Wide-angle shift aid for a folding camera

[Paul Schilliger]

The Linhof Super/Master Technikas are great universal tools but like most foldin gs, are somewhat irritating by the absence of a direct lens downward shift. Inst ead one must work with the back tilt, using sprit levels and being very careful on lens alignment. (Bob, don't you think a Master 2000 with a 20mm down shift po ssibility would be a great tool? I think it would be worse the extra overall siz e of the camera !) Since they wont build one extra for me , I am figuring out a way to improve my takings with wide-angles. I could get a Technikardan, Arca or other compact field monorail, but then, would be somewhat limited on my favorit e long lenses. Screwing extensions, changing bellows or carrying two cameras: no thanks. So I am figuring out a way to work on the lensboard, whether by having a totally excentred hole and working to normal with the lense rise, or an excen tred board that could be turned on either side to encrease shift possibilities i n both sides. Or by having a special device like those made to give shift possib ilities to normal lenses on medium format cameras, but there is very little spac e around the lensboard. Has someone already experimented?

[M.]

I don't remember it ever coming up, but the easy fix would be to live with the convergence, and correct in the enlarger. If, for some reason it's a frequent problem, one can always use a wider lens and lower the whole camera a little.

[Paul Schilliger]

For the purists, I should have said "lens fall" instead of "downward shift". Sor ry.

[Patrick Chase]

Hi Paul;

I'm intrigued by your comment about being "somewhat limited on my favorite long lenses" with a monorail. The Technikardan has a maximum extension of 48 cm (19"), which is more than a Technika, so I can't see where you'd be liomited there.

The Arca-Swiss F-line's maximum extension is somewhat limited in its default configuration, at 38 cm (15"), but can be inexpensively upgraded to provide a maximum extension of 60 cm (23.6") by replacing one of the 15 cm monorail segments with a 30 cm part, and by adding a long bellows (with the F-line Compact you'd want to add the 25 cm rail extension II instead, which would bring the max. extension to 55 cm).

-- Patrick

[Bob Salomon]

I don't understand your reasoning.

The TK has everything you want in a folding camera + 4" more bellows than a Technika so if a technika is OK with your long lenses the TK is even better.

Secondly a Technika has limited rear rise by pulling the back out. That would make up for the lack in front drop.

of course the TK has lots of front rise/fall + lots of back rise so this is not a problem on the TK.

[Paul Schilliger]

OK Patrick and Bob, you are right about the Technikardan, although I am not sur e what the shorter focal is that can be used with the standard bellows. But let me put it another way: I love the folding camera as it spends more time on my back than in the studio. With it, I use len ses from 47mm (which is contrary to the rules but rules are to be trepassed) to 360mm. For me it is the perfect tool and it would be a pain to turn to an awkward packing gear such as a monorail. Recently, I was several times confronted to the same situation: taking tables decorated with flowers and candl esticks in the setting of a grand hotel, or decorations in shops. In both cases I needed a rais ed point de vue but very close to emphasize the foreground. It would have been easy with a monorail, but with the SuperTechnika, it took a little bit of pain, setting the back and lens with a bu bble level in a rather dimm light. The same situation could have been found in nature when shooting flo wers for exemple. I guess I should comply to the rules and not ask for the impossible. But I have se en that there are a few centimeters below the lens hole in the plate and ...I confess...I am a rather st ubborn person.

[Bob Salomon]

Again I am a bit confused by your answer. Have you really played with a TK?

The TK is a folding camera. It folds quickly and easily to book size, appx. 4x8x10". Not that much different than a technika.

The TK can use lenses as short as the 35mm Apo Grandagon (in a special board).

The question about the bellows has 2 answers.

You can focus the 35mm at infinity using the standard bellows. Any lens from 35mm up will focus at infinity with the standard bellows.

But you probably want to be able to do camera movements.

You will need the wide angle bellows to do movements with lenses from 35mm to 90mm.

The above is not true for the 23 TK as it does not have the double conical bellows design of the 45 so the wide angle bellows is required to get extreme w/a lenses to focus at infinity.

[Paul Schilliger]

Bob, I rekon, I have never handled a Technikardan. I have now the illustration u nder my eyes and the 6x9 seems very compact and well protected when folded. I suppose the 4x5 folds i n the same pattern, with perhaps less protection on the bellows. It could be true that this camera w ould suit my needs better than a Master and I will certainly give more attention to it, following y our and Patrick's comments. Still, I assert that a new Master 2000 with a 20mm lens fall would be the most tempting camera and in fact, all I need. I have carried a S-Tech V intensively in my back pack for many years,in rugged conditions, it has fallen a few times, has taken rain, dust and some misu se too without great damage. Most of all, I like how fast it is ready to shoot. This is essential to me. Would the Technikardan be as quickly and easily deployed? Can it take a shock (reasonable) without bending and blocking the moving parts of the rail? ........ Thank you for your time and comm ents!

[Bob Salomon]

The TK opens and closes much faster than a Technika and to date (13 years after introduction) has proven extremely reliable and very durable. There is far less to go wrong than with a Technika.

[Robert L Jones]

Paul,

I certainly don't have the experience of Bob when it comes to Linhof equipment, so I'm not about to disagree. However, I've used both the TK 45 and the Technika V in the field, and I prefer the Technika. Earlier this year I sold my TK 45 and bought a Technika V, and I've never been happier. The problem I found when backpacking with the TK was the settings would shift and I would spend more time resetting everything to zero before actually getting the shot set-up. (I also never collapsed the camera fully unless traveling, so the smaller size wasn't appreciated when hiking.) The Technika just pops open and everything stays at zero (or where you left it) without the constant fiddling. So I've found the Technika to be faster to use in the field. In addition, when using longer lenses with bellows extension, I've found the Technika to be more stable, probably because of the mass; the TK would sometimes have its bellows act like a sail in a brisk wind.

I do miss the ease of using shorter lenses on the TK, but I'm not unhappy with the long end on the Technika (I have no desire to use, or carry, anything longer than my Fujinon 600). At the short end, I use the 55/4.5 APO Rodenstock and focus with either the internal rail movement or by extending the back, since I want to avoid added the extra weight by using the WA Adapter (about 13 oz). As for 20 mm of downshift, I never seem to want to move the front quite that much. Most of the shorter lenses don't have sufficient coverage so they make the issue mute. I don't believe any lens presently made that is shorter than 75 mm (except the Schneider 72 XL) has that large of a circle. The WA adapter is mainly needed for 75 mm and shorter; it seems to be ideally suited for the 65 range. To avoid this difficult range (that places a lens between the internal rail and the first rail, while at the same time forcing you to drop the bed one notch), I on use the 55 and then skip to a