Comparing Arca-Swiss M line 2 and Linhof Techno

[rogerxnz]

I have been having strange focusing problems with my Hasselblad Flexbody and Credo 60. Sometimes, objects which are further away come into focus at a point on the lens distance scale which is closer than the point that objects which are physically closer focus at. This often happens with my 150mm lens.

My Flexbody, which is really a BendyBlad, does focus on objects at infinity but often at a point on the distance scale which is way before the infinity mark.
 
I am wondering whether a technical field camera with large format lenses might give me better focus and sharper images. I am looking at the Arca-Swiss M line 2 6x9 and the Linhof Techno.

Your comments would be appreciated.

Also which of these systems would be better? I need a camera I can carry in a back pack.

So far, I have noticed:

Neither camera has rear tilt.

The Techno is more compact; has greater extension and costs more.

The M line 2 has more shift capacity and has "orbix" which means you can tilt the lens at an angle to the camera axis independently of the angle of the rail.

The Linhof's total vertical shift of 40mm is about double what I am used to. So, I think that is OK.

Any other differences to be aware of?
Roger
 

[Doug Peterson]

Why is the RM3Di not on the list? It would seem the natural choice.

Why the requirement for rear tilt? Anything you can do with rear tilt you can do with a combination of tripod was, rise/fall, and front tilt. There are times where, having arrived at a certain point the fastest way would be with rear tilt but when you adjust to a process without rear tilt I doubt you'll miss it.

[rogerxnz]

Thank you, Doug, for your assistance.

I had crossed off the pancake cameras as I am concerned their tilt ability is too limited for getting ground to infinity views in focus.

I have accepted that rear tilt is not essential. Both the M line 2 and the Techno do not have rear tilt.
Roger

Why is the RM3Di not on the list? It would seem the natural choice.

Why the requirement for rear tilt? Anything you can do with rear tilt you can do with a combination of tripod was, rise/fall, and front tilt. There are times where, having arrived at a certain point the fastest way would be with rear tilt but when you adjust to a process without rear tilt I doubt you'll miss it.

[Doug Peterson]

Thank you, Doug, for your assistance.

I had crossed off the pancake cameras as I am concerned their tilt ability is too limited for getting ground to infinity views in focus.

I have accepted that rear tilt is not essential. Both the M line 2 and the Techno do not have rear tilt.
Roger

By most traditional measures 5 degrees should be enough for nearly all non-special effects tilts for lenses up to 150mm or so. With a digital back that means a fairly long landscape lens. Are you often shooting lenses longer than this?

If you needed an extra deg, you can of course tilt the caskets a degree via a trips he's movement and make the 1 deg perspective correction in c1 in post (for correction of just 1 deg the loss of sharpness when applie at raw stage is negligible).

[torger]

I own a Linhof Techno and use it for outdoor photography (landscape), you can read my review at http://www.ludd.ltu.se/~torger/photography/linhof-techno-review.html

The Techno is better to carry than the Arca-Swiss MF-2 as it's more compact and easier to pack. The Techno also have a better ground glass for wide angles. It's a bit more expensive though.

Rear tilt is good to have for longer lenses and product/macro photography. For that you'd want a full-featured studio view camera such as Linhof M679, Sinar P3 or Arca-Swiss M-line. If you want something all-around and intend to use your camera in the studio quite a lot the MF-2 is better than the Techno as the former have a larger movement range. For field photography it's a little bit easier to live without rear tilt. The reason rear tilt is not there is to increase the parallelism precision which is important in digital photography when you focus at a distance (ie have a large depth of field and want utmost sharpness all over).

Both the Techno and the MF-2 should be considerably better than the flexbody in the precision department (as that was designed for film applications), and the large format digital lenses are sharper and have less distortion.

Pancake cameras are good if you don't have the ability or confidence to focus with a ground glass. The disadvantage is that the lens mount is very costly and longer lenses get bulky due to the tubes, plus less flexibility in movements.

If you regularly shoot at wider apertures than f/11 I'd recommend a pancake camera and laser distance meter. At f/11 with a good loupe and training focusing should not be a problem. Another strong application for pancake cameras is indoor architecture when you often use ultra-wides in really dim light conditions and practically never use tilt/swing.

As live view-capable backs are coming a view camera is a good investment for the future too, at some point you will be able to drop the sliding back and ground glass and compose and focus directly in the digital back.

What focal lengths do you use today? What would you want in your tech camera system?

[buckshot]

I would add:

I think 5 degrees barely cuts it with a 120, let alone a 150 - you really need 10 degrees or more to be comfortable. Plus, with pancake cameras long lenses get crazily big - have you seen a 210mm lens for an Alpa, it's like a drainpipe - and/or you have to add spacers - it all starts to get a bit clunky.

The RM3d/i is a great camera, but it was engineered around the problem of focussing a large format style lens accurately. It does this better than anything else - Alpa, Canbo, whatever - but, and it's a big but, with true live view having now appeared, it basically becomes a solution looking for a problem if a CMOS DB is in your future plans; in fact, the super fine helical is probably a hindrance for live view focussing. The Techno is a camera for now and the future - with a true live view enabled digital back this becomes a small and incredibly flexible precision view/field camera. Likewise the ML-2, though the Techno would be my choice since it's so compact.

An 'orbix' design puts the center point of the movement arc of the lens precisely in the center of the lens, so the camera's movements are 'yaw-free' (it would be better to consider an orbix design as one where yaw is minimised rather than eliminated totally, given there are many designs of lenses thant can be mounted). This is essentially what the Techno does as well. With pancake cameras like the RM3d/i and Alpa (not so much Cambo), this center point is increasingly offset the longer the the lens used.

Jim

[buckshot]

I would add further, that if you're considering Alpa, A/S RM3d/i or Cambo (WRS etc.) you will need to factor in an additional US $1500 - US $2500 per lens for remounting any lenses you would wish to reuse. For the Techno and ML-2 you can use standard lensboards (typically ~US $100 each).

[Rod.Klukas]

As Doug replied above, the RM3di would take care of many of your focus/movement issues.  The mounting of longer lenses on the RM3di mount, is a balanced affair, and we deal with the long front problem,  with a rear extension for lenses 120mm and longer, and no rear rear extension for shorter lenses, with the exception of the Rodenstock 90mm HR WS, due to weight(It has a very short extension now). Cost for our cameras is $1106.00 for 110mm and shorter(Except new Rodenstock 90mm) and $1526.00 for 120mm and longer(Rodenstock 90mm falls here as well). 
The fine focus of the R series is a plus, and one can work out a personal maximum depth of field setting/focus point for each lens.  Couple this with an emodule which displays the DOF for 4 apertures,(F 5.6, 8 , 11, and 16) simultaneously with focus change and it would mean not having to worry about focus, but now just composing and exposing.
We also have a bayonet lens board, allowing the use of the lenses on our 6x9 or 4x5 cameras, either on 110 or 141 boards.  So one could go back and forth depending on the project if one of these cameras were also available.
Being quite compact, and light, The RM3di packs quite small in a back pack or case.
I use it on an almost daily basis for landscape and urban landscape/architecture and it always does the job superlatively.
Rod