Sinar F2 Too Heavy For Field Work

[JustinB]

Hey all, I have had my Sinar F2 (4"x5") for the better part of 6 months now and I find I get frustrated trying to drag it out through NYC to shoot. At this point I am not sure what to do to replace it, because the weight is most of the annoyance for me. Once I finally get it set up on a trtipod I find it a joy to photograph with large format cameras, and playing with schleimpflug is (if amateur) fun.

My question is pretty simple I think. Should I be looking at a field camera (doesn't Shen Hao have something compatible with all the Sinar boards/etc.) or will that still be quite heavy and perhaps I should be looking at something like a Hasselblad ArcBody or Flexbody instead?

For understanding I did get a photobackpacker pack based on the Kelty Redwing, no complaints about it, just wanted to note that I am trying to lug things around with the right pack.

Thank You All,
Justin

[Jeremy Graves]

I used to borrow a Sinar F2 in college for field work and had the same complaint about the weight and bulk. My Sinar was in the hard sided suitcase with modular foam padding.

After college I decided to go with a Shen Hao which takes Wista style lensboards. I like the camera for the size and weight but the precision isn't what your used to with the Sinar. I shoot a fair amount of architecture and find the movements and bellows extension limiting for what I need. Front rise is roughly half what I could get on the Sinar. Bellows draw on the Shen Hao is only 12 inches on a flat board.

If you have a chance to borrow a camera before buying one that would give you a good sense of what your giving up by trading the F2.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Camera choice is to me secondary to lens choice and subject matter. What lenses do you have and/or expect yourself to be using, and what do you shoot?

If it's architecture, for instance, it'd be tough to improve upon a monorail with a bag bellows for wide-angle use.

[Frank Petronio]

Some people can tolerate going from a tight, rigid camera to a flimsy, wobbly one in order to save weight. But to get tight, rigid AND compact and light you end up compromising something... lots of people like their Chamonix ($800) and Ebony ($2500+) cameras as being robust wooden cameras. But you can go too light, like a Tachihari, and find it discomfortingly flexible (no offense to owners, it is only my opinion of course).

There is no free lunch, a Sinar F really isn't that heavy but it can be a bit bulky. You can get more compact with a good metal Wista/Toyo/Linhof but they don't save you much weight. Cameras like the Linhof Technikardan, Arca F-line and Toyo VX are pretty nice ~ but mucho $$$.

The best value is probably to keep the F for complex work and to get something like a Crown Graphic to beat around town in - they are rugged, compact, inexpensive - they just don't a lot of movements. But you can own both a Crown and a Sinar F for $500-$600 and that is pretty sweet.

[john biskupski]

If you want a reasonable range of movements and longer bellows extension but without the weight, you could look at the Canham metal or wood cameras. Users don't describe them as flimsy or wobbly. Or an older Wisner Tech Field. The Graphic choice is very practical, but movements are very restricted. Another idea is a Horseman 45FA, very light, metal, precise, but limited bellows and range of movements. As said above in earlier post, you are into compromises here.

[Doremus Scudder]

With all due respect to Frank and others, I'll unreservedly recommend a smaller wooden field camera. A Wista DX, a Woodman, a Shen Hao or the like are small, compact and lightweight and can be used with most lenses and in most situations. I carry mine (I have Wistas, and a Woodman) all over cities in Europe and on extended wilderness trips and lots of day hikes in the U.S. I have lenses from 75mm to 300 and use them all just fine (the 300 has an extended lensboard).

That said, I would advise you not to get rid of your Sinar F. There are times when the flexibility and range of movements of a monorail camera are indispensable (I've got a couple of those too...). They are especially good for close-in architecture shots when lots of movements are needed and when doing close up work.

The largest problems with wooden folders is not their flimsiness (I've found most to be more than rugged and, as long as you don't manhandle them when actually shooting, they stay still and in position) but the lack of movements. Some of this you can get around by knowing a few tricks. For example, you can point the camera up and then tilt the front and rear standards to vertical to get extra rise. Pan and swing parallel to get extra shift, etc. But, at some point, you will run out of capability. If you find yourself doing this often, then it's back to the monorail or a move up to a more full-featured field camera. But then you get extra weight, exactly what you are trying to eliminate. I have a Zone VI Field Camera that is too heavy and bulky for most of my trips. Sure, it has front and rear standard focusing, much larger movements, and a 21" bellows, but I use those features seldom enough to make that camera my second choice unless I know I'm going to do a lot of long lens work (then I pack the 450mm lens along with the heavier camera and bite the bullet).

Again, keep the Sinar, get a cheap woodie and see how you like it. You can always resell it if you don't.

Best,

Doremus Scudder

[Frank Petronio]

I agree with Doremus, I only bash wooden cameras because of the classic newbie posts that come along about once a month from some starry-eyed digital convert who thinks they need to buy the best $5000 Ebony model right off the bat.

But rather, several people here are making the point not to sell your Sinar (after all, a Sinar F only sells for $300 these days) and instead to simply get an alternative camera for easier transport... the cheapest option is something like a Crown Graphic, progressing up through the range wooden and metal field cameras.

And since he is into architecture don't forget that he could consider nice wide 4x5 compacts like the CamboWide (Sinar Handy, etc.)

The nice thing is that with the internet market, it is easier to buy, try, and resell without losing very much money in the process.

Also, BTW, have you searched and found the threads about how to fold up a Sinar for compact carrying? Or tried using the 150mm short rail for a base? Sometimes the older smaller square plastic rail clamp is considered an advantage as well.

[Ken Lee]

Price - Portability - Useability... You get to pick 2 :)

[rdenney]

Here's my advice: Go buy a Cambo SC/Calumet 45NX, or even better, an old Calumet CC-400, and haul that guy around for a year or so. After that, the Sinar will seem compact and light.

Rick "but, yes, the Shen-Hao XPO is compatible with Sinar boards and bellows" Denney

[Linhof]

i use a small cart to carry sinar P8x10 to shoot my city...and enjoy the result. inside a city where transport means few dollars for a ride, i still shoot with 8x10" film. my lenses include 210 SA, 300,450 and 600mm

[rdenney]

More seriously, it is possible to drag along a Sinar in a wheeled case, and then the weight is no issue. Getting mugged might be an issue, but in places where that is likely, I'd rather bring one of two things: A Crown Graphic, or a bodyguard. Or both.

The Sinar packs into a case more efficiently than most monorails, and as efficiently as some field cameras.

Rick "who uses a rolling mobile office case for his Sinar" Denney

[Richard Mahoney]

Justin,


Hey all, I have had my Sinar F2 (4"x5") for the better part of 6 months now and I find I get frustrated trying to drag it out through NYC to shoot. At this point I am not sure what to do to replace it, because the weight is most of the annoyance for me. Once I finally get it set up on a trtipod I find it a joy to photograph with large format cameras ...

For me that's the critical bit ... what happens once one's camera's been set up. I haven't used a field camera but I am used to carrying around -- `transporting' -- a heavy, cold monorail. And yes, getting it into position is a pain, especially if one's short of time. ... But once it's set up then it's a pleasure, and often, I've found, a necessity. A couple of weeks ago was typical.

I was on the top of my truck trying to photograph the recently burnt out ruin of an old mill. The Land Rover was hard up against a temporary chain link fence with State Highway 1 a few inches to the other side. There were too many cars and trucks passing for me to feel comfortable standing behind the ground glass so I had to manipulate the beast and lock it down all from one side. I imagine that this would have been possible with a field camera but I can't imagine it being as convenient or quick. I just wanted to get the job done and to get back down. To me there's nothing more disconcerting than being buffeted around under the dark cloth by passing traffic ;)

Anyway, although monorails can be a bit of a performance, they can also come into their own, actually making things easier and faster -- once one's set up.


Best,

Richard

[David E. Rose]

For what it's worth, I had the same issue with the transportation of my F-2, along with several lenses mounted the large Sinar boards. My solution was to keep the F-2 for assignments and situations that require large movements, but to compliment the Sinar, I bought a Wista VX. As someone mentioned, it does not weigh a lot less than the Sinar (6lbs vs. 8lbs?), but it does close into a compact box that is much easier to carry. The Wista can take a bag bellows and has geared rise on the lens standard (nice for architecture). The best thing is that I have mounted all most of my LF lenses to Wista/Technica boards, which are lighter, smaller and cheaper than Sinar boards, further decreasing the size and weight of the kit. The Wista boards can also be used with the Sinar via a Sinar/Technica adaptor board, so even the Sinar kit can be lighter and smaller due to the Wista boards.

[tgtaylor]

i use a small cart to carry sinar P8x10 to shoot my city...and enjoy the result. inside a city where transport means few dollars for a ride, i still shoot with 8x10" film. my lenses include 210 SA, 300,450 and 600mm

I second that idea.

I purchased an inexpensive ($35) collapsible 2-wheel dolly from WalMart that I use to wheel my 4x5 Toyo ROBOS (12lbs) around town in. The ROBOS is in it's factory-fitted case which will also hold 3 - 4 lens, spot-meter, loupe, filters, cable release, focusing cloth...etc. The tripod (either an Manfrotto 475B with 329RC4 geared head or Gitzo 1348G with Arca Swiss z1-sp ball-head) rides on top of the case and two bungee cords holds everything in place. I carry the film holders (up to 12) in two F64 film holder cases ($25 each new) that have straps for carrying over your shoulder or loops to attach to a belt or pack.

With the dollie I can walk around town all day with ease pushing the cart using 3 fingers on a hand (I have 5 on each). In fact, I'll even use the dollie when walking around town with my MF camera's or Toyo Field camera packed away in a Lowepro AW Trekker. You have to be careful to arrange the pack's straps so that they don't drag on the ground but it makes walking around a lot easier than carrying everything on your back. Plus I imagine that you're less noticeable pushing a cart that wearing a backpack with tripod attached.

If you need to catch a public transit ride, the dollie and its wheels collapse flat to carry and you can board a bus or subway train carrying the cart with one hand and the camera case with the other and sling the tripod over your shoulder. No place to sit? No problem, sit on the case.

In sum, I have found it a lot more confortable using a dollie to transport my gear in town than using a backpack.

Thomas

[Drew Wiley]

The f2 is hard to beat for a combination of portability and versatility. Wooden folders
are a slower to operate and nowhere near as convenient for things like architecture.
I also like the f2 for long lens work; I currently have a 28" bellows on it. What causes
the most weight is filmholders per se. Since I primarily shoot 8X10, I consider my f2 a
lightweight camera! But for airline travel or longer backpacks into the mtns, I supplemented my gear with a little Ebony RW45, which will handle up to a 360mm lens
without a tophat board. I have no regrets spending extra for an Ebony. But no way any small wooden camera is going to survive the abuse the Sinar has received over the
years - stuff wears out, but then you just purchase a replacement component and its
fixed almost instantly.

[Brian Ellis]

Yes, you should go to a field camera. As I've said before, in my years here I don't think I've ever heard anyone who works outside a studio say they wanted to switch from a field camera to a monorail because they wanted to use a heavier, more cumbersome, less portable camera. But I've seen at least a hundred posts from people who work in the field and want to switch from a monorail to a field camera. Contrary to what some here claim, all field cameras are not flimsy or wobbly and it's unfortunate that they pass that misinformation on to people who have never used a LF camera before.

[venchka]

Jogging stroller.

http://www.amazon.com/Joggers-Strollers/b?ie=UTF8&node=166846011

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41hc24ljAOL._AA300_.jpg

[Frank Petronio]

Have you ever used a good monorail Brian? I know you've had Technikas, Ebonies, and a Chamonix but didn't you go back to a heavier metal Technika in the end?

Nobody is arguing that a Chamonix or Ebony or any of the quality wooden cameras won't get the job done. It's the perception that they are the only way to go that is the misinformation... and I'll stand by my claim that a good monorail is far simpler and faster for someone who uses camera movements -- you can see what you're doing and there are no limitations other than your lens's coverage.

A $300 Sinar F is stronger/steadier than a $$$$ Ebony.

And the lightest, most compact 4x5 cameras? They're monorails too, the Gowlands and Tohos....

[Drew Wiley]

Heck Brian, I've carried an f2 thousands of miles on foot over all kinds of terrain in all kinds of weather. It is a little more bulky than some folders but is also much faster to
operate; and since a monorail is easier to balance on a tripod, if you combine that kind
of wt factor to the equation, it probably comes out lighter than something like a Tecknika, which was considered by many as an ideal travel camera. Plus you can leave
any lens you wish on a Sinar and just extend the bellows and pop the lens cap. It's
built a lot tougher than my Ebony, and Ebony is as good as it gets in a folder. The
wt difference is only 5 lbs, and that's with the long bellows and extra extensions on the Sinar - enough to matter on long treks where every pound counts, but hardly a
significant factor on dayhikes or for urban use. I'll probably been out on some steep hills with the Sinar tomorrow, but only because I'm trying to conserve my 8x10 film for
a trip in a week or two.

[Noah A]

I thought I had found the perfect camera...a nice, small field camera that's still sturdy and precise. (A Wista 45VX, it'll be listed for sale soon.) But after using it for a while in urban situations I realized that it didn't have the flexibility I needed. Field cameras are very nice for many uses, but working in urban environments implies that architecture will be involved. And sometimes you may need more movements than a field camera allows.

I switched to a Technikardan, which folds like a field camera but operates like a monorail. And I don't think I could go back to a traditional field camera. The monorails are just so nice to use once they're set up. Something like the TK, an Arca Swiss or Toyo VX125 could suit you as they're monorails that are also compact. But alas they aren't cheap. The older TK (non-S) should be the cheapest of the three.

I can fit my camera, a few lenses and some film in a domke satchel, but more and more I've been using a Pelican 1510 case. It has wheels and I can stand on it when I want to get the camera higher. (It also locks and is great for travel, but you didn't mention that as a priority). I don't know if it would fit your Sinar kit, but perhaps some sort of wheeled case would work for you.

For me the choice comes down to what kind of work you are doing. Do you like to wander around aimlessly, explore the city and make some photos? Or are you scouting locations ahead of time, getting to know an area, then going out to shoot more deliberately? I'm not saying one kind of work is better, I enjoy both ways of working. But they call for different kits in my opinion.

If I wanted to wander around the city with lots of freedom and mobility, I'd probably go for a field camera and one or two lenses in a satchel bag. Otherwise I'd get a wheeled case for your Sinar.

[Drew Wiley]

Heck - those wheeled cases, armored suitcases, and even those foam-lined dedicated
camera packs are where the excess weight problem is! For years I wrapped my Sinar in a goosedown jacket and dropped it into an ordinary external frame backpack. Bubble wrap for the lenses. For day use, I now simply set the bellows part of the camera down into an ordinary office poly rectangular wastebasket which weighs only about a pound, with the rail resting on the top, then drop this into the top of the pack. It pulls out ready to use and is totally protected and comfortable to carry.

[Jeremy Moore]

You say you shoot in NYC, so why not go to B&H or similar store and check out what is available to put your hands on in the way of options? Or there are lots of LF photogs in NYC (check locations on these guys here on the forum with cameras you like to see if they live around you and email them if need be--I find this to be by far one of the best online communities around, subject-matter aside).

Hands-on experience with LF cameras is really key to deciding if you like the process as mediated by that specific design, imo.

[Drew Wiley]

Sinar "F" stands for "field" use. The camera was designed to easily fit into an ordinary
briefcase. That's how the older literature illustrated it. They would just detach one
end of the bellows, turn the standards sideways, and the whole thing would fit flat,
with room to spare for a meter, a couple lenses, etc. (no room for filmholders or tripod
however, which could be carried with a pouch and sling). Nowadays you could simply
use one of the larger lightwt laptop cases. But I personally prefer to carry the camera
fully assembled for quick operation. Yet even briefcase-style, it would set up faster
than the typical folder.

[Bill_1856]

you should at least look at a Busch Pressman for city use.

[Brian Ellis]

Have you ever used a good monorail Brian? I know you've had Technikas, Ebonies, and a Chamonix but didn't you go back to a heavier metal Technika in the end?

Nobody is arguing that a Chamonix or Ebony or any of the quality wooden cameras won't get the job done. It's the perception that they are the only way to go that is the misinformation... and I'll stand by my claim that a good monorail is far simpler and faster for someone who uses camera movements -- you can see what you're doing and there are no limitations other than your lens's coverage.

A $300 Sinar F is stronger/steadier than a $$$$ Ebony.

And the lightest, most compact 4x5 cameras? They're monorails too, the Gowlands and Tohos....

I use my cameras to make photographs, I don't enter them in contests to determine which type or brand is the strongest or the steadiest. So whether a Sinar F is "stronger/steadier" than an Ebony is immaterial to me. The Ebonys and every other brand of field camera I've ever owned were more than adequately strong and steady for the kind of photography I do.

My last 4x5 camera was a wood Chamonix, not a Technika, though the two Technikas I've owned were my favorite field cameras.

I've never owned a monorail and never intend to. I've watched too many people struggle to carry them around, set them up in the field, then take them down and repack them to ever want to go through all that when I don't have to in order to do the kind of photography that I do.

I doubt very much that I've ever said that field cameras are the "only way to go." I think a field camera is the best way to go for general purpose photography in the field and I believe that's how I've usually expressed it - as an opinion or personal preference. I do think that the many threads in this forum over the years started by people like the OP in this one indicate that my opinion is correct for many (not all) people but it is an opinion and I think I've usually stated it that way.

I have no problem with your preferences or your opinions if they're expressed as opinions rather than fact but that's often not the case. I do have a problem with your disparagement of wood field cameras by the use of terms such as "flimsy" and "wobbly" in response to newbies' questions because you're passing on as fact what is at best an over-generalization to people who don't know any better. I've owned around 12 different wood field cameras ranging from 4x5s to 8x10s. None were "flimsy" or "wobbly."

[JustinB]

Camera choice is to me secondary to lens choice and subject matter. What lenses do you have and/or expect yourself to be using, and what do you shoot?

If it's architecture, for instance, it'd be tough to improve upon a monorail with a bag bellows for wide-angle use.

I shoot whatever catches my eye. Right now I have a 210 and a 150 and I will likely get a 90 at some point this year for even wider views. In a city as full as this one is (of architecture) I do definitely expect to be photographing buildings, bridges and other man made constructions.

[JustinB]

Also, BTW, have you searched and found the threads about how to fold up a Sinar for compact carrying? Or tried using the 150mm short rail for a base? Sometimes the older smaller square plastic rail clamp is considered an advantage as well.

I'm not sure what the "right" way is, but I did get the gentleman from Photobackpacker to make me a custom holder for the F2. it essentially sits at the bottom of the backpack with the two standards in the holder and the rail sticking out and across the width of the back. I keep the 12" rail on the standards and have a 6" extension.

Thoughts?

[rdenney]

...I've never owned a monorail and never intend to....

...I've owned around 12 different wood field cameras ranging from 4x5s to 8x10s. None were "flimsy" or "wobbly."...

Hmmm. You complain that Frank is leading young'uns astray by stating that all-metal high-end monorails are sturdier than wood field cameras, but you have not yourself actually made the comparison of which he speaks. He has.

He didn't say they were unusably flimsy. He said they were not as sturdy as high-quality all-metal monorail cameras. He also said they were more difficult to use in situations where lots of movements were needed, and not as intuitive as to what to do to effect those movements. And he said they were more expensive.

Field cameras are easy to set up with minimal movements. But my pictures always seem to need a careful combination of swings and tilts, and it sure is easier to visualize what those need to be when the orientation of the lens and film planes is so easy to see and adjust independently.

You also base your argument on the preponderance of people who have added a field camera to their fleet compared to those who have added a monorail to their fleet. But I'm not sure that is persuasive to me. Given the relative prices, monorails are usually in one's possession before they consider a field camera. I'll bet that there have been lots of photographers who moved to a monorail after a press camera (which is a field camera without as many movements, but even easier to use). Even cheapie field cameras in the current market cost more than formerly high-end monorail cameras that are being dumped out of professional situations. For those whose desire is to spend money on toys (and that certainly applies to me at least to some extent), the natural progression in large format is press, monorail, field, just because of the price and the perceived beauty of the camera. Or they go orthogonally to larger formats. Or both. That doesn't mean one is better than the other with respect to any given set of requirements.

I am tempted to buy a Shen-Hao XPO, just because I want one. Would it be lighter? Not appreciably. I might save two or three pounds on a kit that weighs 10 or 15 times that. Would I be able to slam in that really heavy Sinar Vario roll-film holder the way I can with my F? Bet not. Maybe I could with an Ebony, maybe not, but it's ten times what I paid for the F so I'm unlikely to put it to the test. The real advantage is the smaller packing space, but once one finds a solution to that whatever their camera, they stop asking the question until their requirements change for whatever reason. I have a solution I like. But I'm still attracted to that XPO. I don't pretend, however, that it is anything more than a toy attraction, given my requirements and approach.

Rick "wondering why there is always so much heat in these discussions" Denney

[rdenney]

I'm not sure what the "right" way is, but I did get the gentleman from Photobackpacker to make me a custom holder for the F2. it essentially sits at the bottom of the backpack with the two standards in the holder and the rail sticking out and across the width of the back. I keep the 12" rail on the standards and have a 6" extension.

Thoughts?

Only positive thoughts. Could you show a picture of how that works with your camera?

Rick "not always in situations where wheels work" Denney

[JustinB]

http://justinbermanphotography.com/justin/_JMB0725.jpg

You can see the camera body at the bottom, case for two lenses above it, the tripod mount is detached for convenience (i.e. it is a huge hassle to leave it attached and fasten the bottom buckle on the camera holder), the 6" rail is beside the camera body and my Blackjacket (sans bag which in a fit of natures anger, blew so far from me I have no idea where it resides) sits next to all the rest. I usually also store my lightmeter and focusing loupe wrapped up in the blackjacket.

[venchka]

Based on your photo, I don't think a field camera would pack and carry a whole lot differently. I will say that Drew's description of carry mode is different than yours. The Photobackpacker cases take up more room than other ways of carrying lenses.
I have a similar sized backpack and carry: Linhof Technika 5, 3 lenses (125mm, 180mm & 250mm), ~15 holders (maybe a few more-n.t.s.), dark cloth, meter, level, filters, Leica M5 and 1-2 lenses if I really need to.
The Linhof is heavier than my Zone VI camera but occupies less space folded up. everything is a trade off.
I carry my 3 lenses in a fishpond large Sweetwater fly reel case. If I had smaller lenses I could probaly fit four in there. The Fujinon-W 250/6.3 is a big sucker. Like this...
http://www.fishpondusa.com/productpics/sweetwatermain5.jpg

[Noah A]

That's a pretty nice kit...how much does it actually weigh? It doesn't look all that heavy;) .

You might have to chalk some of this up to the cost of working with a large format camera. By the time you figure in the lenses, film holders, tripod, etc., the weight of the camera is often a small part of the load.

I've tried shooting urban landscapes and architecture with a field camera (and large-coverage lenses like the 115/6.8 and 90/4.5 grandagons) and it's not fun. At the very least with some field cameras it won't be possible to take full advantage of the coverage provided by the lenses. For landscape you may not need those movements, but for urban work you might.

Just suggesting that, unless you want to go very light to explore the city, you might just have to live with the weight.

I generally have avoided wheeled bags since often you can't use them (over stairs or rough terrain). But they can be fine for getting around a city. The insert of my Pelican case also fits an old non-photo backpack that I use for clothing on trips, so if I can't use the wheels I slip the pelican insert, gear and all, into the backpack.

[rdenney]

You can see the camera body at the bottom, case for two lenses above it, the tripod mount is detached for convenience (i.e. it is a huge hassle to leave it attached and fasten the bottom buckle on the camera holder), the 6" rail is beside the camera body and my Blackjacket (sans bag which in a fit of natures anger, blew so far from me I have no idea where it resides) sits next to all the rest. I usually also store my lightmeter and focusing loupe wrapped up in the blackjacket.

Here's mine in a mobile office I bought at Office Depot for about $90. Mine holds a lot. As pictured here, there is a Sinar F (I added an F2 front standard later--fits in the same spot), with a lens attached. The case-in-a-case at the bottom of the picture holds six lenses. Adjacent to that is a Fujiroid holder. The pocket on the front of the bag holds two roll film holders and a 6" rail extension. In the back of the bag, above the wheels, is a Pentax spot meter and a bellows with compendium clips. Sundries are in the top and film is in the outside pocket on the left. If I was carrying sheet film holders, they would go where the roll film holders are now, and also in the side pockets. Under the blackjacket (which I keep in its pouch) is a loupe and a few other bits.

The wheels are too small for trail stuff, but they would be fine in the city.

Rick "who used to carry a Cambo/Calumet in a Kelty external-frame pack with the 22" rail sticking out the sides" Denney

[Frank Petronio]

Brian is a straight shooter and a good guy, I don't want to irritate him. And to Brian's credit, in other threads I've been pretty blunt in stating that wooden field cameras are flimsy toys made of toothpick wood. And that people are influenced by a lot of peer pressure to buy the pretty wooden camera in favor of a more functional but utilitarian model. Same goes for lenses and other exotic semi-useful paraphernalia (expensive loupes and darkcloths), I call that stuff out for being silly, especially for beginners.

All of that is only partially true and I admit to being biased, misleading, deceptive, and even wrong on occasion. Almost everything I say is based on opinion and prejudice. I do have 28 years of large format photography experience, much of it professional or at a fairly high level... and thanks to eBay and the internet trading I've dabbled, owned, and experimented with 40-45 different view cameras simply because I think they're neat... so my biases are somewhat informed. But they're biased and subjective AND YOU SHOULDN'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ ON THE INTERNET ;-)

Back to the OP... that's a nice rig you got there. If you really want to drop the weight and size, you probably ought to follow the Kerry Thalman's advice on his website -- he reviews ultralight lenses and cameras like the Toho and he gets his stuff down to superlight backpacking size/weights. I don't have the link handy but Google it or someone else can post it. It's the Holy Grail of ultralight large-format.

It's tough though, because film holders and lenses really are the culprits. Now that the Quickloads and Readyloads are almost gone, using a Grafmatic or a 6x12 roll back is the next best thing. As for lenses, the small ones - with less coverage - run counter to your desire to shoot architecture....

[Drew Wiley]

There is sometimes a penalty for going ultralight. Wind is one of them. Couple weeks
ago I had my enitre Sinar plus the Ries maple tripod picked up by a sudden gust and turned into a kite while I digging a filmholder out of the pack. I landed about eight feet
away on a lupine bush all unharmed. But that kind of thing happens to me at least once a year. A more common problem with wind is vibration. The Sinar will take wind
a lot better than a Toho with its tiny diameter rail. My 4x5 Ebony and 8x10 Phillips folders are exceptional good in the wind, which was one of the priorities when I bought them. Lots of wonderful choices out there, but I'm strictly a user and not a camera collector, so just one each monorail and 4x5 folder for me. Maximum portability
means I take the Ebony; if architecture or a commercial shot, or exceptionally long lens
use are the priority, then I choose the Sinar.

[Brian Ellis]

Hmmm. You complain that Frank is leading young'uns astray by stating that all-metal high-end monorails are sturdier than wood field cameras, but you have not yourself actually made the comparison of which he speaks. He has.

That isn't at all what I said. I said that whether a Sinar F was more sturdy than an Ebony was immaterial to me. I also didn't say that statement was leading anyone astray. In fact I didn't even disagree with the statement. And since I didn't disagree with it, what difference does it make whether I've compared a Sinar F with an Ebony or not?

He didn't say they were unusably flimsy. He said they were not as sturdy as high-quality all-metal monorail cameras. He also said they were more difficult to use in situations where lots of movements were needed, and not as intuitive as to what to do to effect those movements. And he said they were more expensive.

I know he said those things, kind of. I didn't disagree with them. I did disagree with the statement that wood field cameras are flimsy. Some may be but I've owned many that weren't flimsy.

Field cameras are easy to set up with minimal movements. But my pictures always seem to need a careful combination of swings and tilts, and it sure is easier to visualize what those need to be when the orientation of the lens and film planes is so easy to see and adjust independently.

Cool

You also base your argument on the preponderance of people who have added a field camera to their fleet compared to those who have added a monorail to their fleet. But I'm not sure that is persuasive to me.

That wouldn't be persuasive to me either. But that's not what I said. I said that the number of people who come here and ask about switching from a monorail to a field camera - not "adding a field camera to their fleet" - supports my opinion

Given the relative prices, monorails are usually in one's possession before they consider a field camera. I'll bet that there have been lots of photographers who moved to a monorail after a press camera (which is a field camera without as many movements, but even easier to use). Even cheapie field cameras in the current market cost more than formerly high-end monorail cameras that are being dumped out of professional situations. For those whose desire is to spend money on toys (and that certainly applies to me at least to some extent), the natural progression in large format is press, monorail, field, just because of the price and the perceived beauty of the camera. Or they go orthogonally to larger formats. Or both. That doesn't mean one is better than the other with respect to any given set of requirements.

"Natural progression?" I've probably known at least 50 LF photographers well enough to know what equipment they own at any given time. Some started with press cameras, some with field cameras, some with monorails, some with hybrids (which is what I did, my first LF camera was a Linhof Technika). Some started with 4x5, some with 5x7, some jumped right into 8x10. Some stayed with press cameras. I don't think there's any "usual" progression or "natural progression" or "going orthogonally" when it come to large format photography. But if you think there is, fine.

I am tempted to buy a Shen-Hao XPO, just because I want one. Would it be lighter? Not appreciably. I might save two or three pounds on a kit that weighs 10 or 15 times that. Would I be able to slam in that really heavy Sinar Vario roll-film holder the way I can with my F? Bet not. Maybe I could with an Ebony, maybe not, but it's ten times what I paid for the F so I'm unlikely to put it to the test. The real advantage is the smaller packing space, but once one finds a solution to that whatever their camera, they stop asking the question until their requirements change for whatever reason. I have a solution I like. But I'm still attracted to that XPO. I don't pretend, however, that it is anything more than a toy attraction, given my requirements and approach.

Not sure of the relevance but that's cool.

Rick "wondering why there is always so much heat in these discussions" Denney

No heat on my part and I don't think any on Frank's either unless you consider a disagreement "heat." I disagreed with Frank, said why, made it clear it was just my opinion, said he was entitled to his opinions, etc. etc. Hopefully you won't find any "heat" in this one because there's certainly none intended.

[Frank Petronio]

Consider this barroom banter without the bar or fisticuffs... Brian and I both have over 6,000 posts, we might as well be kin. Ricky and Drew might be our kid nephews.

[Jeremy Moore]

I meant to just take some pictures of how I have my 2 4x5 field setups in small Think Tank bags, but it seemed easier to just sit on the floor and make a video. And then it just made more sense to post it on my blog. Here is an example of how one photographer travels lightly in the field:

http://www.jeremydmoore.com/2011/04/01/think-tank-urban-disguise-40-version-1-0-and-2-0-as-4x5-field-camera-bags/

[cdholden]

Price - Portability - Useability... You get to pick 2 :)

As my old boss used to say, "Bueno, Bonita y Barato... puede tener dos!"
Translated: "Good, Pretty and Cheap... you can have two!"

[Bob Kerner]

Sometimes I think we photographers spend too much time worrying about how to lug our crap around and not enough time using it. There is no perfect camera or camera bag.

I have a Sinar F and the camera itself is not significantly lighter than a folding camera, particularly a metal folder like a Toyo. Yes, it's bulkier. But when you factor in all the other stuff you need for LF work, the camera is not the problem. I can tell you that the F with all the necessary do-dads will fit into a Think Tank backpack or roller. If I were rambling around the city, I would skip trying to carry it on my back and go with a roller. You don't need to spend $300 on a Think Tank; a plain rolling overnight bag would work just as well. Once you unpack and set it up, why not leave it assembled and walk with it. Dip into the bag when you need your meter and film holders.

Since entering the LF field, I've acquired a wooden Wisner, the Sinar and a Crown. The Wisner is the least sturdy of the three and the moment I get free time I will sell it since I don't use it. It also (for me) is not as intuitive to use as the monorail. The Crown is bombproof but has limited movements; it might as well be a 4x5 point and shoot with a little rise and tilt.

Don't ditch the Sinar unless and until you've had a chance to try something else, including a cheap rolling bag.

[letchhausen]

I started out with a Tachihara and it was great for someone who doesn't own a car and carries everything in a backpack around town or in industrial areas. However it's technical limitations got reached and I found a Sinar F2 on ebay for a good price. However, I found it too heavy for field work, slow to get setup out of my current bag and most of all, not really something I could sling over my shoulder and run down to the next thing with. I loved the movements and it was joy while shooting but everything else was too much.

I found an Ebony SV45U used and borrowed money to pay for it and sold the Sinar (and some other things) to pay it back. I find the Ebony as rigid as the Sinar and has all the movements I want even when shooting architecture. I wouldn't go back that's for sure, the Ebony fits in my current pack and slings pretty easily for running down to the next thing. What I do miss is the smoothness of operation of that Sinar. Everything you did on that camera felt right and made sense. The Ebony's movements are fairly clunky in comparison, especially trading off those knobs as you extend or retract the camera bed. However, I can get up and moving on a field camera faster but some of that is that I had to pretty much disassemble the Sinar to get it to fit in the same bag.

I'm happy with my current rig and in the end it was the right choice.

[Richard Wasserman]

Just to prove that there is no one way to do these things, I use a Sinar Norma, which is not particularly petite. I simply leave it on the tripod, with a lens attached, wrap the darkcloth around it (a Harrison medium) and lash it to the front of a Sherpa Cart. This works well in urban areas, where I do most of my work, as well as more rugged ones. I can get the camera set up in about 30 seconds.

[rdenney]

No heat on my part and I don't think any on Frank's either unless you consider a disagreement "heat." I disagreed with Frank, said why, made it clear it was just my opinion, said he was entitled to his opinions, etc. etc. Hopefully you won't find any "heat" in this one because there's certainly none intended.

Cool.

Rick "yes, Uncle Frank" Denney

[tgtaylor]

Another way for urban street photography with a large camera would be to mount it on a tripod dolly and simply roll it around already set-up. See a picture? Simply lock the wheels, focus and shoot! Much easier than carrying an 8x10 camera and tripod over your shoulder like street photographer Joel Meyerowitz does in the last part of the film posted on another thread.

Not having to worry about all that weight bearing down on your shoulder leaves you mentally free and relaxed to scan the environment as you move thru it.

[rdenney]

As my old boss used to say, "Bueno, Bonita y Barato... puede tener dos!"
Translated: "Good, Pretty and Cheap... you can have two!"

There is a twist on this saying:

One can attain all three attributes with two cameras, pretty cheaply. A Sinar F and a Shen-Hao XPO, which share many interchangeable parts, wouldn't together make much of a dent into the budget required for a Technika or an Ebony.

Rick "it's a good time to be buying large format" Denney

[Frank Petronio]

Another way for urban street photography with a large camera would be to mount it on a tripod dolly and simply roll it around already set-up. See a picture? Simply lock the wheels, focus and shoot! Much easier than carrying an 8x10 camera and tripod over your shoulder like street photographer Joel Meyerowitz does in the last part of the film posted on another thread.

Not having to worry about all that weight bearing down on your shoulder leaves you mentally free and relaxed to scan the environment as you move thru it.

Ha that would be an awesome contraption in a Gyro Gearloose - Mad Bicycle sense, with big puffy wheels and chrome, with a horn and battery power....

[tgtaylor]

Ha that would be an awesome contraption in a Gyro Gearloose - Mad Bicycle sense, with big puffy wheels and chrome, with a horn and battery power....

Now we're cookin' with gas! That made me think of the possibility of mounting a camera and tripod onto the Power Chairs or Scooters that are regularly advertised on TV for those whose with challenged mobility. It seems to me that it wouldn't be difficult or expensive to mount a camera and its tripod on one of these. A focusing cloth fastened to the camera's back consisting of an American flag for the outer surface and black for the inner surface would be ideal - both picturesque and providing visibility for safety. Man you could cruise the city all day taking photographs and have a ton of fun too!

[Frank Petronio]

Don't forget the cupholder!

[tgtaylor]

or the stereo - gotta have your music while driving around!

[Darin Boville]

I shoot whatever catches my eye. Right now I have a 210 and a 150 and I will likely get a 90 at some point this year for even wider views. In a city as full as this one is (of architecture) I do definitely expect to be photographing buildings, bridges and other man made constructions.

Then it's easy. Keep the Sinar for when you need extreme movements. Keep in in the trunk when you go out, if driving, or at home at the ready if walking.

Buy a Toyo 45a and an adapter board for your Sinar to let you use Toyo boards on the Sinar. Convert all your boards over to the smaller Toyo.

The Toyo is not super light but will seem a lot more portable. If you are not shooting Architecture with a capital "A" then you might end up using the Toyo 90% of the time. A lighter version is the Graphic cameras (e.g. Crown Graphic, which are lighter and cheaper, just not quite as nice). Moving upscale is the Linhof Technika which is lovely but heavy, $$$$, and probably not what you want. Toyo = $600, Crown Graphic = $200, Linhof = $1000. Ballpark for all amounts. The Toyo is not a glam camera like some of the others but is a wonderful design from a usability perspective and well made.

Don't forget, if you buy it right you can always sell it with little to no loss as your needs become clearer.

--Darin

[David E. Rose]

Darin,
Similar to my thinking (see my previous post), but for architecture a bag bellows would be a good idea. I don't believe that the Toyo field cameras take a bag, the Wista and some wood field cameras do. This will become important if the OP gets into wider lenses.



Then it's easy. Keep the Sinar for when you need extreme movements. Keep in in the trunk when you go out, if driving, or at home at the ready if walking.

Buy a Toyo 45a and an adapter board for your Sinar to let you use Toyo boards on the Sinar. Convert all your boards over to the smaller Toyo.

The Toyo is not super light but will seem a lot more portable. If you are not shooting Architecture with a capital "A" then you might end up using the Toyo 90% of the time. A lighter version is the Graphic cameras (e.g. Crown Graphic, which are lighter and cheaper, just not quite as nice). Moving upscale is the Linhof Technika which is lovely but heavy, $$$$, and probably not what you want. Toyo = $600, Crown Graphic = $200, Linhof = $1000. Ballpark for all amounts. The Toyo is not a glam camera like some of the others but is a wonderful design from a usability perspective and well made.

Don't forget, if you buy it right you can always sell it with little to no loss as your needs become clearer.

--Darin

[Darin Boville]

Darin,
Similar to my thinking (see my previous post), but for architecture a bag bellows would be a good idea. I don't believe that the Toyo field cameras take a bag, the Wista and some wood field cameras do. This will become important if the OP gets into wider lenses.

I'm with you but keep in mind two points: 1) The OP doesn't even have a 90mm yet, 2) He said "architecture" in a sort of passing way, though lots of people have fixed on that word and are pushing for extreme movement capability.

I think he just wants to shoot shots in the city, not architecture, per se. Heck, a Hasselblad or whatever might even be better.

In any event, the best advice that we all know already is to buy it at a fair price used and sell it if it isn't quite right. Date before you get married.

--Darin

--Darin

[Ivan J. Eberle]

If you can find a nice one, a Meridian 45B has more movements than most other Technical/Press cameras, do credibly well with wide angles, and are far less expensive than a Technika or a Toyo 45AII. They also are light at about 5 lbs sans RF or lens. They fold up to protect rather largish lenses without having to remove them, as well (which enables them to be very rapidly set up).

I have two of them.

[Photobackpacker]

Based on your photo, I don't think a field camera would pack and carry a whole lot differently. I will say that Drew's description of carry mode is different than yours. The Photobackpacker cases take up more room than other ways of carrying lenses.
I have a similar sized backpack and carry: Linhof Technika 5, 3 lenses (125mm, 180mm & 250mm), ~15 holders (maybe a few more-n.t.s.), dark cloth, meter, level, filters, Leica M5 and 1-2 lenses if I really need to.
The Linhof is heavier than my Zone VI camera but occupies less space folded up. everything is a trade off.
I carry my 3 lenses in a fishpond large Sweetwater fly reel case. If I had smaller lenses I could probaly fit four in there. The Fujinon-W 250/6.3 is a big sucker. Like this...

Just a point of clarification - Sinar boards are 5.5" x 5.5". That is what causes the pictured lens case to be large. Your Linhof boards are slightly less than 4" x 4". They fit nicely in my much more compact LS-xxxx-4 lens cases - no coincidence since I, too, shoot a Linhof Master2000 and designed the cases to fit. :)

[rdenney]

Just a point of clarification - Sinar boards are 5.5" x 5.5". That is what causes the pictured lens case to be large. Your Linhof boards are slightly less than 4" x 4". They fit nicely in my much more compact LS-xxxx-4 lens cases - no coincidence since I, too, shoot a Linhof Master2000 and designed the cases to fit. :)

For a whole lot less than the difference in price between a Sinar and a Master Technika, you could buy a Sinar-Linhof adapter board. That would let you keep your lenses on Linhof boards and still use the Sinar camera.

Rick "who has considered this on occasion" Denney

[Richard Wasserman]

Rick, I use a Sinar-Linhof adapter and it works great. Highly recommended!

[Brian Ellis]

If you can find a nice one, a Meridian 45B has more movements than most other Technical/Press cameras, do credibly well with wide angles, and are far less expensive than a Technika or a Toyo 45AII. They also are light at about 5 lbs sans RF or lens. They fold up to protect rather largish lenses without having to remove them, as well (which enables them to be very rapidly set up).

I have two of them.

There was a Meridian on ebay last night, probably still there. I don't know if it's a 45B.

[Jim Michael]

Take a serious look at the Canham 45 DLC - it's lightweight, can handle lenses at both focal length extremes easily, and has more movements than you're likely to be able to use.

[JustinB]

Take a serious look at the Canham 45 DLC - it's lightweight, can handle lenses at both focal length extremes easily, and has more movements than you're likely to be able to use.

I don't know about that Jim, I'm sure I can throw tilt, shift and swing at the camera until I exceed some tolerance somewhere. :)

[BennehBoy]

Transporting a LF camera is always going to be a compromise, a balance of how much pain we are willing to accept against the quality of the output.

Environmental and personal factors will weigh heavily in that compromise, for someone using public transport in a city such as NY then light makes sense.

Living in urban England, where a car can get pretty much anywhere, I find it easy to move my P2 8x10 about in a Peli 1440. Lens, blackjacket, loupe, meter, holders, other crap goes in a large laptop bag (which sits atop the peli whilst it's being rolled). Tripod and pan tilt head goes in a sling type Manfrotto padded bag.

It's heavy, cumbersome, a good workout, and ultimately worth the hassle to get the shots.

I doubt this goes much toward answering the OP's question, but it may be useful to some.