I am thinkinh of purchasing either the Linhof MT Classic or the MT2000 for mainly landscape purposes. I do not usually use wider than a 75mm lens (approx. 24mm in 35mm? except with my Horseman 612 which I like using the 45mm) but I would like to keep my options open. My question is how useful is the rangefinder on the Classic for landscape? Does anyone use it for landscape at all? Is it worth sacrificing the rangefinder for ultra wide angle capabilities?
Many thanks.
I don't have the camera in question but have researched it very carefully as I intend to get the MT2000 at some point.
For critical focusing, and in any instance where the front and rear rear standards are not parallel, then a lupe is necessary anyway. i.e. if you use tilt or swing then the range finder is not much use.
Where the rangefinder is useful is for handheld action or documentary style images. However, for the rangefinder to work you must have a cam link made for each of your lenses as they are specific to focal length and need to be very accurately machined. The cams are not cheap so unless you are prepared to get them made for each lense you want to use, then there is no advantage to getting the MT classic. The 2000 is cheaper and lighter and will take much shorter lenses if ever required. My thoughts are that I would never be likely to use the camera handheld so the range finder is unecessary.
I am a rangefinder freak for 4x5, MF and LF, so consider the source.
If you use swings, tilts, then a rangefinder won't be useful. If you do only work that doesn't require movements, and you stick to one lens (for example, 135mm), then the Technika is a horrible waste of money - you can do as well or better with alternatives I can mention in another thread. Finally, if you do not use the rangefinder, then the beautiful, precise Linhof optical viewfinder can be replaced with a little bit of experience, or much less expensive equivalents.
Many lenses for the Technika come with cams. No special grinding required. I am referring to model V and later, of course.
All that said, if you DO use straight rangefinder work a lot, and you ALSO do ground-glass work, then the Super Technika (the Classic) is awesome - cannot be beat for a single field camera solution.
The rangerfinder is very useful when you need to get a shot in a hurry, or when you do not want to be behind a dark cloth. Think balancing on rocks or on boards in a swamp, or on the remains of a hurricane damaged pier - all of which I have done. You need the Linhof varifocal finder to really use it effectively so that your framing is accurate. (I have an older Technika, but the principle is the same.) Rob is right - you need cammed lenses, but these are sometimes available on Ebay and are interchangeable on the MT. If you are buying a new one, they make you a good deal on camera, lens, cam package. (Within the very limited context of a good deal on a Linhof.) Marflex will cam a lens for $250 last time I checked, which is a terrific deal. I have a camed 90 and 150, and I use the 90 with the cam a lot. I shot about 150 images of hurricane damage, and most were with the rangefinder on tripod so I could work quickly and in some nasty places. You cannot use it with tilts, but you can use it with the front raised a bit - you get pretty good at guessing elevation to reduce the foreground.
Ed Richards
http://www.epr-art.com
I like the rangefinder--rarely for landscapes but sometimes it's useful in low light, if you're not using any camera movements and just stopping down for DOF.
I do use the camera handheld like a press camera, and you might find that if you have a 4x5" with a rangefinder, you'll find uses for it. It's great for travel, where I might want to switch off between view camera mode and press camera mode, shoot everything in the same format with the same lenses, and not have to bring another camera.
The rangefinder is also handy for portraits, so you can check focus with a filmholder in the back.
The widest lens I use on the Tech V is a 55mm Apo-Grandagon, and while it can be done, it's a little awkward. With the wideangle focusing device, the rear cell just barely fits and needs to be adjusted very carefully so it doesn't rub against the side of the focusing device. Once you've got that sorted out (a one time operation, and then it's set), you need to be sure it's set on the inside track so that you have a reasonable focusing range without the focusing knob hitting the center filter (do it a few times, and you'll have it). If you've got any slight imperfections in the way the bellows folds, you might have some bellows vignetting that can't really be resolved without replacing the bellows or adding some front rise/fall shift, which could cause other kinds of vignetting (I have this problem with the back in the vertical position, so for verticals I either use the camera sideways or with a little front rise). Maybe the new Linhof helical mounts avoid these pitfalls, but they add substantially to the cost of the system. It's workable, but if you really use 47mm or 55mm lenses often, the MT2000 is a better option than the Classic.
I have the Linhof Master with the rangefinder and have a 90mm, 150mm and 200mm lenses cammed for this camera. When I acquired the camera I honestly felt that I would use the rangefinder component regularly for most of my 4x5 shooting.
The reality of the situation is that for candid off tripod shooting in crowded places, for spontaneously shooting people or where tripods are not allowed the range finder component is truly fabulous.The extra film speed in T Max 400 is a great partner in these conditions. I had Marflex perform the camming and install the infinity stops and they did a fabulous job.
However, for landscape work even though I know that it may not be always absolutely necessary I seem to find my comfort zone on the ground glass. I drop a set of infinity stops and pull the front standard into position and it is a breeze. If you decide to use movements however, I am always on the ground glass just to make sure.
Using wide angle lenses or shooting architecture would be better served IMHO by the Linhof Technikardan 45S. The Master Technika in either designation is a great camera but has its limitations. It is a heavy very expensive camera.
I know a guy that has a Super Speed Graphic and has several lenses cammed for his camera and although his camera has less bellows extansion (about 12/13"), he paid under $400 for his camera and it makes marvelous images.
I remember reading that John Sexton uses the Master for landscape and the TK45S for architecture / wide angle lenses. Both are great cameras but are designed for different applications.
Cheers!
IMHO, without the use of coupled lenses, a Technika is a clumsy and overpriced substitute for a good modern field camera such as a Wista, Horseman, Canham, etc . OTOH, it is a PITA to change cams.
Wilhelm (Sarasota)
" it is a PITA to change cams."
How is simply pulling a cam out and pushing a new one in a PITA? There are no tools required and all one needs do is put the lens standard into the body and extend the bed rails till the cam is exposed. Then a simple pull to remove and a simple push to replace.
Brian,
I shoot landscape almost exclusively. For years I had used a Sinar F, then agonized ages over buying a true folding field camera. I finally got my MT2000, about 3 years ago and have never regretted the decision (at the time I had to get over the cost, but I'll be using this for decades).
I always compose and focus on the ground glass, so the rangefinder would be of no benefit to me. I think that at least 90% of the time I am using at least front tilt with medium and longer lenses, up to 300mm.
When I use my 65 mm, I usually use back tilt, with this camera front tilt is difficult with the lens inside the body but the back tilt works great. In fact, I am glad I didn't follow Linhof's recommendation to use the special lens boards, as they negate the possibility of as much movement of the back.
The camera is built with incredible precision and is extremely durable. I have seen them tumble across asphalt parking lots and pick up only abrasions. I have also heard of them surving staircases. I do recall someone on the forum who had one fully open with an extended bellows, on a tripod have the entire rig slammed down a precipice by a gust of wind and it did bend the door. But if I recall right, the owner went on to get a new one.
For my uses, the 2000 is a good choice and is excellent value for the price. (I drive a 6 year old pickup truck which fits my life style better than a Mercedes Benz.)
As Michael above notes, John Sexton uses the MT as does David Muench, Bruce Barnbaum, John Fielder, along with a host of other landscape folks. I only dream of doing as well as some of these great photographers, but I will also vouch that the camera supports me well in the field, leaving me to concentrate on the photograph.
"John Sexton uses the MT "
John has had the 2000 almost as long as it has been available. He traded his MT Classic to Glazers for it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks