Advice regarding field camera capabilities

[mmerig]

If your main interest is portraiture, you know how important it is to have a camera that focuses with a gear-driven rear standard. This should be a primary consideration in your choice of a folding field camera.

Are there folding field cameras with a geared rear standard? Do any of them even have what would be traditionally called a standard?

Why is it necessary to focus using the back? Why not just put it in the position needed and focus as usual with the front standard?

I don't use large format for portraits, so this is new to me. Anyway, it seems like a monorail would be better for portraits than a field camera.

[Jac@stafford.net]

I wonder why you specify a field camera. Does that mean:
Lightweight? Collapsible for easy transport? Rear and/or front focus. Compliant rear rise, fall? (Front is a given.) Rugged steel construction?

My modest contribution is the Century 1 8x10 including its extended rails. It has all but rear rise/fall. It has rear standard focus. It is so super lightweight that I find it difficult to use in a breeze. It is a classic worthy of replication which has not really happened yet ... I think.

[mdarnton]

If you set the lens at eye level and then point the whole camera down, without corrections, to include some or all body, then the body keystones--the head becomes bigger relative to the small feet, and the feet, being farther away, are out of focus. If you slide the lens down, keeping film, lens and body parallel, you maintain relative proportions of the top and bottom of the body without distortion as well as maintaining focus from top to bottom.

[Ulophot]

Thanks to all of you. I shall address several pertinent issues raised.
The first is, Boy! was I off with my measurement! After another poster had said he didn't think I would need so much vertical displacement, I put pen to paper and ran a quick calculation on my lunch break, figuring that the reproduction ratio of fitting an upper-body framing comfortably within a vertical orientation -- roughly 36" of actual height reduced to perhaps 4.25" in the image -- comes to a factor of about 0.12. Multiplying even 18" of needed displacement of the actual subject by that factor results in only abut 2" of lens/film vertical displacement. (Anyone who know how to properly count and calculate is welcome to explain why my calculation is wrong, but I don't think I'll ever use it.) As soon as I got home from work, I took out my camera, found an obliging family member to sit for me, and conducted the experiment -- camera level, adjustments zeroed, lens at eye level, from about 5 feet. Only 1.25-1.5 inches of displacement was needed.
I used back rise for simplicity, in order to leave the lens where it was; with a field camera, the displacement would be accomplished with a lowered lens, or possibly a combination of fall with camera tilt and re-righting back and lens. I suspect this will be little problem with many field cameras, as long as the design allows a bit of backward tilt fore and aft.

• Why specify a field camera? Yes, portability, weight, simplicity. The Omega 45 does not fold down like a Horseman studio. The hard case is nearly 20x13x15 and the weight is significant.

• While the Technika must be a very fine camera indeed, I am obliged to think more modestly for my planned location portraiture future. I did pretty well without a Sinar in my architectural work; I used what I had, and the portraiture will be less demanding in this regard and more demanding of my rapport skills than a remodeled home. Adequate movements, good condition with reasonable build and solidity -- these are all I really need. I neither need nor desire the very sharpest lens; my Komura 210 is fine and has very good coverage. On the other hand, I am not obliged to compromise with a purchase of something that almost does what I want, such as the mentioned, more inexpensive cameras that don't have back tilt or a back that can be either vertical or horizontal. Thus, I staked out the price range I suggested in my OP, based on other comments I have read in this forum and postings on auction and for-sale sites.

A purchase may be some months off. I'll certainly post about it when the switch ha been made.
If others have maker/model suggestions, I remain open. Thank you.

[Vaughn]

Not a light weight at 6.5 pounds, a Wisner Techincal 4x5 seems to fit your requirements:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...MonoChrome.pdf

Though the Expedition has the same movements at 4 and a half pounds.

PS -- both have back rise.

[Neal Chaves]

With a longer than normal lens, frequently used for portraits, in a close-up situation focusing with the front changes the lens to subject distance significantly and you may find it difficult or impossible to focus quickly and accurately.

[Doremus Scudder]

Not very many field cameras have rear rise. My preference is for lighter-weight wooden folders. Of those, the Shen-Hao TZ45-IIC is one. Here are the specs from the Shen Hao website ( http://www.badgergraphic.com/opencar...roduct_id=2533 )

"Specifications:
• Material Used: Black Walnut, Aluminium Alloys
• Format: 4"X5"
• Front: Rise 23mm Fall 43mm
• Base Tilt 90° Back 35°
• Front Shift: 36mm
• Swing +10° -40°
• Rear: Rise 55mm
• Base Tilt 90° Back 22°
• Swing +10°, -10°
• Back 8cm
• Bellows Draw: 75-340mm
• Weight/Exterior: 4.7 lbs./190x190x110mm"

That would certainly do the job.

There are many lighter wooden folders that have ~40mm of front fall. That may be enough for you, depending on lens and camera height.

The "point down and tilt parallel" method that you mention works fine but is a bit fiddly. If you don't mind taking the bit of extra time to set up the camera, that in conjunction with just about any amount of front fall should open up a wide assortment of cameras for consideration.

Best,

Doremus

[Ulophot]

My 45F is 11.5 pounds, so any weight reduction, plus the reduction the 3021 represents in comparison with my 3051, will be welcome. The Shen Hao and Wisner Expedition both look very good to me, if I can find one in my price range. I'll have to check specs on Tachiaras as well.

[Pere Casals]

Pretty foldable, 3kg, all movements, no extension limitation, touching it is a sensorial experience, Ansel used it, it's 1948 design, it's inspiring, its a piece of gear, works perfect in the field and in the studio.

[Bill_1856]

I have, and use, Crown Graphic, Super Graphic, Busch D, and Techinka IV. None of them is really suitable, hand-held, for the raised back/dropped front situation you describe. Since a tripod will be required, you might just as well keep what you've already got.