Rangefinder Accuracy & Practicality on Horseman's/Linhoff's

[howard_slavitt3]

I've used a Horseman VH 6cm x 9cm field camera for a couple of years

and love it. I'm planning several trips to third world countries in

the next few years and would prefer a camera that's quicker to set up

and take down for street scenes and/or just to feel less exposed and

vulnerable than I sometimes feel with my VH. After thinking about

investing in a Mamiya 7, I came around to thinking about getting a VHR

(with the built in rangefinder), which is less expensive and would

also still allow me to use the ground glass and tilts. Does anyone

with a VHR or a Linhoff with the built in rangefinder use the

rangefinder a lot? Have you traveled with this camera abroad? What has

been your experience about the accuracy of your camera's rangefinder?

Is there a particular focal length range in which it's more accurate?

At what f stops do you typically shoot with the rangefinder (f11? f16?

f22?) How quick and easy is it to use a field camera in the

rangefinder mode? Thanks in advance for your help. Howard

[scott walton]

I shoot with a Linhof Tech III and love it. The thing you have to get are cams that are matched to the lens. Most of the time when I do use the range

finder, it is for aerials and is just used for positioning. I use a 150mm or 180mm and have the camera preset with the locks in place at f16. Other than

that, it is on a tripod using the ground glass. I would consider your thoughts on the M7 more!

[dan_smith]

In years past I have used Linhof Technicas rangefinders with

matched/cammed lenses. With these I have shot wide open to a few

stops down doing sports & candid images as well as some wedding work,

all in 4x5. I found the images sharp and satisfactory once I got the

hang of using the framing wire at a 'correct' distance for

composition. With the Schneider prime lenses I used I had sharp

images at all apertures from wide open to stopped down and on a

tripod.

[doug_paramore2]

A properly adjusted range finder is extremely accurate at the

aperatures you would normally use. A rangefinder is especially good

at at closer distances and with wide angle lenses providing you have

the proper cam and the bed stops are set correctly. It is also

extremely fast. Once you get used to the wire frame or optical

viewfinder, framing can be quite accurate, but leave a little room

for cropping. The disadvantage is that is it not easy to change

lenses, as you also have to change the cam. Some of the later

graphics, such as the Super Graphic, had drop-in cams which speeded

up the process. You will need additional bed stops for each lens if

you intend to change lenses and cams easily. I would suggest you set

up the rangefinder for the lens you will use most often, and use

groundglass focusing for the other lenses. Incidentally, you can

focus handheld using the groundglass quickly with a bit of practice.

 

<p>

 

Regards, Doug.

[dennis lee]

Howard,

I just signed on to ask the very same question. Thanks for the

head start. I'm also looking at the Horseman and Linhof models

because of the frustration I'm having with my Century Graphic.

 

<p>

 

I can tell you this though. In terms of a reliable, dead on accurate

medium format rangefinder camera (with a wonderfully accurate

meter) and one of the finest lenses I've ever used-- The Plaubel

Makina 67 with 80 2.8 Nikkor. This lens is magic and the

camera folds to the size of a paperback (albeit a heavy

paperback). It can be a little delicate so that you can't let

everybody play with it. But there's always room to take it along

after all the other cameras are packed. Especially if the 120 film

is already coming along. I too like to have a ground glass option

with my medium and large format shooting, the Plaubel is a

fantastic 'ersatz' camera when needed.

 

<p>

 

Let's hope we get more positive feedback on the

Horseman/Linhof rangefinder question.

[ray_fenio]

Howard- I have the VHR horseman and checked the rangefinder against

the ground glass focus and found it too be extremely accurate. I

still prefer to focus on the glass it is nice to have the option. I

heard of a fellow who handheld his VHR horseman to take wedding photos

and it worked well. I have used the Fuji 6x9 rangefinders and they

are a nice camera, very easy to handle. However, I vote for the VHR.

[qtluong]

I have a Technika IV configured in hand-held mode. I have also

travelled extensively in several Asian countries. For a preview

see <a href = "http://www.ai.sri.com/~luong/travel/vietnam/">

http://www.ai.sri.com/~luong/travel/vietnam/</a>, and although

this is off-topic, let me know what you think :-). I wouldn't

rely exclusively on the Linhof on this kind of trip if I was after

any kind of candid pictures. The camera would be OK for posed

or preset pictures on a tripod, for which a GG camera would also be

usable,

but I'd also want another faster and hand-holdable camera.

(1) The 2x3

Tech, although more compact, is not that much lighter than the

4x5. (2) I find my Linhof too heavy and cumbersome to hand-hold

comfortably, practical shutter speeds are quite slow for handholding

(3) Beeing all-manual, operation is quite slow for me. Rangefinder and

viewfinder are quite far apart.