Titan wide angle variant might be the ticket.

Kirk Gittings

28-Aug-2008, 07:52

Frankly, I don't think that the Toyo Field Camera's, or any, if not all, field camera's would be a good choice for architecture.

Never used one myself, but a friend Robert Reck (who was is a regular at Architectural Digest) used the Toyo fields for many years very successfully shooting architecture.

tgtaylor

28-Aug-2008, 08:18

A technical field camera will work for a lot of architectual photography but not all as the available camera movements are limited relative to those available with a view camera. Perhaps only once in a blue moon would you need those movements but they are available on a view and not on a field.

The Toyo-Field 45AX would be a good choice. It's a solid built technical field camera that takes lens down to 47mm on a recessed board. However they are selling used in the $700 to $1000 range. The 9lb Toyo 45C, 3lbs more than the 6lb AX, is a full-blown studio camera that is only recently out of production. They sell used in the $200 to $300 range.

A lot of other cameras out there would also work and fall within a low cost budget. I'm partial to the Toyo's because I've found them to be good cameras for the buck. I own 4 of them.

Thomas