New to LF researching Field Cameras

[Shadowtracker]

Hello everyone,

I am new to LF, have a monorail camera and am pulling everything together for it. Even have what I need to develop B&W 4x5 negs now.

I am doing my homework in order to find a 4x5 field camera. I have a couple LF books on the way, Using the View Camera being one of them.

I would like to find out what your personal experiences are with 4x5 field cameras - though other size field cameras are welcome too - specifically relating to Durability. I understand you can't abuse these things, but I also know there are failure rates of just about everything made. I would like to find out what results people have had with their field cameras.

I am not interested in speculation though pointing out weak design or design elements is not the same as speculation. Mostly, I want to avoid starting a fight due to opinions; that's why I would like to hear about actual experiences.

If you have had a particular model that has had problems, be those ease of use, parts sticking, parts breaking through 'regular use' as opposed to having taken a 200' tumble, I would like to hear about them.

Likewise, if you bought something X number of years ago and it's still working fine, without problems, if it was used when you bought it and it's been in your possession 50+ years or something like that, I would like to find out about those as well.

Features to 'definitely get' or 'avoid' would be good to find out as well.

As for uses, I hunt, fish, camp, hike, trap and a whole lot of other things, most of which are outdoors. So when I say 'field use', I mean getting out and taking it a good distance for at least a few days at a time. I don't mind carrying weight but don't want to go to either extreme with weight either. At 52 and having been a manual laborer much of my life, I am fit but not stupid to the point of taking a monorail for a week long canoe trip (although, a big enough plastic bag and a life vest for it just might work...).

Thanks for any input you have.

 

[munz6869]

Hi Tim,

I did some similar research, prior to buying my field camera, and after using a couple of monorails and press cameras in the field, and I decided I wanted a new wooden field camera that was:
1. Light weight but robust - so I could wander around with it without breaking my back, and also so I wouldn't need to upgrade my tripod/head
2. new, so I have no-one but myself to blame when I damage it
3. capable of dealing with a good range of focal lengths - like 65mm to 300mm
4. nice to setup and adjust, rigid, and with a useful, but not silly amount of movements
5. aesthetically pleasing ;-)

And so about a year ago exactly I bought a Wista 45DXIII, and took it to Sweden & Switzerland in July, making 150 or so exposures. Since then I've used it for every other trip anywhere (including a 7,000km road trip to Perth and back), as well as some commercial architectural work. It still looks like new and has worked really well. One thing that was really handy though, was to find another APUG-er (thanks Shane!) who owned one, who kindly agreed to bring his along so I could actually play with it. Now this Wista "fad" has spread, because another Melbourne APUG-er just acquired one too - so I think it has a lot to do with actually seeing the cameras you're interested in in real life, to see if they meet your needs.

Marc!

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

Yes, seeing Marc's and Shane's Wistas was definitely an advantage when I decided to buy one from another Australian APUGer. It helps to see the size, how they can be carried easily, etc before knowing it is right for you.

 

[Shadowtracker]

Munz, your criteria is exactly what I am looking at. I hadn't considered the 'new' part for the reason you explained, but it makes sense to me. Aesthetically pleasing is important too. I always appreciate good workmanship in any field - I don't want to pay too much, but good tools are expensive sometimes and really, they are only expensive in the short-run. Over time, the money comes out cheaper than replacing things all the time.

I will probably go down to a 90mm and up to a 210mm lens - that's for now as far as I can tell. There may come a time to go to 65mm or 300mm but not real likely without a good deal landing in my lap. But, it is good to know the range of lenses that can be used.

I appreciate your input too Kevin. I don't know anyone that has anything for me to look at and such, but so far, I think I want a wooden camera; just not sure of the make/model yet. Glad to know someone else looks into things like this the same way I approach it though.

Oh, and I have time to look, be patient and save my money for whatever camera I do decide on.

Thanks to both of you.

 

[Curt]

Hello Tim, when I started photography school the one 4x5 camera I had was a Toyo G, I needed it for studio and field, in the studio it was great but in the field it was not that easy to pack around but it had movements that were so smooth that when I was set up it was actually fun to use. That being said I evolved though the Calumet monorail models, I still have two of them, and onto a Shen Hao 4x5 that I bought from Badger, it was so inexpensive, relative, that I just had to get one for easy field work. Easy being light enough to pack around without much effort. It works exactly like that.

Now I hear that you have been doing manual labor most of your life, that's great but at the cost of some arthritis or stiffening of the hands or fingers? Even though I have three degrees from colleges and universities, I have done technical work and have really used my hands and fingers. Shop work and remodeling didn't help either. So what I'm getting at is the Shen Hao is a nice single extension wood field camera but the knobs are a little too small for what I would call easy operating. It's not that difficult but it seems miniature compared to my 5x7's and 8x10 cameras. The small footprint is why the knobs and hardware the size they are, they are scaled to the camera.

I would still suggest getting one because of the price and that fact that you would be getting a new camera. Stepping up to a more reasonable operating camera is the Chamonix 4x5, I saw one and had was able to check out the focus and controls and I have to say that it's a fine camera that I could see myself owning. Price, higher.

If you don't want to pay much and get a new camera and your hands are good then the Shen Hao wood field camera is a choice, it can take wide angle lenses and has interchangeable bellows IE wide angle and standard, takes Linhof type lens boards, a plus as they are a major standard, and they are available. The Shen Hao has all of the movements that you will need in a tight package that is very respectable. The Shen Hao also has an international back for the use of roll film backs, very handy and almost a must. That's my two cents worth, you do know that the Calumet cc401 type monorail cameras are almost bullet proof and very very inexpensive, have all of the movements and a revolving back, not international but a great bale system. They slide easily on the rail and can be compacted down and can take a lot of use and abuse in the field. A good starting camera that you most likely won't be disappointed with while you wait for that ultimate wood field camera. Often they say, buy this camera and save your money for a lens.

Curt

 

[alanrockwood]

How about a Crown Graphic?

The main disadvantage is limited movements.

 

[BradS]

I have bought, used and sold at least ten different LF view cameras in the past five years. Most of them I bought just to give them a try - to see how they worked to examine the design first hand. I've lost money on almost all of them but usually, not much ( took a hell of a loss on a nice wooden canham...but it went to a very good home). I just look at it as "rent" and the cost of the small education I've given myself.

Here are some that I have had: Burke & James Commercial View (two or three), Crown Graphic (about five now), Ebony (two of these too) , Canham DLC, Canham Traditional, Korona View, Deardorff, Kodak 2-D, Omegaview (monorail), Sinar, Walker Titan, Nagaoka....

Here's the thing that I've learned in my search for the perfect camera....there is none! They all have good points and they all come up short in some respect. Most are pretty much alike. Every design involves compromise.

However, if you're looking for the most durable, I'd have to say it comes down to either the Crown Graphic or the Walker Titan. The Walker also is, of the cameras I've owned, absolutely the best design and the best constructed camera of all of them by a very long measure. It is strong, rigid, weather proof and extremely tough. It handles like a nice wooden folder but has the precision of a fine european (like Sinar or, maybe even Linhof). Don't get me wrong, it is not perfect...it has things i do not like about it. But, it is the best that I've owned.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Shadowtracker,

Here's my contribution: My primary considerations are size and weight. For that reason, I have avoided the metal-bodied cameras, opting for more fragile, but lighter weight wood. Some wooden 4x5 field camera bodies (the wooden "box") are much larger than others. I like the smallest possible.

The first field camera I bought was a Wista DX. I still use it as my primary packing camera for a couple of reasons:

1) Unlike a lot of other field cameras, the Wista will fold up with a lens mounted on it. Mine will just close with the Fujinon A 240 mounted. I routinely close it with my 135mm and my 203 Ektar. This, for me is an advantage since it saves on space. My other wooden field cameras won't allow the camera to be closed with the lens mounted, which means I have to carry the lens separately.

2) The Wista is among the lighter cameras, and is dimensionally small (many cameras have bigger "boxes"). This coupled with the above lets me get most of my field kit (4 lenses, camera, filters, darkcloth) into a fanny pack. Meter and holders go in a fly-fishing vest and another over-the-shoulder pouch. Tripod is either lashed to the fanny pack or, more often, carried. For day trips, this allows me lots of flexibility; hands can be free to scramble, the weight distribution is good, etc. In use, I hang the film pouch from the tripod and sling the fanny pack down over my shoulder. This allows me to work out of it like a camera bag; nothing has to ever touch the ground except the tripod feet. This comes in handy in water, snow, tricky, steep, slippery locations, etc. (Look at http://www.doremusscudder.com/?m=9&s=40 for a picture of my kit in action.) For backpacking, I can strap the fanny pack to a larger pack and stow the other stuff inside. Then I have my kit for day trips with me as well if I have a base camp.

There are some disadvantages to the Wista and similar-size cameras. I can only use my 300mm because I've mounted it on an extended lensboard. The 300mm of bellows draw is not really enough to use a 300mm lens. Longer lenses are impossible unless tele-designs. On the other end, my 90mm and 75mm lenses are in recessed boards and I have to wrestle a bit with the bellows when using movements to the maximum for these (they do work, though).

Most standard wood field cameras will be similar with the exception of the top-end models (Ebony comes to mind) that have greater extension and wide-angle bellows, etc. These are almost always a bit heavier and often larger (i.e., a bigger "box"). I work with a Woodman Field in Europe a lot, which is lighter, won't fold up with the lens mounted and won't accept recessed boards. Nevertheless, I find it to be very serviceable. Its design allows for close enough focusing for the 90mm with some movements. I imagine the Tachi and the Shen Hao cameras are similar (I haven't handled those for a while).

That said, if I were looking for a new field camera, I would definitely look at the new Chamonix 45n-2. I haven't had one in my hands, but it looks really "trick," with extra bellows draw, nifty multi-purpose bellows and lots of extras that basic field cameras don't have.

The above is my experience, now my advice, for what it's worth: Light weight bare-bones field cameras have more limited movements. Most of them will do anything that more sophisticated ones can, but may take a bit more fiddling or, at least, figuring out how to do things (I wrote an article for View Camera Magazine on field camera movements some years ago if you can find it ) I feel lateral shift is a must, on either the front or rear standard, so double-check to make sure the camera you buy has this feature (the Wista DXII, for example, does not). The advantage to the simpler cameras is light weight. Most more sophisticated cameras weigh more. Compare specs and features and make decisions based on your desires and needs. Getting your hands on a camera and trying out the controls is the ideal, but not always possible.

Finally, don't stress out too much about your decision. Just about any camera on the market will do a creditable job for you if you learn how to use it well. And, if you get one you really hate, you can always sell it and try another; and you will have learned what you do and don't like.

Sorry this is so long, but I hope it helps.

Best,

Doremus Scudder
www.DoremusScudder.com

 

[Mark Fisher]

I took a little different approach. I went with the lightest, new wood version I could find. I have a Tachihara. My logic is that light is good and repairable is also good. I figured I could fix any wood camera without too much trouble. I've never had to. I am not particularly hard on cameras, but I'm not all that careful either. I've made a few hundred exposures and always hiking, I've never felt the need for more movements. If I were getting a camera again, I'd take the same approach, but perhaps get the Chamonoix.

 

[Shadowtracker]

Man, this is exactly the kind of information I was looking for. Thanks very much to each of you. I won't stress too much about what I get first.

Seems that resale prices are reasonable to good. There is someone at school that is considering letting me buy their Horseman Field camera since she doesn't use it anymore - at 84 years old, she says she would like to but she just doesn't walk that much anymore - I will look at it and consider it and if I buy it, will consider is a learning tool. I am still going to look at all the suggestions you have given and consider the importance of each thing as best I can. I do get into situation outdoors where movements could be important to avoid converging lines; rock formations and such that daunt people where looking up will cause distortions. So, finding what movements are available will be important. I'm not against wood or metal, no arthritis in my hands or anything like that. My eyes aren't what they used to be so being able to focus properly will be my main problem I think though I'm not blind or anything like that. I have heard good things about Tachihara via reading only but I'm not going to rule out anything.

Each of you has valid points that need consideration, but believe me, I'm not going to worry myself into non-movement about this either. As for long posts, I don't mind those at all. Everyone here has been helpful to me in my pursuits of photo info.

Thanks very much.

 

[hacked - sepiareverb]

I much prefer lockdowns that are not round but either toggles like the Canham or cross-handles (star??) like on my big Bogen tripod. I swapped my Wisner for a Canham because I couldn't get the Wisner round knobs unlocked sometimes.

 

[z3guy]

Tim,

I am with Doremus. I have a Wista DX that I have been using for several years and it has been just great for my 90-210mm lenses. I got it used but it was just like new and have not had any problems with it.

Paul

 

[Pupfish]

Worth a look at some of the so-called "press" cameras (designs from which the Wistas and Horsemans and Toyos evolved). For a rough-and-tumble camera they're tough to beat; your lenses if they fit inside are well protected and ready for fast set-up even under adverse conditions. A well-adjusted or properly cammed rangefinder is also very useful when using a roll-film back or a Grafmatic.

I've got a couple of Meridians-- these fold up closed with largish modern fast Plasmat lenses. Revolving back with post moves like a Linhof. Focuses a 75mm lens on a flat board. Pretty much bomb proof, about 5 lbs without lens. These are 60+ years old--do not have pinholes in the synthetic bellows!--operate just as they should. I also have a Super Graphic c. 1957 which is still going strong. It is aluminum bodied, also synthetic bellows that have no holes. SG has more moves than a Crown, also has a rotating Graflok back.