stefan_dalibor

The viewer is quite nice, but to my knowledge it fits only on Horseman cameras, so you probably will need a custom adapter. I have one made for my Toho camera - nothing dificult, but it takes a skilled machinist.<p>

Using the viewer is quite nice to get an overall impression of a framed shot with the builtin loupe. But for critical focussing work (Scheimplug applications!) I have to remove the viewer's loupe and use a conventional one. Still, the viewer is useful for shading off light as a dark cloth replacement (if it's too hot, or if there are so many people around that I feel uncomfortable sticking my head beneath the cloth).<p>

However, although much less bulky than a mirror viewer, the direct bino viewer is still quite large to pack - this conflicts with the whole purpose of the Toho camera (packing as light and small as possible for a LF monorail), so I find I tend not to carry the viewer in the field. Maybe I'll have an adapter for my Arca F-Line made someday and the viewer sees more usage then...<p>

Keep in mind that the direct bino viewer is discontinued by Horseman since at least 1.5 years, so you'll have to get one used - this was not so easy when I bought mine in spring 2003 (Robert White was very helpful). AFAIK Sinar wide angle bellows can be combined with a bino loupe, so that might be a possible replacement.<p>

My summary: the Horseman direct viewer is a useful gadget for those that <b>really</b> dislike dark cloths and prefer direct ground glass inspection over mirrored images - but I'm still not sure wether the viewer is really <b>better</b> than a dark cloth, and it's more and heavier to pack in the field.

The pleasure of being able to answer one's own questions :)...<br>

After aquiring a SA 72 XL, it turns out that I can apply almost the full 10cm of rise with the leather W/A bellows and the lens focussed on infinity.<br>

Tilt and swing is a bit stiffer, but I don't think it's a problem (I can fully exploit the ca. 20 degrees of tilt the MicroOrbix allows).<br>

Standard alignment with significantly rised standard, however, is a different beast - the leather bellows (though very flexible) tends to exert quite a bit of stress on the IMHO rather thin standard posts... I guess that's the price for the relatively low weight of the camera.

If you apply a lot of rise to an F-line with a W/A lens, be sure to check for sharpness thoroughly in all corners of the groundglass!

Yes and no - on my FC-45X, it's certainly an international standard back in the sense that it accepts (of course) standard 4x5 film holders and roll film holders that slip under the ground glass (like Sinar Zoom, Linhof Rapid Rolex etc.).<br>

But there are no Graflok hinges, so I'm afraid you're out of luck with the kind of rollfilm holders that are attached to the camera instead of the groundglass back (and AFAIK the Horseman rollfilm backs are of this type).<br>

I read however that the FC-45X was/is delivered with 2 slightly different backs, one where the groundglass/film holder frame is made of hard plastic (like on my camera) and another where this part is made of metal. So maybe the metal back has the Graflok hinges...

I have a 4x5 F-metric, too - the finish is really nice, although IMHO it wears off (esp. at the edges) very easily - the old chromed cameras like e.g. Sinar Norma, Linhof Kardan Bi etc. seem to be much more robust in this respect.<br>

Another thing that gets off much too easy for such an expensive camera (IMHO, of course) is the metered scale on the rail for measuring standard extension - this scale is simply glued to the rail, and came off after short use. I've seen this on a few used F-line cameras, so it might be a common problem - but it can be fixed very easy by applying a bit of glue.<br>

The F-metric has of course zero detents for all movements, but they are only feelable and don't click. Just actuate the movement slowly, and you'll feel the soft click!<br>

I like the micrometer Orbix a lot, because it gives you center-tilt (which many believe a bit easier to adjust, depending on personal working habits), and it makes very tiny adjustments more precise.<br>

However, at my camera some screws at the bottom of the front standard came loose, leading to a feelable play in the front standard (this was also very easy to correct with a screw driver).<br>

In addition, the micro orbix dovetail itself had a tad too much play for my (rather stiff) taste, but this is also adjustable.<br>

If you prefer ultimate standard stability (e.g. for very heavy lenses), the camera w/o micro orbix might be better for you.<br>

Refering weight, I had an F-line basic before the metric, and I think the metric is at maximum 100g heavier - certainly much, much lighter than a P2 and absolutely portable!

Nothing against field cameras - but don't give up view cameras to early.<br>

I don't think that any 4x5 field camera packs smaller and lighter than a Toho FC-45X, i.e. in a 35mm shoulder bag 38x22x21cm for the complete kit (w/o tripod), including a 210mm lens, film holder + 10 quickloads and spot meter (but Frank is right, I have to dismantle the bellows/frame assembly for this).<br>

For larger monorails like e.g. Arca Swiss F-line, I have come to the conclusion that it is a misconception to pack them like field cameras (i.e. drive the standards as close together as possible on a short monorail). I did this with my AS F for 2 years and carried it in a Tamrak 767 rucksack... but the compact block of the folded camera results in a large lever on the shoulder straps, which I found uncomfortable. But if the bellows is detached from one standard and the standards turned parallel to the rail, it results in a flat package that can be stowed (with a lens attached) into a large shoulder bag and carried (IMHO, of course) much more conveniently - an additional advantage is that a longer (non-collapsable) monorail can be used.

I use an Ortlieb messenger-like bag for this... I've been converted to this carrying technique after seeing a guy in Berlin who carried a 13x18 Linhof Kardan GT camera this summer! Though I'm afraid the latter would be a bit too much for me, I think 4x5 monorails that fold flat and are not of the heaviest studio breed can become quite manageable this way - of course, backpacking in the country would be a different thing.

The Rodenstock analogue calculator is a very useful tool - but it should be noted that your camera has to have metric with scales (with 1mm/1degree precision) for focus and tilt/swing angles in order to apply the calculated results.

<br>The calculator works O.K. with my Arca F-line camera (though applying 6.5 degree tilt with a scale where only 5 degrees are marked can be fiddly), but is essentially of no use with my Toho FC 45X (which has only inches marked for horizontal shifts).

I can confirm that the leather bellows works fine with a 210mm Sironar S, though it is stretched quite tightly if e.g. the lens is rised fully.<br>My question is, is anybody using a Schneider 72mm XL together with the leather WA bellows, and does the bellows allow to really exploit the large image circle of this lens?

I don't have the lens, but am contemplating about getting it some day... and if I place the standards around the 7cm focal length, applying large movements feels rather stiff due to the bellows. So I'm afraid a real bag bellows might be necessary to accomplish WA lenses with really large image circles. I'd be happy to be proven wrong :)!

Well, the pleasure of answering one's own questions... :)<br>

I followed Michael's advice and asked Linhof - they were very helpful, and it turned out that

<ul><li>the Kardan L is indeed a non-yaw-free center tilt camera with L-standarts and center tilts</li>

<li>the original, earlier version had floating tilt axis on both standards, for asymmetrical application of Scheimpflug's principle</li>

<li>Linhof had to omit the floating tilts, because Sinar won a patent law suit about asymmetrical tilt axis (seems a bit strange to me as a patent layman - variable tilt axis are IMHO a bit more sophisticated than the fixed asymmetrical axis I know from Sinars)</li><li>so there are 2 versions of the Master L, w/ and w/o floating tilt axis</li><li>the Kardan Master L was a very sturdy design, even for Linhof's high standards, and some parts for it might even be still available from Linhof</li><li>lensboards, bellows and backs should be compatible to current Linhof products</li>

<li>I was asked why in Heaven's sake I was interested in a 13x18 camera, as film supply for this format would probably dwindle in the near future :):)</li></ul>

Hm, I checked the HP site, but found only a brief description of the current (GTL) model - BTW, B&H's online catalogue seems to contain much more technical details on this camera.<br>

But, I found no reference to the »L« model I mentioned... so, the questions remain: <ul><li>How is this L model related to the current one?</li><li>Is it (aside from the missing base tilts) the same, feature- and movement-wise?</li><li>Are the L accessories available / compatible (e.g. monorail extensions) with current Linhof systems?</li></ul>

As usual, Bob Salomon will have to be the last and definitive resort for this online Linhof puzzle, too :):)...

Is there something like a Linhof Kardan Master L?<br>

From the foto I saw, this looks like a Master GTL, but w/o the base

tilts, and a chrome monorail with cylindrical cross-section. Is

this an earlier or cheaper model of the current GTL series, and

where could I find the specs like dimensions, type (which, geared?)

and range of movements?<p>

Thanks,<br>

Stefan

Use a Toho (not Toyo!) FC-45X. Currently, I find my A/S F-line C also too heavy to carry (though more while walking then flying :), so the little Toho (1.5kg) is really liberating.

I can use a puny Slik 804 CF tripod (less than 1kg/50cm when folded, fits in my onboard luggage) with the Toho instead of the Gitzo 410 needed for the Arca w/o any ill effects up to now.<br>

Also, use Quickloads and confine yourself to 1 or two lenses - and I bet your LF kit will be no more bulkier or heavier than your 35mm bag.<br>

A Fuji 6x9 is even lighter and smaller (and can give really outstanding results if used within its limits!), but even more minimalist.<br>

IMHO, the ability to bring back large negatives from a long journey depends mostly from how much one can adopt a »reduce to the max« attitude referring equipment :).

William, the Toho FC-45X has only one knob for locking each movement (but of course each movement has its own locking knob :).<br>

While it's true that tightening the knobs helps for ultimum stability and precision, I never experienced unexpected slip (have the camera for ca. 7 months now and used it quite a bit, although not in a professional context).<br>

As a matter of personal preference, I prefer metal over wood for technical instruments (so I'm a bit biased here), but I think in terms of rigidity and wobble-freeness there is really nothing to criticise with the FC45-X. Changing format orientation is slow, and for wide angle lenses you'll probably need the special shift adapter lensboard, but apart from that I really enjoy the camera. And as Kerry Thalmann states in his thorough <a href="http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/toho.htm">review</a>, the low weight and small packing volume <b>is</b> a liberating experience (esp. after hauling an Arca Swiss F-line around for 2 years :)!<br>

(Sorry for the off-topic babble...)

As you have <i>the</i> extreme metal studio camera, why not going to the other side of extreme weight-wise, while staying metal?<br>

For field use, you should really consider the Toho (not Toyo) FC45-X (available from Badger Graphics)? Aside from modularity (fixed bellows), it's a full metal monorail with 31cm bellows draw, even yaw-free - rigid, repeatable (where the latter quality is what I really miss from non-metal cameras, even including Ebony) capable of doing everything a monorail camera should do - and the camera body weighs under 1.5kg!<br>

Referring its sentimental value when passing it to your grand-children, I think that depends from their taste... I personally would like and admire a Linhof Technika III much more than any wooden camera (I only wish I really had a grandpa giving it to me :).

As far as I can see (and this is from dismantling the base-tilt joint), the detents are given by the form of the parts, i.e. the block sitting in the rise/fall clamp and the one that clamps the standard. The little Phillips screw you mention is only to prevent that the joints don't slip apart if the locking knobs aren't tightened.

This means you can't change the detents w/o some machining...<br>

I'm also a bit obsessed by »detent parallelitis« (in fact so much I considered buying a zig-align device) - I check the standards with a spirit level quite frequently, but up to now, my Toho seems to be at least as parallel as my Arca (confirmed also by the pictures I took, but I don't use very wide lenses).<br>

If you look closer at the machined surfaces that form the detent mechanism, you can see that the resp. »fixed« parts have chamfered edges, meaning the moving part is forced into the detented position stronger (i.e. with less possibility for play) if pushed into the direction of the fixed part (this is for swing and tilt). So to get play-free alignment, I press the resp. standard down (to align swing) and left before tightening the locking knobs.<p>

Regarding the position of the front tilt locking knob, I have the same problems (and neither can't understand why the knob isn't positioned on the front side) - I've bought another screw with a smaller locking knob for this reason ($1 in a local shop specialized on screws), but this is unsatisfying (too hard to my fingers). I'm contemplating about a screw with a pivoting locking bolt (not sure about the word, in german it would be »Knebel«) instead of the fixed knob, but it hasn't been annoying enough until now.<br>

More often a problem are IMO the weak springs on the camera back - I use a Horseman direct bino viewer, and if I shoot upwards, I have to remove the viewer for shooting because otherwise the film holder is not positioned firmly enough, as the combined weight of the holder and viewer is too much for the springs to compensate. My machinist tells me that it would be a major and risky work to replace the springs, as the bolts holding them are riveted to the groundglass frame.

I second Armin - I thought about buying a Plaubel camera, and though I decided otherwise in the end found Plaubel's service (i.e. Fr. Kühnel) extremely helpful.<br>

BTW: Old Plaubels are fine tools (and Plaubel still offers a surprisingly large range of accessories for them), but I encourage everyone to have a look at Plaubels current products: IMO, the Peco Profia PL is a very well-made system, falling nicely between field monorails (e.g. Arca Swiss F-line) and the large studio cameras (e.g. Sinar P) weight- and feature-wise.

Don't know about the old one, but I tried the new finder at Photokina (looking for an aid in where to set up the camera).<br>

For me, the new Linhof finder was really hard to use w/ glasses (at every focal length)... the Horseman viewer I tried at their booth was much better in this respect, but the equally high price prevented me from buying it until now. Before shelling out that much money, as an eye-glass wearer I'd check out the Horseman device (althouth it had a slightly more limited zoom range than the Linhof finder).

Another tip on the viewfinder-obscuring lens of the 6x9 Fujis:<br>

Due to the 2 shutter releases and the relatively low weight of the Fuji, I find it quite easy to turn the camera on it's head while composing - IMO, this makes framing the `hidden' areas a non-issue.<br>

However, I found that using a monopod increases the quality of my Fuji pictures quite a bit... and even then, it's of course no comparison to composing on a 4x5 ground glass :)! In fact, although I like my GW690 a lot, I find I leave it at home often nowadays in favour of LF equipment - which is of course too heavy to allow a second camera :/.

Anybody using the Really Right Stuff B2-Pro LR lever action quick release clamp under an LF camera?<br>

Would this clamp be sufficient, say, for an Arca Swiss F-Line with normal to medium weight lenses attached (210mm Sironar S, Fujinon C 450mm or similar)?<br>

Or would the standard B2-Pro (maybe even the long L version) with screw fixation be more suitable in this case?<p>Thanks, Stefan

Bill, you're right - I use indirect rise the usual way:

<ol><li>point the camera to the subject so the selected frame is on the ground glass</li>

<li>tilt the back so it is vertical (or just vertical enough), using base tilt and the bubbles</li>

<li>apply the same base tilt angle to the front standard (using the bubbles, or the scales at the base tilt joint)</li>

<li>perhaps fine-tune the amount of rise by applying rise or fall on the camera back</li>

<li>finally, use the Orbix to apply front tilt if needed</li></ol>

It's really easy!

You're right - the Orbix tilts the lens round its nodal point only if no direct rise is applied.<br>

This made me also think about the usefulness of the Orbix device a while before purchasing an F-Line w/ Micro-Orbix... but in my experience using the camera, it has never shown up as a problem.<br>

If I want to shoot a subject that needs rise and tilt, I just use indirect rise (with the camera's base tilts) - this is very convenient with the F-Line, and the camera also feels more rigid if the standards are not rised.<br>

I've also developped the habit of setting up the camera with the back standard rised about 1cm for shots involving tilt and rise, so that I have a bit of room for fine-tuning the amount of rise by applying back fall.<p>

If you're still not convinced, consider the fact that Horseman includes a special feature for changing the tilt axis (quite similar to Arca's Orbix tilt combined with rise) in their top model LX - it should (at least in theory) be possible to use Orbix tilt plus rise as a variable tilt axis for facilitating some shots.

I've discovered a 13x18cm (i.e. 5x7) camera, produced by Plaubel, labeled <it>Universal II</it> at a local dealer.<p>

It's a (fully) metal monorail w/ base tilts; condition seems to be fine, price affordable (about $300).<br>

The problem: there are no accessories, and (according to the dealer) it has no international back.<p>

So my question is: Is anybody using such a device? Are accessories like lensboards, (reducing) backs etc. still available for this (as it seems rather old) system, so I could use it as a cheap entry to LF?<br>

Or is it essentially a dead machine, incompatible to the range of accessories available nowadays?

Could someone quantify the (dis)advantages of AS field vs. standard F?<br>

How much weight is saved, how much rise lost?<p>

BTW, the AS product catalogue states that the (rather large) standart/bellows cross section was chosen in order to minimize vignetting/to maximize contrast.<BR>

Has any AS field user noticed deterioration in this aspects, compared to the 4x5 F?

Guess what, I got a M679 brochure today (surprisingly, from a shop where I was to examine an Arca) - so I can fill in the dimensions of the M679 (so that it is in the database, in case anybody else is interested:<BR>

It's 170mm x 153mm x 294mm (l x w x h), and weighs ca. 3.8kg (with the integrated ballhead).<p>

Stefan<p>

P.S.: Assuming 180km/h on the A9 is like photographing with theoretical MTF charts - during business hours, you are lucky if you achieve an average of 130km/h (couldn' resist to disgress, but Linhof Kamerawerke is on my agenda for the next Munich visit :).

Thanks again, Bob!<p>

That was exactly what I wanted to know... I'm in fact in Germany (even in Bavaria, about 180 klicks from Munich :), but the net is so much faster and more comfortable than any surface mail...<p>

Stefan

Wow, hadn't expected such a fast answer over Xmas holidays... :)<p>

That encourages me to repeat my core question:<BR>

Where can I find the technical specs for the M679? I'm looking for the nice B&H summary format (they don't seem to sell this device), including dimensions, max. possible movements, extension etc., and of course pricing.<p>

I assume it is integrated into the rest of the Linhof system (backs, lensboards etc.)?<p>

And I'm rather curious about first-hand user experience with this camera... the design has a certain appeal to it (the kind of minimalistic design that sometimes turns out superior to traditional solutions?), but my experience base with view cameras is much to small for informed judgment.<p>

Stefan