It would appear to me that a monorail camera would require beefier components to be rigid and have the extensive movements associated with that design.
It would appear to me that a monorail camera would require beefier components to be rigid and have the extensive movements associated with that design.
Most of the posts subsequent to my earlier thoughts fall into two camps: either "why bother to make a lightweight monorail, because we already have excellent systems cameras (Sinar, etc.)," or "it would have to be heavier to be rigid." The answer to the first question, is "because that was the question to OP asked," and for the second, if any of you watch F1 motor racing, you can make almost anything both light and rigid using the proper carbon fiber or similar composites, because F1 cars undergo stresses orders of magnitude greater than any camera would have to, and they are made almost entirely from CF and composites. (Of course those cars cost several million dollars each, but that was not part of the question.)
Lower weight = easier to move = less stable under applied energy ... like wind.
Camera movement during exposure could be an issue.
It's all a trade off.
Bernice
i've actually been working on a design for a lightweight wooden monorail and tripod that both fold down flat for easy storage. no budget to actually start building anything right now though.
I am sure that you could make a monorail that was lighter than most, but that is only half the battle. The biggest problem with making a portable monorail system is it's bulk rather than it's weight. I have a monorail and I could easily deal with the weight of the camera if only it would fold up smaller.
Monorails are not necessarily heavier than folding 4x5's. For example, my Arca-Swiss F line weighs in at about the same weight as a Zone VI 4x5; it's actually lighter than a Wisner Technical 4x5. And, IMO, the Arca-Swiss is sturdier and more precise than either of the wooden folding cameras. The Ebony SV series were nice, stable folding cameras, but, again, about the same weight (and price!) as the Arca-Swiss. The design of the Arca also allows it to "fold" down to a compact shape easily carried in a backpack. I've used several folding wooden 4x5's over the years and still own the very first one I bought, but I prefer the Arca when working from the car or carrying it over short(ish) distances. If I'm really heading out on a long trek, I'll take the Toho outfit.
If practicality were the only consideration we'd all be debating cell phone cameras
A LF camera better grab hold of your fancy if you expect to go galivanting around with all that awkward and heavy gear,
or else it will sit in the closet attracting dust.
Maybe a folder, maybe a monorail----if it's what a hobby photographer wants and can afford, that's what a hobby photographer will likely go for.
The rest of the details are logistical challenges.
"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority"---EB White
I thought about substituting a custom carbon fiber rail on a Sinar, but it would be a lot of work for very little actual weight saving, unproven and hardly worth the effort. Just take along a candy bar for a little more energy instead. I once nearly passed out up around 11,000. I had been up there several days and was acclimated, so I wondered if there was something suddenly drastically wrong with my health. Then, sitting there on a rock that morning, I realized that I had been having such a great intense time photographing with my Sinar, that I had completely forgotten to eat anything over the last 24 hrs! A candy bar cured me, on back on the pack went.
Putting all the "eggs" into the camera basket again.
After each and every possible technological effort has been put into reducing the weight of the camera to .... 100grams... or less,
The added up or combined weight of lenses, film holders, tripod, tripod head, dark cloth, light meter, filter set and all required to
make images with a view camera has yet to be discussed and all up weight is gonna be a LOT more than 100 grams of
über techno view camera.
Fact remains, making images with any image recorder is a system not camera alone.
Bernice
Nowadays lots of people find it addictively necessary to haul along certain electronic conveniences which would easily offset the weight if those gadgets were left behind. For example, if you've already got a view camera for taking pictures, why do you need a damn laptop along too, plus a solar panel atop your pack to keep it charged? If somebody is a career writer, and likes to do that out in the woods - fine. I sometimes encounter those kinds of people; but they aren't apt to be carrying view camera gear too. Or somebody might find it necessary to carry the extra weight of a folding camp chair, where there are already all kinds of logs and rocks to sit on - same kind of folks who think they need an anodized forty dollar designer-logo pee bottle in their tent.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks