Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Lorenzo Pierucci on August 27, 2014, 10:35:44 pm
-
Hi everybody,
im seeking (again) for some experience from some architectural interior photographer that use tech cam. I ve used my TOYO view / leaf / rodesnstock 55 for a year now and i have to say I'm really pleased of the result compared my D800. So i decided that finally i should upgrade the camera. The Toyo 45G is is a whole heavy backpack stuffed of metal and not exactly stable whit my a DB attached ( scary... ).
I have to flight the whole thing to Bali and Hong Kong and was not fun ( especially explain to Indonesian clearance what a digital view camera is....... :P ).
So I'm looking now at a smaller compact system as I'm Italian my heart push me to the Silvestri, but as I'm a stitcher i noticed that the italians does not have rear shift. As i using a the Sironar 55, stitch allow me to zoom out and is like having a zoom lens ( highly recommended for who is the beginning and in "low" budget, ICC correction is your friend ).
I saw some good second hand Linhof 679 which seems to be a great over all camera ( that i will use also for studio replacing the TOYO) but i will like to know if anyone had some experience with that especially in location as is a proper view camera. The Techno seems to be available only new ( $$$ ) and not rear shift.
On the other hands there is the Horseman WD and the Toyo 23 D ( this one seems no one use ).
So far i feel the Lihof is the best choice but any other suggestion, comment ( or insult as i always ask questions... ) are always more then welcome.
Thanks for reading this.
-
View cameras are not so popular among architectural photographers. Most are using pancake cameras like the Alpa or Arca-Swiss RM3Di. The big advantage of the pancake cameras is that you can focus without the ground glass, using a laser distance meter and setting on a high precision focusing ring instead. The disadvantage is high cost of the lens mounts. Focusing view cameras with center-filter wides in dark indoor scenarios is not easy, but with proper technique its possible, and if you shoot tethered or use a Leaf back you can check sharpness to make really sure you're on target.
The Techno has +/-20mm in geared rise/fall on the rear, and fixed +/-17mm sideways shift on the sliding back. The fixed sideways shift positions are designed for being used together with the standard ground glass with 49x37mm (the new bright ground glass does not cover the side positions, you can stitch "in the blind" though of course). You can get sliding back stitch options from Kapture Group too, and maybe Silvestri as well. I use a Techno myself.
Linhof 679cs is a heavy camera, but if you can carry it it should work, it takes wide angles too. I haven't used it myself.
The Silvestri is a cost effective solution, they have pancake and pancake + view camera. Haven't used it myself though. The Bicam III is said to have +/-15mm rise/fall and left/right shift, not sure if it's the lens or the back that moves though.
-
Arca Swiss(M-Line/M-Line2, or 6X9 Monolith)
Linhof: m679, m679cs
Cambo: Ultima 23
Rollei: X-Act, X-Act2 (I'd recommend talking with Eric Hiss, the USA Rolleiflex rep about this system)
All are pretty dang solid cameras, and allow for fully geared movements. All can have digital backs attached to them, having sliding backs available from either the factory or 3rd party vendors(such as Kapture Group).
It really just boils down to which one feels "good in the hands" and allows you to work as uninhibited/freely as possible. Equipment that will not get in the way of you working efficiently and in a time-sensitive manner. I'm sure that no one likes fumbling with a camera, and wasting time on a shot that doesn't need to be wasted!
cheers,
Dan
-
Hi guys,
Thanks so much for the feed back ( also to who private message me... ).
Knowing that the Linhof is a heavy camera is a good start point. It does come down to what i feel good to work with but to me now is mostly to what i can carry over and set up faster. The Toyo work well for me but is really a rock.
Pancake cameras are what i need but I'm not sure i can keep use my Rodenstock 55 on it. A lens can be "adapted" or i need to buy the whole thing again?
The cambo ultima 23 seem a cheaper way of the Linhof... and i can use Copal 0 lenses. I look into it.
But a good pancake seems the way to go, especially as i can found them second hand with the lens. Problem is few have rear movement, essential for stitch.
Im looking at the second hand market, this one seem perfect:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/351144242370?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649
But i read that the Horseman are now discontinued. I will still be able to find a mamiya plate for it?
So many questions.... but thanks again for the help !
-
My thinking was that almost every pancake camera has rear movement. Some models lack sideways movement on the rear though.
Yes you can adapt lenses, I'd guess that all pancake cam manufacturers have such a service. Note that lens mounts can be really expensive, like €800 or so, much more expensive than view camera lens boards. I don't know what it costs to adapt a lens, probably a bit more than the lens mount alone of course.
Cambo and Silvestri don't have high precision focusing rings, but on Cambo Alpa's rings can be used, not sure with Silvestri. A pancake camera without high precision focusing (so you'd have to focus on the ground glass anyway) is like losing one of its major features, and then I would prefer a view camera. Most of the legacy pancake cameras don't have high precision focusing rings, and only Arca-Swiss RM3Di has it out of the box (although their focus precision is arguably overkill and a bit cumbersome to use unlike Alpa).
-
Thanks again!
Precise focus ( even if I'm sure is critical fro a 60 MP back ) is something that i can pass on for save some good money to buy another lens ( ex 35 mm ).
Im looking at the old Cambo Wide: what the heck they was thinking when they decide that the lens have tho shift and not the back? ???
-
I think they are all geared except the Horseman.
I use the Silvestri Bicam III in techcam mode.(without bellow an sliding back)
It has both movements on the back.
If you are an frequent stitcher, you can add a sliding back (i think the current model has 3 positions, left, center, right)
If you need tilt-swing, you will need a bellow.(it is similar to the Linhof Techno too) But you have to choose if you want lenses to be mounted for the technical set up (shift only, with helicoidal ring) or bellow set up (Tilt, Swing, lateral shift too; a simple lens board, you focus with the bellow)
They don't have a large dealer network outside of Europe, but they have demo/pre-owned material on their website too. There was an upgrade possiblity when i changed the Bicam II for the III.
The Linhof Techno is a wonderfull tool too, and worth a look IMHO.
Tom
-
I use the Silvestri Bicam III in techcam mode.(without bellow an sliding back)
It has both movements on the back.
If you are an frequent stitcher, you can add a sliding back (i think the current model has 3 positions, left, center, right)
This make me really happy Tom, i was wish the Italian was up to the task coz i was rooting for that one. Problem is that mostly are only new... but might be worth the investment.
On the other hand u said the horseman is not that good. Can i ask why? ( was to cheap to be good... ;D )
Thanks again for the info, I'm checking the Silvestri website and counting down price. U also said that it as both movement on the back. Is so i don't really need a sliding back. With my Toyo and live view i shift the back around to stitch. The only difference is that 500 USD of sliding plate vs a 100 USD one.
-
If you are not in a rush, I would also shop this site's used equipment and www.getdpi.com
The Horseman, featured on ebay, has the older 24mm lens, and on your 60MP back, it's not a great solution. Shifts will not be that great and it sound like you are after shifts.
As for weight, both Cambo and Arca make products that would be perfect for your needs, the Arca Factum is one to look at. Acra in the rm3di, offers you in standard setup, 15mm shift R&L and 30mm rise and 20mm fall, you can always rotate the rm3di 90 degrees and use rise/fall as shift. I often do that.
Both companies tend to make significant announcements at Photokina so you might see more used gear coming on the market.
Paul
-
The Horseman, featured on ebay, has the older 24mm lens, and on your 60MP back, it's not a great solution.
Err... i earlier said that is critical for a 60 MP back. Not "mine" 60 MP back... i own a obsolete 22. Which is good as i can use lens as a old digitar Rodenstock 90 mm with really good result. But i agree is not a good place to invest money as probably i will upgrade to a P40 or aptus 65 in the near future.
I will check the second hand market on getdpi, thats another great call. Thanks
Lorenzo
-
What kind of work do you do in studio and what focal lengths do you work with?
Going back to the pancake cameras, they are great! I use an Arca Swiss RM3Di and have no complaints, for architecture and landscape. Small, light and portable; very easy and fast to set up, very stable. The focusing ring on my Arca is super precise.
But for lenses longer then 90mm, it becomes impractical for a few reasons.
The movements provided on the pancake cameras really lend themselves to architecture and normally have a very large amount of movement down (shifting your view up). Movements up and side to side are less generous, but those are not really needed for architecture or landscape. For furniture though, where you are using a long lens and want amble room to shift, the pancake cameras just won't give you that. (The few time I have shot furniture with my Arca, I had to turn it up side down to get enough up shift; kind of annoying to work that way).
Also, the Arca pancake camera only has fine focusing, no course focus. For shooting macro work, this is very annoying, since you need to move the lens much further to focus on closer objects. It can seem like you are spinning that ring forever.
All the pancake cameras move the lens when you focus. This becomes annoying with, again, macro photography since you are moving the lens closer to the object you are focusing on, thus ever increasing the distance you need to have the lens from the back to be in focus. (You are kind of working against yourself.) Also, all pancake cameras will have a limit to how far you can get the lens from the sensor (sort of), thus limiting how close you can get to your subject.
For the longer lenses, all tilts and swings will be more like base tilts and swings, not axil. Also, (I know for the Arca RM3Di) the tilting mechanism is not made to handle front heavy lenses or lenses that need to sit far from the sensor.
If any of these are a problem for you, I would suggest getting a camera with bellows. My girlfriend, who is a food photographer, and I are thinking about sharing the cost of an Arca Swiss M Line 2 for the reasons stated above and keeping it as a studio camera.
-
On the other hand u said the horseman is not that good. Can i ask why? ( was to cheap to be good... ;D )
Thanks again for the info, I'm checking the Silvestri website and counting down price. U also said that it as both movement on the back. Is so i don't really need a sliding back. With my Toyo and live view i shift the back around to stitch. The only difference is that 500 USD of sliding plate vs a 100 USD one.
Nothing wrong with the Horseman, it was very popular a few years ago, they never updated it since SWD II. the other manufacturers updated a few features here and there. Maybe someone else can say something about the Horseman.
I wouldn't buy a tech cam without testing it first. If you do tabletop or close up stuff in studio, a bellow camera may be the way to go instead of a rigid tech cam.
If you buy used, i could be wrong, but it seems to me the Cambo, Silvestri, Horseman can be found 50% off new, their sometimes considered less "premium" than Alpa, Arca or Sinar. But accessories aren't that expensive and they get the job done.
-
Joe thanks for share your experience. Im considering to get a camera just for the on location shooting, if i need to shoot table top or macro, well i will still go for my old Toyo view, is a long process anyhow so lose a bit of time focusing and heavy weight is not a big deal. Is just when it come go out that the big case of the 4x5 is a real pain.
Tom, got what u mean. And I'm totally on the line of "get the job done", as long i can use the right lens and the right movements. Another thing is that i live in Taiwan, here even Mamiya does not have assistance ( just representative that whatever problem my system had the solution was Upgrade ). So run test are not really possible... But i will go Japan soon, maybe there i can give some system a try.
In the meantime i m reading all the user manual of all the system suggested so far.
-
Anyone have tried those DAYI Chinas camera? Them are freaking cheap and can be used with normal lens.... must be something wrong somewhere.... ???
-
On the rm3di, I agree with Joe macro is very practical due to the amount of turning on the Arca Helical that has to happen to get the lens/subject distance right. Not as big an issue with Cambo.
However I don't see lenses past 90mm being non-practical. I use the 105mm Rod (very small lens, with a lot of rings) and the newer 120mm Schneider all the time on my rm3di, really with no problems. I am not using them for macro work, just landscape work. The 105 and 120 have huge image circles and really allow great amounts of shifting.
The rm3di, by default only allows the 15mm or shift, but simply rotate it 90 degrees and your rise fall now become shift. I use this configuration all the time with my 60XL, 105Rod and 120mm. The wides will hit too much crosstalk past 15mm unleuss you have ea 32mm Rod or 40mm Rod which can usually make it out to 18mm.
The rm3di should by design have no problems with tilt on the 32mm Rod or 28 or 23mm Rod's. These are the only real front heavy tech lenses I can think of. The 32 by is the most front heavy.
I generally use my 40 and 60 with a Lee wide angle hood and a 105mm CLPL with 1 filter. This does add a bit of weight to the front, but my rm3di has no problems holding the weight during up or down tilts. Arca can adjust the tilt wheel so that it had more pressure, thus won't allow movement under load. The 28mm Rod is the heaviest lens I use and was the first lens I purchased for the tech camera and it has not problems with tilt either.
Another solution for table top that is very popular is the Arca M2. Not as easy to find these used however.
Paul
-
Just to reply to Paul.
The Arca RM3Di would work perfectly fine if you tilted the head it 90 degrees to get more shift. The question just becomes how stable is your tripod since the center of gravity of the camera is no longer over/near the center of the tripod.
But even so, for furniture, where you may need a good deal of shift and rise, the RM3Di does not give you that. That, taken with the very large image circles of the longer Rodenstocks that you may want to take full advantage of, I think is not the best solution.
Insofar as front heavy, I really meant lenses that are mounted to sit a good deal away from the camera and are heavy, like with the Rod 90mm. I find, with that lens, I have to be very conscience of any tilt I may use, since if I do use tilt, the weight of the lens could torque where the tilt pivots and tilt it some more with out me knowing it. At 0 tilt though, the mechanism is notch fairly well and does not pivot by accident. With the Rod 105 and SK 120, it probably is not as much of a problem since they are much lighter.
-
Joe:
You bring up a good point on stability. You are totally correct that when rotated, on the Acra L bracket, the rm3di is not as stable, and I in fact carry a minicell foam block that I use to place between the edge of the camera and the bottom the L bracket. When in this position, I find you have to be much more careful when shifting and you have to remember to take a bit more time to make sure no motion from your hands may be effecting the shot. It's a bit more delicate for sure.
The rl3di I believe that is the current name, is the bigger version of the rm3di and has more shift (20mm) or maybe more.
One of my biggest issues with the rm3di was the 15mm limitation on shifts. Would love to see a follow on with more shift.
Paul
-
Forgot about the RL3Di, which has more shift and can be used to shoot 4x5 film
Someone on this forum uses it, although I forget who.
-
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.
-CB
-
Anyone have tried those DAYI Chinas camera? Them are freaking cheap and can be used with normal lens.... must be something wrong somewhere.... ???
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.
-
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.
-
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).
-
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. :)
-
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.
-
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.
-
thanks for feed back guys... i moving to the linhof direction more and more.
if i can just try one here in Taiwan.... :-\
-
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,
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.
-
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):
(http://christopherbarrett.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/ArcaReview_017.jpg)
-
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 ;D. 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.
-
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.
-
What happened to the thread? On my browser just an empty page is shown...
-
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...
-
here are the pics of the f-line that I fogot in last mail.