Field Cameras and Galvin 2x3 Camera.

[teleparallel]

Hello All

God, how nice to have forums such as this to get some help in daydreaming about photography.

So, I shoot 35mm exclusively. No particular reason, just how things are. But! I am thinking in a small personal project that I think would look so nice if I had a field camera, with it's nice tilt, swing and fall movements, and it all got me thinking.

I do realize that it's kind of a big jump to go from 35mm to a field camera, but aside higher quality and tonal rendition (not that these aren't big deals) I don't see so many advantages to go bigger in film size. Camera movements on the other hand, sounds awesome. The Idea of the project is basically a set of landscapes, shot at close distances(5 to 50 meters), usually scorched land. Since these landscapes are not usual, to control focus plane and perspective would be great.

This leads to the camera. I'd like to be quick to set and shoot. Not super quick in a "hand held" sense, just in the "little trouble to set up" sense. So go to full 4x5 size sounds a little to much. Roll film would be great. Some google searching led me to the model in the thread title. The Galvin: not too expensive. lightweight, rollfilm option, monorail etc...

So I'd like some wisdom here. How is monorail field camera experience? How does it compare to folding cameras like those horseman 2x3? Any reason to get one over the other? How is the Galvin camera?

I'd like to know, also, about the possibility of making a Mamiya Press lens board, to use some of it's lenses, if anyone had any such idea. Would be for specific use, I'm aware of these lenses limitations.

In case other suggestions come around in camera models: I don't make any money with photography, so super expensive new gear is out of question, consider me in a budget. I need things not to get

I know that 6x9 is actually medium format, but this forum seemed appropriate.

Thanks

Hermano

 

[shutterfinger]

The biggest change between 35mm and a monorail is learning to see upside down and laterally reversed and to meter the scene accurately.
The smaller the format, 2x3 vs 4x5 the harder to see the detail on the ground glass. A good loupe is essential.
A medium format lens for a medium format fixed body will just cover the format of the fixed camera. They will have very limited or no movement latitude.
Every lens projects a circle of illumination and a circle of sharp image. The circle of sharp image can be less than the circle of illumination. In order to have movements available the image circle has to be larger than the format in use.
The aspects of the view/field camera that are important is its Rigidity, location and ease of use of the controls, the type and amount of movements available, and the weight of the camera.
Most scenes/subjects need 10° or less movements to adjust the focus and or perspective to achieve the desired result.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Using swings and tilts requires shooting from tripod. If you're going to shoot hand-held you'll need to use a rangefinder to set focus and a viewfinder to frame. Many, not all, press and technical cameras have both.

If you're going to shoot from tripod, a short monorail isn't that much more difficult to use than is a press or technical camera. But monorails can be heavier and bulkier.

If you decide you want a 2x3 monorail, don't fixate on the Galvin. In the late '80s when I first contemplated moving from 35 mm to 2x3 I had the opportunity to play with a 2x3 Galvin. Light? Yes. Crude? Yes. There are other 2x3 monorails that are much nicer to use. These days I have, in round figures, 2 1/2 2x3 Cambos and more bits that let me mix a 2x3 front and 4x5 rear so that I can use a 6x12 roll holder. I also have 2x3 Graphics.

Cambo isn't the only firm to have made 2x3 monorail cameras. Arca Swiss, Cambo, Linhof, Plaubel and Toyo have made (AS, C, and L still make) 2x3 monorails. And I'm sure I've missed some. If you decide to buy a 2x3 monorail, be alert to all possibilities, don't fixate on the one true make and model. Of the ones I handled, the only 2x3er that I really disliked was the 6x9 Linhof Color, a Technika on a rail. Very heavy, no more movements than a 2x3 Technika, and very tall.

I didn't mention Galvin. I didn't like the one I played with and they're quite scarce. As I said, don't fixate on a particular make and model. Grab what's available and fits your budget. If your budget's tight and you must shoot 2x3, give up movements and look for a 2x3 Graphic. Century/2x3 Crown Graphics are much better for short lenses than are Speed Graphics.

If you want to repurpose Mamiya Press lenses, fine, wonderful. But understand that after you've taken a lens with shutter out of its Mamiya barrel it will be much like other view camera lenses. It can be mounted on a board that fits your 2x3 camera and that has a hole that suits the lens' shutter. All perfectly normal, nothing special required. This because Mamiya Press lenses aren't cocked or released by an internal linkage in the body. I've used a 60/5.6, more use recently a 58/5.6, Konica Hexanon ex-Koni Omega. These lenses have to be reshuttered to be used on, e.g., a Graphic because their native shutters are released by a linkage in the body.

I have no experience with Mamiya Press lenses, have no idea how large their image circles are. Charles' point about lenses for MF is well taken but there are exceptions.

 

[btaylor]

I had a Galvin for years. Nice little camera, and yes, a bit crude-- but it did the job. You mention landscapes and camera movements, unless you have buildings in the picture do you need them? 6x9 lenses have pretty good DOF at small apertures. I have a Linhof Color (2 in fact) in 4x5. I think they are quite compact, I would guess the 6x9 model would be even smaller. The build quality of Linhof is superb. I would look into it if they are inexpensive enough. Use lenses designed for 4x5 and you'll never want for lens coverage with movements. Some people have a harder time with "upside down and backwards" than others, I find I get used to it pretty quickly. There is no substitute for groundglass and a loupe if you are using movements, btw. Another thought would be to buy a 4x5 camera you like (they are plentiful and cheap these days) and simply buy a roll film back.

 

[Dan Fromm]

OP, I just stumbled across this. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cambo-69-6-...-exc-EXTRA-set-from-japan-73290-/331931267371

Looks like a nice kit, but the pictures in the listing don't show enough for me to be sure that it has a complete focusing panel. The last image shows a ground glass that slides into the focusing panel but not the panel. If you're interested in it, ask the vendor. The board on the front standard is an adapter. I don't know which boards it accepts.

 

[Neil Poulsen]

The difference between a folding versus a rail camera depends on how and how wide you need to photograph. For wide photos with movements, a rail camera with interchangeable bellows is best, especially for medium format view photography. For this reason, I use rail cameras.

For some of the reasons that you indicate, medium format photography is great. Film isn't as expensive, and it can be loaded outside. Interchangeable backs make it easy to switch back and forth. The cameras are lighter and easier to backpack.

I've sent you additional information in a private message.

 

[btaylor]

Good point about the wide angle lenses, on a Technika style camera the bed can get in the way of the image. On a rail camera (like the Linhof Color) the standards can be mounted before the clamp, putting the front standard at the front end of the rail.

 

[shutterfinger]

Dan, reference post 5, the glass in the final picture of the linked listing is a fresnel that sits over the ground glass. No focus panel with the ground glass is shown.
The price + shipping says pass but is a good example of what to look for.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Charles, with respect, I have several 2x3 Cambo international backs. They're not like the Graflok backs we're both familiar with, the ground glass slides in and out of a much modified lensboard and so do roll holders. The piece of glass shown is in the listing's last picture is the ground glass also known in 2x3 Cambo context as focusing panel.

OP, I just took a look on eBay for Galvin cameras. There are more than I expected. I expected none, there are infinitely many more. At those prices, grab one. If you don't like it you can resell it.

 

[btaylor]

Wow, there's a Galvin on the 'bay with 3 lenses and a roll film back for $350 obo. 361677346355

 

[John Koehrer]

There's a 6X9 Galvin on Chicago CL* for less than $300. I think it also had 2 lens boards.

*not mine etc.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I'd rather have a solid compact 4x5 field camera, since this gives you not only the option of both full 4x5 film and various roll film backs, but a lot more options to choose from without really much extra weight, and often at better pricing. But Jim Galvin was a nice fellow who also did a fair amount of custom machine shop work for photographers.

 

[Paul Howell]

I had a friend with Galvin, he was quite fond of it, I was thinking about getting one of the other 6X9 view cameras. After watching him change backs from ground glass to the roll back I decided to stick with my Speed and Crown. My Crown is the newer vision with 6X9 and 4X5 backs, when using a 6X9 back as long as I stick the 135mm lens the rangefinder is camed for I don't need to change backs in the middle of the shoot. The Galvin has more swings and tilts.. For landscapes I use some front rise and occasion front tilt, but not often and not much. Over the years I have used the 6X9 back less and less and shoot MF with my Mamiya Universal with a 3 lens set up all coupled to the rangefinder. I guess I would give some thought to a baby Crown as well.