Digital view camera experience Sivlestri Linhof Horseman

[torger]

It's funny, I often find that the with longer lenses, I'm  applying greater movements.  So, I typically use the 35, 43, 55 & 70 on the Rm3d and then the 90, 135 & 180 on the M2.  The M2 has 35mm of movement in every direction and always feels like the better choice for longer focal lengths.

Good point, I have the same experience. Longer lens, often larger movements. With wide angles you reach a very wide angle with quite small shifts, and stretched perspective in corners often becomes evident anyway so I want to shift as little as possible. With longer lenses there's often a need to "look up" (or down, but more often up) quite some distance in relation to the narrower angle, and stretched perspective is generally a non-issue. If the subject allows I generally tilt the camera a little too to not shift too much (landscape generally allows more tilting without obvious perspective issues than architecture).

The Techno has +/-20mm on the back and a +20mm on the front so the maximum difference is 40mm. The Arca-Swiss MF-two is a better choice if you really need very large movements, while the Techno is more portable and has a better ground glass solution. Among the portable view camera solutions out there I see the Linhof Techno and the Arca-Swiss MF-two as the two best. The Techno is better for backpacking/hiking/landscape, and the MF-two is better for architecture/tethered/studio, although there are examples of people using the Techno for architecture and the MF-two for landscape.

All the view cameras with tilt/swing movements on both front and back are either too heavy or have too weak precision for being used with digital wide angles, but are on the other hand often nicer to work with when shooting with longer lenses in the studio.

[torger]

Concerning side movements I guess everyone knows their own shooting style, but I'd say that as soon as there is an architectural structure in my photos it's indeed quite common that I employ side shift (for composition, not stitching), while in landscape it's rare.

With architecture I often want to shoot "straight on" with a flat symmetrical perspective, but may want to put it to the side a bit for framing, and then I employ sideways shift. With the Techno this is +/-10mm on the front (lens moves). Ie not a big range but generally big enough for me (I'd prefer +/-15mm though), and not at all suited for stitching (the fixed +/-17mm positions on sliding back are for stitching, but as said only designed for standard ground glass and 49x37mm sensors, otherwise you stitch in the blind).

[Lorenzo Pierucci]

Manufacturing in China is much cheaper than for the Alpa, Linhof, Cambo, Arca-Swiss which are all made in Europe. However it's not only the workforce, the chinese manufactures don't have the same quality standards either, you simply don't get as good precision.

The Fotoman cameras I've heard is quite okay (the Dmax body maybe would suit you?) although you can't really trust the scale on the focusing ring. Hopefully parallelism is good though. I don't think you have ground glass on that, and as you can't trust he focusing ring you'll be focusing blind (trial error tethered). I've heard people using shim tape to adjust and get a better match with the focusing ring though so it gets usable. You could probably fix parallelism issues if any with shim tape too. If there's play in the parts then there's trouble though (play in a focusing ring is a pain, play in shift mechanism is a disaster for parallelism). I haven't personally laid my hands on a Fotoman camera so I don't know. It would be interesting to try, maybe they're not too bad. One need to keep in mind that many in the business have a reason to spread FUD about those cheap chinese cameras.

Of course, with a 22-39 megapixel back, f/11 - f/16 apertures and relaxed relation to pixel peeping you're much more likely to be pleased than if you're a IQ180 owner and really like to pixel peep corners and shoot at f/8.

Thanks so much Torger u make a point. Is true that with a 22 back i have a little bit of edge, and stitching i usually end resize the files ( none of my client ever print bigger then A4 ) so i really have all the sharpness that i need. BUT if i need to trow money in a system, well i wanna something that last. My best investment so far was that Rod 55 sironar that whatever camera i put it on is just perfect. Period. The photo i took so far with the 14-24 nikon are simply not even close ( was checking yesterday some detail on a floor moquette... )

Im looking at the Silvestri prices online, seems that will be around 3000 euro new if i convert the lens ( BICAM II ) but it seems it have only movement of the lens ( as most of the camera ). The Arca are just out of budget...

I start to think that a second hand linhof 679 is the right tradeoff. All those pancake beast are $$$ if u want good back movement.
As long i don't have to un mount rails and and bellows as my Toyo to fit it in my back pack.... prehistory ( but still i got some great shot with it )

Monday i will take her on Taipei 101 skyscraper to shoot the new Google office.... bringing some old fashion vibe in there.

[Ray R]

I have a Fotoman DMini which I use with my P45.
The focusing ring can be adjusted physically by loosening the srcrews on the mount and focusing to infinity, then tightening the srews up.

I have found no requirement to use shims.

I have found that the depth of field at given apertures not to be that accurate though, but I do tend to use it tethered.

[Gigi]

THere is a tradeoff here between weight and flexibility. While the pancake cameras are relatively small, they are assembled with milled alum plates, sometimes several. The weight adds up, esp. with a digital back. For studio or stationary work, this is not an issue, but for portability on a hike or in the field, it can be. Add a viewer, digital back, maybe a stitching back, and it adds up.

Its not like the days of view cameras, where a good 4x5 wooden camera was flexible enough to do almost anything, and the weight was simply in the number of film holders you brought along! Now its in the setup and all the ancillaries one brings along.

[Lorenzo Pierucci]

thanks for feed back guys... i moving to the linhof direction more and more.

if i can just try one here in Taiwan....

[RomanN.]

Hi,
Why not take a look on Arca swiss F-line 6x9?
I worked 2 years with the F-line digital before I get a M-line 2.
Ocourse, M-2 is the better option for digital, but if the price is important the F-line is a very cheap and transportable option- about 2 kg only.
On location it is a very nice option, it is not the best solution for studio work.
Linhof 679 or Ultima 23 are great for studio but simply to heavy for outside.
F-line 6x9 and Kapture group sliding back gives you the most compact and cheapest solution.
I used also 23 and 28 mm on this combo and its work. Its not the best solution but working. I enjoy now the precision of the M-2 and use extem wide angle on Cambo WRS but these both set up are expensive.
Anyway for your 55 mm the AS F-69 will be great.
If you will make a decision for a pancake so Cambo WDS would be the cheapest way. But be carefull: on WDS there is only a focusingscreen for the H-1 system- you must have a optical finder or i-phone. For me this was the main point to change from WDS to WRS: I need a screen to compose on it- not for focusing.
Bitcam II or III is maybe better when you get the whole system used with the right sliding back. But the 15 mm border on movements could be a problem. Silvestri have a solution for longer lenses as 72 mm- thay have a ring that allows additional 15 mm movements, so together 30 mm, but I dont know if this is also available for 55mm lenses.
Anyway pancace system willl be much more expensive, limitated but easier to focus.

[Lorenzo Pierucci]

Hi,
Why not take a look on Arca swiss F-line 6x9?
I worked 2 years with the F-line digital before I get a M-line 2.
Ocourse, M-2 is the better option for digital, but if the price is important the F-line is a very cheap and transportable option- about 2 kg only.
On location it is a very nice option, it is not the best solution for studio work.
Linhof 679 or Ultima 23 are great for studio but simply to heavy for outside.
F-line 6x9 and Kapture group sliding back gives you the most compact and cheapest solution.
I used also 23 and 28 mm on this combo and its work. Its not the best solution but working. I enjoy now the precision of the M-2 and use extem wide angle on Cambo WRS but these both set up are expensive.
Anyway for your 55 mm the AS F-69 will be great.
If you will make a decision for a pancake so Cambo WDS would be the cheapest way. But be carefull: on WDS there is only a focusingscreen for the H-1 system- you must have a optical finder or i-phone. For me this was the main point to change from WDS to WRS: I need a screen to compose on it- not for focusing.
Bitcam II or III is maybe better when you get the whole system used with the right sliding back. But the 15 mm border on movements could be a problem. Silvestri have a solution for longer lenses as 72 mm- thay have a ring that allows additional 15 mm movements, so together 30 mm, but I dont know if this is also available for 55mm lenses.
Anyway pancace system willl be much more expensive, limitated but easier to focus.

Hi there RomanN,

sorry late reply, i just back from 2 days shooting a office... after a whole 2 days of shooting i really need to find a view finder for stitching a 55 mm... composing is hard even with live view if u plan to do stitching... or i should just buy a 35 mm lens.......

ANYHOW thanks for the suggestion, my first concern its that the arcs seems have a rail. The rail come quite annoying when it come to put the camera in a back pack or case, coz is become the wider side. As far as i see the linhof is more compact. Im 31 years old so i don't mind have extra kilos on my back, but i do mind to carry around a extra case coz the camera won't fit OR have to dismount the whole system all the time......

Correct me if I'm wrong, coz i just see them in picture never had the luck to try one.

[DanielStone]

Try taking the standards OFF the rail, and pack everything separately. The 6x9 F-Line will EASILY fit into a backpack.
Heck, even with a sliding back to go on it, you'll have a very small package to work with.

You could also get a Pelican case, like the 1600, and use an inexpensive rolling/folding cart to tote it around with. Easier than carrying it by hand

Or get a Pelican 1510 like Christopher Barrett did here(which has integrated wheels, and an accessory divider set):

[torger]

Another example of portable MF system. Here's my Linhof Techno system, all packed in a F-stop XL Pro ICU. When I only hike with the camera and some minor clothing I use F-stop's Satori EXP, and when I'm on a real hike with full equipment (tent, sleeping bag, gas burner, food, clothes etc) I use a Bergans Powerframe 130L, which fits the XL Pro ICU plus my hilleberg tent in the lower compartment.

I use a Gitzo 3542XLS extra high systematic tripod and Arca-Swiss D4 head, tripod plus head weighs 3.0 kg (6.6 lbs) which I carry in my hand with the F-stop Satori, and attach to the side with the Powerframe. You can attach the tripod to the back or the side of the Satori EXP, but weight balance with that small backpack becomes bad so it's generally more comfortable to just carry it in your hand, or over your shoulders. The Powerframe is big and stable enough to also carry the tripod on the side.

The camera box with all gear in it is 8.7 kg (19.2 lbs), gear total is thus 11.7 kg / 25.8 pounds. With typical full hiking outfit and the powerframe the total weight becomes about 27 kg (60 lbs). Lightweight backpackers would probably be able to reduce that weight a few kilos (by using lighter outdoor gear). I haven't weighed my Satori EXP backpack but I would guess that the extras is about 1.5 kg, so total about 13.2 (29 lbs).

So what does the 11.7kg/25.8lbs gear box contain? Here's a list:

• Linhof Techno body, with wide angle and normal bellows
• Lee Filters Seven compact filter with 4 grads
• 72mm Polariser and one ND
• Seven SK lenses (35, 47, 60, 72, 90, 120, 180), with short cable releases and with filter rings adapted to 72mm filter diameter except for the 40.5mm lenses, means fast filter setup
• Step-up ring for 40.5 to 72mm when attaching filters to the 40.5mm lenses (the 72, 90 and 120)
• Sliding back with gg shade and Leaf Aptus 75 digital back, synch cable pre-attached for quick setup
• Four normal batteries and one large
• long cable release as extra
• (not shown) rocket blower
• (not shown) neck pouch with LCC card, mechanical stop watch, leitz fokos rangefinder, 12x and 20x loupe, dof/tilt table card.
• extra CF cards
• optical cleaning cloth
• (not shown) black t-shirt used as focusing cloth (rarely needed thanks to gg shade and bright gg, but it's still important as padding for the Techno body when carrying)

The dividers in the ICU looks a bit messy, I so far use just the standard dividers coming with the ICU (the grey ones) plus some extras (the green ones). The dividers are of course designed for 135 systems so the fit is not great, but it works. At some point I'm going to make custom dividers though.

The gear box is really 100% complete when adding the tripod and head, no parts on the side. It's great when changing backpack. For shorter transports you can carry the ICU "naked" in your hand (there's a strap than can be used as a handle), which I often do when out hiking with the larger backpack.

Wide angle bellows works for all lenses except for 120mm on closeup and 180mm.

In the picture there's no lens on the Techno body, but the typical case is that the last lens used is on the body. If you're going to shoot with the same lens setup is quick, 1) mount the body on the tripod head, 2) mount the sliding back on the body, 3) attach the synch cable to the lens (already pre-attached to back), 4) focus and shoot. Pre-attached short cable releases for all lenses is totally worth it.

I won't claim that 11.7 kg + 3 kg tripod and head is light, but this is a system with seven lenses, and the tripod and head is the real deal concerning size and stability. I challenge anyone to get away lighter than this with a movement-capable system with these amounts of focal lengths . The MF-two will probably be about the same weight, but I think most pancake cams will be heavier due to heavier and bulkier lens mounts. Note that my sliding back is the full length back, Linhof has made a short sliding back which is naturally a bit smaller and lighter. If I had bought the system new I would probably have chosen the short sliding back to save a bit of weight and make the system easier to pack.

The easiest way to reduce weight is of course to use fewer focal lengths and stitch and/or crop inbetween. With a 33 megapixel back like I have you don't want to crop much (and even with a 60 megapixel back you don't need to crop that much to lose all your expensive resolution), personally I don't like to stitch, too mechanical in terms of photographic enjoyment and too cumbersome in terms of shooting speed and post-processing work, but of course many think otherwise. If you stitch, the 60XL have almost the same field of view as the 35XL.

A note about stitching - I think you will want a click-stop stitching back to make it enjoyable. With most tech cams you have turning gears, and it's not exactly speedy to move between positions. It's fine when you shift to make a one-shot composition, but say if you want to stitch four images you'll be turning gears like crazy.

[RomanN.]

hi,
when you compare Linhof with Arca you compare best cameras in this sphere.
So nobody could tell this or this is the better camera. They are both first class, very light, very compact.
The differences are very, very little in any cases.
But if money is an important point the classic F-line is the first choice. You get the camera in great condition for 1200 euro.
Techno and M-2 you must buy new, becouse there are simply no used cameras on marked, or very less and for prices like new .
So you pay 5500 euro, or 4700 euro. than you need a sliding back ect...
my fast and easy comparison:
-Arca Swiss M-2- fainest rail camera on market, bigger movements on rear than techno, horizontal and vertical (techno only vertical or with the Linhof sliding back), possibility to use Sony A7r or Canon/ nikon. Possibility to use film kassets- for techno you need expensive Linhof Rollex (1700 euro) or you need spacial adapters for other filmbacks. 4x5 inch can be used with additional 4x5 set ( with some limitation).
All Arca items like compendium, bino-viewfinder, bellows can be used on all cameras, all is compatible- not at Linhof!
The Arca standart bellows can be used with wide angle and normal- short tele lenses. For Linhof you need 2 bellows for that.
Rotaslide is very compact, finest sliding back on marked but expensive. Arca screen incl frensel, is very exactly but a little dark- still better than Linhof screen but far away from Linhof Super bright.
- Linhof: little more compact, but the Linhof sliding back is big and long.If you like Technika you will love Techno.The sliding back has great quality, but you need expensive Super bright screen for wide angle- is the best and the most expensive screen ; 850 euro. For using Hasselblad or arca viewfinder you need adapters- expensive! No need at Arca.
Linhof techno is a dream camera, no doubts, but the camera and the additional equipment will be expensive. You can not find used parts for it like compendium, you must buy it new. At Arca you can find a lot of stuff used and it can be used at F, M and R line. Limitation: no horizontal movement on rear will be a big limitation for stiching guys.
-Arca Swiss F-line: movements are not so exactly as at the other systems, it is not geared but still good. The F-line have no limitations, no problem to build it till 8x10 inch, if you want. It is lighter and more compact than M-2. I would say it is so compact as Techno: please take a loock on the pics, the rail is only 15 cm long so it is as big as Techno. Together with Kapture sliding back (used about 400-500 euro) it is more compact than techno.
The standart F-line have no fine swing, but it can be additional purchased ( orbix). Also the F-standart can be changed against F-metric, a geared one.
To 35 mm lens:
try schneider angulon xl 38 mm, sharper than rodenstock 35 mm, easier to use ( have a little retrofocus constraction, therefore have bigger distance to the screen), forget the stupid digital or not digital lenses discusion.
For your information: Andreas Gurky, one of best photographers on this planet used Linhof Technicardan with analog lenses with Phase on 45 so just take a look on his work, I think it say all.
And F-line is definitly more solid camera than the Technikardan.

To my opinion:
I like all of there cameras, own both Arcas and will also get Techno. But Techno will bring my finacial position to the near of bankcruptcy.

[torger]

What happened to the thread? On my browser just an empty page is shown...

[Lorenzo Pierucci]

SAME HERE!

I had to read it from unlogged, if i log my self i can't see the second page........

To reply, that camera gear is pornography! I will send a photo of mine... so lame.....

Roman thanks for the great reply, i checking on websites and ebay about those cameras. There is some big deal of saving money actually...

[RomanN.]

here are the pics of the f-line that I fogot in last mail.