Venturing into 4x5

[Helena]

Hi! I'm glad to have found this forum.

I am a professional portrait photographer, but am using only digital means for my business. However, on the side, I do what I really love, which is landscape work (much easier to make money on portraiture than on landscapes, unfortunately). I currently have been using my MF gear (Hasselblad 503W) for most of my landscape photography, but for quite some time, have been wanting to get my hands on a 4x5.

So here is my loaded question. Which 4x5? Actually I have narrowed it down to two - the Ebony 45SU or the Linhof MT 2000. I have read, researched, and read some more, and understand on paper what the disadvantages and advantages are for these two cameras (I think). I know it may be unfair to compare these two, since one is a tech camera and the other a field, but indulge me if you may.

What I'm hoping is for someone who have experiences with these two cameras to tell me their thoughts.

One request - please don't tell me to try a cheaper 4x5 first, etc. I also do not want to go bigger, eg. 8x10, etc.

Thanks so much - your help is much appreciated. I am dying to get my hands on one of these cameras but cannot decide on which one. And no, I cannot afford to buy both!

- Helena

[Wayne Crider]

Welcome Helena. Although I cannot comment on either camera, there are people who will come after me to tell you what you need to know. Have you been able to try out any cameras in the field? Sometimes a little experience with a rental or friends clunker is worth a thousand words. Beyond that, nice to have you aboard.

[John Jarosz]

Hi Helena,
If you haven't already, you may want to read some of the thoughts here:
http://www.photographyreview.com/cat...6_3106crx.aspx

They are for the most part positive reviews, but there are come comments worth reading between the lines on.

I think your decision should be based on what kind of landscape work you envision -- ie what length lenses you think you'll be using. You can use telephotos for long lenses if you don't have the bellows travel, but teles are a lot heavier and limited in selection and coverage.

Comparing a metal drop bed to the wood field camera is tough.

You don't say where you are from or where you think you'll do most of your shooting but metal cameras can be pretty cold to use in the winter.

The Linhof is really a 5x7 in size because it has the rotating back. Rotating backs are very convenient but the weight is something you need to consider if there is any backbacking involved in your work. The rangefinder adds weight as well, do you need that for landscape?

Just some thoughts, I wouldn't know which one to pick out of that choice.

john

[Doug Dolde]

The Linhof is surely more compact, rigid, and precise. I owned one and liked it a lot. However it's downside is limited movements. There is only limited front rise and no fall. Tilt can be done with the front standard (axial) or the back. Nevertheless many landscape shooters favor the MT2000.

I also owned an Ebony 45SU. It indeed has more movements and is a pretty sweet camera. I found the stock Ebony fresnel rather poor and would recommend a Maxwell screen if you go this way. To me the Ebony seemed rather imprecise especially in the focusing although this is typical for wood cameras. Not to say it won't focus but rather that the movement seems sloppy compared to a metal camera. The Ebony is extremely easy and fast to set up; I think a bit more so than the Linhof.

I'm now using an Arca Swiss Field and like it better than either the Ebony or MT2000. I often use the +/- 50mm back shift to get a panorama by stiching two frames. The image on my home page was made this way.

[Brian Ellis]

A couple corrections to a previous post, then some thoughts:

The Linhof is really a 5x7 in size because it has the rotating back. Rotating backs are very convenient but the weight is something you need to consider if there is any backbacking involved in your work. The rangefinder adds weight as well, do you need that for landscape?

The MT2000 doesn't have a rangefinder. It also isn't 5x7 in size, a rotating back doesn't convert a 4x5 camera into a 5x7 camera.

I've owned two Ebony cameras but not the 45SU. I presently own a Classic Master Technika, which is basically the same camera as the 2000 except for the 2000's ability to use shorter focal length lenses.

Both the SU and the 2000 weigh about the same (the 2000 is about half a pound heavier I believe), both have roughly the same bellows extension (though the SU gains its 360mm from a 120mm bed by a long extension that slides out from the much shorter camera bed, I'm not sure what that does to the stability of the camera), both accept Graflok backs, both have similar movements. Of course the obvious difference is that the MT folds and the SU doesn't and one is wood and the other is metal. I'm assuming price isn't a relevant consideration for you.

I sold my Ebony camera to buy my Linhof Master Technika, having previously sold a Technika V to buy the Ebony. After using the wonderfully engineered, precise, smooth, solid, etc. etc. metal Technika V I couldn't accept the comparative imprecision of the wood Ebony. I also didn't like the three wheel focusing system of my Ebony (a 45SVTe) but I'm don't know whether the SU has that unusual system or not, my guess is it doesn't since the bed is so short. A non-folding camera has always seemed very inconvenient to me but people who have used them say they aren't so I'd have to take their word for it. While non-folders are quick to set up, the Technika is also very quick as well so I wouldn't think there'd be a huge difference there.

Obviously since I sold an Ebony camera to buy a Master Technika I would prefer the 2000 as between the two cameras you're considering but Ebony makes very fine cameras and I wouldn't recommend one over the other for you. It probably comes down to whether you can live with a non-folding camera and don't mind the comparative imprecision, lack of smoothness, etc. of a wood camera vs a metal camera (I emphasize "comparative" here, the Ebony is not inherently an imprecise or unsmooth camera, it has those attributes only in comparison to the metal Technikas). It would be interesting to know, and perhaps people here could be more helpful, if you would tell us what leads you to consider only these two cameras, i.e. what is it about each of them that appeals to you.

[John Jarosz]

OOps, wrong camera. My apologies

John

[Helena]

Thank you all so much for taking the time to help.

Brian, one of the reasons why I have narrowed my choices down to these two cameras, and I apologize in advance if the reason seems trite, is that part of my enjoyment from photography is in using finely crafted, beautiful instruments. From my research, Ebony and Linhof seem to be two of the best cameras out there in LF. Furthermore, I believe that Ebony and Linhof will have higher resale value should I decide that I do not want to continue to pursue LF. Many have suggested that I try a "lesser" 4x5 camera and then move up, etc. But I don't want to bother with that - budget is always a concern, but I do have $$ set aside for this as I have been contemplating for quite some time.

Anyhow, from what you've written and from other research I've done, it seems like the Linhof may be the way to go for me.

Having said that, Brian, do you use your rangefinder a lot? I am thinking of the MT2000 because it is a bit more compact than the Classic, and not so much due to the extreme wide angle lens capability. The Classic goes for quite a bit more, and I'm wondering what yours and others thoughts are on this issue (whether the rangefinder is useful). I don't see myself handholding my 4x5.

Thanks again.

- Helena

[Macy]

Helena,

I know exactly what you're going through. I went through the same conundrum last year when I decided to get into LF. I was choosing between a MT 2000, a Classic, and the Ebony SV45SU. I ended up getting an Ebony 810SU. But, to make a long story short, the timing was all wrong, life got in the way, and the Ebony sat on my shelf for 3 months. Then I sold it for nearly as much as I paid for it (I do think that if you buy quality resale will be better). Now I'm back at square one. Well, not quite. I know I don't want 8x10, at least not to start with. It was big.

Life has settled down. I also have a portrait business (www.macymills.com), and I am once again thinking about venturing into LF.

I will say that this is a great forum - Brian, Steve H., Scott R. - have all helped me when I was in your position. Good luck in your decision.

Regards,
Macy

[Ole Tjugen]

Helena -

I know you have narrowed the choise down to two cameras, but so had I...

I used to use a 5x7" Linhof Technika. It was truly a precision instrument, but due to the weight I didn't use it as much as I could. It was just too heavy to carry for long distances. I know that this doesn't apply to the 4x5" to the same extent, but still...

Then I put in a shamefully low bid on a Gandolfi Traditional 5x7" - and won it. Within a month after this, I sold the Technika as I found the Gandolfi to be every bit as much of a precision instrument, and 4kg lighter! The only advantage the Technika had over the Gandolfi was two inches of bellows, which I've so far missed exactly once (it can't focus the 420mm rear half of a 240mm Symmar Convertible without putting the cell in front of the shutter.

The 4x5" camera I use now is a Carbon Infinity, which for my use is perfect. But they're rare, expensive and out of production - and accessories (like lens boards) must be specially made...

[Gordon Moat]

Just wondering if you have looked into and compared this ARCA Swiss Misura:

http://www.galerie-photo.com/arca-swiss-misura-us.html

http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/c...ct_detail&p=20

I have seen one in person in use, which had the metal carrier. Quite a nicely crafted and well made camera. Also seems that ARCA Swiss hold quite good resale value. The price of this one is near what the Ebony 45SU and that Linhof run at Badger.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat

P.S. - I have used a different Linhof, with rangefinder, in the past; they are quite nice to use.