Monorails in the field

[Jeff Dexheimer]

I am curious to know, is anyone using a monorail camera in the field and why? Some specifics I am interested in is how heavy your camera is, how far you hike with it, and what you use to carry it.

Right now I am just toying with the idea of getting a monorail camera because I am starting to incorporate more studio work. My primary focus has been landscapes, but like I mentioned I want do do studio work as well as portraits. Owning one of each is out of the question for me so I have to pick one or the other. I will be shooting 4x5 too.

For reference I am currently using a tachiara 4x5 and am considering either a Sinar F2 or cambo sc 4x5.

[domaz]

I'm using a Gowland Pocket View 4x5 Monorail. With two lenses and Readyloads my entire system weight is less than six pounds. So not all monorails have to be heavy. But is the Gowland a good studio camera? No probably not- although it is usable as such.

[Jeremy Moore]

8x10 sinar p, but i don't have a field 8x10 or i'd be using that!!

[ic-racer]

Graphic View would be somewhere between the Gowland and the Sinar/Cambo/Horseman, etc cameras. O Winston Link and John Szarkowski used the Graphic View in the field. I used one for a while and it is pretty light but still needed that big box which was a little difficult to carry.

[BrianShaw]

I use a Cambo SC in the field. Why... because that's the camera I own... that's why.

I transport it in the stroeage box that gets strapped to a 2-wheeled luggage trolley. This confines me to trails, but I've covered many miles with that configuration. That is the primary, maybe even the "only", limitation of using a monorail in the field.

[csant]

I used a Linhof monorail 4x5 when it was the only LF camera I had - have to confess that it was a blessing when I got myself a field camera instead… It's been field cameras ever since - 4x5, 5x7, and the most used 8x10.

[Bob McCarthy]

I used a 8x10 Sinar P in the field in the past, and am using a heavy folding field camera now.

What Ive learned, the Sinar is only a pain getting to the shooting point, once there its far superior.

So if I shoot close to a car, or a short stroll then the monorail is about as good as it gets. More than a couple hundred yards, the pendulum swings the other way.

For 4x5, the sinar F can go a lot further before it becomes a pain. I also have a Sinar F in 4x5, and portability is fine with a shoulder bag.

bob

[Ari]

I used a Toyo 45G in the field (city for me); The case, camera, lenses and other stuff weighed about 20kg (45 lbs).
I hauled it around town with a hand cart.
I prefer working out of a case, and I have a car, so getting around was pretty easy, and using a heavy system outdoors never seemed a burden.

[Drew Wiley]

I prefer 8x10 folders in the field, and for really long backpacks, a 4x5 folder. But there
are many instances where a monorail works better. You can basically leave any lens on
and a compendium too, and simply collapse the bellows and slip it in the backpack. I did literal mtn climbing for several decades with a Sinar F2 in a Kelty ext frame pack
(a real one, not the cheap import packs sold nowadays). Monorails are esp nice with
very long lenses because you can just slip on another rail section. And now I finally have my dream Sinar system - a very clean vintage 60's 4X5 Norma. It interchanges with all my existing Sinar F and P components, yet is much more rigid than the F, and way way lighter than a P or X camera. All one gives up is the yaw-free option.

[DanK]

I use an older monorail in the field about half the time - collapse the bellows and carry over the shoulder - mounted on the tripod (3021)...Just something I got used to doing - it's little less than 8lbs w/out the tripod - really not much different than a 5.5lb ELM w/lens that I hauled around the same way before - little more awkward through trees...but I usually stick to short hikes, minimal holders, and one lens - slow and easy...anything longer sees a 2D in a backpack...

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Owning one of each is out of the question for me so I have to pick one or the other.

Why? Cost? For little more than the price of a Sinar F2, you may be able to get two cameras - one for each purpose. Perhaps something like a Crown Graphic and a Graphic View, or perhaps one of the less expensive Toyo/Omega monorails. Lens board adapters are available that will let you share lenses between both cameras without swapping boards.

You have two very different applications in mind; hiking and studio portraits. Other than something like an ARCA-SWISS F-Line, there isn't really any one camera ideally suited to both applications. You need something light and compact for hiking. You already have a Tachihara, which is well suited to that application, but not at all well suited to shooting studio portraits. Why not just keep the Tachihara and buy a good, cheap Toyo/Omega, Cambo or Calumet monorail. These cameras are very inexpensive, and are full system cameras perfectly suited to studio applications. Unfortunately, they are big, bulky, heavy and definitely not ideal for hiking any considersable distance. If you poke around on the KEH web site and prowl eBay, you will see a ton of different 4x5 monorail cameras for less than $200, even several for less than $100.

Why try to force a tool to do something it was never intended to do? Would you use a screwdriver to pound nails? The wrong tool will bog you down and distract you from your image making goals. The camera should be a transparent part of the image making process, not a distracting burden that is ill-suited for the intended application. I highly recommend you keep your Tachihara for hiking and pick up a good, cheap $100 - $200 monorail for your studio work. This will give you the right tool for both jobs.

Kerry

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Some specifics I am interested in is how heavy your camera is, how far you hike with it, and what you use to carry it.

Perhaps if you answered the same questions, the replies you receive will be more appropriate to your needs. We already know you have a Tachihara, that weighs about 3.5 lb. How far do you hike with it and how do you carry it? There's a big difference between a half mile stroll on a paved path through your local city park and a 20 mile wilderness hike up steep mountainous trails. Pretty much any camera, field or monorail, will work fine for the former. As you approach the latter, practical considerations start to limit your choices.

Kerry

[AnselAdamsX]

I have a Wista SP metal field camera which weighs about 6lb. But I picked up a Sinar F monorail which I think weighs 9lb and is bulkier. I tend to shoot wide angles and the Wista SP requires a recessed lens board for my 65mm and I have to drop the bed. The Sinar allows me to use a flat lens board with even a 47mm lens.

[Corran]

I hiked up to the tallest point in the Great Smoky National Park with a Toyo GII monorail. It was at that moment that I realized the value of a field camera!!

Considering decent monorails can be bought for $200 or less, I don't see why you can't have both. I have a Wista now for field use and the Toyo is used for architecture and indoor work.

[Heroique]

I also have a Tachi 4x5 (4 lbs.) – and complement it with a Toyo 45c monorail camera (15 lbs.).

I don’t do much studio work as you plan to – my work is almost exclusively landscape – but I may be able to share some personal experiences to help your decision.

My brief reply: “I think you’re gonna miss your Tachi when it’s time to go on strenuous hikes!” ;^)

Now for a slightly longer reply:

I’m glad I have both cameras, because depending on the type of trip I take, one or the other is the best one to take. Three key considerations help me choose which camera to bring.

1) How far will I walk/hike to my destination, and just what else am I “lugging” there?
2) How much time will I have to set-up, compose, take the shot(s), and take-down?
3) How sophisticated will my camera movements be? (This of course, influences #2).

For example...

When I’m near my destination w/ plenty of time, I enjoy using my monorail camera – whether or not I think movements will be sophisticated. Once I have it set-up, I like (I love) having all the optional movements, plus the ease of applying them, some of which I may not have anticipated.

On the other hand, when I have a “hike” ahead of me, usually there is no question – I bring the much lighter field camera, no matter what I think about #2 or #3.

Only if I think I’ll need several extraordinarily precise movements, and have little chance of getting the shot I want w/o them, will I consider making the extraordinary effort of hiking over hill & dale with my studio camera. But my landscape shots most typically don’t need movements like that.

Please let us know what you finally decide is best for you – one camera or two.

[Joseph Dickerson]

Don't be misled. A Sinar F/F1/F2 weighs 7 pounds or so with lens. At least mine does.

That's only a couple of pounds more than most field cameras (two pounds=one quart of water).

The Sinar F(ield) cameras can be carried in a backpack (check PhotoBackpacker) and will give more movements and more rigidity than most folders. Speed/Century Graphics don't offer much in the way of movements, and a Graphic View camera (as lovely as they are) will be at least 40 years old.

If you're somewhere you can rent lf gear you might want to try that before you commit to anything.

Also, search the Large Format home page, you'll find lots of info re: monorails vs. folding cameras.

JD

[gevalia]

I used a Sinar F2 4x5 for 6 months in the field. And I define field work as hiking anywhere from a few hundred yards to 8 hours. So field work for me is not "by the car". While I got use to the extra weight of the F2 and extension rails, the problem was that it was difficult to get the weight distribution correct in my backpack. I had to constantly shift it around to reduce stress. I spent a long time trying to figure this out and also got the photobackpacker case but in the end I went back to a field camera. I also have a tendency to hike more flat areas with the camera on the tripod over my shoulder and this was just not a good idea with the Sinar.

That being said, if I could find a way to get the weight distribution right, I would hike with the F2.

Ron

[Scott Walker]

I use a Sinar P2 8x10 for my field camera and carry up to 25 holders. I will go down to 5 to 10 holders if I am going to be going on a short hike or one with a big elevation change. I usually carry the camera over my shoulder mounted on the tripod with the dark-cloth as padding. I carry lenses etc. in a backpack and my wife carries more film holders, food and extra water in her backpack. My backpack will normally weigh in at 30 to 35 lbs and Lorraine's at about 20 to 25 lbs. I have no idea what the tripod and camera weigh but it is heavy. There are times (especially on steep inclines) when I think a nice light folder would be perfect but those thoughts always seem to disappear once I set the camera up and actually start using it. I also use the same setup for snowshoeing although the weight makes breaking trail in deep snow very tiring and slow.

http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg90/Beecool/HeadingupIdahoPeak.jpg
This picture is from a fairly short hike on a good trail of about 3 miles with a bit of elevation, about a 400 foot gain if I remember correctly.

[Ken Lee]

You might find it illuminating to weigh all your equipment: film holders, dark cloth, light meter, lenses, etc. Then consider how to save weight. It may be better to carry a lighter camera, or fewer lenses, or get a lighter tripod instead. It depends on your gear. You should also consider the lenses you use, and the kind of images you make. The Tachi may be perfectly adequate for 99% of them, so it may be counter productive to chase after that elusive 1%.

As others have wisely counseled, there is no one perfect camera for all circumstances. You have to decide which images you consistently want to make, and when the wise thing to do is just smile and say "no thanks".

[Drew Wiley]

Just get a real backpacking backpack instead of one of those silly photographers things. A Sinar is super easy to pack. I just wrap it with my goosedown jacket and plop
it between a couple of tupperware boxes of holders. I've carried at least a hundred of miles at a time, over class 3 13,000 ft passes, hauled over ledges with ropes, scooting
down glaciers with an ice axe. You name it. But I had a problem carrying enough food, and now that I'm getting to be a lazy geezer and deserve to eat better in the mtns, I've resorted to an Ebony folder. But for those long dayhikes when I'm not carrying 8x10, that new/old Norma is sure the ticket! Maybe only a pound heavier than my similarly equipped F2, and holds its settings much better.

[Vaughn]

I'm using a Gowland Pocket View 4x5 Monorail. With two lenses and Readyloads my entire system weight is less than six pounds. So not all monorails have to be heavy. But is the Gowland a good studio camera? No probably not- although it is usable as such.

Just echoing Domaz's post...though I don't use the little Gowland 4x5 much these days.

Scott -- some folks are nuts, some are nuttier (but you get bonus points for the tripod and matching shorts!) -- my 8x10 kit (a Zone VI and Reis A-series pod, 6 or so holders, 2 to 4 lenses) is around 60 pounds...more if I take more water/food.

[Heroique]

...more if I take more water/food.

(I thought you were like me, and had a beautiful assistant to carry refreshments?)

[Joshua Dunn]

If you are considering a Sinar F2 get one. I hike all over with either a F2 or P2. The F2 is light infinitely capable and the best value around if you want a truly expansive system.

[Nguss]

As mentioned in another thread I have an MPP folding camera and a Sinar monorail. There is very little between them in terms of weight (1 or 2 pounds) and either can go in a shoulder bag. The monorail is however much more versatile and I always now go with the monorail whenever I am out walking (though to be fair the furthest I have been is probably 6-8 miles).

[Michael Kadillak]

I use a Sinar P2 8x10 for my field camera and carry up to 25 holders. I will go down to 5 to 10 holders if I am going to be going on a short hike or one with a big elevation change. I usually carry the camera over my shoulder mounted on the tripod with the dark-cloth as padding. I carry lenses etc. in a backpack and my wife carries more film holders, food and extra water in her backpack. My backpack will normally weigh in at 30 to 35 lbs and Lorraine's at about 20 to 25 lbs. I have no idea what the tripod and camera weigh but it is heavy. There are times (especially on steep inclines) when I think a nice light folder would be perfect but those thoughts always seem to disappear once I set the camera up and actually start using it. I also use the same setup for snowshoeing although the weight makes breaking trail in deep snow very tiring and slow.

http://i246.photobucket.com/albums/gg90/Beecool/HeadingupIdahoPeak.jpg
This picture is from a fairly short hike on a good trail of about 3 miles with a bit of elevation, about a 400 foot gain if I remember correctly.

What a fabulous shot on the trail. Bravo! I pack my 8x10 and ULF the same way and continue to get recommendations for babystrollers or other "assistant" devices. What folks forget is that if you are in a wilderness area any wheeled device motorized or not is absolutely prohibited. You have to bring in your camera the old fashioned way - you need to carry it. I packed for years into the Montana mountains so carrying a 13# Toyo 810M is really not that big a deal with the right pack. Like you when I get it set up I am thankful to have it on the tripod. Keep up the good work!

[Frank Petronio]

Why? Cost? For little more than the price of a Sinar F2, you may be able to get two cameras - one for each purpose. Perhaps something like a Crown Graphic and a Graphic View, or perhaps one of the less expensive Toyo/Omega monorails. Lens board adapters are available that will let you share lenses between both cameras without swapping boards.

You have two very different applications in mind; hiking and studio portraits. Other than something like an ARCA-SWISS F-Line, there isn't really any one camera ideally suited to both applications. You need something light and compact for hiking. You already have a Tachihara, which is well suited to that application, but not at all well suited to shooting studio portraits. Why not just keep the Tachihara and buy a good, cheap Toyo/Omega, Cambo or Calumet monorail. These cameras are very inexpensive, and are full system cameras perfectly suited to studio applications. Unfortunately, they are big, bulky, heavy and definitely not ideal for hiking any considersable distance. If you poke around on the KEH web site and prowl eBay, you will see a ton of different 4x5 monorail cameras for less than $200, even several for less than $100.

Why try to force a tool to do something it was never intended to do? Would you use a screwdriver to pound nails? The wrong tool will bog you down and distract you from your image making goals. The camera should be a transparent part of the image making process, not a distracting burden that is ill-suited for the intended application. I highly recommend you keep your Tachihara for hiking and pick up a good, cheap $100 - $200 monorail for your studio work. This will give you the right tool for both jobs.

Kerry

This is what I've been recommending as well. I know it's expensive to own two cameras but some very fine monorails sell for peanuts... get an adapter lensboard and you already have everything else you need.

Also bear in mind that you can probably use a lighter tripod with the Tachi while using a heavier duty one in the studio, etc.

Other than the expensive but very fine later Arca-Swiss systems, the lightest "field monorails" like the Gowland and Toho are so lightweight that they really aren't going to be any more useful than the Tachi in the studio.

When I do portraits I like robust cameras on heavier tripods so I can make adjustments smoothly and quickly, not worrying so much about knocking some light camera around -- such as when you load a holder quickly.

So you really have two very opposite sets of requirements - why compromise?

[Jerry Bodine]

but you get bonus points for the tripod and matching shorts!

If the tripod is aluminum, there lurks a problem. :eek:

[AnselAdamsX]

FYI my Sinar F with the normal bellows, bag bellows, tripod mount w/arca plate, 6 in extension, Linhof to Sinar adapter is 8.8lb. If I go with just the bag bellows and drop the 6 in extension I can get it down to 8 lb.

[r.e.]

An Arca-Swiss Discovery, if you can find one, may fit your needs. Weighs about 7 pounds.

[Vaughn]

(I thought you were like me, and had a beautiful assistant to carry refreshments?)

You must be confusing me with some other Vaughn. I do occasionally have the assistance of my three 14 year old boys. Their mother decided being married to an artist is not where it is at.

I guess asking her to carry all the film holders and the beer was the straw that broke the camel's back...:rolleyes:

Vaughn

[David Karp]

You might consider a used ARCA Swiss Discovery with the extendable monorail. You can mount the camera on one of the short rails and carry it that way in your backpack. It is easy to slide the rail onto the bracket that normally holds the two extendable rails. The camera does not take up much more room than a folding field camera, and it is very quick to set up.

[Uri A]

After using a Deardorff V8 for a year (and getting a lower than desired sharp-as-a-tack ratio in my negs) I moved on up to a Sinar P2 and for my purposes it's the better camera. Steadier and more reliable to focus. Having said that I shoot urban, have flight cases and a trolley for my gear.

Unbelievable what Scott does carrying that thing on a hike!! I would need $5000 in physio after that stroll :)

But ... I still have the 'dorff and prefer it for the odd portrait or non compound-plane focussing job. If you're into the more relaxed LF vibe, a 'dorff is an amazingly pleasurable piece of equipment. It's taken me a while to feel OK with the P2. With the 'dorff I never had to look out from under the cloth to find the right adjustment .. it was always just 'there'!

[neil poulsen]

I use the older 171mm Arca F for field with the leather bag bellows. It collapses well and doesn't weigh a lot more than many folding cameras. The 141mm Arca F would weigh a little less, but I like the larger bellows size.

Given it's ease of use, I prefer this camera to any folding camera of which I'm aware.

[r.e.]

Dexmeister,

The point about the Arca-Swiss Disvovery is that it was offered at a very attractive price compared to the rest of the Arca-Swiss line, and it is fully compatible with Arca-Swiss cameras that use a 171x171 frame. As far as I can figure, the idea was to market it to students. The idea, I think, is that students would use it with 150mm, 180mm and maybe 210mm lenses. Arca-Swiss stopped selling it five or six years ago, but if you can get one second-hand, it is a great value.

It has a 30cm rail and, if I recall from mine, a bellows that will go to about 45cm if you get a longer rail or extension. You will have to decide whether that is sufficient for your purposes, but from what you describe, it should be unless you want to use very wide lenses and need a bag bellows.

I can tell you that I also use an Arca-Swiss 8x10 F-line camera and that all of the basic parts are interchangeable.

The Discovery is a great camera if you can find one at a price within your budget.

[mamanton]

I use Linhof Kardan Master L 13x18 in the field. With one lens it's about 10kg. I carry it in my Lowepro Super Tracker backpack (3kg) with holders, mountainer tripod, spotmeter, etc... All about 20-25kg I think.
Now I also have Vanguard 53F case for flights. But I need to cut down the rail a little bit, cause now it's 60cm.
I'm really happy! It's a great camera, and a I have a lot of pleasure to work with it!

[Struan Gray]

Just get a real backpacking backpack instead of one of those silly photographers things.

When I started climbing and hiking I was told to get good boots and a good pack. Everything else can be improvised. Good advice.

Photo backpacks are still heavy for what they do, and they don't have harness systems which are as well designed and adjustable as climbing and hiking packs. It's amazing how painful a photo pack can be compared to even a mundane hiking pack that's properly fitted.

Everyone is different, both in shape and walking style. A LF outfit is peanuts compared to a full ice-climbing rack and camping gear for a two week trip. It's a monster load compared to a granola bar and a water bottle. Without knowing your personal baseline, it's difficult to say what is hard or easy.

Personally, I can take a Sinar Norma 4x5 with 18" of rail and four lenses everywhere I want to hike. That's mostly day trips, but can include twenty miles across peat hags or up and down steep hills, rarely are there any paths or trails. If I need to lighten the load I cut down on lenses. If I really need to lighten the load I switch to MF, but that's usually because of time constraints and the wish to keep moving, rather than weight or bulk issues.

The time LF really gets to be a pain is walking round towns and cities. The bulk, and the necessity to have and use a tripod, mean that I use MF far more in those circumstances than when 'in the field'.

[Cor]

Weight is not as important to me, the hikes I've done a fairly short, and on flat country.

Compactness is more important, so when I travel (by air or car, also the family luggage such as camping gear is supposed to fit in) I take the 4*5 Gowland Pocket view and 2 lenses (a 90mm Angulon and a 150 mm G-Claron) and 5 holders along plus an ancient but lightweight aluminium Linhof tripod (tiny ball head) along. I was surprised how stable that set up is (relative off course).

For "daily" use I recently acquired a 1963 Linhof Color, kinda odd thing, it's ugly, it's a mono rail (but limited movements for a monorail). but very solid, quickly mounted on the carbon fibre tripod (monorail clamp on the tripod), lens stays attached, and fits in a Lowe photobackpacker with ease. I used to use a 1954 Linhof TechIII, which is a bit more heavy, but a pain with the 65mm Angulon, switching horizontal to vertical meant taking of the camera, and most important: no front tilt (yes I know and used the work around).

Just yesterday I measured the weight of my set: Camera 3.2 kg, and together with the complete lens set (over kill most of the times):65mm, 90mm, 120mm, 150mm, 180mm and 210mm: 5.2 kg. Not measured the film holders and other stuff needed..

Best,

Cor

[rdenney]

I have used some really heavy cameras in the past. In college, I used a Linhof Color--the ancient version--which was no lightweight. My first view camera was a Newton NewVue, which caused suspension failure on my pickup truck. That was followed by the vastly better, but not really any lighter, Calumet CC-400. And I moved up from there to a much lighter, but also much bulkier, Cambo-made Calumet 45NX.

I used all of these in the field. What studio work I have done has been mostly production portraits best done using (then) medium format or (now) digital.

I tried hiking with the Cambo. I modified a Kelty external-frame pack for that camera, suspending the rail sideways across the top opening. With tripod, 10 film holders, several lenses (themselves no lightweights), meter, dark cloth, loupe, compendium shade, filters, and so on, the whole package weighed about 40 or 45 pounds. Even though that camera was no lightweight, removing a couple of pounds from it would have gone unnoticed.

Now I'm using a Sinar F2. I routinely haul it around in a rolling case with six lenses, several film holders of various types, a couple of rail extensions, filters, etc., and the total, without tripod, weighs maybe 30 pounds. If I used a field camera, I'd still want all that other stuff, and a camera that weighed maybe 3 or 4 pounds less wouldn't make that much of a difference.

If I backpacked extensively with the camera, I might rethink things. But people who backpack extensively know they are going to do so. I would never optimize on that even though I might occasionally do it. I bet that I could put a productive F2 kit together that would weigh less than my Pentax 6x7 kit.

I surely do like the simplicity of movements on a monorail camera, and the rigidity of the camera when everything is locked down. People say they never use movements for landscapes. I guess I'm a bit different in that regard--I seem to be attracted to pictures that demand extensive movements at least once in a session. That's why I end up carrying around Super Angulons and plasmats in the shorter lengths, I suppose.

Rick "who has hauled 20-25 pounds of medium-format kit on many a 5-10-mile hike" Denney

[gevalia]

People say they never use movements for landscapes. I guess I'm a bit different in that regard--I seem to be attracted to pictures that demand extensive movements at least once in a session.

Rick,

I'd love to meet the people that say they never use movements for landscapes. I cannot think of 1 shot of mine that did not require movements. And a few that required quite a bit of flexibility.

Ron

[Jeff Dexheimer]

Thanks all for your replies. I am pretty certain I am going to get the Sinar F2. There is one for sale near me for a steal and I can't pass on it.

I like my tachi, but I already feel its limitations. For the work I do, I can already feel the limitation of its movements. Plus, even with everything locked down, I can tell its not very solid. As far as it being a good field camera, I still think it is, but I need something with more movement.

I don't want two cameras right now simply because I am still fairly new to this and I need to concentrate on learning one system. Once I have mastered the movements of my Sinar I will consider getting another camera; however it will most likely be a larger format rather than a different field camera.

[John Kasaian]

I am curious to know, is anyone using a monorail camera in the field and why? Some specifics I am interested in is how heavy your camera is, how far you hike with it, and what you use to carry it.

Right now I am just toying with the idea of getting a monorail camera because I am starting to incorporate more studio work. My primary focus has been landscapes, but like I mentioned I want do do studio work as well as portraits. Owning one of each is out of the question for me so I have to pick one or the other. I will be shooting 4x5 too.

For reference I am currently using a tachiara 4x5 and am considering either a Sinar F2 or cambo sc 4x5.

Why not both? You can find a good Calumet or Graphic View for well under $200which would be a nice compliment to a field camera for far less than the cost of an extra lens.

[MIke Sherck]

I'll be 54 next Saturday, with bad knees and advancing arthritis which is really starting to limit my movement, and I carry an 8x10 Burke & James Grover monorail on a tripod, over my shoulder with the rest of the kit in a soft-sided cooler bag over the other shoulder for balance. The camera weighs 12 lbs, the tripod and head another 8. I don't know what the bag weighs but I carry two lenses (Fujinon 210mm f/5.6 and 420mm RD Artar in Ilex 4 shutter,) meter, loupe, filters, etc. etc. and 4-6 wooden film holders. The tripod has foam over the legs and I also use the focusing cloth on my shoulder as padding. I'm ok this way for 2-3 miles, maybe 4 at a stretch on the level. I have a couple other shoulder bags with 4-6 film holders each I can carry if I think I'm going to need them (end of season sale at Menard's!) and there's a bigger bag of film holders in the trunk I can change out when I get back, if I need to.

Why? It's cheap. The camera cost somewhere between $0 and $100, once I sold off the stuff it came from Ebay with. Wooden film holders are not only lighter than plastic, I've never paid more than $20 each and sometimes a lot less. I didn't economize on the lenses, though, and everything is in good shape. At one time I had a Fujinon 420mm L lens in Copal 3, which I absolutely loved, but man, was it heavy! The Artar is a nice lens, too, and much, much lighter. Also at one time I had a Wehman metal 8x10 folder (8 lbs) and I deeply regret selling it in a moment of insanity. If you have the money, that's the way to go (if you could find one, that is.)

Mike

[LynnRB]

I find my best images are made within 20' of the back of my truck. Lynn

[GeorgesGiralt]

Hello !
I own an MPP MK VII and a Sinar Norma. Guess what , I use the Norma in the field so much I've leaned the MPP to a friend instead of seeing it gather dust in the closet.
The 4x5 Norma is ideal for field use as it is quite lightweight allow for full movements, and fit nicely in a backpack with a couple extension tubes, 4 lenses, bag bellows and the paraphernalia you sue with a view camera.
Frankly, the backpack is not that much heavier than with the MPP. And when I go out with my fellows photographers, their backpack are heavier too even the one using a wooden filed camera.
So if you can borrow one, try getting out with a Norma !

[Drew Wiley]

I got my Norma (a fairly clean one) for about what it would cost to replace the worn
out parts on my F2, and of course all the leftover components are interchangeable.
I typically need at least twenty inches of rail, so this is a great system with long lenses. Sounds like my 4x5 outdoor style is a lot like Struan's; but I did carry a complete Sinar system plus ice gear and full backpacking supplies for quite a few years.
Loads were typically around 85 lbs or more. But high quality packs made this fairly
easy to do. Now you have to hunt around for a decent pack. I was lucky enough to
recently find a brand new unused 1960's vintage Kelty, just like my first serious pack.
Nothing better. I'm saving it for my 70's, about when my present packs will probably be worn out. The Norma should last longer than I do, esp since I use an 8x10 Phillips
most of the time.

[rdenney]

Loads were typically around 85 lbs or more.

Hey, Drew, you are not helping the cause here.

Ahem! Well, as I was saying, in the grand scheme of a complete kit, a couple of pounds here and there doesn't make much difference.

As I previously described, I have just acquired (thanks, Chris!) a Sinar flight case that, unlike the battered old Rainbow case that I threw in the attic as soon as I tried to fit a camera into it, suspends the camera by the rail. I just ordered a pair of side-mount luggage rollers (metal castings designed for flight cases), a handle, and improved latches for that case. It will allow me to grab a handle at one end, and let the other end roll along. With any form of wheels, carrying a reasonably complete kit for more than 20 feet from the car becomes much simpler. It does not work for back-country hiking trails, but it does work for the sorts of places I'm likely to go these days. And if I need to go further afield for a day hike than is allowed by a rolling case, I can reduce the kit and use a backpack.

I have previously used (and shown here) a mobile office case I bought at Staples or Office Depot. It worked fine, but I feared that telescoping handle wouldn't hold up to a briefcase application let alone a 4x5 kit application. But I still intend to use it for when I need something a little more compact and that looks a little less like an expensive-equipment-case.

Rick "whose back-country backpacking days are behind him" Denney

[Frank Petronio]

Those blue plywood/fiberglass Anvil-style Sinar cases are pretty nice - compact but can hold a good 4x5 kit.

While you aren't going to want to lug them very far, working out of a hard case certainly is nicer than throwing your $$$ Nylon photo backpack down on the mud. The other advantage is that you can stand on a good hard case, this helps a lot.

[jwanerman]

I successfully use a Sinar Norma 4x5 in an Osprey Atmos 35 2300 cu in backpack. Although the camera can be carried assembled, I find that deconstruction has worked well for me. I leave the rail clamp on the Linhof 003333 twin shank tripod. I carry a 12" basic rail, and also a 6" rail extension for use with longer lenses. Rail end caps are also separated for travel. The front and rear standards are easily wrapped in my substantial Zone VI darkcloth, and are well protected. The bellows are carried separated from the standards. This setup takes about two minutes flat to fully assemble or disassemble. Also carried are up to four lenses ( 100mm WF Ektar, 150mm Sironar, 210mm Ysarex, 10 3/4" Artar ), two grafmatics, and about six double sided film holders.

[Richard Wasserman]

I don't go into wilderness areas, but when I take my Norma out for a walk, either urban or sylvan, I simply strap it to the front of a Sherpa Cart. I place a backpack with lenses, film holders, and assorted bits inside the bag of the cart, and the camera mounted on the tripod and wrapped in a darkcloth goes on the front. The Sherpa Cart has bicycle wheels and is very easy to maneuver. It has a smaller footprint than a baby-stroller, and doesn't challenge my fragile sense of masculinity quite as much.

[Brian K]

I used to use a modified sinar F2 in the field. The mods included having the 6" rail cut to 5" ( I know this sounds a bit extreme but the extra length made it hard to fit into many cases, that loss of one inch fixed that). I kept the round base rail ring attached to the camera and used the base rail clamp as a sort of quick release, it always stayed on the tripod.

I had the height of the twin vertical standard bearers cut down (they used to protrude from the bottom of the camera when the camera height was fully compressed, and added a inch or so of height) and I had a custom bellows made that works for everything from a 480MM APO Ronar to a 65mm Grandagon. So I only needed to carry one bellows.

These mods allowed me to carry the F2 attached to the 6" rail in many different cases during air travel. It made it far easier to pack my carry on stuff. However once I was in the field, the longer rail extensions were added and the camera was carried in a hard case. the hard case would be flown as cary on luggage and clothes and a very squashable duffel would be inside. But once in the field the camera would be in the hard case and as such was very quick to set up if working from the car. If I decided to hike, the sinar would go back to it's soft case and would be compressed back to the 5" rail.

Ultimately I ended up getting a Technika MT3000 and now use that as my in the field view camera.

[cdholden]

Brian can you elaborate on your modifications? Those look like struts on the side of the F2. I would be interested in knowing how you found/made a bellows that would support a 480mm lens, but still be able to collapse enough to support the 65.
Inquiring minds want to know!
Thanks,
Chris

[Drew Wiley]

What I did with my Sinar F for "normal" to long lens work (which is mostly what I use
it for) is simply to buy a 28-inch Horseman bellows. It is better quality than the Sinar
version and doesn't sag even at full extension. Now I notice that the tapered 4x5
Norma bellows will give nearly as much extension without stressing it, but will collapse
way down for moderate wide-angle lens use as well. These are hard to find unless
you a buying a complete Norma system. I don't know if the long Horseman bellows is still made of not. Mine still has a lot of life left on it. And when I said I used to pack with 85 lbs don't get all scared. That included a week or more of mtn backpacking supplies too, and often ice gear. And that was back when I carried relatively big heavy lenses and a whole stack of loaded holders, prior to my need to use a Harrison tent in the field (Quickloads etc were then used for much of interim). For what it did,
the Sinar F system was a very reasonable weight compromise; and if I encountered
an interesting architectural subject or narrow canyon shot to and from the mtns or desert, it was the ideal camera for that too, esp if I had the bag bellows tucked somewhere.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

After having a Sinar Norma for almost a year I'm convinced of the superiority of a bag bellows with wide angles versus folding field designs.

I can't make the same case for choosing a monorail over my Meridians for field use with the 135mm and 210mm. For me, the bomb-prooof design and swift setup of a folding metal technical camera makes one of these a more compelling choice for the majority of landscape tasks. I also greatly appreciate a well-dialed in Kalart rangefinder in fast breaking light. So although I liked the Sinar for what it did very, very well, I found myself not using it very often because my longer lenses were mounted on Meridian boards--I never fabbed the adapter board as I'd intended. With the right adapter set up, it all might have all worked out. (Did have a Norma adapter board to Technika boards-- these are fairly ubiquitous, as are Graphic to Speed/Crown adapters.)

As a sidebar, re the Norma: I found there were some pre-ergonomic design rough edges to it that didn't bode so well for packing (the sharp points on the bellows release tabs stick in mind-- given a little more time, these could have stuck holes in the bag bellows stored compressed on the shorty rail). The pointed square corners on the aluminum rail blocks were not optimal, either.

[Drew Wiley]

Normas went thru a bit of an evolution themselves. I seem to have one of the later ones. The internal cams for bellows tabs on the F-series are something which wears
out. Not soon, but inevitably. The Norma version of this looks more reliable; but I don't
plan on switching bellows much. With the F2 I switched bellows freuently because I was shooting commercial architecture quite a bit back then, plus heavy field use.
Anyway, at my age I think I'm set as far as a monorail is concerned. I've got enough
spare Sinar components to last me if needed. But for anyone just starting out, the
F-series is a real bargain used right now. Much easier to find affordably and add components to than an Arca or Technikardan, though those are tempting options too.

[Brian K]

Brian can you elaborate on your modifications? Those look like struts on the side of the F2. I would be interested in knowing how you found/made a bellows that would support a 480mm lens, but still be able to collapse enough to support the 65.
Inquiring minds want to know!
Thanks,
Chris


Chris the things that look like struts are part of a compendium bellows which attaches to the sinar through the front accessory rod connector.

I designed the bellows to be wider in the middle and taper to the standard sinar bellows size at each end. This allows the bellows to collapse into itself instead of stacking and becoming too wide for a wide angle lens. You can see how the bellows sticks out slightly all the way around because of the wider center section it has. The smaller tapering sections of the bellows just compress into it. Camera Bellows co in the UK made it for me custom.

The cutting down of the 6" rail and the shortening of the twin standard shafts were done for me by SK Grimes.

[tgtaylor]

While not reading all the posts in this thread I think that it is crazy to pack a monorail in the field unless that was your only camera or you knew in advance that it would take the movements of a monorail to capture the shot. For ordinary everyday landscape photography a field camera is all that is required.

Large format film cameras are pretty cheap these days and personally I own five. For lightweight hiking in mountainous terrain I will usually pack a Toyo 45CF which weighs in at ~4.2lbs with the 150mm normal lens attached. Add another 2 lbs for the tripod and head (Gitzo GT0540, GT1177M) you're ready for any image that requires a modest amount of rise/fall, swing, tilt and shift and will be able to pack it for a multi-day backpack trip. Why carry unnecessary weight especially when you have to pack bear can, food, water, tent, sleeping bag...well, you get the idea.

If a monorail will definitely be needed and it will be a day trip only, then I'll pack my Toyo 45C. But that is a rare occurrence.

Thomas

[Drew Wiley]

Tom - a monorail makes a helluva lot of sense if one uses long lenses a lot. A monorail
like a Sinar can be balanced at any point along the rail and therefore work with a lighter tripod than most comparable folders. Having long extensions allows one to use regular view lenses like a 450C Fujinon, which weigh considerably less than telephoto
style lenses of similar FL. Add all this up, plus faster setup, esp in difficult conditions,
and the cumulative wt difference between systems is not significant. In fact, a Sinar
or comparable system is probably lighter than a tech camera like a 4X5 Technika given
similar applications. Raw wt of the camera itself isn't the determining factor, but
cumulative wt of what one needs to get these kinds of shots reliably. Now I'll admit that if I'm headed out for a week up in the high county at my current age, I'll take my little Ebony folder. It at least works with a Fuji 360A. But it's a lot slower to use than the Sinar. My last trip was in such continuously wet weather that it was just luck to get anything at all; so I decided to take a 6x9 back for my Ebony. With a little 300M lens that gave me plenty of "reach" in a small kit. But I prefer not to use roll film unless
I have to. Hopefully it will still be around when I get old enough to routinely need a
lighter pack.

[Struan Gray]

I too tend to use longer lenses. My standard is a 240 mm, my favourite, which gets used almost as much, is a 420. The 240 mm works well on the field camera I have (A Toyo 45A), but I miss the precision and ease of setting movements I get on the Norma. The 420 mm can't be used at all on the Toyo, and those field cameras which can handle the bellows extension and movements are no lighter than my Norma, and are usually much more expensive.

The point of longer lenses is not just that they can be quite heavy, but that the extra length puts greater torque on all the sliding extensions and around the tripod mount. The camera catches the wind more effectively too. Also, sooner or later you are going to want to lay the plane of focus along the ground, and then you find you need to apply a relatively large tilt which is both stable when locked and easy to set correctly with fingertips and your arms fully extended.

The Toyo is great for small-movements fast setups with the 240 mm (I love the viewing hood for this), but for many of my favourite LF images, where movements and control of the plane of focus add that last bit of 'just right' to the image, I always prefer the monorail.

[Winger]

I use my Cambo monorail in the field. It weighs close to 9 pounds with a lens on it and the tripod is about 6. I put it on the tripod and carry it over my shoulder. Since I weigh about 115 and have the arm strength of a 10 year old, it isn't that tough. And if you get the shot you want that you wouldn't have with something smaller, then it's worth it.

[ljsegil]

OK, so anybody got any good solutions for trying to truck an 8x10 Sinar P around? Even getting it down from the second floor of the house to the front door is daunting.
Larry

[Alan Gales]

OK, so anybody got any good solutions for trying to truck an 8x10 Sinar P around? Even getting it down from the second floor of the house to the front door is daunting.
Larry

Mack, REO, Peterbuilt, White, etc. :D

Seriously, I wouldn't want to carry it very far from the car unless you wheeled it around in something like a jogging stroller.

[Daniel Unkefer]

I use my Cambo monorail in the field. It weighs close to 9 pounds with a lens on it and the tripod is about 6. I put it on the tripod and carry it over my shoulder. Since I weigh about 115 and have the arm strength of a 10 year old, it isn't that tough. And if you get the shot you want that you wouldn't have with something smaller, then it's worth it.

I do the same thing with my 8x10 Sinar Norma, attached to a Zone VI standard tripod. I've slogged for miles with this rig and it's really not that bad. I do roll up a terrycloth towel to cushion my shoulder. When I get to where I want to deploy it, I'm glad I have it. I carry holders and other stuff in a soft Zone VI bag, on my other shoulder.

Works for me.

[Jeff Dexheimer]

Again, thanks for all the replies. I took everyone's advice into consideration. I ended up buying the Sinar F2 today. Got a great price on it and already had it out for a test run. So far I am thrilled to have it and all the movements. I will miss my Tachihara, but only because it looks so pretty.

[GeorgesGiralt]

A wheel cart is the way to go. In France some fools do this...
Carrix has products for this, with THE price tag...
Have a look also at high end baby trolleys with inflated tires or shopping carts fro Andersen in Germany. (the key here is the large inflated tires to absorb the bumps in the field)