Ebony SV45TE or the SV45U2

[Dave_B]

All:
I am wondering if the asymmetrical tilts on the Ebony camera are worth the extra cost. I would be interested if anyone has experience with both the SV45TE and the SV45U2. I have read some of the threads on the Ebony and there are comments that the asymmetric tilts are not very smooth and that the titanium binds. Primary use will be landscapes out west.
Thanks,
Dave B.

[Eric James]

For a field camera, the SV45U2 movements are smooth. Rear AS tilt glides over a thin sheet of Teflon; rear AS swing isn't quite as smooth but the titanium certainly doesn't bind. Greater maximal extension is another reason to favor the U2 over the TE. Price and weight favor the TE. Good luck with your decision!

[Doug Dolde]

I didn't like the assymetric tilt on a 45SU I had. It does have teflon but I found a sticking point when using just a few degrees tilt.

Now I use Orbix on my Arca Swiss Field and love it. I prefer front tilt to back tilt anyway as it doesnt cause as much delta in the focal distance from top to bottom. This in itself is reason enough for me. The larger delta on back tilt will require a smaller f stop increasing diffraction.

[walter23]

I prefer front tilt to back tilt anyway as it doesnt cause as much delta in the focal distance from top to bottom. This in itself is reason enough for me. The larger delta on back tilt will require a smaller f stop increasing diffraction.

Wait, that makes absolutely no sense to me at all. Unless the movements are different types (axial and base, etc), back tilt (to the rear) is exactly equivalent to the same front tilt forward. Well, I mean, except in that one moves the film plane and one moves the lens plane - but assuming you reoriented the camera.

Am I missing something else here? Or is that what you mean (tilting without changing camera position).

[Steve Hamley]

I'm the one that posted about the asymmetric movements being not smooth, binding. It makes little difference in 4x5, so go with the U/U2. The asymmetric movements are otherwise worth it; you'll buy only once. You can tell the effect is there, but in the small formats it just isn't an issue IMO. If I were going 5x7 ebony wood or larger, I'd either get symmetric movements or right of return after a trial period for an asymmetric model.

BTW, the model with asymmetric movements that correspond to the SV45TE is the SV45U, not the U2, which adds rear shift, a pound, and another $500 (and an inch or so of bellows).

Steve

[Ted Harris]

I'd also ask if the TE is worth the extra cost over the Ti and, for that matter, if you really need the additional features offered by the T series as opposed to the RW?

[Herb Cunningham]

Ted, I had an RW and found it too limiting in bellows. As far as ebony wood vs
mahogany, I could care less.

[PViapiano]

The 45s non-folder is a great all-around camera and has the extra advantage of being able to use all but the widest lenses without a recessed board, although the shorter bellows (270mm) could be a drawback to some. The extension back adds 90mm, and it works great and is made with the same care and craftsmanship as the cameras are.

I don't find any trouble focusing without the asymmetrical movements..

[PViapiano]

To Walter23:

A back tilt (on the film plane, of course) does cause a change in the shape of the image, a slight distortion.

Jack Dykinga mentions this is in his book, Large Format Nature Photography, and can be used to your advantage by emphasizing foreground subjects.

If back tilt is used in conjunction with a corresponding front tilt, as happens many times with architectural photography when the camera is aimed slightly upwards, then the distortion will not occur, as long as the film plane (back) stays parallel to the subject plane.

[Dave_B]

Folks:
Thank you for the information. As always, the willingness of the people on this site to share their expertise is wonderful.
Dave B.