Horseman L or Sinar F

[Ricardo Maydana]

Hello which should Sinar F of Horseman L
Which of the two camera should be in price and movements.

Gente cual de estos dos equipo conviene Sianr F o horseman L.

Espero sus comentarios

[Ed Richards]

They both have more movements than any lens for 4x5. The Sinar is much lighter and a little more compact, and there are lots of Sinar accessories.

[Joseph Dickerson]

Ricardo,

The Horseman-great in studio with some possibilities for field work.
The Sinar (F1/F2)-great in field with some possibilities for studio work.

Joe Dickerson

[Lachlan 717]

I'm changing to a field camera from a Horseman as the rail camera systems a) take too long to set up and b) weight too much.

If you're not going to take this system outdoors, go the cheaper option and put the saving into your glass

If you're going into the outdoors, look at another system (i.e. A field camera)

Lachlan

[Ricardo Maydana]

They both have more movements than any lens for 4x5. The Sinar is much lighter and a little more compact, and there are lots of Sinar accessories.

Gracias por tu respuesta, si tuvieras que elegir lente para paisajes y retrato que lente es la opción.

Thanks for your answer, if you had to choose lens for landscapes and portraits, what would it take:confused:

[Ricardo Maydana]

Gracias / Thanks.

[Chuck P.]

I have a Horseman LE and use it in the field quite easily, but I guess it's all a matter of what one is looking for.

[Joseph Dickerson]

Ricardo,

If I were doing large format portraits I'd use the Sinar F1/F2 or Horseman. Either is great. But for landscapes I'd rather have a field camera.

With the Sinar it's useable for both. The Horseman is a great camera, I had an LE, and loved it. But too bulky and heavy for regular field use, at least for me.

You may eventually end up with both a monorail and a field camera as many of us have. With the correct lens board adapter you can use your lenses on both cameras and have the best of both worlds.

If you're only going to get one though, the Sinar is hard to beat.

Joe D.

[Ricardo Maydana]

Ricardo,

If I were doing large format portraits I'd use the Sinar F1/F2 or Horseman. Either is great. But for landscapes I'd rather have a field camera.

With the Sinar it's useable for both. The Horseman is a great camera, I had an LE, and loved it. But too bulky and heavy for regular field use, at least for me.

You may eventually end up with both a monorail and a field camera as many of us have. With the correct lens board adapter you can use your lenses on both cameras and have the best of both worlds.

If you're only going to get one though, the Sinar is hard to beat.

Joe D.

Joe.

My experience is with 35 and 120. what kind of lens is recommended to start.

I live in Paraguay, one from here is difficult to get lens for the 4x5 and two 4x5 is not at all widespread.

[Chuck P.]

When I made my decision to move to 4x5, I found this article very helpful and I have not regretted it since-----I did not want to have more than one 4x5 camera system. With the LE, I have one system that suits both field and indoor applications for me; however, my primary use is in the field.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/mono-field.html

[Richard Raymond]

Senior,
I have a number of mono-rail cameras that I use, studio and field. First, for me, is that they are MUCH less expensive than field cameras. I have a Horseman LS, a Sinar F2 and a Cambo NX that I regularly take to the field. The Horseman is the heaviest but only by about a kilogram. I am using these on hikes of up to about 20 kilometers at altitudes often from 2,000 to 3,500 meters. As a percentage of the overall total backpack weight the camera weight is not that significant, just bulky. The least expensive of these cameras is the Cambo NX which is light and frequently used in the field. In general, I prefer the Sinar F2 in the field because of the short rail (30cm) that can be easily extended for use with longer lenses which I personally favor but that is my "vision".
One lens for 4x5? I would recommend a 210mm lens. This lens will be the most useful in both landscape and studio work. For landscape you will find it a little narrow in view but one can concentrate on detail, mountains and flowers, etc. rather than sweeping vistas. You could add a second lens (90mm) later as money or interest allow. The 210mm is also very useful in the studio and can even be used for some portrait work. For my vision a 150mm would be a little too wide for portraits.
Personal recommendation for someone moving up to 4x5 work is to do it in the least expensive manner. I would recommend that you seriously look at any Cambo NX system currently selling for less than $200. US. I would use the money saved ($200 to $600 depending on Horseman or Sinar system) to buy a two lens system of a 90mm and a 210mm lens. The Cambo will be adequate for both studio and landscape. It is a widely available system so parts or selling the camera later will be easy.
Best regards,
Ric

[rdenney]

I agree with everything Richard wrote with only a couple of warnings: The Calumet 45NX (which is just a rebadged Cambo SC) is bulkier than the Sinar even if it's not heavier, and it will not happily accommodate really short lenses.

For portraiture, neither of these are at issue. And for landscapes, only a few of us really go for ultra-wide lenses so it probably won't be an issue there, either. I favor either the Cambo/Calumet or the Sinar simply because there are so many bits for both of these systems available on ebay for cheap.

The Sinar is definitely a better-made camera with some really nice features, but the Calumet is completely competent and I used one happily for a couple of decades.

I packed my Calumet in a Kelty external-frame backpack, and with a couple of lenses 10 film holders, spot meter, loupe, dark cloth, Polaroid holder (heavy!), a tripod strapped across the underside, and a couple of water bottles, it weighed about 45 pounds. (I was more fit in those days.) I reshaped the top of the pack to allow the camera standards to be dropped in top-down, with the monorail poking out to either side under the top flap.

For less remote situations, I carried the Calumet in its hard case on a fold-up luggage cart.

It is not as portable as a field camera, but it's much cheaper and more flexible, and it can be managed in the field. The modularity of these cameras provides real advantages if you want to make one camera do it all.

Regarding lenses, I also agree with the recommendation to start with a 210, and then add a wide. But 90 may be too wide, depending on your vision. At 60% of the film diagonal, the 90 is about the equivalent of a 45 on medium format or 24 on 35mm. If you want something a little less wide, there are also really excellent choices in the 120mm range. Any of the older f/8 wide-angle lenses (Super Angulons, for example) at either focal length will be relatively cheap and still quite excellent.

For the 210, if you want primarily to do portraits, there are a zillion options. I have a 210 Caltar that is really a Rodenstock APO-Sironar-N, and a 8-1/2" Ilex Paragon f/4.5 of Tessar design that is fast enough to provide plenty of "character" when you want it. They each provide their own look, and both are excellent. Both were also quite affordable at $200 or less.

Rick "still a monorail fan" Denney

[Richard Raymond]

Richard Denny is very correct about the Cambo and short lenses. On the rail length: the standard rail is around 50cm (20 inches) I think. Using this with a lens like a 90mm or a 125mm puts the back end of the rail firmly in ones chest. Very awkward (and sometimes painful). There is a shorter 25cm or one can be made from a square piece of aluminum rail cut to any length you prefer. But still this short rail ends up a little too short for the longer lenses. Also, Richard Denny is correct about the 90mm. It is my bias as I use a 24mm on 35mm film cameras and 50mm on my Mamiya 6x7 so I have a preference for a wide look at the short end. All of this equipment is a compromise of some sort. Somehow I have grown accustomed to the equipment and have found ways to capture the photos I was trying to take without letting the limitations of the camera get in the way. Good luck with your search. I would be interested in seeing some of your photos of your country.
Best regards,
Ric

[Ricardo Maydana]

Raymond and Denny
Thank you all for the comments, and considering the comment will review the possibilities and I have offered my sin plauble Profi. On the other hand I was watching sinar A1. without abandoning your comments I think that between these two chambers is my choice. Only the accessories are hard to get Plaubel the opposite happens with the sinar that many accessories. I agree about the 210 mm lens and a 120 mm

Photos - I have pictures on 35mm would share, just remains to be seen where you can publish in this photo published on WWW'm not very good.

Saludos
Ricardo Maydana

[Lachlan 717]

Ricardo,

I'm getting a new camera made at the moment. Briefly, it is a 4x5 wooden field camera that accapts Sinar bellows. As such, it will also accept Sinar's auto shutter. If you don't know about these, they are a shutter that replaces one mounted on in the lens. Thus, you can use regular lenses (with a Copal etc shutter) or barrel lenses (old brass etc)

If you are interested, it will accept Sinar lens
boards. It will have bellows range from 70-360mm. It will not be a folding camera. It will have full front and rear movements.

And, importantly, it's costing me under US$750. New.

Let me know if you'd like to see some photos when it's finished.

Lachlan.

[Richard Raymond]

Ricardo,
Thanks for the information. I think that you will like the Sinar A1. It is a fine camera and part of a widely used system. As you mentioned, accessories are much more available for this camera than for the Plaubel. Also, remember that many of the Horseman accessories will work on the Sinar. Please keep us informed of your work and let me know if there is anything that I can do to help.
Best regards,
Ric

[luis moreno]

Hola Ricardo.

Creo que para paisaje va mejor un angular y para retrato un tele. Si solo se puede elegir un objetivo, yo elegiría un 150mm. Tiene un ángulo más ancho que un 210, lo cual va bien para paisaje y extendiendo el fuelle puedes hacer retratos.

En cuanto a la cámara, elegiría la más fácil de transportar y montar. Creo que en esto la Sinar es superior a la Horseman.

Con la Sinar tienes un montón de accesorios en ebay a buen precio y puedes acceder al 8x10 con facilidad. De la Horseman no te puedo hablar.

Si estás abierto a otras posibilidades, te recomendaría, para los usos que le vas a dar, una Linhof Technika. Durísima y muy rápida de abrir y cerrar. Muy bien para transportar al exterior y con un fuelle largísimo para retrato.

Un saludo. Espero haberte ayudado. Si necesitas algo, pregunta.

[msk2193]

Ricardo,

Para uso en el campo, depende el angulo de las fotos que prefieres. Un lente de 75 te va dar un angulo bien amplio y uno de 250 algo mas al rededor de un 90 en 35mm. Yo tengo un 75, 150, 210, y estoy buscando algo entre 310 y 400 para captar montanas y lagos en la distancia.
Saludos.

[Ricardo Maydana]

Luis, desde ya muchas gracias por los comentarios, solo que desde Paraguay es muy difícil de acceder a elementos para cámaras placa, por lo de la decisión coincido que la cámara de campo es la opción adecuada y si es una linhof technika mejor, sea III o IV.

El costo de una cámara linhof es elevado. Como comentaba y después de haber evaluado los comentarios he descartado la hoserman, y enfocar esfurzo por una Sinar, sea F o como comentaba hay dos opciones una Sinar A o bien una Plaubel Peco ambas 4x5. Vere que camino tomo

Sinar A
Sinar F
Plauble Peco Profia

Luis, and thank you very much for the comments, only that since Paraguay is very difficult to access elements for 4x5 camera, so I agree that the decision field camera is the right choice and if a Linhof technika best, whether III or IV. The cost of a Linhof camera is high.
As commented and after evaluating the comments I have no considerate the hoserman and focus a Sinar, either F or as said there are two options a or a Sinar A Peco Plaubel both 4x5.