Shen Hao TFC 45-IIB:
You will see that they look very similar, even almost the same. The lock for the front standard swing is even the same, and isn't like other cameras. The specs are almost identical:
Front: rise 45mm, fall 25mm, shift 26mm, swing +/-45°, tilt +/-20°
Back: rise 50mm
Bellows extension: 50-190mm
Front: rise 60mm, fall 25mm, shift 38mm, swing +/-45°, tilt +/-20°
Back: rise 50mm
Bellows extension: 46-190mm
The places where there are differences, the Ebony has a little more movement, probably due to a thinner, more supple bellows, and due to more elegant construction. One example is front shift, where the Shen Hao, since it is screwed together, has two blocks, one on each side, for stability. This limits shift. The Ebony is welded or bent titanium, and doesn't need the blocks, and so gains 12mm shift on each side.
The Ebony is better built, but the price is vastly higher, and they are both good products, the Shen Hao being better value for the money. However, the Shen Hao (and not only this model) is a very literal copy of the Ebony. This has been their business model, more or less, since Mr. Kwok left, as far as I understand.
3 is also for correcting perspective. Pointing the camera straight and using rise on the front allows keeping a building straight. But what if your lens doesn't have enough coverage? Point the camera up, and tilt the back. Sideways works the same. I find this to be a very interesting possibility. One situation I have come across several times in my current project is a grave memorial which I wanted to photograph from straight on, but there was a tree in front. So, I can move to the side a bit, and shift the front. Front shift on portable cameras is often quite limited, however, so I could also move to the side, point the camera at the grave, and then swing the back to correct the perspective.In regards to movements, do consider this;
1. Shifts and rise/fall = perspective corrections.
2. Front tilts and swings = DOF extensions.
3. Rear tilts = enables exaggeration of nearby subjects vs. far distance.
Do you need 3? Or, in the few cases when you do can you tilt the camera?
As I mentioned previously, I am fine with giving up rise, fall and shift on the back. These are fully equivalent to rise, fall and shift on the front, and can be simulated with more effort with tilt and swing on the back. I do want to have a camera which can do tilt and swing on the back, however. The effect of these are not equivalent to front movements, although with a bit of effort, and a lens with a very large image circle, you could get around it.
I do read the Large Format Photography Forum, by the way. You probably haven't seen me there, since I am not posting so much yet.