Revolving back on the Toyo 45II worth extra weight?

[ed_candland1]

I was wondering if the revolving back on the 45II is worth it or should I just get a 45AX. I can get a 45II at Robert white's for about the same $$ as a AX here at Badger etc. RW doesn't list as AX on his web site. The 45II adds about .4lbs, so unless it's really a lot better I think I'd stick with the AX.

Thanks.

[scott_jones2]

Ed,

 

<p>

 

I don't have the 45, but do have the VX125 which has the Toyo rotating

back. It is wonderful. It rotates even with one hand when the release

button is pushed. Sure you can do just fine without it, but I find

mine very pleasant to deal with and I NEVER have to worry about

dropping that ground glass when changing rotation which I think sells

me on the feature right there...

 

<p>

 

Scott

[andre_noble4]

Ed, I have the 45AII with revolving back. It's very useful during

composition phase,especially architecture, city scapes.

 

<p>

 

However, my recommendation is to call Robert White on Monday and get

the Toyo AX at substantial savings from him, put the money you save

toward a lens you really like. Best of Luck.

[ted_kaufman]

I would get a revolving back on any camera it's offered as an

option. I've used Toyo G 4x5 for years, and I love the revolving

back. Removing a back and rotating it manually is such a hassle

compared to pushing a button and turning. Moveover, the Toyo G model

allows you to lock the back in any position, not just turn it 90

degrees, which can be very useful. I think the AX also permits this.

Lastly, revolving the back eliminates the chance of dropping it.

[brian_ellis3]

It's surprising to me that a revolving back would add that much

weight - 4 lbs seems like a lot to be attributable to just that

feature but I've never owned or used either of the Toyos so I assume

you're right. I have one camera that has a revolving back and two

that don't. I find virtually no difference in convenience between the

two types. I don't know about the Toyo, I've never used it, but on my

two cameras that don't have revolving back changing from horizontal

to vertical takes about 5 seconds and is very easy to do. If it were

me, there's no way I'd add 4 lbs to the weight of a camera I planned

to take in the field just to get a revolving back but that's just my

view, obviously others differ.

[andre_noble4]

+ 0.4 lbs

[richard_deimel]

I agree with Brian Ellis. I have had cameras with and without the

revolving back, and while obviously it's less effort just to turn a

back than to take it off and turn it, (a) it's not something you are

doing constantly and (b) what's the hurry? Most LF photographers are

not in a rush. Certainly the marginal convenience is worth neither

any increase in weight (a pound or two as I recall, not 4 pounds) nor

any increase in cost. Not, at least, to me.

[glenn_kroeger]

I have owned both. I currently use the AX with the non-revolving

back. It is simpler, saves weight, and locates the film 4mm closer to

the body which helps with wide angle lenses. On the other hand, the

revolving back has a release bail which is nice.

[merg_ross]

For weight clarifucation: Toyo lists AII @ 6.2 lbs. and AX @ 5.8 lbs.

for a difference of .4 lbs. as noted by Andre.

[merg_ross]

Clarification: +0.4 lbs.

[kinesisphotogear]

I used to own a Toyo with a revolving back. It has been many years, but as I recall, with wide angle lenses and with serious shifts or rises the extra thickness

caused some vignetting. I now shoot Sinar (w/o such a back) and NEVER miss the rotating back. As already mentioned on this thread, you are shooting sheet film,

which is inherently a slow operation.

[ed_candland1]

Thanks for all the responses. Looks like 50% for 50% aganist.;-)

Anyway I think I'll most likely get the AX both weigh a bit more than

I'd like to begin with. So why add more and the vignetting with the

II doesn't sound so great and the extra 4mm for short lens on the AX

couldn't hurt either. I was wondering if anyone knows, the II adds

0.4lbs is that all the back or do they include the weight of the hood

that comes with it?

[jim_billups1]

Ed,

 

<p>

 

I also use the 45AX and do not miss having a revolving back. What I

did purchase as an accessory, was the Toyo folding focusing hood,

which also doubles as a ground glass proctector. I think the hood was

around $90.00 or $100.00 through B&H.

You will really enjoy this camera.

[dave_karp]

Ed,

 

<p>

 

It might depend on where you photograph. A friend of mine sold a

45AII to a good customer who does a lot of work in the desert. He

loves the revolving back because he does not have to remove it and

expose the inside of the camera to blowing dust, sand, etc. Removing

and replacing the back exposes the inside of the camera to more dust

than opening the back to slide in a holder.

 

<p>

 

Another consideration. I was in the local Calumet store last week.

Another customer was buying a new BossScreen to replace the

groundglass that he broke by dropping the camera back. If you wear

gloves, or are clumsy like me, you might want to carry the little bit

extra weight and go with the revolving back.

 

<p>

 

Aside from the above and the added convenience of the revolving back

(which I have on my Calumet 45NX and love), the revolving back won't

make your photos any better!