from sinar f2 to ebony sw45 ???

hi

I have been using a sinar f2 wide angle bellows, 90mm xl, 150mm HM . I want to now go to a ebony sw45 80mm ssxl, 120 xl ss. i quite often use alot of shift at close range(narrow streets) and wonder if the normal bellows would vignett. I also would use a 210mm lens at full rise(with an extender panel) would this be a bit shakey?

I do so much travelling that the weight of the sinar is a bit much, but like any photographer i dont want to be limeted by my camera. Has anyone made the same transition?

I wouldnt mind getting a lighter 150mm lens like the 150mm L but i do like using alot of rise with the lens, the ebony goes to 60mm does anyone know if the 150L would cover that or do i still need to carry the much bigger 150 HM and is there any other reason i should keep the 150 HM ? would it be sharper?

thanks tom

I recently bought an SW45 for what seems to be the same reasons you are considering it. I also have an Arca Swiss which I am completely happy with other than the weight and size. As I almost always use wide angle lenses I felt like I was carrying a lot of extra capability that I never used. I'm not sure why you'd want to go to new lenses - I suppose you want a bit wider view than you have now. I like my 80 Schneider and the 110. I'd pick the 110 over the 120 if you want lots of movements. The SW allows 60mm front rise. The smaller Schneider 150 covers 230mm so the camera will out move it but I think the real question is how much movement do you need? Do you use all the image circle of your current 150mm lens? If so, then keep it because it covers more than the 150L.

Tom,

My first LF was a Sinar F2, I then got a Wisner 4x5 and the lastest is a Linhof Technikardan.

If I had my time all over again, I would have bought the TK as my one and only camera. All the movements of a monorail, which packs down to the size of a flatbed camera and has a great set of bellows.

Hope this helps .... Ron

http://www.icon.co.za/~panfield/

To me at least, these make more sense than an expensive Ebony that compromises movements for the sake of building a pretty camera.

Frank,

I wouldn't hold up the Panfield as an example of outstanding movements in a camera. It has no rear swing or tilt, so it's only half a camera when compared to almost any wooden field camera. The Ebony may be pretty, but it also has plenty of functionality.

I'd take the Ebony over the Panfield anytime!

Graeme

Graeme

I suspect Tom doesn't need a camera with a lot of rear movements. It sounds like he shoots architecture or subjects requiring similar equipment. If true, than shift and rise/fall movements of the back standard is generally what's only needed since you'd generally want to keep the rear square and upright.

The Panfield is specifically designed to be a very compact and lightweight specialist half-a-camera for largely architectural photography applications (I own one). For that end, it's excellent. I like the fact that it takes Linhof boards and Horseman/Sinar rear accessories.

The Panfield is not quite suitable for a lens longer than 150mm though, unless you bring along a slightly kludgy extension rail and a normal Sinar/Horseman bellows. But a lot of 4x5 or 6x9 architectural photography doesn't require a lens longer than a 150, though I do find an occasional need for one.

Actually, I was looking at Shen Hao's copy of the SW45 until I saw that it has a fairly rigid bellows which may not allow for a lot of movement with a very short lens, not like the SW45 Ebony. That Shen Hao doesn't appear on their current catalog though.

Regards
Tan