Linhof Master Technika vs. Chamonix 45N-2 vs. Ebony ?

[carstenw]

I think you should buy the Tech --- only way you'll get it out of your system... Bottom line is all of them do the same basic thing -- hold a lens in place and film in place all in a light-tight container. And all of them have enough movements for what you need to do.

Funny, I had that thought myself... I am currently *very* curious about it, the price is right (if it is indeed still available), and if I don't like it, I can sell it in 6-12 months and get something else.

Lars, I am in the process of selling some items which remove the concern over the initial difference in price, so I am thinking more about long-term value, where the Master Technika may well beat the Chamonix. At least, it seems more likely for the balance to tilt in this direction than the other, given the new Chamonix, VAT, shipping and customs fees, as opposed to the already well depreciated MT, and a local purchase.

Ultimately, if I get the Master Technika, I will either keep it or sell it for something quite different, there is no upgrade path from it; it is already the ultimate in its genre. However, if I get the Chamonix and like that kind of camera, there is a distinct possibility that I might switch for an Ebony one day.

There are many ways to think about it, but I have kind of made my peace with the fact that whichever way I start, I will have a great camera, and in the worst case, the open possibility to switch to the other.

 

[Jack]

I think that is sound logic carsten -- and Lars is correct: No matter what you start with today, you will likely be shooting something different 6 months from now. The only three field cameras I know folks have stayed in love with over time, are the Ebony, the Phillips (and also Cham since it is a copy) and the Arca F-line.

 

[carstenw]

I did a quick weight-comparison of my kit for my current project, and thought I would post it for others to see. Since the Contax 645 doesn't have an L-bracket, I cannot use it with the Burzynski, which penalizes the MF kit a bit (I take the Manfrotto 405 in that case). The highlighted numbers are for the Master Tech, and the Chamonix would only differ in the camera's weight. The Contax kit should be self-explanatory. I often also carry a book in my Tenba, which would tend to reduce the difference in weight, proportionally. The weight of the Tenba already includes small items like lens cloth, etc. I still need to add a dark cloth, but I guess they are not so heavy.

 

[jeffvk]

You want the Tech. Buy the Tech. If you find yourself wishing you had more movements. Sell it. Come back to this post and buy one of those cameras. Great advice all around. I have a Tech 3 or 4(honestly I don't care which it is)Works great.
Can you just borrow a camera from someone and go make a couple of pictures? I think you'll know pretty quick how you want to work.

 

[carstenw]

You want the Tech. Buy the Tech.

I was watching this YouTube video which very quickly made me realize the value of asymmetrical movements. Somehow I had in mind that the workflow would be more fluid than jerky like this, but I guess without geared swings and tilts you have to do it like this. The movie also made me realize that it is not necessarily easy to see which way to swing or tilt, if you are already close.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RgL2MKfWTo

However, if the corners of his cereal box had not been on the asymmetrical lines, this feature would probably have gotten in the way more than it would have helped.

I also don't quite get why when setting up the swings, he focuses on one corner, then swings, then re-focuses on that corner, checks the other, and so on.

The accuracy would only be about half, but wouldn't it be much quicker to work like you would with an asymmetrical camera, i.e. focus on something in the middle, then swing until the edge was sharp, done, without re-focusing? For tilts, this wouldn't work with base tilts, but it would with axial tilts.

 

[Anders_HK]

I'll repeat what I said before - keep your investment down, three years from now you'll either not shoot LF anymore or use another camera based on what you learned using your first camera.

That is what I did --- Shen Hao TFC45-IIB non folder, which was cheap in comparison to most... and lenses off of Ebay. I upgraded to Maxwell screen, a well worthy investment...

Works great, and is a sold keeper!

Anders

 

[Aaron]

I was watching this YouTube video which very quickly made me realize the value of asymmetrical movements. Somehow I had in mind that the workflow would be more fluid than jerky like this, but I guess without geared swings and tilts you have to do it like this. The movie also made me realize that it is not necessarily easy to see which way to swing or tilt, if you are already close.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RgL2MKfWTo

However, if the corners of his cereal box had not been on the asymmetrical lines, this feature would probably have gotten in the way more than it would have helped.

I also don't quite get why when setting up the swings, he focuses on one corner, then swings, then re-focuses on that corner, checks the other, and so on.

The accuracy would only be about half, but wouldn't it be much quicker to work like you would with an asymmetrical camera, i.e. focus on something in the middle, then swing until the edge was sharp, done, without re-focusing? For tilts, this wouldn't work with base tilts, but it would with axial tilts.

em, that appears to be a video of some bulgarian idol show, funny but i suspect its not what you had in mind

Did you mean this one?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR4m70xr9mE

 

[carstenw]

Huh? Funny, how did that happen. I guess the URL didn't correspond to what I was seeing. That was a link I posted for the benefit of one Ken Lee on LFP

Yes, your link is the right one, thanks! Isn't there a blush icon here somewhere?

 

[lilmsmaggie]

Well, I hemed and hawed for a year.

Now I'm committed. Placed my order today for a 45N-2 YIPPPEEEE! :grin:

 

[Jack]

Congrats, you will love the little Cham!!!!

 

[JCT]

I'll add my 2 cents as I traveled a *very* similar path-- a gradual step up from 35mm to MF to LF. Although in all honesty this is a delightful thread, so I am mostly just echoing here.

First, I completely "get" the interest in the MT -- I maintain a pretty healthy fascination with the engineering and overall feel of the camera. Every time I have the opportunity to fiddle with one I start following auctions.. In my case, the combination of the weight (I'm pretty small) and, as Jack described so clearly, the tweaky nature of the back tilt usually makes me back off.

I remember being warned that I would not stick with my first LF camera- figured everyone was wrong because I had done so much research--- bought a nice Shen-Hao. Never meshed with that camera-- it was completely amusing, here everyone raved about them and every outing with it felt like a bad blind date. I finally switched to the original Cham 45N-1 and it was like night and day. Just feels intuitive, is a joy to hike with and to use. It is definitely one of the best bangs-for-the-buck out there. I think the only camera I would trade it for is an Ebony. But I can't rationalize the cost of the Ebony ... yet .

I think one of the very best things about LF is that you aren't locked in by your glass -- the freedom to trade among different cameras is a huge advantage and is so different from the smaller formats and their "systems" that it takes some time to get used to. So, while it feels sort of nuts to buy a camera with the thought that you may just sell it and buy another in the relatively near future -- I think that is just the nature of LF, and you should resign yourself to it (and enjoy). Besides, if you buy good gear and treat it well, the resale is often quite good, as Jack mentioned. I usually just chalk up any loss to a "rental" fee and go forward.

So if you're feeling a match with the MT -- go for it.

Oh and a nice starter lens set-- at first I was amazed at how I could spend an entire trip using 2 lenses without feeling constrained. Sometimes only used one...

Enjoy,

JT

 

[carstenw]

Hello JT, and thanks for your thoughts. Yes, the MT is very attractive, and I am still thinking about that camera, and if I should invest in it. I suppose I will continue to think about this until I have enough money to buy it (or the Chamonix), and at that point I will make a decision. I also have a very good feeling about the Chamonix, and like you, there is something about the Shen Hao which doesn't appeal to me, although I couldn't really explain what it is. I think whether I get the MT or the Chamonix, I will be happy for a long time.

I can see myself going to 8x10 at some later point, but probably not a ULF camera. 5x7 is also interesting, as is 5x8, although both are too close to 3:2 for my taste. If I do get an 8x10, I would want to buy something which pairs up well with my 4x5, i.e. not too similar, and this is another reason I could imagine getting the MT, and then an 8x10 Chamonix. I don't want to plan to buy an 8x10, but knowing that the possibility is there, the MT has another little notch in its favour.

Anyway, I will just continue to save and mull it all over, until I have the money. Then I will probably see if the MT I came across is still available, and then make a decision about that. If it isn't, I will likely end up with the Chamonix.

The 90/210 is my starter set. The 135 was just so cheap, and I was curious about the special rendering Jack was talking about, so I bought it on a whim. It is not part of my project kit though, just another lens to play with.

 

[carstenw]

Well, I hemed and hawed for a year.

Now I'm committed. Placed my order today for a 45N-2 YIPPPEEEE! :grin:

Congratulations! Did you get an estimate on when you will have it?

 

[JCT]

I actually bought my 8x10 on a whim . An 8x10 Deardorff in user condition but light-tight bellows plus 6 holders, a 4x5 back and 2 lenses in functional shutters (14" Commercial Ektar and a 210 Angulon) for $750. My best camera score ever -- definitely not a take-anywhere sort of item, but wow, the negatives! My teenager went with me one day and said it felt like she was watching TV on the groundglass. And I agree about ULF, for me that is the point where the hassle/film expense takes over.

Sounds like you're well on your way!

JT

 

[Anders_HK]

Hello JT, and thanks for your thoughts. Yes, the MT is very attractive, and I am still thinking about that camera, and if I should invest in it. I suppose I will continue to think about this until I have enough money to buy it (or the Chamonix), and at that point I will make a decision. I also have a very good feeling about the Chamonix, and like you, there is something about the Shen Hao which doesn't appeal to me, although I couldn't really explain what it is. I think whether I get the MT or the Chamonix, I will be happy for a long time.

I can see myself going to 8x10 at some later point, but probably not a ULF camera. 5x7 is also interesting, as is 5x8, although both are too close to 3:2 for my taste. If I do get an 8x10, I would want to buy something which pairs up well with my 4x5, i.e. not too similar, and this is another reason I could imagine getting the MT, and then an 8x10 Chamonix. I don't want to plan to buy an 8x10, but knowing that the possibility is there, the MT has another little notch in its favour.

Anyway, I will just continue to save and mull it all over, until I have the money. Then I will probably see if the MT I came across is still available, and then make a decision about that. If it isn't, I will likely end up with the Chamonix.

The 90/210 is my starter set. The 135 was just so cheap, and I was curious about the special rendering Jack was talking about, so I bought it on a whim. It is not part of my project kit though, just another lens to play with.

Carsten,

You should perhaps not brush Shen-Hao off so speedy... but perhaps take a look at the TFC45-IIB that I have. While everyone is not at all of same preference, what makes it interesting is that it is a non-folder and thus is speedy to set up and use. Do compare it to the Camonix 45-N which appear to have less rigid connections between members (flimsy) and seeming not same smooth for focus. This is per me seeing on photos, but do take look at one in person if you can. Also Shen-Hao makes a similar light weight camera to the Chamonix, but... I would not recommend it, based on Shen-Hao in Shanghai themselves saying it being not same good as mine and more difficult to focus etc...

A 4x5 camera is a box between lens and groundglass/film, and as such a rather simple thing, but need be steady/rigid (at least when locked and simple to focus. Also simple to set up is of great value in m book. Perhaps an Ebony SW45 is of higher preciseness than both the Chamonix and my TFC, but... do you need it, and want to pay the $$? Granted I frequent visit Shanghai, so my preference was granted... for price of an Ebony I could buy near five TFC;s... if mine malfunction I can simply replace it! And, extra accessories are cheap from them there too...

For lenses, I do not know of your specific focals, but the Schneider XL's are indeed very very good and sharp. I got both the 58mm and 72, the 72mm is super stellar sharp. Perhaps as a general rule newer generations are frequent sharper because of later technical developments, but not always so as with the 80XL vs 72XL, as also based on Schneider the 72XL is far sharper but the 80 being less weight. I also have a Rodenstock Sironar-N 150mm which can be bought for 400 USD or less on Ebay and is super sharp. A good website to describe such classics is following... http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/future.htm

There is frank an abundance of used high quality lenses on Ebay, and by lurking around and placing smart bids one can make outright bargains at very fine conditions. Paying for new will be $$$.

Regards
Anders

 

[Jack]

Carsten,

You should perhaps not brush Shen-Hao off so speedy... but perhaps take a look at the TFC45-IIB that I have.

I'd have to agree with this. I owned the folding Shen, and it was maybe a notch behind the Cham in overall quality, but also about 40% less expensive. And it made excellent images, and it was rigid enough to use with my Betterlight scanning back. It was not elegant, but functional. Now the thing that is interesting, is this Shen TFC is a copy of the Ebony SW, which is the basic non-assym, non-folding verison of 45 SU. For the price, I'd definitely consider at least looking at one of these before you make your final purchase -- you get about 80% of the Ebony 45 SU features at 1/5th the price, or 100% of the SW features at about 1/3rd the price... Pretty compelling if you ask me...

What I can guarantee you from knowing what I know about view cameras, if I were getting back into LF again today, I would buy either the Cham or this Shen. Then if I really got stuck with the bug again, I'd pony up for the Ebony assym non-folder.

 

[carstenw]

Anders, I already have my lenses for now: Schneider 90mm f/5.6 Super-Angulon MC Linhof Select, Schneider 135mm f/3.8 Xenar, Schneider 210mm f/5.6 APO-Symmar. None are the latest greatest, but the 90 and 210 are probably close enough for all practical purposes other than the most uncompromising very large enlargements.

The TFC45-IIB is a copy of the SW45, if I understand correctly, and this is non-folding and has a rigid back with only rise. I could imagine leaving out rise, fall and shift on the back, but not tilt or swing. Without tilt and swing on the back, I might as well get a Canon 5D2 with a couple of T/S lenses, in some ways. For this reason, I had already eliminated the SW45 and SW45SII. Only the SW45SIII starts to look interesting to me, and at that point the 45SU is just more attractive.

In general, one problem I have with Shen Hao is that they seem to copy cameras, pretty literally. Not only that, but they copy current cameras. They even have a copy of the Chamonix, although it apparently hasn't done that well for them, maybe because it is heavier and less rigid (no carbon fibre bed), and only slightly cheaper. There was apparently earlier a Mr. Kwok who did some original designs, but he left, and now they just do copies, mostly of Ebony cameras.

Chamonix on the other hand have copied and improved the Phillips camera, which is no longer made, and is very hard to find second-hand, and only at large prices.

To me this makes a large difference in how I feel about the companies. The Shen Hao cameras also seem to be a little cheaper, and more cheaply made, than Chamonix and some other cameras in the same price class, and I prefer to pay a little more and get a little more.

Anyway, sorry about this, I don't mean to criticize your choice, and this is just my decision process for myself. Thanks for the suggestion in any case.

 

[Jack]

Carsten, this Shen has rear swing and tilts and IIRC it even has rear shifts. They're axial, not assym...

 

[DougDolde]

You forgot Arca Swiss ! I find the Field model to be the absolute best and I've owner an Ebony 45SU as well as an MT2000. You will need a Maxwell screen to replace the POS stock Ebony screen; the A-S screen is superb out of the box. But that's not the only reason just an important one.

 

[carstenw]

Is that the Arca Swiss F-Line Field? We had that above, my answer here: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showpost.php?p=183259&postcount=16

Or is it another model?