Monorail for semi-field use:any experience?

[Ole]

I have no jam-hut (retaining ring) for the lens so I had to use a front flange mount. I even tried using the flange as a jam-nut, but it's just too big. I'd like to find the correct retainer. ...

If you have a good measurement, or the Rodenstock specification, I can see if I have one. I've just got hold of a HEAP of flanges and retaining rings

 

[jjstafford]

If you have a good measurement, or the Rodenstock specification, I can see if I have one. I've just got hold of a HEAP of flanges and retaining rings

That's very generous of you, but if you have one I would be happy to trade; is there anything you need? (From you posts, it seems we each have an awful lot of old parts, but not what we really need.)

I will get the measurement this evening when I return to the shop.
Thank you.

 

[User Removed]

I use monorail cameras for both my 8x10's, and I would not prefer it any other way! I can very easily slip the front and rear standard off the rail, and lay it down in my backback. I use really wide lens...so my rail is only about 10" long for my 8x10. I can fit the rail into my backpack as well! My monorail cameras are lighter then other 8x10 field cameras I have seen. Another plus, is having full camera movements, because on some field cameras they are limited.

If you get a monorail, I suggest having a short rail, and a long rail. I keep the short rail with me all the time, then when I need to do a close-up image, I just walk back to my car and get the short rail.

Ryan McIntosh

 

[Donald Miller]

My first LF camera was a Sinar F...I got rid of it because it was a pain in the a** for field work.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Note to poster a page back - it was over 20 years ago that I learned to hate Cambos (and Deardorfs too) so my memory fades, but it may have been more to do with the fact that the owners of the cameras were dicks more than the camera's fault.

But I do remember doing lots of work with the camera pointing down and really having a hassle keeping the standards from sliding forward out of their locked position. And the 8x10 Deardorfs I had to use were shakey and beat to heck, and the knobs were hard on my delicate fingers (so frail was I...)

 

[Richard Wasserman]

I'll jump in here to add that I use a Sinar Norma in the great outdoors. I keep it mounted on its tripod and strap it to the outside of a Sherpa Cart, all the other gear goes in the cart. I photograph mainly in the city or on groomed trails and easily can cover a couple miles or more at a stretch. I really like the Sinar as it is modular and can handle all my lenses from 110-450mm.

 

[davet]

Back on topic ...

Hello again,

Having considered my options, I'm tending towards getting one of the lighter monorails, like the Sinar F or A, given long lens use, weight, and price considerations. Basically the only field cam that allows some long lens use under $1000, the Shen HAo, is almost as heavy as a light monorail (6lbs SH vs 7lbs Sinar A/F). Since I don't backpack, because of back problems, but rather carry my gear using a little cart, I'm wondering whether it doesn't make more sense for me to go w a monorail.

The Sinar F2. The Shen Hao is significantly lighter and smaller (the advantage increases with number of lenses...) but compromises had to be made to get the size and weight (and cost) down. The SH is actually an incredible deal, and would be the easy choice if you were carrying it on your back, but you're not and a monorail will be more flexible. The Sinars will also handle long lenses better than the SH.

The F series does use a shorter rail and will be easier to pack. It's also compatible with a wider range of accessories (the A and F are identical above the standard bearers, so that's not too big a deal), but it does take a whacking huge rail clamp, so the A is a little lighter, sits a little lower on the tripod. The A is really Sinar's attempt at something they don't do terribly well (make real field cameras)

Ideally you'd want a collapsible monorail, like the aforementioned Arca Swiss F-line, the Linhof Technikardan but these are NOT cheap -- a decent used one goes for more than a brand new F2. So get the F2 (actually, you could do well with either the A or F, or the SH for that matter)

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Just a postscript - the Sinar F I have is actually a hybrid made up of 2 F1 rear standards. It just happened this way because I acquired the parts, but this has allowed me to avoid an F1 front standard, which some say has a weak rail clamp. At the same time, the F1 rear standards are less sophisticated than the F2 components (no microdrives except for focusing), which also makes them arguably more robust for outdoors.

 

[Dan's45]

Well I have a sinar f1 and I have no qualms about it, I just wish sinar would break down and make a field camera based on the f series. As far as being in the field, the f series monorails are not that cumbersome to haul around. I believe they weigh in around 10 pounds or so when traveling, just take out the bellows and turn the front and rear standards right in line with monorail for storage. This keeps the bellows from being damaged and is easier to carry while traveling long distances. As far as going to a local area, leave it alone and keep the tripod attachment on the tripod,this way you can mount up in a matter of minutes and get your shot and move on (or if your like me, stay a few minutes more and just enjoy the moment because you may or may not be this way again anytime soon). I am saving up for a field camera! as far as the price on a sinar mine was around 450us in 9 cond. with lens and tax w/ s&h it came about 700 or so, it was worth though. I hope I helped, I know what it feels like being new to something. I just started playing with my toy not too long ago and really enjoy and would not trade for the most expensive 35 or d*%$@#l camera ever! Anyway, that's my 2 cents worth.

 

[John Cook]

to Paul Sorensen:

Paul, the Cambo focus mechanism is a soft rubber wheel which rides along the bottom of the rail. Everything is fine as long as this wheel is tacky and has good grip to the rail. Not a good idea, therefore, to go crazy with wax, WD40 or other lubricants in this area.

Once the standards are focused, the locking mechanism is as good as that of any other camera. However, a little preventative maintenance every 25 years isn't a bad idea. Calumet has an excellent service department.

By the way, slippage in the vertical position is a problem with cameras which do not have a locking mechanism (like the Cambo has) but rather rely upon friction alone. From experience I can tell you that the Toyo 810GII is one which suffers from this shortcoming. Especially when loose and over-lubricated.

 

[Frank Petronio]

SK Grimes used to handle a camera made by a South African commercial photographer who made a very light, Sinar-based camera (the name escapes me at the moment.) He passed away last year so the camera may no longer be manufactured, and it was rarer than a Phillips to begin with. It used a smaller rail system and lighter standards, all friction locks (no gears) and was light, compact, and relatively cheap. He used it for car photography, mounted on outriggers and the like. I've never seen an actual one but it is heck of a good idea to build such a camera using off the shelf Sinar parts which are almost cheap these days...

The above poster who uses two F1 rear standards to "build" a good Sinar F field is also onto something - great idea.

Finally, if you search, you can find a technique for folding the Sinar into a compact package by unhooking the bellows from one standard and folding them in such a way that they protect the GG.

 

[gbenaim]

Using long lenses on a Sinar F1/2

First off, thanks for the many helpful replies, this forum is an outstanding resource. OK, so I'm leaning more and more towards a Sinar F1/2, but am now a little concerned about use of long lenses. One of the posters mentioned that the longest lens one can use with the standard bellows is 360, which doesn't get me too far away from the Shen Hao. So would I need an extra standard or a longer bellows for anything over 360? What camera would you recommend for frequent long lens use in 4x5?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The standard Sinar bellows is about 14", so you might be able to use a longer lens of tele design (probably the Nikkor 500mm T-ED will just get to infinity, and could be more usable with an extension lensboard). If you need more bellows, then you add a rail extension, extra standard, and another bellows. Used Sinar stuff is plentiful and not too expensive. If you get a bag bellows anyway for wide lenses, you can use that in combination with the standard bellows, figure $50 for a 6" extension rail, maybe $150-200 for an extra standard (or even cheaper--just buy a second F and sell off the parts you don't need). You might even find an F or F1 to begin with with standard and bag bellows, which is a fairly common setup, and you would only need to add the extra standard and maybe more rail.

A Technika has 17.5" of bellows, so a 500mm should work without modification.

I think the Canham DLC has 20".

 

[John Cook]

The Toyo 45GII, Calumet 45NX and at least one Sinar model offer a 21" extra-length bellows (as an accessory). I have used all three as "standard" for 210mm and 240mm lenses in studio tabletop product work. It had been so long since we used the "normal" bellows, no one remembered where they were.

Perhaps you can locate such a bellows for the camera of your choice for long lens work. A more expensive solution is stringing two normal bellows together with a simple compendium standard between. Anything is possible with a modular camera.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Finally, if you search, you can find a technique for folding the Sinar into a compact package by unhooking the bellows from one standard and folding them in such a way that they protect the GG.

In fact this is very easy - all my Sinars have clips on their backs to accept a spare bellows as a viewing hood.

 

[gchpaco]

My 4x5 is a Bender, a wooden monorail. For long lenses it's not really very rigid; I have a 210 which is fine but when I convert it to a 370 or the like I'm not comfortable taking pictures outdoors due to wind vibration. Other than that there's nothing inherently wrong with a monorail, although you might have problems if it doesn't collapse well.

 

[papagene]

Just to throw my tqo cents into the ring...
I have been using the Calumet Cadet in the field. Not too heavy, but at times a little awkward in the New England underbrush. So I try to stay on trails as much as possible.

gene