Worthy Linhof Contenders

[AdamD]

You could also do all that easily with the Chamonix and universal bellows.

Exactly...but that the purpose of the other thread I started titled, "Chamonix F2 vs Xxxxx". In there I'm trying to find alternatives to the F2 and it's capabilities. Then, when I find interesting alternatives, I start other threads like this one.

It's been really helpful to nail down the cameras that are as versital as the Chamonix F2. There really aren't any that I've found that can check all those boxes....

The Arca-Swiss F-Line and Linhof Technikardan are the two standouts but I. Both cases you STILL need an extra set of bag bellows to cover the same range. So, whether it's an easy swap or not is another story, but the point is, Chamonix is doing something others just aren't doing.

The next question I'm really trying to understand is, do the Arca-Swiss F-Line or Linhof TK offer other benefits that are NOT capabilities of the Chamonix F2? Is there some advantages they have over the F2. Weight and compactness are definitely not.

Movements maybe? Maybe a little bit...
Precision of movements might be the biggest difference, but I'm not even sure if that.
Availability of accessories? Cost of said accessories?

Now you're getting into the details of overall cost of ownership which is a good conversation to have.

Good stuff....

[Robert Opheim]

I bought a used Technikardan years ago because I take a lot of architectural photographs. It has a bag bellows available. I have used the bag bellows with: 58mm, 75mm, 90mm, 92mm 112mm, and 135mm lens - with whatever movements that the lenses will allow. Prior the the Technikardan I had a Graphic View II and a Toyo camera both with fixed bellows. I was always fighting the standard bellows and corrections - I had to make corrections in the enlarger.

Cameras are a tool - you need to figure out what you want to do and pick the best tool for the job. There may not be a perfect camera.

I also take images of: landscapes, close-up details, etc. If I was shooting a different subject matter I might use a different camera.

[Michael R]

Exactly...but that the purpose of the other thread I started titled, "Chamonix F2 vs Xxxxx". In there I'm trying to find alternatives to the F2 and it's capabilities. Then, when I find interesting alternatives, I start other threads like this one.

It's been really helpful to nail down the cameras that are as versital as the Chamonix F2. There really aren't any that I've found that can check all those boxes....

The Arca-Swiss F-Line and Linhof Technikardan are the two standouts but I. Both cases you STILL need an extra set of bag bellows to cover the same range. So, whether it's an easy swap or not is another story, but the point is, Chamonix is doing something others just aren't doing.

The next question I'm really trying to understand is, do the Arca-Swiss F-Line or Linhof TK offer other benefits that are NOT capabilities of the Chamonix F2? Is there some advantages they have over the F2. Weight and compactness are definitely not.

Movements maybe? Maybe a little bit...
Precision of movements might be the biggest difference, but I'm not even sure if that.
Availability of accessories? Cost of said accessories?

Now you're getting into the details of overall cost of ownership which is a good conversation to have.

Good stuff....

It is somewhat of an “unfair” comparison - monorail vs folding wood field type. But anyway.

You will not ever find a field/folder with as much movement flexibility as a good monorail. To some extent, the field type is designed for more convenient portability, at the expense of total movement freedom/flexibility and sometimes rigidity at extremes. That’s why I’ve been telling you from the get go there is no do-it-all view camera design that doesn’t involve compromises. Different cameras manage the balance of attributes in different ways.

One of the strengths of most rail cameras is that not only do you get maximum movement range (more on this in a minute), but more importantly that you have the same movements and ranges on both standards. That is a particularly important feature for some photographers under certain circumstances, notably architecture photography where it is often helpful to have the same vertical and horizontal movement flexibility front and back. It can also come in handy under some studio/tabletop/closeup circumstances.

Regarding the sheer movement ranges, inexperienced users often overestimate the range they will typically need, particularly for most landscape photographs. This is especially true for tilts/swings. Big movements are usually most applicable relatively close range/tabletop studio photography. A good amount of rise/fall and shift range is typically needed for architectural and some urban landscape photography, but often as long as you have a good amount of rise range on the front standard, and/or can tilt both standards, you can do fine.

“Precision” is a tricky one. What do we mean, exactly? For movements specifically, if we mean fine, geared adjustments, printed scales for angles etc. then yes rail cameras typically have more of those things than field cameras, but again, those are really more useful under relatively complicated “studio” conditions. Another type of “precision” I have always looked for is how truly squared up the camera is when zeroed, and how simple it is to zero. That’s important to me, not to most people. And it is difficult to say which type of design is better for this. It has more to do with the particular camera and how well it is constructed.

Availability and cost of accessories - well, what kinds of accessories do you think you will need? Typically, the higher end rail cameras (Linhof, Sinar, Arca...) offer(ed) a much wider selection of accessories. In particular Sinar’s System was modular and you could transform your camera into whatever crazy machine you needed. But how much, if any of this stuff do you realistically need? Besides lens boards, maybe a few recessed boards, and a wide angle bellows what else do you think you might need? Chamonix doesn’t have a huge range of accessories, but they are much cheaper new than Linhof or Arca. Some Linhof accessories (Technika/Technikardan lens boards for example) will work on the Chamonix.

Of course I’m generalizing, and if you don’t have a lot of experience I still say:

1. Think about what kind of photography you want to do
2. As you work with any camera you will adjust to it, and also become better able to decide what features you like and don’t like.

These points are really important in my opinion because this is ultimately a personal thing. There are few rules. Even under similar circumstances two photographers might have drastically different ways of seeing and preferences for the way in which they get the shot. Consider some quick examples: Mark Citret’s personal work spans a relatively wide range, yet he has a preference for rail cameras with the same movements on both standards. George Tice does a lot of urban landscape work, mostly on 8X10 film, and has used the same Deardorff clunker since the late 1960s.

[AdamD]

It is somewhat of an “unfair” comparison - monorail vs folding wood field type. But anyway.

You will not ever find a field/folder with as much movement flexibility as a good monorail. To some extent, the field type is designed for more convenient portability, at the expense of total movement freedom/flexibility and sometimes rigidity at extremes. That’s why I’ve been telling you from the get go there is no do-it-all view camera design that doesn’t involve compromises. Different cameras manage the balance of attributes in different ways.

One of the strengths of most rail cameras is that not only do you get maximum movement range (more on this in a minute), but more importantly that you have the same movements and ranges on both standards. That is a particularly important feature for some photographers under certain circumstances, notably architecture photography where it is often helpful to have the same vertical and horizontal movement flexibility front and back. It can also come in handy under some studio/tabletop/closeup circumstances.

Michael R, et al,

You always have good things to say. Thank you again!

You are right that the field vs monorail is somewhat unfair AND you are right about the advantages of the monorail design.

But you are hitting on the needle I'm looking to thread! I'm looking for the most flexible, lightweight, yet ridged monorail that is "backpackable" to compeat with the good quality field cameras such as the Chamonix F2.

Yes this will be a compromise on weight and size, but the added benefit of the monorail design is a worthy compromise to make.

So you're right on in your assessment and guidance.

The conclusion I have come to is if I want the best "do it all" type of camera to provide the best of both worlds to the greatest extent possible the possibilities come down to the: Arca-Swiss F-Line and the Linhof Technikardan.

Those two cameras really fill three roles: studio, field and cover the widest range of subject possibilities (landscape, architecture, portrait....)

So, do I really need that? IDK!!! For the things I shoot today, and the frequency I shoot Im totally fine keeping my Cambo SC. I figured out a way to pack it in a bag and set it up in the field in under 4 minutes!! I can pack it back into the bag in under 4 minutes!! It takes me about 5 minutes usually to take a shot.

Anyway, can I get away with less flexibility and go with a dedicated field camera like the Chamonix F2? Absolutely. Now let's talk cost....

The Arca-Swiss F-Line and the Linhof Technikardan (used) go for around $1200-$1500. The Chamonix F2 goes for $1400 new after tax and shipping.

So the price is a wash. Granted, the F-Line and TK will need extra bellows (~$200) so they may cost a bit more overall, but still pretty close. So, for the same price, it boils down to capabilities vs weight.

Right now I'm in the camp of capabilities and so my search is on!! I found an F-Line. Just need to verify some aspects of the details......

This thread has been a HUGE help to me. What did we do in the days before this forum existed!!!

Thank you all.

[6x6TLL]

The conclusion I have come to is if I want the best "do it all" type of camera to provide the best of both worlds to the greatest extent possible the possibilities come down to the: Arca-Swiss F-Line and the Linhof Technikardan.

Those two cameras really fill three roles: studio, field and cover the widest range of subject possibilities (landscape, architecture, portrait....)

So, do I really need that? IDK!!! For the things I shoot today, and the frequency I shoot Im totally fine keeping my Cambo SC. I figured out a way to pack it in a bag and set it up in the field in under 4 minutes!! I can pack it back into the bag in under 4 minutes!! It takes me about 5 minutes usually to take a shot.

Anyway, can I get away with less flexibility and go with a dedicated field camera like the Chamonix F2? Absolutely. Now let's talk cost....

The Arca-Swiss F-Line and the Linhof Technikardan (used) go for around $1200-$1500. The Chamonix F2 goes for $1400 new after tax and shipping.

So the price is a wash. Granted, the F-Line and TK will need extra bellows (~$200) so they may cost a bit more overall, but still pretty close. So, for the same price, it boils down to capabilities vs weight.

Right now I'm in the camp of capabilities and so my search is on!! I found an F-Line. Just need to verify some aspects of the details......

This thread has been a HUGE help to me. What did we do in the days before this forum existed!!!

Thank you all.

I have an Arca F-field metric (with the smaller front standard & lens board), I can get it set up and zero'd in in about 1 minute from the bag.

Haven't (yet) needed a bag bellows, but for more extreme movements on the shorter end of the scale, probably will at some point.

Good luck with your search!

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

It is somewhat of an “unfair” comparison - monorail vs folding wood field type. But anyway.

That's right.

Even if it sounds a little heretical now: I do not understand the Chamonix as a folding camera. Folding means to me that you can fold the camera as it is. And that the camera is ready to shoot as soon as you press the zip button. "Zack", as we say in German-speaking countries. Something like a "Taschen-U-Boot" (inflatable pocket submarine).

For me, for example, a Graflex Crown Graphicis a folding camera, a Technika, a Horseman 45FA: with these cameras, you're ready quickly, you protect the lens from dust, as well as the bellows, and you don't burden yourself with assembly and disassembly.

The Chamonix, on the other hand, is in my opinion a camera on an optical bench, that is built as a flat plate, unfortunately without a hole for the mounted lens. A design flaw, because if you're already using a plate, you could have made the Deardorff-style gears on the sides. A Deardorff, an FKD protect the bellows better than the Chamonix, which needs an extra cover that also weighs something.

Don't cut corners: a Horseman 45FA without dark cloth and neoprene wrap doesn't weigh much more than a Chamonix with these things.

A Technikardan is also not the measure of all things. There is also, for example, the absolutely excellent Toyo VX125, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYy3xZSJXgQ ...

[lenicolas]

I'm looking for the most flexible, lightweight, yet ridged monorail that is "backpackable" to compeat with the good quality field cameras such as the Chamonix F2.

Has anyone suggested the TOHO (not Toyo!!) 4x5 monorails?

[GG12]

That's right.

Even if it sounds a little heretical now: I do not understand the Chamonix as a folding camera. Folding means to me that you can fold the camera as it is. And that the camera is ready to shoot as soon as you press the zip button. "Zack", as we say in German-speaking countries. Something like a "Taschen-U-Boot" (inflatable pocket submarine).

For me, for example, a Graflex Crown Graphicis a folding camera, a Technika, a Horseman 45FA: with these cameras, you're ready quickly, you protect the lens from dust, as well as the bellows, and you don't burden yourself with assembly and disassembly.

The Chamonix, on the other hand, is in my opinion a camera on an optical bench, that is built as a flat plate, unfortunately without a hole for the mounted lens. A design flaw, because if you're already using a plate, you could have made the Deardorff-style gears on the sides. A Deardorff, an FKD protect the bellows better than the Chamonix, which needs an extra cover that also weighs something.

Don't cut corners: a Horseman 45FA without dark cloth and neoprene wrap doesn't weigh much more than a Chamonix with these things.

A Technikardan is also not the measure of all things. There is also, for example, the absolutely excellent Toyo VX125, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYy3xZSJXgQ ...

That is one fine camera...didn't know of it, but really nice and precise.

[Gabe]

A Technikardan is also not the measure of all things. There is also, for example, the absolutely excellent Toyo VX125, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYy3xZSJXgQ ...

I almost mentioned the VX125 before. Indeed it was a camera I had considered getting myself, but ultimately was put off by the fact it had base tilts, a strange proprietary mounting plate which would require a jerry-rigged replacement Arca foot in order to be compatible with my tripod setup, and finally I decided I didn't want to be limited by its rather short maximum extension in the default configuration.

[Joseph Kashi]

Has anyone suggested the TOHO (not Toyo!!) 4x5 monorails?

The Toho is excellent for field work, if you can find one. I was lucky and found one in nice condition for $625 after looking only a few months., The Toho detaches into two pieces, the collapsible monorail with complete base movements built into the monorail and the detachable lens board-bellows-film back unit. I replaced the original tripod mount block with a Neewer 70mm Arca Swiss-compatible QR plate - it's an easy two-screw direct replacement,

Total weight is about 3.5 pounds. Minimum lens board length is about 6 inches, A 75mm Fujinon SW uiltra-wide-angle lens focuses to infinity with a normal flat lens board. Maximum practical bellows extension is a bit over 15". Stability and rigidity are decent, but be cautious not to deflect the film back when using a focusing magnifier near the top.

This camera takes round lens boards, but can also mount stock Technika lens boards if they are mounted at an angle. That looks odd but works well and is light-tight., I made some spare round boards by generally rounding Technika boards with a jig saw using a metal-cutting blade, This works - the lens board light trap is the same as the Technika by design.

If you look under the DIY section, you'll find the 5x7 conversion that I was able to make using the same Toho collapsible monorail and a new 5x7 lens board-bellows-film unit that clips into the base movements of the Toho monorail unit.

FWIW, I bought my Toho from a retiring East Coast professional photographer who used it for studio and tabletop product work despite its apparent design goal as a highly compact, exceptionally portable monorail camera for backpacking. He was satisfied with it as a studio camera for demanding work.