Canham DLC 'v' Toyo-View VX 125

<p>HI,</p>

<p>I'm replacing a trusty Sinar F with something equally flexible, but a bit lighter and more compact. I want a compact metal monorail. I generally shoot urban exteriors, but also some landscape, and occasional table-top stuff. I regularly use a 90, 110, 150, and 210 mm lenses, and don't foresee using wider than an 80, nor longer than a 240 mm in any immediate future. Most of the lenses I use are fast and bulky - f5.6, because I shoot a lot in available light, and I like to have a bright ground-glass for focus and composition.<br>

I know there are other comparable choices from Linhof and Arca-Swiss, but right now I have affordable used choices between the Canham DLC (highly recommended by two friends who own them) and a Toyo-View VX125, which is a camera I've never handled but which I have always really admired from afar.<br>

The Canham is a little lighter, and more flexible, but the Toyo is very precisely made, and still very light even with geared movements. I don't know the compacted dimensions of the Canham, but the Toyo is 12 x 9 x 5 inches folded. The Canham weighs 4 lbs 11 oz. and the Toyo-View 5.5 lbs. Both easily handle the focal lengths I shoot with the standard bellows, but the Canham can theoretically handle longer lenses if need be. <br>

I've had ten years experience with the old Sinar, so I'm not phased by the set-up of the Canham. I guess I'm just wondering if there is any strong opinions on which is better. I do a lot of short trips for business by air, and I'd like something that I can pack and take with me, maybe with some Quickloads and a CF tripod. That would be great!<br>

I'm grateful for any opinions on the topic.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Gerard</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Can't help you with the Toyo, but I have owned the Canham DLC for about three years now. It is very compact, light weight, has one of the best bellows and folds down into a very small package. The rear standard seems flimsy at first - even after three years, I still check the focus after I took a shot because I am never quite sure that the rear standard didn't move when I inserted the film holder - the thing is though that it does seem to stay put - my negs are crisp and sharp. The Canham has all the movements you could ever wish for - for me it is the perfect middle between a mono rail (I started out with a Sinar F1 - great camera) and a field camera. Hope this helps.</p>

<p>Juergen,</p>

<p>Thanks - yet another positive for the Canham. My friends both love their canham's too. There is very little info. out there on the Toyo, but what there is is also very positive. Thinking about the choice, it's basically down to whether the extra 10 oz / 500 gm of the Toyo is worth carrying for the fully geared movements.</p>

<p>Since I replaced my Toyo Field with an Arca Field, I've become a light weight monorail fan. While I have never actually made an image with a Canham, and clearly respect those who actually own and use them, I have played a bit with one, a friend's at a workshop, and found that it felt flimsy, may not have really been, but it felt that way, as in Juergen's comment about refocusing after exposure. The Toyo VX 125 was on my short list of dream cameras and I almost got one. The standard rail is a bit short, but I believe extensions are available. Were your choices my choices, I'd go with the Toyo. I suspect you'll be happy either way.<br>

Good luck.<br>

Eric</p>

<p>Thanks Eric,<br>

The problem seems to be that very few people have hands-on experience of the Toyo. But it is a "Toyo" and manufactured by the same people who make a lot of other well-made cameras and popular cameras.<br>

I think I'd be more than happy with the Canham - as the more 'proven' choice, flimsy feel notwithstanding. The toyo might be the more exotic choice; potentially fabulous, or possibly it flatters to deceive?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If you just shot architecture and table-top the I think the Toyo should be strongly considered. But throwing landscape into the mix would make me lean towards the Canham.</p>

<p>My experience with the Toyo is that it has better precision than the regular Toyo monorail cameras. This could be a good thing and a bad one. If the shooting environment is clean, the geared controls and precision are very nice. But add some sand or grit to the mix and the camera suffers. Also, because it is relatively rare, replacement parts are harder to come by. Basic parts are interchangeable with other Toyo cameras, but many repair parts are unique. You could be stuck with an orphan in the near future.</p>

<p>The slide and tighten method of the Canham allows for more adverse conditions and Keith is very good if your camera breaks or needs help. While I am one of those who never liked the way the camera functions, (I'm a Philips guy) it is a well designed and executed design.</p>

<p>If you have an original Sinar F it's selling price is pretty low right now. It has a higher usage value than resale value. If you do the table top work at home, you could consider keeping the Sinar for that and use the Canham for the other work.</p>

<p>Summary:</p>

<p>Interior Architecture:<br>

<strong>Canham</strong> [Good], <strong>Toyo</strong> [Excellent], <strong>Sinar F</strong> [Good] </p>

<p>Landscape:<br>

<strong>Canham</strong> [Excellent], <strong>Toyo</strong> [Poor], <strong>Sinar F</strong> (Based on portability and nylon focusing track)[Poor to Fair]</p>

<p>Tabletop:<br>

<strong>Canham</strong> [Fair], <strong>Toyo</strong> [Excellent], <strong>Sinar F</strong> [Good]</p>

 

<p>John,<br>

Thanks for a wise opinion. I have promised the Sinar to my sometime assistant who is soon to depart further afield. I realise it's not worth selling, but he is excited to take ownership, so I think at this point I'll have to let it go. If I really need a 'table-top' camera in the future, I'm sure I can borrow something.<br>

Your point about Landscape work is important for me - and I have been reflecting in the past few days on how I've actually quite enjoyed the slide and lock controls of the Sinar - I've never missed geared mechanisms, and actually the tactile quality of the simpler system is quite nice. Still I'd be less worried about grit etc than I would about the idea of irreplaceable parts. That would be a real fear with the Toyo.<br>

On the other hand - maybe the Toyo is more rigid than the Canham in heavy winds, an issue here in Northern Europe. Do you concur that the Toyo would in fact be more rigid than the Canham in wind?<br>

I am leaning back towards Canham a little more - it seems like a very safe bet all-round (wind stability allowing), whereas the Toyo seems more high risk as a choice.<br>

Thanks for your help.</p>

 

<p>Bummer about the Sinar, but at least you are encouraging the spread of large format.</p>

<p>I never used the Toyo in more than a gentle breeze so I don't have a way of a direct comparison. I used the Canham and it seemed to be about average for this type of camera. However, since I shoot in windy condition pretty often, I always bring a wind break with me. I ended up getting a Phillips Compact II for my 8x10 and a Chaminox for my 4x5 and they both are extremely rigid but I don't take a chance with the wind. I found that the wind catching on the bellows shook the camera no matter how rigid the standards.</p>

<p>John,</p>

<p>Thanks for all your answers. They have helped. I'm going to sit on the decision for a week - busy in work right now. But I am looking forward to something I can more easily travel with, whichever way I go.</p>