See http://largeformat.homepage.com/toho.htm for an in-depth review by Kerry Thalmann of the Toho 4x5. It's a monorail that seems to have been designed for fieldwork. He reports on his experiences backpacking with it and compares it to the (more expensive) Canham DLC and to a (cheaper) wood field. It looks interesting.
I have a Toyo 45A. It's a rugged little camera. I thought the wooden flatbeds too flimsy. I had an original Calumet monorail before, and the 1/2 inch rail flexed too easily for field work.
I used the Toyo recently for the first time in a quite few years outdoors. Yosemite at 35 to 40 degrees. The focusing was stiff. So I just bought a Toyo 45CX. It has a 39mm (1.5 inch) rail which won't flex. Everything on it seems easy to use. I can even see how to remove the lensboard 0 detent, since it seems to stiff. Big bonus: all my 45A accessories work on this camera. Lensboards, backs, etc. And it's only $550 discounted, so it's about as low as you'll get for an entry level camera. It weighs a couple of pounds more than my 45, but that's not a big deal.
Basically,
1)I think monorails are easier to use; 2)They are a little bulkier; 3)You can get a monorail that doesn't weigh much more than a metal flat bed; 4)I can't recommend wooden view cameras, but lot's of people like them.
Good luck! Charlie
Well David, since I haven't seen you out in the canyons and mountains where I do a considerable amount of my shooting, I will stick with what I said. "Most of the LF photographers I see out in the environments where I do most of my photography use field cameras." The photographers that have monorails don't have a problem with using them when they get them set up, just that their set up effort is more than mine. Some have had short rail models and fit into their packs easily. The longer versions had to be disassembled to fit into their packs efficiently. Monorail cameras have their advantages and disadvantages. My Gandofi flatbed field camera( which isn't meant to say it's the greatest camera) uses lenses 90mm to 480mm all on the same toyo boards. It is a very rugged camera and has had it's share of spectacular spills with no adverse effects and gets wet quite often with no harm. Flatbeds fold up neatly, quickly, and efficiently into small packages. Most have more than adequate movements front and rear. Except for Toyo A1's and such, most flatbed cameras don't need to drop their beds to use short lenses. If you use a mono rail camera, great. No disapproval here. But from my experience, most of the shooters I see use field cameras because they are so much easier to fold up and store in a pack easily. And if you need more than a few small movements to get everything from your feet to the distant horizon in focus or that flower or that building, maybe you need to visit Mr.Schiemflug again. You might have missed a lesson or something. I'm not saying monorails aren't great cameras. I'm saying I don't see that many of them out in the wilds far from the roads. James
I'd like to ask a provocative question for my own information. Please do not smite me with flames. My LF camera is a Super D Graflex, which has no lens or back movements (tilt, shift, or rise). To increase depth of field I simply stop down to f:32 or f:45, while carefully checking the ground glass for sharp focus. To correct for unwanted converging lines in the negative I tilt the enlarging easel. It is quite rare when I need to do either of these things. I wonder how much others actually use their lens or back movements when in the field. 1)Often, 2)rarely, or 3)almost never?
Quite often when there are any straight lines such as buildings or windows/doors in the image. Or if I want to exagerate an existing foreground object or lengthen /shorten the foreground, door/window, or legs. James
Stopping down as far as you do does increase depth of field and reduces lens performance if you go too far do to diffraction.
On the other hand tiltiing or swinging the lens does not increase deppth of field. It controls the plane of focus. So does moving the back (although with a change in image shape).
For extreme sharpness from near to far both a tilt and or swing as well as closing the lens down to its diffraction limited stop is commonly used with view cameras.
Simply stopping all the way down is not the answer.
As to correcting on the easel rather then the film means that it is virtually impossible to make 2 identical prints at 2 different times. It is far better to simply eliminate the convergence (or introduce it) at the time the picture is made.
Bill, I use at least one of those movements for virtually every LF image I make. Front rise/fall and rear shift I use most commonly, followed by tilts of either standard, followed by swings. I try to set up in such a way that the less moveme tns i need to do the better but very occasionally (and never in the field) I end up with a combination of some times as many as six or more movements (each stand ard having four types of movement not counting focus).
I have never used a monorail, only a flatbed camera. On the Technika and other f latbeds, the axial point of the lens is about 95mm from the base of the camera. This compactness is quite re assuring when working outside, with air streams coming from everywhere. Looking at monorails (Technika rdan, Arca-Swiss) makes me somewhat giddy, for the axial point is about twice as high. In practice , does it really make a difference in sensitivity to vibrations due to wind?
Paul... despite higher pivots, my Arca-Swiss is much stiffer than my Toyo 45A was... as for wind, although the profile is higher, there are fewer large flat surfaces (bed, sides) to catch the wind so it seems to be an even trade.
Scott: In seeking advice about whether to buy a flat bed or monorail camera, you need t o consider whether the person giving the advice suffers from "homo erectus dysfu nction." People with this syndrome only take pictures with the camera positioned at eye l evel. At this level, very little lens tilt, if any, is needed to bring the groun d (horizontal plane) into clear focus from the near to the far. These people can get along fine with cameras that have limited movements because their needs are modest. Because of their limited experience, these people may be clueless why a ny one would need to tilt the lens 5 to 10 degrees to maximize sharpness along t he horizontal plane. A few landscape photographers are noted for wide angle images in which the camer a is positioned within a few feet of the ground. I think of these people as "hom o neandertals," because they assume a stooped or seated position and at times pl ace their knuckles or palm on the ground. Lowering of the camera to this height magnifies the foreground and allows small objects such as few flowers to fill th e lower third of the print. Lens tilts of 5 to 10 degrees are needed to realign the plane of focus and bring both the foreground and infinity into sharp focus. Lens tilts of this magnitude are needed at lower camera heights in order to ensu re convergence of three planes at the same point: the horizontal plane (represen ted by the ground), the imaginary plane that passes through the optical center o f the lens and tilts as the lens is tilted, and the plane of the film. The most prominent photographer that I can think of who uses this technique is David Muen ch. If anyone thinks it incredulous that I would need more than a few small movemen ts to get everything from my feet to the distant horizon in focus or that flower or that building, maybe he needs to visit Mr. Schiemflug again. You might have missed a lesson or something. Regards, David
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks