PDA

View Full Version : choosing a large format camera



C Jones
9-Jul-2009, 07:28
Hello,

I'm very new to the large format world so having a difficult time deciding which camera to buy. I want to travel with my camera so I need something fairly light. I'll be shooting landscape and portraiture. I'm debating between the Toho FC-45X because of it's light weight and range of mobility or a wooden field camera.

Any thoughts on what would be a better choice? Or any other camera that someone could recommend for my particular needs?

Thank you so much for the help,

chloe

Steve Hamley
9-Jul-2009, 07:48
Chloe,

Welcome to LF! I'm assuming you mean the 4x5 format.

I'm partial to conventionally designed and constructed cameras, so something like the Ebony RW45 or SV45Ti (in mahogany) are appealing, or a used later model Picker-built Zone VI (although not particularly light for a field camera).

Portraiture is a bit at odds with a lightweight traveling camera because large lens boards and a longer bellows draw can be advantageous with larger, faster lenses preferred for portraiture, but add weight and bulk, sometimes a lot.

You might also look at the Canham DLC-45.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/canham/canhamdlc.html

If you're not intending to both at the same time, you could easily justify and afford a field camera and a dedicated portraiture camera such as a older Cambo or Calumet, which can be had for a couple of hundred dollars and has large lensboards. Or for a little more money, a Sinar F1, F2, or Norma with the Sinar shutter.

Now if you aren't restricting yourself to traveling with your portraiture camera, an 8x10 camera such as a Kodak 2D with an installed Packard shutter is cheap, light for an 8x10, and opens up a lot of opportunities for portraiture that isn't easily achieved with 4x5. Search on the forum for Jim Galli and visit his website. Jim used a Kodak 2D and a Packard for many of his "traveling" portraiture shots.

If you're sticking with 4x5, an Ebony SV45Ti, long bellows Zone VI, or Canham DLC and a Cooke PS945 would be hard to beat for traveling and portraiture, but expensive. Just add you favorite focal length used Caltar II-N lenses for the landscape and you're in business.

Cheers, Steve

Martin Aislabie
9-Jul-2009, 07:56
I’m not sure that the weight of the camera is as significant as some make it out to be.

According to the spec, my 5x4 Camera only weighs 2kg

However, my all up trip weight (Camera/Tripod/Lenses/Darkslides/………) weighs just under 20kg

So, getting a 0.5kg lighter or heavier camera isn’t going to be a significant change to my all up weight.

When I bought my 5x4, I had a long hard think about what sort of lenses I liked to use and what sort of camera movements I was wishing to use.

Individual LF Cameras tend to either lean towards shorter focal lengths or longer ones, few do both

As you know, landscapes generally call for wide angle lenses but Portraiture tends to use longer focal lengths.

How wide and how long the lenses you need very much depends on how you and only you.

Therefore I would recommend you consider long and hard the focal lengths you normally use and let that drive you decision about Camera choice.

So far my guess/estimation of the lenses I needed has been pretty much right

Martin

C Jones
9-Jul-2009, 07:59
Thanks Steve,

Lots of great advice!

Chloe

Archphoto
9-Jul-2009, 11:05
Welcome to LF.

There is one or two other camera's to consider: the Shen Hao HZX45-IIA and the more expensive Chamonix.
Both have interchangeble bellows so you can go from wide to long and are not too heavy for backpacking.

Peter

Brian Ellis
9-Jul-2009, 11:45
I'd question the Toho as your first LF camera. They're perfectly fine cameras, several participants here use them, and they're extremely light (weight is important to me, I notice the difference between a 3 lb camera and a 6 pound camera, especially after an hour or so of carrying them around). But from what I've seen of
Tohos (never used one) they're a little quirky so I'm not sure they're an ideal first camera. Obviously someone who uses one would know better than I do though. I believe there's a review of one on Kerry Thalman's web site if you haven't already seen it.

For a light weight (4 lbs or less) camera to use for landscapes and portraits I'd suggest a Tachihara or a Chamonix. I've owned both, both are fine cameras. If the cost difference (about $250 more for a Chamonix the last time I looked) isn't important I'd go with the Chamonix. It has more movements, a longer bellows, axis front tilt, and accepts a bag bellows. It's also a very pretty camera if that's important to you as it is to me. But the Tachihara will also work well for your purposes. While it has fewer movements, those movements are perfectly adequate for the types of work you plan to do. And while it won't accept a bag bellows, the bellows on mine was very pliable and I could use a lens as short as 75mm with room for movements (but not a whole lot).

If you anticipate using a lens longer than 300mm then the Tachihara probably isn't for you with its 13 inch bellows (compared to 15 or so for the Chamonix), especially if by "portraits" you mean typical head and shoulder type stuff. But you can use a 300mm lens on a Tachihara, you'll just be a little limited in how close you can focus it. Both are easy to use, the Tachihara probably a little more so than the Chamonix just because it has fewer moving parts.

I've owned two Ebony cameras, an SV45Te and an SV45Ti, and sold them both, the Te a week after buying it, the Ti about a year after. They are, IMHO, grossly overpriced in comparison to other cameras equally good or better for a whole lot less money. I didn't mention a Shen Hao because it weighs over 6 lbs but it combines some of the best features of the Chamonix (movements) and the Tachihara (price).

Bruce Watson
9-Jul-2009, 14:11
I'm very new to the large format world so having a difficult time deciding which camera to buy. I want to travel with my camera so I need something fairly light. I'll be shooting landscape and portraiture. I'm debating between the Toho FC-45X because of it's light weight and range of mobility or a wooden field camera.

Years ago I decided that LF was for me. Bought a small starter kit including a Zone VI wood field camera. Then life hit with a vengeance. Went back to grad school (both broke and zero time), got married, had back problems, moved a few times, all that. So the camera basically sat in a closet for a decade. When the dust finally settled I reevaluated where I was and where I was headed and decided what I really wanted to do was hike with the camera.

Sold the wood field in favor of the Toho. (http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/toho.htm) Best decision I've made from a photographic equipment standpoint. Bought some lightweight lenses based on Kerry Thalmann's recommendations. (http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/lightwei.htm) All have served me well.

I'm not sure what people mean when they say the Toho is quirky. They usually say it as if it were a bad thing. In fact, every view camera is quirky in it's own way. It's really just a matter of matching your own personality with that of the camera. I find the Toho to be easy to use, accurate, repeatable, and surprisingly rigid when locked down.

Now, over the years I've made some modifications. I tossed the paper weight they use for the tripod mount in favor of an Arca-Swiss style quick mount plate. I designed levels for the rear standard so I could level and plumb the film plane. And I swapped out the existing ground glass for a Maxwell screen (highly recommended BTW). All that done and my camera's weight is down to just 1.25Kg.

When working I carry my whole kit on my back. Camera, five lenses, ten film holders, meter, dark cloth, tripod, ball head, pack, three liters of water, and misc. stuff like some nylon rope to tie back tree limbs, comes to a maximum of 16 Kg (about 35 lbs). I'd like to drop a couple of Kg off this, but I persist in carrying lenses I'm pretty sure I wont need because every once in a while I do need them. Same with film holders; I could probably cut down to eight but every once in a while I use all ten on a long hike.

The thing about the Toho is, with it I get the choice of carrying the extra film holders or the extra lenses if I want to. With a heavier camera I wouldn't get the choice. I'd have to leave the extras at home.

Finally, I have to say all I do is landscape work. The Toho excels at this. It should work just fine for portrait work too, but the advantages it has for field work (light weight, full movements on both standards, etc.) won't be big advantages for portraiture where weight isn't a big concern and neither are movements.

A lot of people change cameras every few years always looking for the next best thing. I've been using the Toho for seven or eight years now (well over 1000 sheets), and never been struck by the desire for another camera. It does what I want, it's solid, reliable, and easy to use. I haven't found another camera that tempts me. What more can I say?

C Jones
9-Jul-2009, 16:45
Such a lovely community of helpful photographers. Thank you everyone for your input and suggestions,

chloe

John Kasaian
9-Jul-2009, 17:11
Welcome to LF!
My 2-cents: Start with something used and in good condition. Look for something like a used Tachihara or Wista 4x5 wooden field. Know what they go for new and don't be lead into paying anything close to the new price.

Don't sweat the small stuff, what you get might be your dream camera, or it might point you to another camera with different features---you won't really know what until you start shooting (and have been shooting for a year or so)

Since you want to travel, get a light wieght lens on the wide end of the spectrum (since architecture is one of your interests) Fear not vintage glass---much of it is very good and the price is right. A late model 90mm or 120mm Angulon would make a good start. Alternatively you might consider a 135mm WF Ektar (though they are commanding cult prices these days) My favorite 4x5 lenses are the 203mm Ektar (Wollensak made an equivalent lens which usually goes for less $$) the 168mm Wollensak Velostigmat, and the 215mm Ilex. None of these lenses cost me over $200 in working shutters. Save your $$ for film. Get three or more old style plastic Riteway Graphic holders (save yourself some possible grief and get them from Midwest or another reputable dealer, so if you get a "leaker" you can easily exchange it for another holder (that's not likely going to be the case when buying on ebay!) Add a suitable tripod and home mode dark cloth and you're on your way.

Good luck!

Ivan J. Eberle
10-Jul-2009, 07:46
I don't see where anyone has mentioned the obvious yet, but you may find camera that offers portrait orientation is essential for portraiture. Many but not all of the field camera designs have backs that clip on and off to change modes. A quick perusal at Kerry Thalmann's Toho page doesn't answer that particular question for me. But it answers another: though the camera you mentioned might be a backpacker's delight, it looks nowhere near as rugged as many other cameras likely to better withstand the rigors of other modes of travel (nor does it appear as versatile).

You might also consider a metal folding press or technical camera. A rotating back like those found on the Linhof Technika, Busch Pressman Model D, Graflex Super Graphic (or my choice of camera, a Meridian 45B) make portraiture mode simple. While somewhat heavier (from 4 lbs to as much as 6), any of these are compact boxes ready to deploy in seconds that offer near bombproof protection for your lens when folded up for travel.

Ron Marshall
10-Jul-2009, 08:49
I concur with what Bruce Watson has said about the Toho.

My first LF camera was a Sinar F1. Too heavy for me to backpack, otherwise a wonderful camera. I was a bit spoiled by the smoothness of the Sinar, so at first I found the Toho a bit dissapointing. However, once I had put in the time to become as familiar with it as I was with the F1 I was completely satisfied and wished I had purchased it sooner.

I use mine with focal lengths from 55mm to 450mm.

Leonard Evens
10-Jul-2009, 09:13
I chose the Toho FC-45X as my first---and so far my only---large format camera. The fact that it is so light and easy to pack for transport was important to me. Every once in a while I suffer from Arca Swiss envy, but the Toho has done everything I wanted to do. I would recommend getting the elliptical lensboard for use with wide angle lenses which you expect to use with movements. (I use my Toho with a 75 mm lens for architectural photography, and the elliptical lensboard is very helpful.) It serves the same function as a bag bellows.

I don't have any first hand experience with wooden filed cameras, but generally they are fairly limited in movements compared to the Toho.

I don't know if the Toho is specially quirky or not, but I presume any large format camera will have quirks of one sort or another. The quirks most often mentioned about the Toho are (1) the fact that the back doesn't rotate, (2) the fact that the back can be a bit wobbly when loosened for fine focusing, and (3) there is a small amount of play in the detents for standard positions. (1) is not really a problem for me since I can take the bellows assembly off the rail and remount it in about 30 seconds. In any event, I use a viewing frame to plan the picture before I even set up the camera, so I seldom have to change orientations. I avoid (2) by being careful to loosen the tightening screw just enough for focusing but not enough for a perceptible wobble. (3) is not a problem for me because I don't trust detent positions anyway and always use a level to get make sure the standards are where I want them.

The focusing screen that comes with the Toho is usable, but I replaced it with a screen from Jim Maxwell's Precision Optics because I wanted to see better in relatively dim light. It was well worth the price. I think I would have needed to do that whatever camera---in the price range of the Toho---I had got.

Bruce Watson
10-Jul-2009, 09:19
I don't see where anyone has mentioned the obvious yet, but you may find camera that offers portrait orientation is essential for portraiture. Many but not all of the field camera designs have backs that clip on and off to change modes. A quick perusal at Kerry Thalmann's Toho page doesn't answer that particular question for me. But it answers another: though the camera you mentioned might be a backpacker's delight, it looks nowhere near as rugged as many other cameras likely to better withstand the rigors of other modes of travel (nor does it appear as versatile).

It's in the basic design of the camera. When you assemble the camera you decide whether to assemble it in landscape or portrait mode. This eliminates the weight and complexity of a rotating back or a clip back. And I'm able to assemble the Toho as fast as the guy next to me can get his Ebony ready. I've had the races so I know that for a fact ;-)

As to ruggedness, clearly appearances are deceiving, at least in this case. My Toho has taken a beating -- it's only home is my backpack, and it lives for the trail and stream. It's at least as rugged as any wooden field camera, and it won't shatter if you drop it. Interestingly to me at least is that it's a good deal more rigid when locked down than many (most?) wood field cameras.

jeroldharter
10-Jul-2009, 10:09
Keep it simple and cheap. Get the Toyo CF. The back is changeable from horizontal to vertical fro portraits. You can go from 90 - 400 mm with flat lens boards. The lens boards are small, interchangeable with Canham (which are cheaper). It folds into a nice package. A small lens can be attached while folded (I'm not sure of the exact list). It is lighter than all but the Toho but I think it is more easily carried in a variety of packs because of its "brick" shape. They are inexpensive new, so buy a new one and enjoy it.

No matter which camera you get, you will want another so the Toyo will be easily sold to someone else.

wfwhitaker
11-Jul-2009, 08:35
Any thoughts on what would be a better choice? Or any other camera that someone could recommend for my particular needs?

Dear C,

My first LF camera was a Wista 45DX. It was a very capable camera within its limitations and served me well. No regrets. It or a Tachihara or similar would be a good choice. They're light, travel easily and are easy to use. They're pretty, too.

No one camera will do everything. It's always a set of compromises. Consider your budget and your goals and remember that you can always get a different camera later. And you probably will. But get something and get started. Good luck!

Brian Ellis
11-Jul-2009, 11:56
Wow, use even the mildest of derogatory terms like "quirky" in connection with a Toho camera and its owners leap to its defense. : - )

Bruce asked what I meant by "quirky." I had two things in mind: the way you have to switch the back from horizontal to vertical orientation - which as I understand it involves removing not just the back as with most LF field cameras but the entire bellows and frame, rotating them to the desired position, and then reinstalling them on the camera - and the round lensboards. Not that there's anything wrong with round lens boards, just that they're very unusual (maybe even "quirky?").

None of this is or was intended as a major criticism of the Toho. It just seemed to me that a first-time user like the OP, who says he does landscapes and portraits and so who will be presumably switching the orientation of the back around quite a bit, might be better served at first by a more conventional camera.

Matus Kalisky
11-Jul-2009, 13:39
Hi, for landscape any camera will do and for portrait as well - though there it depends on the type of portraits you want to use and also partially on the lenses.

I have since 3 years a Tachihara 4x5 - one of the lightest field cameras. It packs small and it handles any landscape photography you throw at it - though it is limited for long lenses, as the bellows is only 330 mm (about 13") long.

If you want to use some really wide lenses - be sure that the camera you choose can safely (= with movements) accommodate them or it offers the bag bellows.

If you want to do tight head (and shoulders) portraits you may need (especially when using longer lenses) more bellows. Also if you want to use some faster and longer lenses - what generally means quite heavy ones - you also want camera that is able to support them (Tachi would not be the best option).

And one more point - should you consider doing some close up (say 1:2 or more) photography - the focusing with front standard only will make your life much harder. There you definitely want camera that offers also rear standard focusing. Just few day ago I tried to do some table-top photography (some cafe cups, etc) and had a hard time to get the focus there where I wanted with the enlargement factor as I wanted.

Bruce Watson
11-Jul-2009, 13:41
Wow, use even the mildest of derogatory terms like "quirky" in connection with a Toho camera and its owners leap to its defense. : - )

You make derogatory comments about a camera with which you freely admit you have no working experience, then act surprised when people who do have actual working experience with the camera disagree?

You've been around on this forum for quite a while; I find it difficult to believe you are surprised by this.

ki6mf
11-Jul-2009, 13:55
I have a Shen Hao and the field cameras don't quite have the movements of the view cameras that said the Chamonix and Shen Hao are the most popular field cameras. You rarely see them used on E Bay or the used equipment dealers. I always thought the Toho field camera was equivalent to the wooden field cameras. I have heard that some of the knobs can become stripped requiring replacement (this is only a rumor I have no personal experience). With any of these you will be satisfied. I do tend to like the lighter weight cameras for the comfort factor!

John Kasaian
11-Jul-2009, 17:26
Dear C,

My first LF camera was a Wista 45DX. It was a very capable camera within its limitations and served me well. No regrets. It or a Tachihara or similar would be a good choice. They're light, travel easily and are easy to use. They're pretty, too.

No one camera will do everything. It's always a set of compromises. Consider your budget and your goals and remember that you can always get a different camera later. And you probably will. But get something and get started. Good luck!

Wise words. The important thing is to get out there and start shooting. You'll learn what it is you really want by doing just that.

Leonard Evens
13-Jul-2009, 09:59
Wow, use even the mildest of derogatory terms like "quirky" in connection with a Toho camera and its owners leap to its defense. : - )

Bruce asked what I meant by "quirky." I had two things in mind: the way you have to switch the back from horizontal to vertical orientation - which as I understand it involves removing not just the back as with most LF field cameras but the entire bellows and frame, rotating them to the desired position, and then reinstalling them on the camera - and the round lensboards. Not that there's anything wrong with round lens boards, just that they're very unusual (maybe even "quirky?").

None of this is or was intended as a major criticism of the Toho. It just seemed to me that a first-time user like the OP, who says he does landscapes and portraits and so who will be presumably switching the orientation of the back around quite a bit, might be better served at first by a more conventional camera.

It is important that he know just what he may encounter because of `quirks'. Unless you are specific, he can't tell if they will be important to him or not.

It is true that to change from portrait to landscape, you do have to remove the bellows-standard assembly from the rail and put it back in the desired orientation. The rail remains in place. But, as I said, that takes me about 30 seconds. Taking off a back and putting it back on probably takes 15 seconds, so there is not all that much difference. The rail remains on the tripod., and the positions of the standards vis-a-vis the rail remain the same, as do tilts or swings, so you don't have to do much refocusing. You would probably have to change rise/fall or shifts, but you would have to do that anyway.

It is true that you might possibly have to rotate the lensboard, but I always place mine at a 45 degree angle to the horizontal and vertical, and it effectively it remains that way after a 90 degree turn. Making adjustments with the circular lensboard is very simple, and moreover, it gives you much more freedom in choosing the orientation of the lens. With a square lensboard, you have to loosen the lens on the lensboard to adjust it if you need to make a slight change.

This may sound like quite a lot for a newcomer to learn, but I learned it as a newcomer very quickly. I admit it may take an hour longer to learn how to assemble the camera than it would with a folding camera, but that is compensated for by the fact that it is so light and transports easily. I was able to carry my camera and three lenses---one on the front standard---together with an exposure meter and a few other extras in a backpack designed for 35 mm equipment. The film holders I carried in an insulated lunch bag and the tripod I slung over my shoulder. I have participated in outings with others, and the amount I carried was clearly less than that of anyone else.

Weight and ease of transport seemed to be an issue for him. It might well be that when he understands just what is involved that he will decide that the advantages of the Toho in this regard outweigh any advantages a folding filed camera in the same price range might offer. It is also true that being a monrail, one has a greater range both on the short side and the long side than some simple wooden field cameras.

Finally, let me say that a beginner should how to make and use a viewing frame, perhaps even before getting the camera. I did. It is absolutely basic. Not only does it allow you to decide between portrait and landscape orientation, it, more important, helps you decide where to put your tripod before you even set up the camera.

Brian Ellis
13-Jul-2009, 13:43
You make derogatory comments about a camera with which you freely admit you have no working experience, then act surprised when people who do have actual working experience with the camera disagree?

You've been around on this forum for quite a while; I find it difficult to believe you are surprised by this.

No Bruce, I wasn't surprised. It's a normal, and I thought well-understood, practice when posting messages on the internet to indicate that a statement is made in fun or jest by use of this symbol: : - ) If you look at the sentence of mine that has provoked your response, you'll see that it's followed by such a symbol.

Brian Ellis
13-Jul-2009, 13:48
It is important that he know just what he may encounter because of `quirks'. Unless you are specific, he can't tell if they will be important to him or not.

It is true that to change from portrait to landscape, you do have to remove the bellows-standard assembly from the rail and put it back in the desired orientation. The rail remains in place. But, as I said, that takes me about 30 seconds. Taking off a back and putting it back on probably takes 15 seconds, so there is not all that much difference. The rail remains on the tripod., and the positions of the standards vis-a-vis the rail remain the same, as do tilts or swings, so you don't have to do much refocusing. You would probably have to change rise/fall or shifts, but you would have to do that anyway.

It is true that you might possibly have to rotate the lensboard, but I always place mine at a 45 degree angle to the horizontal and vertical, and it effectively it remains that way after a 90 degree turn. Making adjustments with the circular lensboard is very simple, and moreover, it gives you much more freedom in choosing the orientation of the lens. With a square lensboard, you have to loosen the lens on the lensboard to adjust it if you need to make a slight change.

This may sound like quite a lot for a newcomer to learn, but I learned it as a newcomer very quickly. I admit it may take an hour longer to learn how to assemble the camera than it would with a folding camera, but that is compensated for by the fact that it is so light and transports easily. I was able to carry my camera and three lenses---one on the front standard---together with an exposure meter and a few other extras in a backpack designed for 35 mm equipment. The film holders I carried in an insulated lunch bag and the tripod I slung over my shoulder. I have participated in outings with others, and the amount I carried was clearly less than that of anyone else.

Weight and ease of transport seemed to be an issue for him. It might well be that when he understands just what is involved that he will decide that the advantages of the Toho in this regard outweigh any advantages a folding filed camera in the same price range might offer. It is also true that being a monrail, one has a greater range both on the short side and the long side than some simple wooden field cameras.

Finally, let me say that a beginner should how to make and use a viewing frame, perhaps even before getting the camera. I did. It is absolutely basic. Not only does it allow you to decide between portrait and landscape orientation, it, more important, helps you decide where to put your tripod before you even set up the camera.

Since I said that the Toho was a "perfectly fine camera" and pointed out one of its major advantages (light weight), and since I acknowledged that I had never used one and that someone who had would know more about it than I do, I didn't find it necessary to go into any great detail about the aspects of the Toho that I consider "quirky." I wasn't reviewing the camera, I was responding to someone who asked for opinions about an appropriate first LF camera and I gave him mine.

Mike Tuomey
14-Jul-2009, 15:40
i'm a noob myself, so maybe my experience at camera acquisition will be helpful. it took five tries to get a working camera: three tries at a view camera (2 horseman LE's, a toyo G) and two tries at a field camera (chamonix 45 and finally an ebony rw45). i resorted to keh for the ebony after the first four luckless attempts. i paid more than my budget, but the ebony proved to be a solid working camera.

the lesson learned is (1) eBay seems not to be a good place to buy LF cameras; (2) Hugo Zhang stands wonderfully behind the Chamonix brand; (3) buy from truly known reputable sellers. Last and most important, don't give up :)

i make do with a ball-head tripod, an on-hand meter, a tee-shirt for a darkcloth, a few holders, and a simple pack i had handy to carry it all. now i'm shooting, practicing with the camera, and feel that's what's important.

realistically i don't know enough to discern the benefits and disadvantages of one camera over another for my needs. i'm learning. in that sense, i think that once you land in the vicinity of the wistas, shen haos, chamonixes, tachiharas, etc, the particular brand doesn't matter much versus getting out with one or the other and shooting. maybe in six or twelve months, depending on how much practice i can manage, the subtleties will surface for me.

I think John and others are right. You need experience to judge a camera for yourself. But you can't get experience without a camera. So just get one, any one from the recommended list, and you're off ...

Samuel Burns Landsacape P
15-Jul-2009, 00:07
I have backpacked around the USA with a Shen Hao setup, in the same bag I carried an old Canon digital slr (10d) for fleeting shots. Personally I found the Shen Hao to be a really impressive camera for the money, nice usable range of movements and quite light.

They are reasonably priced new but if you could pick one up second hand I don't think you would have anything to complain about...

I would highly recommend them as a first LF or a back up/kick around camera.

Cheers.