[cheekygeek]

Full story about how this Pentaxian slipped into Large Format Land here.

[redrockcoulee]

It's a good start 😊

[stevebrot]

Now you need a field camera to round out the kit or maybe a hand-held.




Steve

[tuco]

With that recessed lens board, I'd say you have a lens wider than 90mm? And a mono rail like that is more for studio or short distance from the car than a field camera. Are you primarily going to be doing studio/portrait work?

[cheekygeek]

I plan on using this in the field, normally a short distance from the vehicle. I realize that field cameras are preferred, but I decided that I was more interested in something that would have ALL of the swings/shifts/tilts so I could learn how they all work. I wouldn't be doing this at all if it was too costly, and as much as I'd love to have beautiful wooden/brass field camera they are way overpriced compared to a basic monorail. I could ruin two or three monorails like this and still spend less than one field camera. (I'm not the first person to use a monorail in the great outdoors, by the way.)

[tuco]

I have a Wisner Technical Field camera that has just as many movements as most studio cameras. But the movements are not as nicely marked or as accurate in terms of a numerical scale to set the movement by as that monorail.

[stevebrot]

I'm not the first person to use a monorail in the great outdoors, by the way.

...and probably not the last. What you get with the field camera is (usually) less weight and (often enough) less bulk. As with tuco, my field camera has almost all the movements (lacks true rear standard rise or shift), and there is potential for yaw, but overall, I have been happy.



My Chamonix is 7.5" X 8" X 3.5" and weighs 3.4 lbs exclusive of lens. The field kit (body, two lenses, meter, loupe, and film holders) fits in a daypack. To be completely honest, I have only taken it hiking once


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 02-01-2016 at 02:15 PM.

[cheekygeek]

Several years ago I was hiking in Rocky Mountain National Park (Colorado) and a guy passed me coming down the mountain, with a camera on a tripod. I just got a glimpse. As he passed me and we made eye contact I said "Is that a Linhof?" and he (not quite believing he heard me correctly) stopped and asked me to repeat myself. Then he answered with a sort of surprised "Yeah!" No clue how I knew that or even what model it was. Musta got a glimpse of a logo or something.

How much do your average Field Cameras (with lens) weight, anyway? My 45D with 90mm on exceeds 5 lbs (by a bit apparently... all I have here at home is a 5 lb postal scale). Ballhead and tripod obviously add some more. If I were planning on hiking with it, I would get a carbon fiber tripod instead of my aluminum Manfrotto.

[Clicker]

Heh, I have the same but with a 150 since college but for table top stuff. It would be much easy to use a field cam for the field hiking with a mono rail isn't impossible but will be challenging something you'll soon find out besides for landscape field work you don't really need the full range of movements a mono rail offers.

That said enjoy your new tool.

BTW I paid ~$1000 cad new for what was considered entry level in the range paid almost as much for the dam lense too but got a lot if use out if the setup, the only thing I never bother with was putting on the measurement stickers, yes I know people are "gasping" but I managed


I lost the alu case when i lent it out so i was given this makeshift trunk as a replacement *posted from my phone in bed so didn't have a chance till now to get a image

The monster this sits on is a manfrotto 475 (geared column with a monster manfrotto geared head *400*?...no pics it's somewhere in the garage of antiquities, i should get a tri dolly to move it around)

[stevebrot]

How much do your average Field Cameras (with lens) weight, anyway?

Less than your 5D until you start adding film holders. If just carrying a 120 film holder the weight is just a little less than the 5D.


Steve

[cheekygeek]

I really don't get the point of using 120 film in a 4x5 view camera, but maybe I'm missing something.

[stevebrot]

I really don't get the point of using 120 film in a 4x5 view camera, but maybe I'm missing something.

The advantage is being able to use roll film at what is still a fairly large format (120 roll film holders go as large as 6x12cm) and still have use of all the camera's movements. My roll film holders (I have three) are all 6x7 and they work great for many types of shooting.

Plus side relative to 4x5 sheets:

• Much lower cost per frame for color work
• Less bulk per frame
• Easier home processing
• More reach with less bellows extension for close-up/macro and portraits
• Ability to use lenses with a somewhat smaller image circle. In many cases this will result in lower cost and/or bulk.
• Where a 6x7 (my holders) view camera simply makes sense

Minus side relative to 4x5 sheets:

• Wide angle on the smaller format is a pain with most view cameras. This is less the case with 6x9 and 6x12 where a 90mm will often suffice. For 6x7, a 45mm or 60mm would be more useful, but less practical for several reasons.*
• When you need the larger 4x5 negative in order to minimize the grain of faster emulsions
• When you need the larger negative in order to maximize the captured detail
• Where a 4x5 view camera simply makes sense

If the above two lists look a lot like the APS-C vs FF debates, that is because the two are somewhat similar. What's more there are those who would suggest that 5x7" or 8x10" are more appropriate than 4x5".

In regards to wide angles, 6x7 tends to "shoot wide" relative to 3:2 formats. An example would be the waterfall in the photo below:



Shot with a 90mm lens, the waterfall is about 75 feet high and the base is about 50-60 feet away from the tripod position. The camera movements help some too. I believe that front rise and both front and rear tilt were used for this shot with the camera bed being inclined upward a little toward the falls.

The same falls taken a few years earlier with the K10D at 18mm and about 10 feet closer to the falls. The same small boulder is visible at the lower end of both frames.




Steve

* For those not in the know, view camera lenses are usually of symmetrical design such that the lens board position is at the focal length for the lens. Many camera bodies are not able to accommodate 60mm and shorter lenses with full movements and many not at all even when using recessed lens boards.

[tuco]

I really don't get the point of using 120 film in a 4x5 view camera, but maybe I'm missing something.

About the only reasons I would is for 6x12 panos on a roll instead of sheet and camera movements.