Ebony RW45 vs Zone VI Ultralight (and others) - Please Help!

I am getting into LF and want to start off right, and after much

research I've narrowed down my choice between almost 2 cameras. I

know there's heaps of information for both these cameras on

photo.net, but not what I really want to know. Both the Ebony and

Zone VI cost exactly the same ($1495) and are in my budget (however,

Calumet (Zone VI) has a current special where you get a free Caltar

II-E 210 f/6.8 lens with the camera - is this lens any good?)

Running 3rd is the Wista 45DXII ($1099 B&H) - much cheaper!

 

The most important factors for me are WEIGHT (max ~4 lbs),

compactness, and $1500 is the absolute limit to what I can spend for

the body.

 

What are the usable lenses with these cameras (without recessed

lensboards or extensions), as the manufacturer's claims are often

dubious? How do they compare with regard to movements and rigidity?

 

I will use the LF mostly for landscapes and cityscapes, and will

usually be carrying the camera with me all day and on hikes. I also

travel very frequently by plane. No heavy stuff!

 

I would like to hear from anybody who as actually used any of these

SPECIFIC cameras.

 

Thanks...

Both those cameras look like very nice light cameras. Might I suggest that you also consider the Toho (not Toyo) FC-45X. See Kerry Thalmann's review at

 

www.thalmann.com/largeformat/toho.htm

 

It weighs a little over 3 lbs, and after his suggested modifications comes in at about 2 lbs 12 oz. I don't think there is anything lighter, and remember this is a monorail with full movements. It packs up quite compactly and is easy to assemble in the field. I carry mine with three lenses, a spotmeter, and assorted accessories in a small backpack. I chose it because, after using a Horseman Technical 6 x 9 camera, I wanted more movements than a field camera was likely to deliver, and the Toho's lightness and ease of carrying were very attractive. But I have to admit that I found its gg a bit too dim in low light for my aged eyes and replaced it with a Maxwell screen. I probably would have had to do that with most any 4 x 5 camera.

 

One thing you might consider while you are at it. I don't think it is necessary for my needs, but I might have been happier if my Toho had interchangeable bellows. The Zone VI Lightweight apparently does but the Ebony RW45 doesn't seem to. For very short focal length lenses, Toho sells an eccentric lensboard, which Kerry Thalmann thought had advantages over a bag bellows.

If weight is your priority, you should look at the lightest field 4x5 out there. Mine is less than three pounds. Here's an in depth review of this little gem:

 

http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/toho.htm

 

Compactness in spades - it separates into two parts to make packing very easy.

 

And... at $1200, it's under your budget. Best dealer, IMHO, is Badger Graphics:

 

http://www.badgergraphic.com/

 

The Toho is also the most flexible, with full movements, and has enough bellows draw to let you use a 360mm lens (just barely) and wide angles down to 90mm are reported to be not a problem.

 

I carry this camera, 10 film holders (Kodak won't give me Tri-X in readyload, which would save me over 3 pounds), four lenses, spot meter, misc. supplies, gitzo 1227 with Arca-Swiss B1, two liters of water, and lunch, in an Osprey Eclipse 42 pack. Total weight: 32 pounds. I could get under 30 pounds, but 32 pounds is easily hikeable for me. My longest hike with this kit so far has been 8 miles.

 

What can I say? The Toho is terrific.

The Zone VI from what I have read isn�t as nicely made or as rigid as the Wisners. The Ebony I'd pay the extra $50 for the Universal Bellows because it's more flexible with short lenses. From what I hear it is good to lenses around 90mm. The Wista has 12" of bellows so if you want to use lenses over 240-270mm you would be better served with the other two. If weight is a big factor that Toho that the others have mentioned might be a good choice. I stated out last year in LF and had about the same budget. I ended up with the Toyo 45AX which weighs in at about 5.8lbs so it's a bit heavier than you wanted, but it's a really nice camera that folds up compact, is very durable and rigid. If I had to do it all over again I'd buy the Toyo again. I feel the added weight is worth having a metal camera. IMHO

 

Good luck and have fun.

Paul, I read your question and saw that you emphasized the word SPECIFIC cameras. I will not try to convince you to consider buying my favorite camera, as others have attempted to do. I have not actually used cameras made by either of the two camera manufacturers that you have specified. However, I have read and studied quite a bit about them. You did not specify which model Ebony you are referring to. I am assuming, by the price you quoted, that it is one of their lower priced models. Therefore, my conclusion: of the two cameras you have selected, CHOOSE THE EBONY! The Caltar lens that Calumet is offering is a re-badged Rodenstock Geronar. It is not one of the top-of-the-line Rodenstock lenses.

Eugene,

 

"You did not specify which model Ebony you are referring to."

You might want to read the title of the post first. ;-)

Paul, P.S., In the past, I did own a Wista. If it would have been available back then, I would have bought a Shen Hao HZX-45AII. It's a lot more camera for a lot less money. I would have put the money I saved into a couple of high quality lenses.

Thanks, Ed. Another one of my "senior moments". Sorry about that.

Not a problem Eugene. I'm starting to get those myself. =)

I am going to add what Eugene has usually been doing:

 

Call Midwest Photo (www.mpex.com) and ask for Jim. I disagree with getting into the LF on new gear. There is a lot more to have for a lot less at the same quality level. I've had great experience with Jim, and especially in the lens department you can hardly do better. The ~$200 or so you save on a lens can go towards film holders (never enough of those) or a polaroid holder or whatever else. LF is an awsome field, but being on a specific budget does not fit the Ebony way (even if by comparison to its other "super" models it's not as expensive). I have not used the Zone VI but have read a lot of rather disapointing comments. You might want to research that particular model much further before puting any money into it.

I have to second Witolds sentiments. One can get twice the equipment or twice the quality for one's budget if you are willing to go with used stuff. And there is a boatload of good LF equipment out there collecting dust just waiting for a loving home. The siren song of digital magic is wooing many a dedicated photographer and they need MONEY. Much money to get that $8k Canon and all that L glass. That's how I got my kit. The whole shootin match but for the lightmeter for less than half what it would have cost new. AND I picked up a couple items I did not need which I promptly sold on e-bay to buy other things I wanted. There are a lot of decent people selling gear out there. You just have to be cautious and take your time.

 

A couple days ago a 60 piece Linhof Master kit sold for $6800 dollars. I KNOW I could have bought that kit and resold it piece by piece for at least ten grand. But that's not my thing. However if one needs money to finance one's camera desires the opportunity is out there.

Paul,

 

I bought an RW45 15 months ago, and am EXTREMELY pleased with it. You will NOT be disappointed with the Ebony .....

 

Good Luck with your decision !

The Ebony is a much better camera and only has a limitation that

the minimum usable focal length is a 90 with a flat lens board. I

do not know what the minimum focal length on the Zone VI is but

I would not trust the manufacture's claims as they are often

overly optimistic.

According to the Ebony website, the RW45 minimum bellows figure is 60mm. Any lens with a 60mm or longer flange to film distance should work. If the bellows gets in the way of movements, get the universal bellows as was previously suggested. I have read too many negative comments about the current Zone VI camera to even consider buying it, but I have an Ebony which is just as fabulous as everyone says it is. Get the Ebony!

See here

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003SwT

for more info on short lenses with the RW45. It would appear that lenses shorter than 90 mm are usable on this camera, but only on a sunk panel. This information is not available on the Ebony website.

I have used the older 6.5lb Zone VI for 11 years. It's a well-made camera that has seen hard use in the field. It is *not* inferior to a Wisner in terms of operation. And Calumet's service is exceptional. Of course I can't say about the new ultralight model- or compare to an Ebony, but to me the Zone VI proved its value a long time ago.

Perhaps I am too trusting of Ebony to be accurate on their website. That's because their specifications for my SV45U are dead-on correct. My 80XL is the shortest lens I can use with a flat board. Ebony says the minimum focusing distance for my camera is 85mm and the flange-to-film distance of the 80XL is 84.7mm. It works just fine. Maybe having the universal bellows helps.

Mark

 

The Zone VI cameras have been produced by several makers, including Ron Wisner, throughout their history. Some of the earlier ones were excellent, but the newer ones are not. There seems to be a lot of confusion over this. One Zone VI owner swears that he has a wonderful camera, but another says his is a piece of junk. Both can be right.

First let me say you can not go wrong with the Ebony. I currently owen a 45SU and previously owned an SV45U.

 

For Daniel, I regularly used a SA58/5.6XL on the SV45U w/o a recessed lens board. As you may know, the SV45U is engineered to extend vertically and push the front standard back to allow for maximum compression of the bellows.

 

The Ebony is a rock solid finely made and engineered camera. Movements are smooth, fit and finish is second to none, and resale value will remain high.

 

Good luck with your decision.

 

Regards,

 

Mike

Paul, the RW (ebony wood version) is far superior to the earlier

mahogany wood version. It is a superb camera and you get a lot

for your cash! The early RWs had problems with lenses shorter

than 90mm - the universal bellows of the new ebony wood

version has sorted this and allows a great deal more movement.

It woyuld be worth contacting Robert White (or view his web site)

as he has a lot of info on this particular model.

Paul,

 

I was wondering, you have said how much better the ebony cameras are compared to the mahogany. I'm no expert on wood, but I know mahogany is a strong and stable wood. It is used in high stress areas in guitars, like the neck. You can buy the mahogany RWs with the universal bellows, which I think is the way to go. Do you really feel the ebony wood is that much more stable and worth the cost in dollars ($350) and weight (1/2 lb)?

I'm not saying your wrong I just wanted to know why you felt this.

 

Thanks, Ed

It appears that the RW45 has been replaced with the new RW45E, which has the same universal bellows as the SV series. According to the specs on the Robert White website, the RW45E with the new bellows supports lenses from 65mm - 500mm.

I saw that Robert White has only ebony cameras now. But I'm not sure that's the case everywere. Badger lists the RW45, RW45 with univeral bellows (for $50 more) and the RW45E.

Thanks for everyone's help and opinions. The result of my quest was............

I found a mint used Toho for sale in my area, played with it, and bought it. Now I actually have money left over for other trivialities like lenses! It's certainly light, rigid, and an engineering delight. I'm still yearning for the beauty of the Ebony, though (maybe later!) For those of you who helped guide me to this camera, could you give me any suggestions as for lenses? I've read Kerry's reviews but am still undecided. Do his recommendations have sufficient image circles? I've new to LF so I'm not sure just how much I need for all the movements. I'm shooting mostly land and cityscapes. I only have enough $ to start with one lens; 135, 150, or 210? I'll eventually probably have just a 3 lens system to keep the weight down.

Also, for those of you who own this camera; I would like to modify the tripod mount per Kerry's suggestions, but it seems to be not only screwed into the rails but glued as well. I don't want to mess up my new toy. Has anybody else done this modification?

Again, thanks for all your help and advice.