Very small field cameras

Some observations. I'm with Andy and Frank on this one - given the limited awareness of what kind of images OP wants to take.

The practical advantage of LF today is movement.

It used to be image quality, but when portability in the field factors, you need to make a large commitment for a backpack 4x5 rig that doesn't leave you room for water and your other hiking gear. Medium format rigs took over the need for high-quality negs/transparencies for many. Field cameras don't have much movement, probably because they aren't used that often.

In spite of my fantasy of bursting from the bush into a Moran or Bierstadt painting after a 3 day hike, I'm willing to bet most landscapes are taken <300 yds of the car.

"Slow process" is rarely a driving force to do anything for long; improved moral fiber is a secondary benefit if you're getting the image results you want.

So, in most cases you can handle 90-100% of your needs with a very small commitment to a good monorail that is still semi-portable and has more capability.

As background, I take out my ancient Graphic View with a friend, who owns nothing but a magnificent Canham 5x7. It's a beautiful thing, but our images are largely indistinguishable and it takes about the same time to set up and haul around from the car, on our big, clunky tripods. "Portable" and "LF" are an uneasy mix of words.

If you've made a commitment to LF, go crazy. It's nice to own "the best" equipment.

- Charlie
 
The best way to quickly quit LF field photography is to get a "lugable" monorail and stay within walking distance of your car. Seriously stop worrying about movements and just go out and shoot with the thing. The only field worthy monorails are the toho and the arca swiss. The rest are heavy monsters (seriously?? a sinar??) most cameras will have enough movements for landscape. Once you develop your own style and if/when you need more movements then get a more specialized camera.
 
stompyq said:
The best way to quickly quit LF field photography is to get a "lugable" monorail and stay within walking distance of your car. Seriously stop worrying about movements and just go out and shoot with the thing. The only field worthy monorails are the toho and the arca swiss. The rest are heavy monsters (seriously?? a sinar??) most cameras will have enough movements for landscape. Once you develop your own style and if/when you need more movements then get a more specialized camera.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I don't know what this obsession with movements is. Movements really aren't the only (or even the main) reasons to shoot LF. I have a Chamonix 45N-2 which offers very generous movements and frankly, most of the time I'm limited by the image circle of my lenses, not the movements of the camera. Besides, the only movement I regularly use in the field is a bit of front rise.

I can fit the camera, a 135mm lens, a 210mm lens, 6 loaded film holders, a light meter and a bunch of accessories like a loupe and cable releases all in my Domke F2 bag. I could easily fit four of these fully loaded bags into a typical blue Sinar suitcase.

(I would add the Linhof Technikardan 45(s) to the list of field worthy monorails although I hear they have a problem with the bellows easily wrinkling.)

Also, I think the notion that you save money by going with something cheap like a Crown Graphic is a bit too simplistic. These cameras are very old so they're more likely to fail in one way or another (be it bellows, rangefinder or other mechanics). If that happens you're left with a $300 paper weight or you spend a few hundred dollars to get it fixed.
On the other hand, if you buy a used Linhof Master Technika classic for a few thousand dollars and take normal care of it, you're likely to sell it for close to what you paid or even the same. So the question isn't really how much money you want to spend but how much money you want to have tied up in cameras. And the answer to that mostly depends on how much money an individual has at their disposal.
 
Small, compact?

How about the pocket 45 made by Peter G... sorry, the old glamor photog - can't think of his last name.

Whoops - Gowland.

A little finicky to use but super light and compact.
 
Thank you all for the inputs. Despite the many recommendations for Monorail cameras, I just don't think it would be portable enough for me. Not just the weight, which is a more minor concern, more the set up time.

My budget should be OK, as I'm selling some gear at the moment, so maybe a Linhof Technika would be possible. The Toyo 45a is the most appealing at the moment, thanks to the comments by Vince Lupo. I'm not obsessed by movements, but I do like the effects that these guys have been able to achieve:

http://www.twinlenslife.com/2011/09/nyc-in-irenes-eye.html

That seems to be with a tilt/shift lens on a Rollei SL66, but that is pretty much what I'm going for. Landscape/Cityscape with a bit of a difference is my aim.

Should the movements in a Toyo field or similar be enough for something like that?
 
thegman said:
T
That seems to be with a tilt/shift lens on a Rollei SL66, but that is pretty much what I'm going for. Landscape/Cityscape with a bit of a difference is my aim.

Should the movements in a Toyo field or similar be enough for something like that?
Click to expand...

I think the movements of about every field camera are plenty enough to do that. In those pictures, it's tilt and/or swing; in most cases, you can't recognise the result of a shift and/or rise/fall in the final picture.

Stefan
 
Should be totally fine for that. Only one thing to mention about the Toyo 45A, not that it might necessarily matter for what you want to do: You are limited by the focal length of the lenses you can use, most notably in the longer and very widest lenses. With the 'A' model, you can't interchange the bellows (for say a bag bellows) to use something really wide, like a 65mm. I used a 90/6.8 on mine, and it was totally fine, as well as a 135 and 210. With the 210 Symmar that I had, it was a 'convertible' lens, in that if you removed the rear element of the lens, it 'converted' it into a 370mm lens. Only problem is that the bellows don't draw out that far, so you couldn't focus it. So aside from that (which never really bothered me), it was fine. However, I should point out that if you find a longer lens that is a 'true tele' design, you'd be okay (the 210/370 wasn't).

If you're tending towards a wider lens like a 90, I'd suggest getting a recessed lens board, which would give you a bit more flexibility and, depending upon the lens, you could actually fold the camera up with the lens attached. With something like a 210 lens, you'd probably have to remove it to fold the camera up.

My camera that I uses to have:

Toyo4.jpg


Toyo3.jpg


The 90mm lens
Toyo9.jpg


The 210 lens:
Toyo8.jpg


A kit like this is really easy to carry around:
Toyo1.jpg
 
The metal Toyo field line is very respectable ~ you probably want to avoid the plastic - err Carbon Fiber - Toyo CF.

One note is that a normal 135-150 lens will not fold up inside the camera, like some of the others (Wista, Linhof).

I'm sorry to have learned that Crown Graphics are so crappy and break becoming worthless. And the poor monorails have undoubtedly crushed my spine and introduced a permanent limp thanks to their being 3 lbs heavier and 2 inches wider than the alternatives.... The thousands of pictures I made with mine will be heartbroken to learn this ;-p
 
Frank Version Two said:
I'm sorry to have learned that Crown Graphics are so crappy and break becoming worthless. And the poor monorails have undoubtedly crushed my spine and introduced a permanent limp thanks to their being 3 lbs heavier and 2 inches wider than the alternatives.... The thousands of pictures I made with mine will be heartbroken to learn this ;-p
Click to expand...

Oh come on, you know exactly what I meant. My point wasn't that all Crown Graphics are crappy and break, my point was that if you buy something old a cheap it can potentially cost more in the long run than buying something newer and more expensive. If you have enough money in the bank there's nothing wrong with buying something a bit more expensive (even as a beginner) and try it out for a while, as long as you can recoup most of your investment in case you sell it again.

As for weight and size, my 'fancy' wood/carbon fiber (call it plastic if you want) Chamonix weighs 3lbs. 3lbs more is a 100% weight increase. And '2 inches wider than the alternative"? Are you serious? What alternatives are you talking about? A folded up field camera is a hell of a lot smaller than a Sinar F.

No one is arguing that monorails are fine cameras that you can take excellent pictures with. And no one would argue that you're getting great value for an amazing price if you go with monorails like a Sinar F(2) or P(2). You're getting professional high end equipment for a ridiculously low price. There's a reason why they were so popular for professionals. If you're gonna do a photoshoot with a couple of strobes and light stands the size of a monorail won't really matter anyways. But do we really want to tell someone who's looking for a light camera to carry around to get a monorail??
 
Ultimate light weight and versatility: Toho (NOT Toyo). VERY slightly slower to set up than a wooden field camera but significantly lighter and much more versatile.

Technikas are seriously heavy. A Technikardan is similar in weight; a fraction slower to set up; and vastly more versatile. I have or have had all of the above.

For a light woodie: Woodman.

Or I think I have a Gandolfi Level 1 Variant somewhere that I don't use...

Cheers,

R.
 
Jamie123 said:
Oh come on, you know exactly what I meant. My point wasn't that all Crown Graphics are crappy and break, my point was that if you buy something old a cheap it can potentially cost more in the long run than buying something newer and more expensive. If you have enough money in the bank there's nothing wrong with buying something a bit more expensive (even as a beginner) and try it out for a while, as long as you can recoup most of your investment in case you sell it again.

As for weight and size, my 'fancy' wood/carbon fiber (call it plastic if you want) Chamonix weighs 3lbs. 3lbs more is a 100% weight increase. And '2 inches wider than the alternative"? Are you serious? What alternatives are you talking about? A folded up field camera is a hell of a lot smaller than a Sinar F.

No one is arguing that monorails are fine cameras that you can take excellent pictures with. And no one would argue that you're getting great value for an amazing price if you go with monorails like a Sinar F(2) or P(2). You're getting professional high end equipment for a ridiculously low price. There's a reason why they were so popular for professionals. If you're gonna do a photoshoot with a couple of strobes and light stands the size of a monorail won't really matter anyways. But do we really want to tell someone who's looking for a light camera to carry around to get a monorail??
Click to expand...

100% agreement.

Cheers,

R.
 
Compact, light, quick to set up and pack away = Ebony RSW (or the Shen Hao copy).

78742693454443651_Uk02VBTJ_b.jpg


Visit Robert White in London to have a look at one.
 
I also use a Tachihara 4x5. Very nicely built and easy to use/carry. It's very cheap also (bought mine new for $500).

I use Crown Graphics too but i took away all the rangefinder finder system and unnecessary junk so what's left is a metal box. I put a leather guitar case handle on the side so it's very easy to carry around. Movement is very limited but with my linhof select 90mm super angulon in there, I feel comfortable taking it anywhere to shoot.
 
_JMB0725.jpg


Since we all like to argue... Sinar in a pack. If you put it on a 6" rail instead of the 12" then it would be even smaller. Most people leave the rail clamp on the tripod since it is effectively the camera's quick release mounting. This camera weighs about six lbs and is 5.5 x 6 x 11 but doesn't use all of that volume. A Norma packs even smaller, 7x6x9.

No question a Tachi is lighter and smaller, but by the time you add up the weight of everything else needed to shoot (holders, lenses, etc.) you have to ask yourself how much is worth sacrificing to save a relatively small difference in weight, 10-20% of the total?

Of course the Sinar is far more robust, infinitely expandable, and quite inexpensive used, but your prejudices are set....

You could always do this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/LIGHTEST-4x5-CAMERA-EVER-MADE-CARBON-FIBER-LINHOF-135MM-LENS-/370577299611?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item564820d89b#ht_500wt_1174 lol
 
Thank you every one for their advice.

@Vince, The Toyo looks good, and having read a bit more, forward tilt is probably all I'm going to want for the moment.

@Roger, I googled the Gandolfi Variant, it looks like a beautiful camera, that's another one to go on the shortlist I think.

I still need to do some more research and also sell some gear, I think my Rolleiflex 3.5E Planar will need to go, love the results, but I'm not sure I love using it.
 
Frank Version Two said:
_JMB0725.jpg


Since we all like to argue... Sinar in a pack. If you put it on a 6" rail instead of the 12" then it would be even smaller. Most people leave the rail clamp on the tripod since it is effectively the camera's quick release mounting. This camera weighs about six lbs and is 5.5 x 6 x 11 but doesn't use all of that volume. A Norma packs even smaller, 7x6x9.

No question a Tachi is lighter and smaller, but by the time you add up the weight of everything else needed to shoot (holders, lenses, etc.) you have to ask yourself how much is worth sacrificing to save a relatively small difference in weight, 10-20% of the total?

Of course the Sinar is far more robust, infinitely expandable, and quite inexpensive used, but your prejudices are set....
Click to expand...

I'm not sure this image really helps make your point. The Sinar occupies a lot of space here. About three times as much as the field camera I use. A backpack is a very large bag so obviously you can fit most cameras in there. Try fitting that camera in a small shoulder bag like a Domke F2.
The camera I use weighs 3lbs, I usually carry it in a bag with six holders (though I never shoot 12 sheets in one outing unless I'm doing some planned production), two lenses and a bunch of accessories. I'd have to weigh it when I get home but I'd be surprised if it came in over 6lbs. As you say, the Sinar alone is 6lbs and then the Sinar lens boards are bigger and heavier than the Linhof boards which again adds weight. And let's not forget the fact that you need a bigger, stronger (and often more expensive) tripod head to support that 6lbs camera. All this adds up to the point where taking out a Sinar is a whole different experience than taking out a foldable field camera.

There are no prejudices here. I have actually used (and still use) Sinars on numerous occasions so I'm basing my judgement on my own experience. All I can say is that they're good cameras but they're not ideal for every situation.
 
3x larger? You must be a candidate for president ;-p

No question it is larger, I just think people always start out saying they want the smallest but don't realize the trade-offs. I remember getting a 5x7 Tachi and puzzling at how to unfold it and lock it down, but obviously I am a bit dim about such things.

Bit I think the OP is set as the Toyo Field he seems to like is a great all-around camera that isn't too light or too heavy.
 
Frank Version Two said:
Of course the Sinar is far more robust, infinitely expandable, and quite inexpensive used, but your prejudices are set....
Click to expand...

You also have the long rail for macro and ultra wide with a bag, if nec. Hell of a capable, all-purpose rig, Frank.

The lensboard is heavier, though.


.
 
Frank Version Two said:
3x larger? You must be a candidate for president ;-p

No question it is larger, I just think people always start out saying they want the smallest but don't realize the trade-offs. I remember getting a 5x7 Tachi and puzzling at how to unfold it and lock it down, but obviously I am a bit dim about such things.

Bit I think the OP is set as the Toyo Field he seems to like is a great all-around camera that isn't too light or too heavy.
Click to expand...

I didn't say three times larger, I said it occupies three times as much space in a bag. Not the same thing. Of course you cram little accessories in all of the little gaps but you can't fit much else in there.

I could just aswell say that people always start out saying that they want the most movements in a camera and then don't realize the trade-offs in size or the limitations in image circle when using moderately priced lenses. I wouldn't recommend anyone to get the absolute smallest but I also wouldn't recommend getting one with a bunch of movements he'll likely never need. It's like someone is asking for advice on what compact car to get and you're trying to convice him that he should get a Jeep because it's got 4-wheel drive and can go off road.

Why not go for a compromise? A decent foldable field camera in a good size with a decent amount of movements. He'll find out soon enough if he wants to go bigger for more movements or maybe even smaller for less. And wouldn't it help to discuss the trade-off of different field cameras instead of discussing field vs. monorail? For instance, one trade-off I can mention regarding the Chamonix and many other wooden field cameras is that the movements aren't geared. It's not a big deal with shift, rise or fall but it does make tilts and swings a bit more difficult.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom