Ebony Counterpoint

[Doug Dolde]

There has been so much gushing over Ebony cameras here I thought a counterpoint might be in order. I purchased an Ebony 45SU after reading all of the glowing reviews here in the forum.



After using my previous Arca Swiss 4x5, my first reaction with the Ebony was how dark and hard to see the focusing screen was by comparison. It just didn't have the crisp and snappy image quality of the Arca Swiss. The bellows focusing hood of the Ebony is no match for the Arca Swiss even with a sweater draped over it. Add the reflex hood to the Arca Swiss and the comparison pales further.



Secondly, after coming from the precise focusing and movements of the Arca Swiss, I found the Ebony to be quite sloppy. Turning the focusing knobs to move the rail any distance causes the locking knobs on the left side to tighten simultaneously thus requiring one to loosen them as one focuses. The highly acclaimed asymetric back tilt is indeed a nice feature, but I found it's adjustment to be a bit coarse as well. It detents in the neutral position and is a bit difficult to move initially. This would be an incredible feature if they could make it geared. For the premium Ebony charges for it, they certainly should.



The mirrored levels are a good feature but their location under the leather strap makes flipping the cover up a bit difficult. As someone else suggested, converting the strap to a metal handle would be an improvement.



I'm not trying to bash the Ebony. It's no doubt the best made wood field available. But for the exhorbitant price Ebony charges, I think it ought to be perfect and it isn't. Thanks to Jeff Taughner at Badger Graphics, I'm now in possession of a Linhof Master Technika 2000 traded for the Ebony.

[Christopher Condit]

Any disappointments with the Linhof? I love hearing bad news about cameras I can't afford... ;-)

[David A. Goldfarb]

I wouldn't really consider the focusing screen to be a problem with a particular brand of camera, since there are many aftermarket improvements that can be made in that department.

[Gem Singer]

Hi Doug,

The Ebony line of cameras, especially the models that are made with the combination of ebony wood and titanium metal, are " as good as it gets" in the world of WOODEN flat-bed field cameras.

The Linhof Master Tech. is "top-of-the-line" in the world of METAL folding flat-bed field cameras.

There are wooden camera guys, and there are metal camera guys. I happen to prefer a wooden camera. After using several brands of 4X5 wooden field cameras, over a twenty year period, I switched to a metal Toyo 45AII. After using theToyo for six years, I realized that I prefered wooden cameras and returned to a wooden Ebony. It has nothing to do with the quality, features, or price of these cameras. The Ebony just feels better in my hands. A wooden handled tool feels better to me than a metal handled tool. I cannot explain the feeling in words.

It seems unfair to compare an Arca Swiss non-folding monorail with any type of flat-bed field camera, metal or wood. They are in a different class. Arca Swiss cameras are fine tools. They aren't inexpensive, either, but I wouldn't call their price exhorbitant.

[Frank Petronio]

The "problem" is that not many photographers are lucky enough to have used both an Ebony and a Technika, much less an Arca-Swiss or one of the other fine high-end cameras. I always thought the wooden Ebonies were abit too "pretty" - made for rich retired folks rather than real photography (no offense). So it's nice to see someone let the air out of their sails (sales?)

[e]

Seems to me if someone could get the quality of Arca or Linhof gearing into a wooden camera like the Ebony they would make a lot of sales!

[KenM]

At the risk of incurring the (good natured) wrath of a local photographer friend, I'll admit here that I just purchased a used Master Technika that I should be taking posession of next week.

I currently own a Gandolfi Variant Level 3 wooden field camera. All things considered, it's an incredibly full featured camera, perhaps even more full featured than the high-end Ebony's. In short, it has every movement excluding asymetric tilts. Axis tilts, base tilts, shift, rise/fall, and axis swing, on both front and rear standard. Geared focusing as well. You could almost call it a field camera on steroids, or a monorail in disguise :-)

One of the great things about the Gandolfi is it's ability to work with wide-angle lenses - because you can focus using the rear standard, you do not need to tilt the camera (or drop the bed) to prevent vignetting from the front standard. It's not alone in this feature, but it's a great feature to have, and one I'll certainly miss with the MT. It also has upwards of 480mm of bellows draw - pretty incredible for a field camera.

As someone who primarily does landscape photography, it's overkill. I only use front rise, tilts (primarly base tilts), and occasionally some front shift and swing. All the other movements are not used; the added weight of the extra features just becomes a burden when hiking - never a good thing. It's also a large camera; it can even be modified to take a 5x7 back.

Regarding the wood-vs-metal debate, to me it doesn't matter. If the camera has the capabilities you need, and is rigid enough for your uses, then it's a good camera. The Gandolfi was more than rigid enough for my uses, and I know the MT will be more so. Metal, while missing out on the prettiness factor, is certainly more robust and able to take more than your average bump.

I used to own a Toyo 45AII, but the way the front swing/shift/focusing worked drove me nuts - only an insane person would try to apply all these movements with this camera, since they're all controlled by a single lock. In fact, trying to apply any of these movements was a difficult task. Bad design, IMHO. However, other than this nit, the AII is a very well built camera. A friend now owns it; in fact, he has two :-)

Why the Technika? Well, I think the fact that it's used by so many 'well known' photographers (I'm not going to get into the discussion about whether or not they're *good* photographers - down that path lies too much fire and brimstone) is a pretty good indication of the strengths of the camera. Sure, it doesn't have all the movements, and it can be a pain with wide angle lenses, but the workmanship, the 'lastability', and the rigidity of the camera are legendary. As I've gotten older, I've moved away from the 'buy cheap/buy often' mentality, and now tend to buy the best I can afford, and buy once. I've done it with my woodshop tools, and how I'm starting to do it with cameras.

I'm considering this my last field camera purchase. At least, until next time :-)

[Gem Singer]

Frank,

Your statements are correct. Ebony cameras are, indeed, beautiful to behold. They are designed and manufactured by a very talented photographer named Hiromi Sakanashi. His LF photography is outstanding. I'm certain that he uses one of his own Ebony cameras to produce his photographs

I admit that I am one of those rich retired folks you refer to. I've been involved with photography for more than fifty-eight years, and I believe I've earned the privilege of owning an Ebony.

Perhaps some day you'll reach that stage in your life. It's a great place to be.

[Gem Singer]

P.S.

The only thing this entire discussion proves is that there is no such thing as a perfect camera.

If there were such a camera, everyone who could afford one would own one, and the competition would be scrambling to build a less expensive imitation.

By the way, the Gandolfi line of cameras is in the same price range as the Ebony cameras.

[KenM]

Eugene, you've pretty much nailed it. If weight and/or size wasn't an issue, anybody could build the perfect camera :-)

And I agree about the Gandolfi's - they are now as expensive as Ebony's - Gandolfi went through about a 20% price increase last fall. Ouch.

[Henry Ambrose]

I just bought an Ebony and am in the process of selling my Arca Swiss monorail on ebay. I completely agree that the Ebony does not function like the Arca - but then I didn't really expect it to. As Eugene wrote, there is no perfect camera - he surely did nail that one!

One thing that I've noticed is that many folks want the camera they are buying to do everything - easy to use with wide angles, roll film backs, long lenses, table top macro, lots of movements, light weight, solid and rigid, inexpensive. Of course you know you can't get all this in one camera. But even though you know this, "feature lust" creeps up on you when you're buying a camera and I think causes way too much worry and teeth gnashing. If you read specs and compare cameras you might find that a particular model has 4 inches of rise, another 3.25, another only 2 inches. Its real easy to get it in your mind that the 4 inch rise model is better - but you might be wrong - it will only be better if you need and use those movements.

I'm pretty sure at this point that buying a camera that does what -I actually do - is more important than that it be capable of doing anything I can dream up or read about. So I've replaced the Arca with an Ebony SW45 and I'm doing so without much regret because I am liberated from about 4 pounds of extra weight, a lot of bulk and unneccessary features. That is not a condemnation of the Arca Swiss - it is an incredible camera and I may own one again if I find I need it as the tool suited to the task at hand.

Now on the price issue, the funny thing is that I'm not spending any additional money in re-tooling. By the time I sell the AS and its bag bellows and tech lens board adaptor (stuff I added to make the camera do what I wanted) I'm about breaking even on the Ebony. Which is important 'cause I'm a long way from rich or retired. But I do want a good tool that fits the work with no extra frills while lacking nothing that I need.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

The only thing this entire discussion proves is that there is no such thing as a perfect camera.

Bingo! I've often said it myself - there is no perfect camera for all users or all uses. And there never will be. It's just not possible. One photographer's dream camera may be sombody else's nightmare. The beauty of a large format camera is that it's an incredibly versatile tool. A large format camera can be the ideal tool for photographing everything from portraits to architecture to landscapes to products, etc. With so many different applications, each with its own special needs, it just isn't feasible to have one camera that is "best" for all situations. Throw personal preference on top of that and it becomes clear why there are some many different "great" large format cameras on the market today - at a time when we are being told that film is a soon-to-be obsolete, rapidly dying medium.

Last summer I wrote an article on current model 5x7 cameras. That article included 24 different models from 14 different manufacurers made in seven countries on three continents - and that's just the currently available new models for the supposedly neglected 5x7 format. If you go down to 4x5, the number of choices skyrockets.

I've been fortunate (some would say - it's both a blessing and a curse) to have personally owned and used a huge varity of large format cameras. I've also had the opportunity to test and review many more that I haven't personally owned. I've used every brand of camera mentioned in this thread, and many, many more. My conclusion is that they all have their strengths and weaknesses - even the highly regarded brands like Ebony, ARCA-SWISS and Linhof. I have yet to find a single camera that is ideally suited to my own personal needs, let alone one that would satisfy "everybody".

These days I do most of my shooting with an ARCA-SWISS F-Line that I have custom configured to better meet my personal needs - and it's still not what I would call perfect. For starters, I wish it was about 5 lbs. lighter, but if it was it wouldn't be nearly as rigid, silky smooth or versatile. My other camera is a Toho FC-45X for when I want to go light. And it is indeed light, but in terms of convenience, versatility and precision, it's not in the same league as the ARCA (or an Ebony or a Linhof, etc.). Unfortunately, it's just not physically possible to have the best of both in a single camera.

Just so I don't drift too far off topic, I'll give my general impresions of some of the cameras being discussed.

Ebony (somewhat dependent on model) - Beautifully made wooden field camera. Very expensive. They tend to be heavier (sometimes substantially) than advertised. Although smooth and rigid for a wooden camera, top quality metal cameras like the Linhof and the ARCA-SWISS are smoother and more rigid. The non-folding Ebony cameras are fast to set-up and convenient to use with wide angle lenses, but lack the extension of triple extension folding field camera models or less expensive, but more versatile compact monorails (like the ARCA-SWISS F-Line and the Linhof TK45S - when was the last time your heard ARCA and Linhof referred to as less expensive alternatives?). The triple extension folding Ebony models take longer to set-up and are not as wide angle friendly, but can handle longer lenses.

Linhof Master Technika - Well built modern technical camera that folds up into a very compact, nearly indestrucible self-contained package. Fast to set-up if extensive movements are not required. Back movements limited and tedious to use. Capable of handling very wide lenses with the bed dropped, but movements severely limited by the fact that the lens resides in the body cavity. Maximum extension more than a double extension field camera, but less than the triple extension models and portable monorails. Rotating back vignettes with lenses 300mm and longer. Expensive.

ARCA-SWISS F-Line - Like the others, extremely well built. The cameras are actually quite resonably priced compared to other brands of comparable quality and features. By far the most versatile system camera that is compact enough and light enough to carry in the field. That said, it is still bulkier and heavier a wooden field camera or technical camera. With optional bellows and rails, this camera can easily be re-configured to handle everything from ultrawide to ultralong lenses. However, these optional accessories add to both the cost and weight of the standard cameras. Can even be easily converted to other formats (6x9, 5x7, 8x10), but again at added cost and weight. Very rigid, smooth and precise. With the telecoping monorail, the F-Line is very fast to set-up and use, yet packs down quite small for a full-feature monorail.

I'll stop there, but would just like to make one additional point. In addition to all the truly fine, well built cameras I've used (far more than I've mentioned here), I've also used many cameras that are far less elegant and a LOT less expensive. Two of the cheapest, most limited large format cameras I've ever used are a 50 year old Speed Graphic and a little Anba Ikeda Wood Field. Turns out, I've made several of my all time favorite (and best selling) images with these two cameras. While I agree that it can be very satifying to use a finely crafted, intelligently designed, smooth and rigid state-of-the-art large format camera, it's hardly required. Great imges can be made with anything that holds a lens at one end and a film holder at the other. Of course, there's nothing wrong with owning a camera that itself is a work of art. If it gives you pleasure, helps you make great images, and makes your life easier, why not? If I want to be picky, I can find fault with every make and model of camera made. Just as easily, I can also find something I like about every camera I've ever used. None of them are perfect, but in a sense, they're all good enough.

Kerry

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Good points Henry. It's funny (and really drives home the point), that you've settled on the Ebony and I on the ARCA-SWISS. Judging by the time stamps, we were typing our threads at the same time, agree on all points, yet still chose entirely different cameras. Goes to show how much personal preference comes into selecting an "ideal" camera.

Kerry

[Brian Ellis]

Last summer I replaced my Linhof Technika V with an Ebony SV 45Te (same camera as yours without the asymetrical back, which wasn't worth $1000 to me since I rarely used back movements). Initially I shared many of your thoughts about the Ebony and I posted several messages here somewhat critical of it - you probably saw my messages if you searched the archives. After reading the raves about the Ebony here I was, like you, disappointed in the relative lack of smoothness, precision, and "sturdiness" of it when compared to my Technika (I emphasize "relative," the Ebony is better in these respects than any other wood camera I've used but it isn't a Technika). Many times in the first few months of usage I came very close to doing exactly what you did, trading it in for a Master Technika or a Technika 2000.

But now that I've used the Ebony for about eight months I've changed my mind. No, it still isn't as precise, smooth, or sturdy feeling as a Technika (or probably any other well made metal camera). But it is a much better camera for me than the Technika in almost all photograph-making respects and it's more than adequately smooth, precise, and sturdy. Back movements are actually easy to use and so I find that I now use back movements much more than I used to. The Technika back is a PITA to use - you have to loosen and tighten the back knobs 16 times to use any back movements and then the movements are very limited. Plus the back just kind of "floats" in space so that it's difficult to keep things parallel unless the back is fully moved to one side or to the top or bottom of the back standard. The bubble level on the Technika might as well not be there. Since it's recesed into the top of the back you can't see it with the camera mounted on a tripod at eye level. The Ebony mirror system makes it easy to actually use the levels and now that I can see them I use them a lot. The strap is a little in the way when you open the mirror but it doesn't present any usage problems for me.

The Technika doesn't have front fall. I never thought that was a big deal until I got the Ebony and started actually using front fall - what a convenience compared with having to lower the entire tripod and stay bent over at the waist to compose and focus or get down on my knees as I used to do with the Technika. And of course the ability to use short focal length lenses on the Ebony without a recessed lens board and without having to fool around with dropping the bed and then bringing the front and rear standards back to vertical position while also keeping them parallel is a pleasure. I understand the 2000 is more wide angle friendly than the Master and earlier Technikas so perhaps this aspect of the 2000 is as good as the Ebony.

The longer bellows on the Ebony is very nice. Lenses longer than 300mm on the Technika pretty much have to be telephotos. I had a Fuji 400T for that reason but didn't care a whole lot for the lens so the ability to use a non-telephoto lens that long on the Ebony is a nice advantage. Finally, the Technika folding focusing hood is virtually useless for composing and focusing, it won't stay fully open unless you hold it open with one hand and that leaves only one hand to focus and compose which isn't enough. It's a very nice ground glass protector but for $500 it should do more than that. I don't use a folding focusing hood with the Ebony so I don't know how it would compare but I can't imagine it's any worse than the one on the Technika.

As we all know, there isn't a perfect camera. I still miss the feel of the Technika, that wonderful feeling of precision and smoothness, the way everything clicks into place and stays there without the slightest movement. But those intangibles, plus the extreme simplicity of opening and closing the Technika, are all I miss - thinking of the camera as an instrument for making photographs rather than an object of affection, the Ebony is a considerably better camera for me.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I use front fall all the time on my Tech V by taking off the accessory shoe, rotating the back 180 degrees, and mounting the camera upside down. It's quicker to be able to drop the lensboard in the normal way on my other cameras, of course, but this is one Technika quirk I've gotten used to.

[KenM]

Gee Brian, thanks a lot. Now I'm gonna have to sell the MT to pay for an Ebony :-) The Ebony must be the magic bullet for me, since I don't have one. Ha!

One of the major changes in my life is that I'm trying to simplify, simplify, simplify. I'm reducing the amount of equipment I have, as well as moving to a simpler camera. My Gandolfi has 17 knobs, and four levers. That ain't simple. When you're trying to capture the fading light, the last thing I want to be worrying about is tightening down this camera. A friend (who has a 'V') got off two photographs of fading light on a mountain top before I even had my camera setup. That single event convinced me that I needed something simpler, and easier to use. So, the choice of a simpler camera meshed with some lifestyle changes as well. Convenient.

I've seen an Ebony, and they are most defintely a fine camera - however, *I think* they suffer from the same problems that all the flexibility of the Gandolfi gives you - they take more time to lock down, and are 'fiddly'. I may be wrong as well, as I'm not all that familiar with Ebony cameras - perhaps it's only a few particular models that have a large amount of flexibility.

Regarding wide angle lenses, I'll certainly agree that wide angle lenses are a pain to use with the Technikas. However, the widest lens I have, and the widest lens I think I'll ever have (oh really?, he says) is a 75mm. I'm a mid/long-lens person, with my longest lens being the Fujinon T-400 (that you don't care for), so the MT will work just fine for me in that respect.

Regardless of what you use, the only thing that matters is that the camera is right for you, as everyone above as pointed out.

Cheers!

[Brian Ellis]

Hi Ken - You're right, the Technika is very fast to set up. I said that was one of the things I missed about the camera, the Ebony takes longer for sure though I don't think the time is excessive and it certainly isn't difficult to do.However, I put infinity stops on my Linhof and that really made it particularly fast to set up. I also know what you mean about lots of movements but I don't think I'd call the Ebony "fiddly." Two of the movements, four of the knobs, are base tilt front and rear and I ignore them so that cuts down somewhat on the "fiddliness" (we're coining new words right and left here). I used my Technika pretty happily for about five years. However, over the years I've changed the way I see and photograph, going from mostly close-up, tightly composed photographs to broader views, more "scenes" and fewer "objects." That led to wider angle lenses which in turn led to some unhappiness with the Linhof. I certainly didn't mean to dump on Technika cameras, I used mine happily for about five years, I just think the Ebony suits what I now do better. But the Technika is a great camera and there certainly are things about it I miss.

[paul owen]

When you try and compare cameras of different types, made from different materials you are bound to come to differing conclusions depending on the variables that you are comparing. Metal cameras have a more "metal" feel and for this reason they appear to be better machined, more stable, more precise - they may well be! Wooden cameras are often lighter, quicker to use (non-folding types) and more pleasing to the eye! What I think most people fail to realise is that unless you are shooting extreme studio-type shots that rely totally on 100% precision you simplt don't need the degree of precision that most cameras offer for 99% of general purpose shots. In the same vein how many of us have actually found that we have run out of a particular movement? My camera offers 30 degrees of front tilt - the most I have ever used is about 10 degrees! Same with shift and swing - my camera offers far greater movement than I will ever likely need. Same with "precision" - if my camera is not lined up 100% accurate I will never know! My shots will not reflect it! If I use a calculator and extrapolate that I need 3.5 degrees of front tilt how do I transfer this degree of accuarcy to my standard - the answer - I can't and anyway it doesn't matter! I don't need to be that accurate! It is a pointless exercise to compare a metal camera like the A-S with a wooden Ebony. They are different beasts and will appeal to different people for different reasons. I don't want to be fussing around with scales and tables when I am taking photographs. All I want to do is look at the miraculous image on the ground glass, apply movements that I see working on the screen and then exposing the film. Ebony cameras are not miracles - they only do what they say on the tin! They are stable, offer great movements and make the picture taking process a joy (for me anyway). I suppose its like comparing cars - some have much smoother controls but does that make them better/more enjoyable cars to drive? IMHO there will never be a perfect camera because we are all too different, but the Ebony comes pretty darn close!!!!!!!!! :-)

[Frank Petronio]

It's funny to observe that many non-professional landscape photographers seem to more expensive cameras (Ebonies and Linhofs) and lenses ($1500 Schneider 110XLs, etc.) than most full-time professional studio photographers!

[Donald Hutton]

I think Doug's comments reflect more about unrealistic expectations from a wooden field camera than they do about any quality or functionality issues with an Ebony. Personally, I'm a big Ebony fan (on my second) - it not only completely covers the functional demands I have, it also gives me a very enchanting sense of satisfaction everytime I use it, which I just don't get from any other photographic tool I own. The assymetric tilt on my camera seems very smooth on my camera and the simple zero detent seems to make far more sense than a complicated 'geared' system which would undoubtedly add a lot more in terms of cost to machine (out of titanium....). I personally find the camera to be very easy to focus (I often don't bother with the focussing bellows or a dark cloth), fast to set-up, plenty rigid (especially when I consider that I use a 58mm and a 450mm on it frequently) and a joy to use... But then again, I'm just another happy Ebony user!

[Frank Petronio]

I didn't mean to offend anyone. I almost bought an Ebony once. They are very nice!

[Christopher Condit]

PaulO notes that most cameras provide way more movement than most of us need, most of the time. Mostly I agree, but with one exception: rise. I live in a skyscraper town (San Francisco), and shoot lots of architecture/urban stuff. I wish every one of my cameras had double the rise they have. The main reason I bother with monorails a lot of the time, is to get more direct rise. No other movement do I need in such quantity, but I wish every camera could out-rise every lens...

[Michael J. Kravit]

I have owned an Arca Swiss and enjoyed it especially for studio work. In the field it required a bit of setup time and bellows swapping when changing lenses. The metric movements were nice and very accurate. Using the Arca to Linhof adapter made my lenses more compact and easier to carry.

I sold the Arca and bought the Ebony 45SU. I also bought an Ebony SV45U2. Great cameras. For architecture I like the 45SU non folder. It is extremely rigid and handles my lenses (37mm to 400mm) with no problems, and with the same bellows.

As far as the Arca screen being brighter than the Ebony.....I just did not find that to be the case. Without the fresnel the Ebony is OK, but add the Ebony fresnel and it is bright and alive. I regularly shoot the 45SU without a dark cloth. I find it to surpass the Arca in brightness.

Over the years the finish on my Arca began to scratch. The titanium on the Ebony looks as good today as when I bought it. When properly adjusted, the focus is smooth and accurate. The assymetric tilts are the feature that I love the best.

Both cameras are excellent, and both are tools that offer different ways of working. Personally I like the compactness of the Ebony and lack of a monorail.

In my opinion, the Ebony is the finest 4x5 I have very owned. It becomes an extension of my inner self when working and just does not get in the way. I also regularly borrow a friends Ebony 57SUE and enjoy it as much as the 45SU.

Some people seem to take satisfaction in bashing other peoples or manufacturers cameras. Perhaps it is insecurity, perhaps jealousy. In any event I find the Ebony to be a failry priced camera that is well made and a pleasure to use.

[Frank Petronio]

It's just jealousy. I'm secure ;)

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

By the way, the Gandolfi line of cameras is in the same price range as the Ebony cameras



Not quite, the most expensive model for the Gandolfi is a little over $2800, that only comes close to the cheapest Ebony 4x5 model. the most expensive Ebony model in 4x5 is more than $1000 over the Gandolfi price and it is still more expensive than a Linhof TK S.



If we compare 8x10 prices...well then Ebony is just way above the Gandolfi prices.

[R.Hageman]

"There is no perfect camera."

How true. Ive been looking for a good motor driven 8x10 with a 200 exposure back plus a sharp, light 800 / 1.4 that will fit into my glove box for years. You know, something for at the football games.

[Gem Singer]

Jorge,

The Ebony RW45, 4X5 field camera (lowest priced Ebony) can be purchased for (approx.) $1500. The 4X5 Wisner Traditional is (approx.) the same price. The lowest price Gandolfi is (approx.) $1800.

When it comes to 8X10 cameras, compare the movement capability, features, and materials. You'll soon realize why the Ebonys sell for a higher price than the Gandolfis in that format.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

The Ebony RW45, 4X5 field camera (lowest priced Ebony) can be purchased for (approx.) $1500. The 4X5 Wisner Traditional is (approx.) the same price. The lowest price Gandolfi is (approx.) $1800.



When it comes to 8X10 cameras, compare the movement capability, features, and materials. You'll soon realize why the Ebonys sell for a higher price than the Gandolfis in that format.

Yeah, but the lowest price 4x5 Ebony does not have all the movements that the Gandolfi has, hell, it does not even close, you have to carry the thing upright and then if you want to compare prices for 8x10, the Ebony made of Mahogany is about $2000 dollars more than the Gandolfi made of Walnut, with no significant improvements in movements. So an extra $2000 so I can have titanium? no thanks!



If you think Ebonies are the best thing since sliced bread, good for you, but lets compare apple to apples, for me, the extra money is not worth it, and yes, I can afford one if I wanted one. I would rather get a 12x20 for about the same price of a cheap Ebony 8x10.

[Gem Singer]

Jorge,

Let's agree to disagree on this issue, and leave it at that. There is no way that I can convince you that Ebonys are not over priced and no way that you can convince me that a Gandolfi is a superior value for the investment.

When I compared the features/price of the Gandolfi and the Wisner Tech Field several years ago, I decided on the Wisner. The Ebony that I now have is more expensive, but it is a better built camera than the Wisner, with more features. I believe that I have up-graded.

I am only referring to 4X5 field cameras. So far, I have resisted moving up to 8X10 because I enjoy making 16X20 wall hangers. Printing with an enlarger is my passion, and I don't have the facility for an 8X10 enlarger set-up.

[Jonathan Lee]

Jorge,

The cheap, if $1500 can ever be considered cheap, 4x5 Ebony (RW45) does fold up. The only movements missing are back and front shift. I'm not a big movement guy, I mainly use front rise/fall, so I don't care. The smartest thing about my Ebony is the universal bellows: I can get 400+ mm of extension and decent movements with a 75mm out of the same bellows.

[Jerry Greer]

I guess I’m one of the “poor-boyz”! I can only manage to own the cheap Ebony RW45 camera to produce landscape image for my calendars and books. One thing that I can say is movements are NOT A PROBLEM! Also, movements don’t do you a damn bit of good if you don’t spend a bucket full of $$$ for lenses with HUGE coverage, that is for us color photog’s anyway. But, I’ll go on producing my landscape images for my calendars and books with my cheap Ebony RW45 (lets not forget “no movements”) while Jorge and the others finish their pissing contest over their favorite camera. All that matters is that all of us Ebony owners love our cameras, whether we paid $1500 or $10,000. It must be a cult thing! Anyway, I’ve gotta get to the bank and cash a few checks! Checks that I received for calendar and books containing images made from my cheap RW45! Get out and shoot!

Hey Jonathan, you can get a 65mm lens to work on that RW without any problems, you don’t even need a recessed board!

www.mountaintrailpress.com www.jerrygreerphotography.com

Man, I love my EBONY!

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Jerry, there is no pissing contest here, while I own a Gandolfi I dont think it is the best camera in the world, and at the current prices I would not buy one. OTOH seems the pissing contest beguins when someone does not sing the praises to Ebony. In any case, I am only pointing out that Ebony and Gandolfi are not at the same price level if one compares apples to apples.

As to taking picture, like you I will continue to take pictures with my cheap Gandolfi....compared to Ebony that is.

[John Hollenberg]

I haven't owned an Ebony, but did consider buying one. When I first got into LF I did not know how different the "personality" of each camera was. Consequently, I have owned 5 cameras in the relatively short time I have been been shooting 4X5. The first two I sold (Tachihara and Toho) due to significant dislikes. Next I bought a Wista which I rather like after putting in a Maxwell screen. However, the lack of precision in making adjustments bothered me and detracted from my photographic experience. I may not "need" that much precision, but the lack of it was affecting my enjoyment and speed of operation. On the advice of an acquaintance from college I decided to try a Toyo 45 AII, due to its rigidity and ease of adjustment for simple movements (front tilt and front rise) that I expect to use most for landscapes.

Before I could start using the Toyo, I happened to run across an ad for a recent vintage Arca Swiss Discovery and was powerless to resist. I picked up the extension rail and Arca-to-Linhof lensboard adapter as well for a very good price. After using this camera on one shoot I am hooked! Yes, it is somewhat heavier and a bit more cumbersome, but once I am on location, it is perfect. As far as the issue of leveling the camera, I initially found it more difficult, but I came up with a good solution to that also:

1) Mount Arca Swiss B1 with quick release on Gitzo leveling base on Gitzo 1325 tripod 2) Set up the tripod on a level surface and adjust the leveling base so it is level 3) Attach the camera to the Arca Swiss B1 (tripod mounting block to quick release) and level it VERY carefully by adjusting the Arca monoball. 4) Lock down the Arca Monoball and don't touch it again while using large format!

When I go to set up now, I extend tripod legs to desired height, use leveling base to create a level surface for the monoball, then use only the panning adjustment on the monoball to rotate the camera. I don't touch the monoball main knob. This will get the camera very close to level and for 90% of shots will be fine. If I find that in spite of these steps the camera levels still show the camera off a bit, I can still fine tune the leveling by adjusting the leveling base using the camera levels as the guide, rather than the bubble level on the leveling base. This procedure takes about 15 seconds in practice, as generally all I have to do is level the leveling base (before the camera is attached), then whip the camera on the Arca quick release.

The bottom line is: finding the right tool for YOU to work with makes shooting more enjoyable. For me, that tool is the Arca. For someone else (say a wide angle afficionado) it might be the Ebony SW.

--John

[Gem Singer]

It must be a "pissing contest". My boots are all wet!

[Michael J. Kravit]

There is no question that Ebony Cameras are simply the best.

Bill

[tim atherton]

"There is no question that Ebony Cameras are simply the best."

At what...?

[Donald Hutton]

Creating envy in non-Ebony owners....

[Steve Daniels]

If any of you are decent photographers (and I know most if not all of you are) you could take any one of these cameras and make decent images (and decent money). Use what you like and have fun.

You know what is said about opinions - They're like A--holes. Everyone has one, and some of them stink.

I'm not telling you what I use (some of you already know).