What's that Word?

Monorail!

I'm wondering about thoughts on monorails vs field cameras. For years I have been toying with the ideas of doing tintypes (aluminum types?) in a 4x5 camera. The evil auction site has a Lihof monorail that looks in good shape and seems a reasonable price compared to other 4x5's. But I think it would be somewhat ungainly for anything outside a studio.

Has anyone used a monorail as a carry around camera?

You could have a look at : https://grossformatfotografie.de/board-list/
Its the German large format website, and I have the impression that most German members there are shooting with a monorail camera inside and outside.

In Germany after WWII and before the days of internet amateur LF photography hardly was existent at all, and within art photography it only was a share.
So there was no recent history of using field cameras aside by some commercial photographers. (Linhof reintroduced field cameras in the 50s.)

@AgX - I'm assuming they're referencing an old Simpsons episode where Springfield gets a monorail. Monorail... Monorail,...

Very much pros and cons to both styles of cameras, and asking yourself what you really need and want out of one is going to help others help you come to a suitable answer.

I own and work with a press camera (A Busch Pressman, slightly more options on movements than some of the other press cameras of the era), but have worked with 'more proper field cameras' that offered a fuller range of movements, and have played with full on Monorail Cameras with far more flexibility and 'control'.

Monorails can work out in the field, and many do wonderful work with them, but they either are aware and accepting of all the drawbacks of them, or they're possibly not actually going to be using one for a very long career...

Do you want all the options and movements of the camera you're looking at?

Or do you really want a more straightforward box-and-bellows camera with fewer controls and alignments to fiddle with?
[Building a camera that only supports focus while skipping movements like rise, tilt, etc, is not a horribly complex task to do with simple hand tools and a small work bench, and is likely far easier to actually setup and use if that is the extent of a camera you want.]

“Carry around” is a relative term. I’ve used a Cambo monorail since 1980 in the field. Transport in car, then in the case with a 2-wheel luggage dolly. Not inconvenient for hard surfaces but going off-road is a hassle. That’s when I use a SpeedGraphic and deal with the reduced access to a variety of lenses and movements.

And the SpeedGraphic... I’ve thrown that and a meter and film holders into a backpack and traveled the world...

In my experience, a monorail is fine if you're shooting out of the trunk of your car. You can set the camera up on the tripod, throw the dark cloth over your shoulder as a pad, and carry the camera and tripod together to where you need to go. If, however, you're going to be shooting a couple of miles away from the car, or in dense vegetation, it's going to be very uncomfortable.

I did build a case for my monorail as well. It's basically a bunch of velvet lined foam packed into a small roller suitcase. It works fine for rolling over distances on concrete or asphalt, but is no good on natural ground. I also made a backpacking frame to carry the roller suitcase over longer distances, but this too can be quite heavy. Especially with a heavy tripod and all of the other accessories. Eventually, I just bought a Speed Graphic, and use that as my field camera/handheld camera/focal plane camera (really useful, by the way). It lacks the extreme movements, but I find it has plenty of movements for landscape work, and when I'm doing stuff that requires more movements (like studio or architecture), setting up a monorail usually isn't too much of a hassle. Plus, I was able to get both a good monorail (Sinar F1), and the Speed Graphic for less than a halfway decent field camera.

It looks like me and Brian have the same idea.

thuggins said:

Monorail!

I'm wondering about thoughts on monorails vs field cameras. For years I have been toying with the ideas of doing tintypes (aluminum types?) in a 4x5 camera. The evil auction site has a Lihof monorail that looks in good shape and seems a reasonable price compared to other 4x5's. But I think it would be somewhat ungainly for anything outside a studio.

Has anyone used a monorail as a carry around camera?

Click to expand...

Yup.. both... or mostly either my 4x5 monorail or... my much experienced 8x1O B&J 'woodie.. but rarely (now-a-days) ever my Mamiya RB.... 'Why?' you might ask.. well I much prefer having the few sheets of film that will be processed within 24 hours. as opposed to having hunt around for something 'worth recording to film' or.. waiting to finish a 'full 120 roll of film

Ken

My first LF camera was a 4x5 Graphic View I, which is an aluminum monorail camera. Inexpensive, indestructible with lots of movements, but very heavy. It doesn't fold up very compactly, even after removing the standards from the rail. There are probably newer monorails that are more compact, but it seemed to be overkill for most landscape/outdoor photography. Most 4x5 field cameras (metal or wood) fold up very nicely and will easily fit in a medium-sized backpack. If you're looking at something like the Linhof Technika, these will be much easier to use in the field. They will usually provide enough movement for any outdoor situations. They are similar to other folding press-type cameras like the Speed or Crown Graphics.

I've never shot tintypes, but if you're using wet tintypes or wet plates, a wood camera may be a better choice. I use a 4x5 Shen-Hao field camera as my main outdoor camera, very light and compact. Also have a 5x7 and an 8x10 Eastman View cameras which are almost a century old. I shoot dry plates and film in these, and they fold up enough to be able to carry around fairly easily. The 8x10 is a big camera though.

If you haven't read it, get Simmons' "Using the View Camera" which may be very helpful in making your decision.

Is there really much difference in a wood or metal camera for doing wet plate/tin type style photography?

Isn't the plate/sheet holder taking the brunt of the drips anyway, and even if it does drip on the camera frame itself, I kind of imagine the metal body would be easier to clean off.

So is there an actual advantage to using wood cameras for wet photography that I'm ignoring, or is this possibly more of a 'Its tradition' kind of thing?

Not speaking from direct experience here, but I would imagine that any wet chemicals dripping inside the camera, even a small amount, could be corrosive to the metal camera body, especially if not thoroughly cleaned over time.
Not because of any other advantage, but older wood cameras may be a better choice as there are plenty of used examples available that are in rough cosmetic condition, but may be perfectly functional.
Posing this question to someone over on LFF might elicit a more definitive answer.

The Linhof Technikardan cameras, due to their telescopic rail, once collapsed and in case are about the same in bulk as the respective field cameras.

AgX said:

The Linhof Technikardan cameras, due to their telescopic rail, once collapsed and in case are about the same in bulk as the respective field cameras.

Click to expand...

I've been eyeballing these (though, generally speaking, I cant afford them). The problem I have with most monorails is as much bulk as is is weight. While I don't want to carry around a 15lb camera, I want something that can fold up and fit in a soft bag. If the bulky shape of a camera requires a hard case to remain protected, that case adds more weight, and is frequently not suited for trails. The TK seems to be a great compromise, if you can afford one.

It's very easy to fold a Sinar F. See this one I'm selling: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/fs-sinar-f-4x5-camera-with-6-extension-rail.166753/

Kumar

The Linhof Color Kardans are a great bargain on eBay. You can remove the bellows and fold the standards flat (parallel with the rail) and it is both compact and lightweight. Combine that with Linhof precision and you have a pretty great precision instrument for a couple of hundred $.

abruzzi said:

The problem I have with most monorails is as much bulk as is is weight. While I don't want to carry around a 15lb camera, I want something that can fold up and fit in a soft bag. If the bulky shape of a camera requires a hard case to remain protected, that case adds more weight,

Click to expand...

Kumar's example of a folded down Sinar F shows that in such case even a homemade case from light sheet material may be sufficient as to the outer are only rigid parts (except for the scales).
But the F folds downs more bulky than the flat Technikardan. However one may just give the groundscreen a stiff protection

Thanks for the input; it pretty much confirms what I was thinking. I've currently got a collection of Kodaks and a bevy of Bessas for 6x9, and have never felt any need for tilt, shift, etc. My main concern is DOF to have a reasonably in focus foreground, and a small aperture combined with hyperfocal focusing easily meets my needs with a 105mm lens.

The various Graflex seem like good options. I've had some ideas for a telescoping box that should do the job nicely.