Monorail for field with good rise

[Darryl Roberts]

Hi,

Any recommendation for a light weigh monorail camera with a good amount of rise (50 mm or more)?

Thank you

 

[Lachlan Young]

You'll have a very hard time beating the weight/ solidity tradeoff of a Sinar Norma. Some Arcas are lighter, but with various trade-offs. Yes, there are very clever ultralights like the Toho, but you will never get the solidity of something a little heavier.

If you are intent on using a monorail, you need to accept that there has to be a weight allowance if you want the maximum benefit of a monorail, otherwise you'll be no worse off with a wood field camera.

 

[Alan9940]

Other than the Toho (as mentioned above) and the Peter Gowland Pocket Camera, the concept of lightweight coupled with a monorail is an oxymoron.

That said, you can find monorails in the ~6 lbs weight class but rise/fall may be limited. The Arca-Swiss F Classic has a pretty significant overall travel of 85mm rise/fall. These are by no means inexpensive cameras, but one of 'em may meet your needs. Nothing wrong with the Sinar Norma, either.

Good luck!

 

[xya]

I had an old Linhof Kardan Standard. Rise and fall are not 50mm, it's a bit less, but it is made of lightwight aluminium and weighs only 4 pounds. Solid as all Linhofs are.

They are cheap as they were the entry line to the Linhof system.

 

[abruzzi]

the Sinar F is a bit lighter than a Norma, and is probably fine on rigidity. It has some design things I like over the Norma, and some that I dislike. My F (bought very cheap) keeps getting the tilt indicator bent out of shape by getting caught on the bag its carried in. The Norma tilt indicator is more robust. However the fact that the swing and tilt are above the rise/fall makes it easier to pack and also makes it yaw free (I believe), which the Norma isn't.

The Arca Swiss F-Classic and F-Metric are excellent designs and are probably my favorite view cameras, but they are expensive. I have a F-Classic 6x9 and 4x5 field, and also a 4x5 M-Metric. I'm saving up for a 5x7 upgrade for the F-Metric.

I have a Toho FC-45A (the older model) and it has one challenging flaw which it when locing the stantard it has a tendency to shift focus, so I have to focus, tighten most of the way, adjust focus, and tighten the rest of the way. The FC-45X may have solved that problem becasue the FC-45 mini solved it.

 

[Hassasin]

Is there a mono rail without good rise ? Point being most of them will not have much difference in weight, but will differ in operation and rigidity, and what it takes to pack them up, then set them up and down again.

 

[Alan9940]

I have a Toho FC-45A (the older model) and it has one challenging flaw which it when locing the stantard it has a tendency to shift focus, so I have to focus, tighten most of the way, adjust focus, and tighten the rest of the way. The FC-45X may have solved that problem becasue the FC-45 mini solved it.

I have an FC-45X and can surely say that the rear standard will move ever so slightly in the vertical aspect when tightening down after focusing. Not sure if this is what you're describing with the A version. My solution to this problem is to loosen the rear standard lock just enough such that I can turn (with some effort) the focus wheel. Once I've achieved focus, locking down fully at this point doesn't move anything. I found that working this way also enables me to achieve more critical focus because the rear standard isn't moving much as I turn the focus wheel.

 

[Alan9940]

Is there a mono rail without good rise ? Point being most of them will not have much difference in weight, but will differ in operation and rigidity, and what it takes to pack them up, then set them up and down again.

I guess "good" depends on what you photograph and the lenes you plan to use. For me, as an outdoor nature/scenic/landscape type guy I don't need much rise. However, an architectural photographer with boat loads of covering power in the lens might need quite a bit.

 

[Paul Howell]

How much does a Graphic View II weigh? I might want to replace my old and well worn New View. The Graphic seems to have enough movement and is cheap enough, but might too heavy to lug much away from my SUV. The New View is an odd design, all metal sort of flat bed, it is light, has decent movement for a flat bed and has rotating back, just showing it's age.

 

[abruzzi]

I have an FC-45X and can surely say that the rear standard will move ever so slightly in the vertical aspect when tightening down after focusing. Not sure if this is what you're describing with the A version. My solution to this problem is to loosen the rear standard lock just enough such that I can turn (with some effort) the focus wheel. Once I've achieved focus, locking down fully at this point doesn't move anything. I found that working this way also enables me to achieve more critical focus because the rear standard isn't moving much as I turn the focus wheel.

the FC-45A functions like a shaft (the rail) whose outside size is slightly smaller than an outer sleeve (the standard) that slips over it. In order for the sleeve to move along the rail without binding it needs to be enough bigger that it dosent catch. The standard locks with a threaded screw on the base that pushes the rail up until the the friction of the top the rail against the top of the inside of the sleeve is enough that it won't move. The screw on the bottom of the sleeve doesn't have any larger or stable contact surface so when you tighten you just has a small 1mm or smaller screw tip pushing up. When that happens the two larger flat surfaces (upper part of the rail and upper inside of the standard's sleeve force the two parts to align, but when loose there is a lot of slop. So, yeah, I do pretty much exactly what you do--get focus close, tighten most of the way, but not so much that I can't still focus, refocus, then fully tighten.

The design of the FC-45 mini (800 grams!) is much more accurate--the standard slides along a dove tail that looks a lot like an Arca Swiss quick release. When locking, its basically pressing in a 1 inch section of the outer dove tail on one side. I haven't really seen focus shift, but there is a tiny left/right shift (inconsequential) when tightening. I haven't seen and FC-45X close up, but I suspect its design is closer to the design of the mini.

They are both usable with practice--you just need to know their weaknesses. They aren't Sinar, Arca Swiss, or Linhof engineering, but then they are insanely light.

 

[Hassasin]

I forgot to mention the Toyo VX125. Price may be an issue, although it's been seen below 1K. But this is precision camera equalled by some to Linhof. It sure looks quick to set up and precise to operate.

VX125 on YT

 

[Alan9940]

The design of the FC-45 mini (800 grams!) is much more accurate--the standard slides along a dove tail that looks a lot like an Arca Swiss quick release. When locking, its basically pressing in a 1 inch section of the outer dove tail on one side. I haven't really seen focus shift, but there is a tiny left/right shift (inconsequential) when tightening. I haven't seen and FC-45X close up, but I suspect its design is closer to the design of these.

I never even heard of the FC-45 mini until this thread, but, yes, the rail design of the FC-45X is as you describe above. I've never noticed any movement of the front or rear standards when tightening down the rail locks, but that may be more toward the way I work with the camera. After choosing a lens focal length and assembling the camera, I tend to lock in my composition and set rough focus before diving under the cloth to finalize things. Therefore, I don't really have a need to move the rails at this point.

The focus mechanism of the FC-45X is very simple, but it works. There is a geared focus wheel attached to the base of the rear standard that moves along a toothed metal strip that's attached to the rear rail. If you loosening the focus lock enough to allow the rear standard to move easily along the rail as you focus, watch the rear standard as the lock is tightened down and you'll see it tilt rearward ever so slightly. In the greater scheme of things this movement may not even matter, but it always bothered me. If you focus the way I described above, the rear standard won't budge as the lock is fully clamped down.

 

[abruzzi]

The first I heard of the mini was a couple months ago when Kumar listed one for sale. It lacks all movements, so it more like a more flexible "travelwide" type camera, but those have uses so I bought it to try out. The one thing I wish it was front and rear tilt. It wouldn't have been hard to add that for not much more weight, but with front and rear tilt I also get rise and fall by tilting the tripod head the adjusting the standards to stay vertical.

Sold - SOLD! Toho FC 45 Mini Camera

SOLD! Toho FC 45 Mini Camera in excellent condition. This is a great hiking / backpacking camera, that weighs only 890 grams. This camera is a scaled up point and shoot camera - there are no movements. The bellows is light-tight and supple and extends from 55mm to 265mm. The front standard has...

www.photrio.com

I've paired the Toho with the lightest lenses I have--a Fujinon CM-W 105mm ƒ5.6, a Schneider Xenar 150mm ƒ5.6, and a Schneider Xenar 210mm ƒ6.1. I also have a Schneider Tele Xenar 270 that isn't light but is one of the lighter telephoto lenses in that focal length (the mini only gets about 280mm of bellows and the FC-45A only gets to 300mm with the smaller rail, so a tele makes longer lenses usable.

Of course the weight difference between any of the Toho cameras as a Sinar or Arca Swiss is pretty huge, so you lose somethng and gain something (or technically lose weight which is the gain.)

For great rigidity I'd either get a Sinar Norma (on the cheap side) or an Arca Swiss F-metric (on the expensive side.)

(BTW, while researching the mini, I discovered that Toho made a 5x7 and 8x10 both of which are exceedingly rare.)

 

[Alan9940]

I've paired the Toho with the lightest lenses I have--a Fujinon CM-W 105mm ƒ5.6, a Schneider Xenar 150mm ƒ5.6, and a Schneider Xenar 210mm ƒ6.1. I also have a Schneider Tele Xenar 270 that isn't light but is one of the lighter telephoto lenses in that focal length (the mini only gets about 280mm of bellows and the FC-45A only gets to 300mm with the smaller rail, so a tele makes longer lenses usable.

For great rigidity I'd either get a Sinar Norma (on the cheap side) or an Arca Swiss F-metric (on the expensive side.)

(BTW, while researching the mini, I discovered that Toho made a 5x7 and 8x10 both of which are exceedingly rare.)

Sounds like an interesting camera, but I gotta have my tilts! I believe my lens setup for the FC-45X are even smaller and lighter than what you're using; I use a 90mm Schneider Angulon, a 135mm Caltar II-n, a 200mm Nikon M, and a 300mm Nikon M. There used to be a guy on YT that used a Fuji 450C with a rather ridiculous looking extension hanging off the front standard, and I've thought about this a couple of times but I can't really see a good use for something that long on 4x5.

Yeah, I have an Arca-Swiss F with all the typical plasmats, but I can carry that featherweight Toho outfit a heck of a lot further!

 

[DREW WILEY]

Sinar F2 has a ridiculous amount of rise. The Sinar Norma is nice if you want an even more stable camera which typically weighs only a pound more. Most Sinar system components are interchangeable.

Alan - I've often used a 450 C Fujinon on Sinars, and in fact generally have the camera set up with about 22 inches of rail. The cumulative weight and bulk are less than using an equivalent focal less telephoto lens, and the image circle is way bigger. It takes just a moment to either increase or decrease the length of rail sections.

Something as light as a Toho in combination with a long lens would seem to be vodoo with even the slightest breeze or jiggle. But the stability of any monorail camera system can be greatly improved by bolting the rail clamp directly to the top of the tripod platform, without any kind of intervening head. "Wobble-bobble" ball heads tend to be the worst. What sense does it make to find the lightest camera around, and then carry a bunch of redundant head weight? Double jeopardy.

When I need to travel lightweight with a 4x5, I reach for my little Ebony folder. My 8x10 is a Phillips folder. The Sinar monorails are faster to set up and operate, and more versatile in terms of focal length extremes.

What gets classifed as "lightweight" is all relative. I've backpacked tens of thousands of miles with Sinar gear, along with full mountain gear and supplies, typically around an 85lb load. Now at 75, I'm looking for the camera with the biggest bellows I can find, so I can fill it with helium ! Balloon travel is getting tempting.

 

[chuckroast]

Hi,

Any recommendation for a light weigh monorail camera with a good amount of rise (50 mm or more)?

Thank you

The old Calumet NX 4x5 should be easy enough to find and they weigh in at 9lb or so. Whether that is "light weight" is a matter of taste, I guess. Lots of rise:

The Calumet 45NX: a review

 

[DREW WILEY]

Calumet monorail? Heavier than a Sinar field camera of comparable length, but a lot less rigid. Cheap, yes - always was.

 

[chuckroast]

Calumet monorail? Heavier than a Sinar field camera of comparable length, but a lot less rigid. Cheap, yes - always was.

Sure, but many of us (me included) got started on that camera and got excellent results. The only thing we really gave up was convenience. Also, there is a considerable difference between the NX and the original Calumet 4x5 view camera (which may be what you're thinking of) in terms of construction and controls. The rail and overall construction were noticeably better.

The Sinars were well suited for precision studio work for doing ad and tabletop photography, but I'd argue they're overkill for most field work. An NX will do just fine if you don't mind the inconvenience of it all.

And convenience is why I bought a Wisner. Then again, when the Wisner Technical Field is fully extended out to 19", it makes a nice wind sail

 

[Alan9940]

Something as light as a Toho in combination with a long lens would seem to be vodoo with even the slightest breeze or jiggle. But the stability of any monorail camera system can be greatly improved by bolting the rail clamp directly to the top of the tripod platform, without any kind of intervening head. "Wobble-bobble" ball heads tend to be the worst. What sense does it make to find the lightest camera around, and then carry a bunch of redundant head weight? Double jeopardy.

When I need to travel lightweight with a 4x5, I reach for my little Ebony folder. My 8x10 is a Phillips folder. The Sinar monorails are faster to set up and operate, and more versatile in terms of focal length extremes.

What gets classifed as "lightweight" is all relative. I've backpacked tens of thousands of miles with Sinar gear, along with full mountain gear and supplies, typically around an 85lb load. Now at 75, I'm looking for the camera with the biggest bellows I can find, so I can fill it with helium ! Balloon travel is getting tempting.

I've used the Fuji 450C without issue on my Arca-Swiss F, but I really can't imagine using it on the Toho, unless there was absolutely no breeze; and when does this happen, especially when shooting LF?

Yep, I've packed heavy loads in my youth, but being an oldster like yourself (I'm 72) has kind of limited the weight I can handle over any appreciable distance. My favorite format is 8x10 and I lugged my Deardorff along with a complement of plasmat lenses all over the place when a young buck. Nowadays, its an 8x10 Intrepid with lightweight Fuji A and C lenses and a carbon fiber tripod. I can still carry this outfit anywhere I'm likely to venture.

 

[Maris]

I must have missed the memo on front rise limitations for monorail cameras. By using indirect rise there are no camera body limitations. Indirect rise is when the rail is tilted up and the front and rear standards are brought back to vertical using the tilt mechanisms. Ok, there is a limit on how far a standard bellows can be twisted before it breaks. Bag bellows solves that problem. Lens coverage is limited and too much rise will run out of image at the bottom of the ground glass. But the lens is to blame not the camera.

 

[GLS]

The Linhof Technikardan has 50mm rise on both standards.

 

[isaac7]

I can’t remember the weight but I really enjoyed using my Horseman LE. One of the best things about it is how the standards rotate in line with the monorail. I was able to put it into a regular backpack no problem. I think Horseman based their stuff on Sinar so maybe there is a similar one from them.

 

[Kino]

Calumet monorail? Heavier than a Sinar field camera of comparable length, but a lot less rigid. Cheap, yes - always was.

Don't be knocking on my 45 NX!

 

[xkaes]

I forgot to mention the Toyo VX125. Price may be an issue, although it's been seen below 1K. But this is precision camera equalled by some to Linhof. It sure looks quick to set up and precise to operate.

The VX125 has 70mm of rise. It weighs 2.7 kilos -- 6 pounds