Originally Posted by
Doremus Scudder
Simple answer: In order to keep field cameras light and costs down, they can't have all the features at once (those that do, and there are a few, are bulky and heavy). So manufacturers trim down "unnecessary" features to keep the cameras small and light. Normally, bellows length suffers (many field cameras only extend to 300mm or so), making the use of longer lenses impractical. Similarly, bellows are usually fixed and standard pleated types, making the use of movements with shorter lenses difficult. Many models don't have shift, some don't have swings or tilts on the front standard. Most field camera adjustments are not as precise as top-of-the-line monorail cameras either.
A first decision to be made is whether the field camera will be wood or metal. Wood is lighter, weaker and usually the adjustments are not as precise. Metal is strong, easily machined to be precise, but heavy and more expensive. Both types have their advantages and market niche, so both are out there.
So now, along comes someone who says, "lets make a more full-featured or specialized field camera for xxx photographers." Do we want to appeal to users of short lenses that need a lot of movement, say architectural photographers? Well then, we need to incorporate a bag bellows and have lots of movements available, but we don't really need a long bellows or even a camera that folds closed. Result: a specialized "wide-angle" field camera with a short bag bellows, shift on at least one standard and swings and tilt on both standards (maybe even one with asymmetrical swings and front axis tilts to help the photographer work faster). But, to keep things affordable and light, we'll sacrifice the longer bellows (making the use of even moderately long lenses impossible) and maybe another feature or two.
Or, lets go the other way: We need a field camera that has lots of bellows extension and is solid as a rock and strong enough to use heavy long lenses. This may result in a camera that doesn't play well with shorter lenses and doesn't have a lot of movements available, but will accommodate 450mm lenses ore even longer.
Say we want a field camera that can do it all. Well, it will be bigger, stronger, heavier, have interchangeable bellows, lots of movements, and be basically a monorail-type camera with a bed instead of a rail. It will be more expensive and heavier.
Do we want extreme lightweight? then cut most of the movements, limit bellows length, use lightweight (usually weaker) materials, and design the thing so it will do well with lenses in the middle range (135mm-240mm).
Do we want a sturdy rangefinder camera for handheld photography? Look no further than the Graflex and other press cameras. They're metal, bullet-proof, but have limited movements.
Do we want more precision? Then machine a metal masterpiece like the Linhof Techikas. Downside: more expensive and heavy.
There are endless variations on the above depending on what a manufacturer thinks they can profitably offer for whatever segment of the market.
Hope this helps,
Doremus
Bookmarks