Linhof technikardan 45

[norly]

Hi.
I have heard that the newer technikardans have a snap position when the angles/levels are zero. Is this true and when did they get that? I dont have it on mine and sometimes I forget to check the levels properly... Could be practical.

thanks

[Noah A]

The newer TK45 'S' has center detents on the swings and tilts. I'm sure Bob S. can chime in and say when the newer S model was introduced...but it's been around for a while now.

The detents are nice and the swing detents make the camera faster to set up. The S model also has stiffer 'L' brackets apparently.

I've never used the older TK45 so I can't say how much of an improvement it is in practice.

[norly]

Well apparently you need the new model to run digital backs. Not that I want to but thats what ive heard... I would just like a second one so that I dont need to worry about sending it to service and such. Thanks fore the reply

[Noah A]

I'm not sure why you'd need the newer model for digital, other than perhaps that it's a bit stiffer or more precise. Really for digital backs a digital-specific design like the Techno would be best.

I know what you mean about a backup though...my TK45S is on vacation at Marflex (getting a CLA) so even though the camera is quite robust, a backup would be nice.

[Bob Salomon]

Well apparently you need the new model to run digital backs. Not that I want to but thats what ive heard... I would just like a second one so that I dont need to worry about sending it to service and such. Thanks fore the reply

No you don't. Both have the identical back. The difference is the standards and zero detente

[norly]

good point. But this seller guy (quite trustworthy) claimed that the old 45 was not as exact and therefore not suitable for digital backs, since they are a tad more sensitive then film... But as stated im not going to start shooting digital as long as there is some film still in production.

btw I just got my first package of kodaks new porta film, that will interesting to try. I hope its more like the NC in contrast and colors.

[Noah A]

I would defer to Bob on this one since he works for the US distributor of Linhof cameras...

However, frankly I'd say that neither TK is ideal for digital, but both will work.

I think you'll like the new Portra!

[Bob Salomon]

good point. But this seller guy (quite trustworthy) claimed that the old 45 was not as exact and therefore not suitable for digital backs, since they are a tad more sensitive then film... But as stated im not going to start shooting digital as long as there is some film still in production.

btw I just got my first package of kodaks new porta film, that will interesting to try. I hope its more like the NC in contrast and colors.

He is correct. Digital, with digital lenses, wants much more precise movements then an analog film camera provides. But that doesn't mean that people don't use them all the time for digital.

[Nathan Potter]

Bob, I'm not a digital camera user and am still pretty much in the dark age of film. But what is it technically about digital sensors and lenses that requires more precise movements (and focusing?) than analogue film cameras? I have heard this from others on occasion but can't quite grasp the jist of it. Perhaps it has something to do with the degree of digital lens color correction and the concomitant necessity to be dead nuts on focus. OTOH much of any image is slightly or more so out of focus anyhow so the sensor pixels are going to see overlapping blur patterns. I think I just need to be informed about this to keep up my level of intelligence in the 21st century!

Don't mean to redirect Norlys thread but this has drifted into the discussion above. Some pessimistic individuals retort to me that this is mostly a marketing ploy but I kinda believe that there may be something to it if only marginally.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Arne Croell]

Bob, I'm not a digital camera user and am still pretty much in the dark age of film. But what is it technically about digital sensors and lenses that requires more precise movements (and focusing?) than analogue film cameras? I have heard this from others on occasion but can't quite grasp the jist of it. Perhaps it has something to do with the degree of digital lens color correction and the concomitant necessity to be dead nuts on focus. OTOH much of any image is slightly or more so out of focus anyhow so the sensor pixels are going to see overlapping blur patterns. I think I just need to be informed about this to keep up my level of intelligence in the 21st century!

Don't mean to redirect Norlys thread but this has drifted into the discussion above. Some pessimistic individuals retort to me that this is mostly a marketing ploy but I kinda believe that there may be something to it if only marginally.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

Digital backs are smaller than your typical film in LF, so you need a smaller focal length for a given field of view, and if you want to use their full resolution, you need a comparatively wide f-stop to avoid diffraction (typically f/11 instead of f/22 for good contrast at 80lp/mm). Depth of focus is proportional to the f-stop and inversely proportional to the focal length, so you have less of it in this case and need more precise focussing. Because of the shorter focal length, swing and tilt angles required to focus a given object plane are smaller, and thus, together with the smaller depth of focus, one needs more precision there, too. Geared movements (which the TK does not have except for focus)help. But it can certainly be done with a camera like the TK, which I own and love.
I have used and use both the TK 45 and 45s, and the main difference is that your setup is definitely faster, since you don't have to zero 4 different swing and tilts - especially important if you carry it around in a backpack like I do.