Small technical cameras, an overview and comparison

[Lorenz(GFX)]

Hi there,
I can see that long term I will want to have a small and easily packable technical camera. I am on foot or bicycle, so packability is pretty important. I "discovered" the techno pretty recently, and it kind of resonates with me. I read torgers review, and a few other threads here on getDPI, but most are a few years old. I realize that it is not perfect, but what is? I also really like the Universalis with wich I had a moment to play with, but not more.
Technos are being sold quite frequently, Universalis not. I don't know if that is an indication of the usability or other reasons.
I would like to read your opinions, if someone has personal experience with both, please tell me your findings.
Thanks in advance.
Lorenz
Edit: I realised that just comparing those two cameras might not be ideal, since wants and needs are quite different and others should be considered as well.

 

[John Leathwick]

If my experience solely as a Universalis user is any indication, my Universalis will not be up for sale in the foreseeable future as I find it fits my requirements for an easily packable technical camera almost perfectly - coupled with my GFX 100s its quite simply the best kit that I've ever owned. Previous outfits include a Graphic View, Linhoff Technika V, Nikon SLR, Olympus micro 4/3, and Sony A7R - spaced out over the last 50 years...

-John

 

[rdeloe]

I use two technical cameras.

The F-Universalis is my "work truck". It's extremely flexible and relatively light. I prefer to pack it fully assembled, but that requires a larger pack. It breaks down very quickly and will fit into a smaller pack. These are sturdy and robust. I wrote a detailed review with lots of pictures in 2023. Like John, I am keeping mine because for someone like me it is the most flexible option for how I work now.

The Arca-Swiss Pico looks great too. It's a bit lighter and more compact. People who have it say it's very sturdy. You get less flexibility in how you can mount lenses and you get less movement range, but you also get access to other kinds of lenses that I can't use as easily on an F-Universalis. Importantly, the Schneider-Kreuznach APO-Digitar 35/5.6 works on an F-Universalis with GFX or Hasselblad mirrorless bodies (with restricted movement though). It doesn't work at all on a Pico with mirrorless GFX or Hasselblad.

My other technical camera is built by me so it's not available. I wish manufacturers would build something like this though because it fills a need (very small, very light, very compact).

Check with Techno users whether mirrorless is an option at all. I recall seeing a plate to mount a GFX 50R, but I don't know if you can get other bodies on. This is a camera meant for medium format backs.

 

[kinglang]

I have used both cameras.Techno is heavy and inconvenient to carry, making it very difficult to sold it.The F-Universalis is lightweight and can be disassembled into parts for transport, but it is inconvenient to carry when assembled and is not sturdy enough.You can consider Pico if you only use digital.

 

[rdeloe]

Sturdiness has not been a problem for me with the F-Universalis. But I avoid using lenses that weigh more than 750 to 800 g. Long heavy lenses can pull the front standard down a bit, which you don't want.

 

[guphotography]

Both cameras are capable achieving stellar results in able hands, similarities aside, one is heavier, older, with less movements therefore slightly less desirability.

Get what you can afford, master the craft, then you can work with any system.

 

[Lorenz(GFX)]

Get what you can afford, master the craft.

That is the state I am in right now.
Technically I get the results I am looking for, but I still need practise. I am not new to photography, do it for more than 30 years, but technical camera usage is new to me. And I really like it. Thing is: time is a factor, so is mobility (consciously chosen) I need something that packs smaller. Much smaller actually. Inconvience is a limiting factor.

@rdeloe and @John Leathwick: I read both of your blogs and everything about your setups and experiences. More than once. Thank you both!
It more or less got me started on the path to get more freedom than with T/S adapters. 10 years ago I had an A7II with two stacked Mirex adapters. Didn´t use it too much though, and then I got distracted and fell in love with another craft wich has become my profession.

Like I said, I did not hear or read of the Linhof until recently, and something about that camera kind of resonates with me. It's also not that expensive wich is a factor for me. I can save up though, and I am also thinking about getting a digital back together with a new camera in 2-3 years.
The Pico is very nice for sure. And maybe the most sensible choice with what I want to do. Hiking to take landscapes with a tech cam. Probably with a CFV 100.
Nothing about this is urgent, I am just trying to find out what the possibilities are. And the photography bug has settled in a pretty central place in my brain right now, and wants to be fed. With leg work just as much as with knowledge and pictures...

So keep going on. Long term experience with the Techno would still be very much appreciated.
If there is a user in germany, maybe I can try it some time? Nothing beats a hands on experience... Same goes for the Pico

 

[Alkibiades]

I have used both cameras.Techno is heavy and inconvenient to carry, making it very difficult to sold it.The F-Universalis is lightweight and can be disassembled into parts for transport, but it is inconvenient to carry when assembled and is not sturdy enough.You can consider Pico if you only use digital.

Techno: 1,9 kg
Universalis: 1,7 kg

techno heavy? Universalis light ????
the difference is 0,2 kg, nobody will be able to feel any difference of 0,2 kg.
sorry this is nonsence.

Techno is inconvenient to carry? what?
I would say techno is the most compact and transport-friendly camera ever made.
even the lens can be left on techno and will be best protected.
Techno is the digital "Technika" that is made to be easy transported....
Universalis as any other cameras in the traditional large format cameras style build on the optical bench will always be more difficult to transport than a compacts "technika style" camera.

But your are absolutely right, for digital users the Pico will be the future system- it will replace universal, it is better constructed, for much higher precision that will be needed with modern backs-cameras. The traditional camera design like universalis have some week points, that Pico dont have anymore.
Universalis is a very good made camera- no doubt about it- Arca made here a very good job, but this camera design itsself will always have some weeknesses.
Universalis like the bigger high end brother M-2 is a great platform for mix use: film 6x9 or 4x5 inch, digital backs and all mirrorless systems like Fuji GFX ect...
especially when you focus more on studio than for work outside...
indeed a very Universal System.

Techno is simply a completely different guy.
The rear part is here very important: it is completely stable, giving you precision of panckace cameras like cambo WRS, Alpa ect...
Sadly only up and down movements can be done- but in best precision. So you need the last small sliding back to get also horizontal movements for panorama and stiching.
This last version of the sliding back is rotatable, that allows you easy switch from horizontal to vertical without moving the back out of the camera- very important outside!

Afcourse you can make all the movements also on the front standart but this is not the same...
The week point-compared with pancake camera systems will be the front standart. it has to be handled very carefully. The front standart is the week part of the system- yes every parts that can be moved and are not riggid are the weekpoints. I have a special way how i close the front standart after using some movements on it- got it from Linhof...
When you compare Techno with a pancake system dont forget that all Techno lenses, also the long like 150 mm, 180 mm, 210 mm are on small technika lensboard, were on a pancake system this is the total opposite: all long lenses mounted on WRS, Alpa ect... weights much more and need spacer ... take a look on the size of 180 mm Digaron mounted on WRS or Alpa...
I use mostly Cambo WRS system and use techno when I use longer lenses also.
The techno system is not heavier than a Cambo WRS system or Alpa.
absolutly not. It is not only about the camera, you must see the whole system...
and afcourse only Techno allows 40 mm movements...
So Techno is the king when you want to use longer lenses also.
With a back with a modern live view the work on the Techno is very fast and easy,
it is a system between a traditional large format and pancake system, where from the technical point of view a pancake system will be still the ultimate precision system.

Dont take techno when you like to use mirrorless system like Fuji GFX.
You can use only longer lenses.
So when you like to use a back and a Fuji, Sony ect... the Arca will be the right option.
But I think that Pico will be here the future platform.

 

[Reginald Fluggelding]

Have you considered a technical camera (Arca Swiss R-Line, Cambo WRS — maybe not Alpa because of budget). If you only need tilt/swing and don't intend on doing rear tilt/swing (which you can't do on most of the compact bellows/field cameras like Universalis anyway), then you get a much more compact and portable system.

I like the look of the Linhof too and considered getting one — bigger heavier camera but smaller lenses on lens-boards rather than helical, especially true with longer focal lengths. The lack of rear shift kept me on a technical camera since I need rise fall and shift on the back. Not an issue if you never want to stitch.

This is all dependant on using digital back though, but that goes for the Techno as well. I think adapting an SLR/mirrorless for it would be clunky.

 

[anyone]

It comes down to whether you own (now or in future) a digital back or use a mirrorless camera as "back". As others have pointed out, the Techno is pretty much out if you decide for a mirrorless camera.

The Techno is a lovely camera. The Technica-lens boards are cheap and available. I did not love the sliding back, it was large and cumbersome (arguably only my version, newer ones exist that are shorter). It is also a slow camera, as you will need to take the time to focus it properly. The ground glass is nice and bright (if you have the latest version), but tiny compared to 4x5". You need to be very precise in your workflow to avoid unpleasant surprises.

 

[Reginald Fluggelding]

Techno: 1,9 kg
Universalis: 1,7 kg

techno heavy? Universal light ????
the difference is 0,2 kg, nobody will be able to feel any difference of 0,2 kg.
sorry this is nonsence.

Techno is inconvenient to carry? what?
I would say techno is the most compact and transport-friendly camera ever made.
even the lens can be left on techno and will be best protected.
Techno is the digital "Technika" that is made to be easy transported....
Universalis as any other cameras in the traditional large format cameras style build on the optical bench will always be more difficult to transport than a compacts "technika style" camera.

But your are absolutely right, for digital users the Pico will be the future system- it will replace universal, it is better constructed, for much higher precision that will be needed with modern backs-cameras. The traditional camera design like universalis have some week points, that Pico dont have anymore.
Universalis is a very good made camera- no doubt about it- Arca made here a very good job, but this camera design itsself will always have some weeknesses.
Universalis like the bigger high end brother M-2 is a great platform for mix use: film 6x9 or 4x5 inch, digital backs and all mirrorless systems like Fuji GFX ect...
especially when you focus more on studio than for work outside...
indeed a very Universal System.

Techno is simply a completely different guy.
The rear part is here very important: it is completely stable, giving you precision of panckace cameras like cambo WRS, Alpa ect...
Sadly only up and down movements can be done- but in best precision. So you need the last small sliding back to get also horizontal movements for panorama and stiching.
This last version of the sliding back is rotatable, that allows you easy switch from horizontal to vertical without moving the back out of the camera- very important outside!

Afcourse you can make all the movements also on the front standart but this is not the same...
The week point-compared with pancake camera systems will be the front standart. it has to be handled very carefully. The front standart is the week part of the system- yes every parts that can be moved and are not riggid are the weekpoints. I have a special way how i close the front standart after using some movements on it- got it from Linhof...
When you compare Techno with a pancake system dont forget that all Techno lenses, also the long like 150 mm, 180 mm, 210 mm are on small technika lensboard, when all long lenses mounted on WRS, Alpa ect... weights much more and need spacer ... and afcourse only Techno allows 40 mm movements...
So Techno is the king when you want to use longer lenses also.

Dont take techno when you like to use mirrorless system like Fuji GFX.
You can use only longer lenses.
So when you like to use a back and a Fuji, Sony ect... the Arca will be the right option.
But I think that Pico will be here the future platform.

I managed to post my reply exactly as you posted yours, so I've kind of doubled up on what you said.

 

[rdeloe]

@Lorenz(X) I trust you found this very long, very thorough Techno review already?

 

[Alkibiades]

here some pics as the direct comparision of the size between a small cambo pancake and techno, both with the same 90 mm lens

 

[Alkibiades]

so when I use a longer lens like the 90 mm techno is much better for transport than the cambo WRS system. The small sliding back dont really make the techno bigger.
If I would add the compendium the techno system will be even smaller, as Cambo WRS compendium is really large compered to Techno compendium.
So the size and weight of such systems are not much different.

 

[Lorenz(GFX)]

Rob, I did find torgers review a few weeks ago, yes. I think it is pretty comprehensive and I didn´t have the feeling that it is biased in any way. He points out the things he doesn´t like pretty extensively.

He uses it in a way that I wouldn't though. I have no intention of using a sliding back and a ground glass. I would use it with a DB with live view.

And thanks to Alkibiades, Reginald and anyone too! I will try to adress your inputs.
I will get something out of the way first:
I do not consider pancake cameras. I am sure they are amazing technically. But with having every lens to be mounted in a helicoid, it's a non starter right from the beginning. Too expensive and not flexible enough for my taste and wallet.
Edit 2: I don´t need tilt or swing on the back, I am fine with just linear movements there. But I do like tilt AND swing on the front. Another reason against the pancakes.

My take on the Techno, just from the appearance was that it should be pretty nicely packable. Folded together it has quite a big footprint, but it is not very deep. The front standard seems to be nicely protected. Tech lenses are small. Tripod on the side of the backpack... Should work out nicely for my needs.

I did a lot of stitching with the T/S adapters, but it was on smaller sensor cameras. I do not want to base my workflow on stitching. For the instances it would come in handy, I could actually live with either the latest db adapter, or even with front shift and compensating with moving the camera on the tripod to avoid paralax.

I do not expect the camera to work perfectly accurate like pancakes do. I would either look up combinations of tilt, focus and aperture to get the DoF that I want, but I would always check that in live view, or, start the whole process like I do it now, from the ground. Focus, tilt, refocus, tilt.. check near and far point in live view till I am were I want to be and take the shot.

Ah yes, I tend to use medium and longer focal lengths. If I want to get a very wide field of view, I can alway do cylindrical panos. But I do have a 20mm lens, then from 47mm up, wich leaves me with a gap that will be closed by the time I will get a smaller tech cam and db.

The Pico though... it still looks very very good! But I think the Techno is a viable option for me. And I find them regularly on the used market with quite acceptable price tags. Already! I guess the price will not drop dramatically any more at this point but that's fine.

Thanks for the pictures Alkibiades! The sliding back with rotation looks very nice and compact. Is it possible to have the back in portrait orientation and do shifts? Would be a bad oversight if it wasn´t..
Edit: I guess I can see that already. The whole plate the db is mounted on can be turned, so it is possible. Nice!

 

[Geoff]

Another review from 2013 (no pics tho): Techno

All the good things about the Techno are still true: rigid back standard, flexible front. Folds up small, keep lens on it; new rear sliding back gives stitching. And delightfully, can use any era vintage lenses on Linhof boards - there area lot of different and cheap good lenses out there. Lots of flexibility.
The downsides: its not a great travel camera - it can go into the field, but it has a slightly awkward form factor and is not super easy to pull out of the bag - beware of damaging one of the side knobs, which are vulnerable. A handle would be nice.
The camera is initially exciting, in between digital pancakes and the older view cameras. But after about 8 years, I gave mine up, as it just wasn't so easy to take on the road. Lots of people have shot with them - Joe Cornish used one for years, but drifted away too.
Pancakes are one option, but the OP is right about the cost of helicals for each lens. But if limited to say 3 lenses, maybe it's ok? Another answer could be smaller view cameras (been using an Ebony 23S with a digital back adapter) or the Linhof Technikardan 23, not as accurate as the Techno but very fast to use.
Of course, with all this discussion, wonder if a Techno is maybe the better answer? Argh.

 

[Reginald Fluggelding]

Pancakes are one option, but the OP is right about the cost of helicals for each lens. But if limited to say 3 lenses, maybe it's ok? Another answer could be smaller view cameras (been using an Ebony 23S with a digital back adapter) or the Linhof Technikardan 23, not as accurate as the Techno but very fast to use.

That is a good point. Helicals are more expensive than plain old lens boards, but my experience is the price is not unreasonable. And you get a much more streamlined focusing experience in the field since you don't have to find your infinity position (even though you can get little widgets for the Techno to 'preprogram" them, plus the benefits of having rigid body vs extra bits that can catch wind.

It really depends on what you want to do. Having limited selection of lenses can be good too. I have four (28, 35, 55 and 100). Considering my work I mainly use the 35 and 55 (55 more with editorial type interior shots or more natural architectural perspective). The 28 is generally only used when I have to and I wouldn't take it with me if I was shooting landscape/art-based, it's a very specific architectural tool for me. The 100 is for details and I don't use it that much. I could leave it behind and get closer and crop with the 55 if I had no other choice. If I was just shooting personal work I'd probably take the 55 and the 100.

The trick I've found is figuring out what you think you'll need (or just want) vs what you really need. Having the emotional connection to the gear is important too, so if you love the Techno that is a good enough reason. I have to look at things from the economics of tools for work to a large extent so sometimes can't factor that aspect into what I use.

 

[vieri]

Hey Lorenz(X),

my .02 for what they are worth.

I used a Techno in the early 2010s, and while I found it a very good camera I didn't love it. The sliding back was a pain to use, but digital backs back then did not have live view, so it was either a sliding back, or a lot of fiddling in the field, so I made do. I didn't love the extending front rail as well - for some reasons, it never felt as precise as it should have. Other than that, I enjoyed it and it was with me during the creation of some photos I still love today.

I never used a F-Universalis, but I do have a demo one with me and I use a M-Two, which is its big brother; they are very different machines from a Techno: they are monorail cameras, more "classic" in conception as others have pointed out. They are beautifully made, rigid and (also as it has been pointed out), truly "universal" allowing you to use pretty much any image recording device from film (medium format and 4x5") to digital (digital backs, digital MF and even 135 digital). The M-Two might be my all-time favourite camera, and the Universalis is a smaller, lighter version of it.

All that said, during the last Workshop I led in Comacchio I had the opportunity to see a Pico (Arca-Swiss sent a demo to one of our Alumni) and I was extremely impressed with the camera. As far as digital MF movement cameras, I worked with the Rm3di, the Alpa STC, the Linhof Techno, the Silvestri Bicam, the phase One XT and none was built like the Pico. Not even close. The precision, rigidity and smoothness of the Pico's movement truly left me wanting for words.

If you are OK with its features, I would recommend the Pico over any of the currently available alternatives with zero hesitation.

If you think you might ever want to add film to your arsenal, then I would go for the Universalis.

Again, just my .02, hoping it helps. Best regards,

Vieri

 

[rdeloe]

I prefer to transport the camera fully assembled, but sometimes I want a lighter backpack with the F-Universalis. This is what that looks like.

The time between putting the pack down on the ground to being ready to shoot is less than a minute if I'm going slowly.

As everyone is telling you, it's crucial to find the glove that fits your hand (so to speak). One nice thing about the F-Universalis (and the Pico for that matter) is that if you don't have a medium format back yet but plan to get one in the future, you can use whatever you have now with a Rotafoot, and then just add the appropriate replacement mount for a back later. That does require a new bellows too, so two parts to buy to switch to medium format back setup.

Are you also looking at the Cambo Actus? I've never used one but lots of people like those too.

 

[Alkibiades]

Rob, I did find torgers review a few weeks ago, yes. I think it is pretty comprehensive and I didn´t have the feeling that it is biased in any way. He points out the things he doesn´t like pretty extensively.

He uses it in a way that I wouldn't though. I have no intention of using a sliding back and a ground glass. I would use it with a DB with live view.

And thanks to Alkibiades, Reginald and anyone too! I will try to adress your inputs.
I will get something out of the way first:
I do not consider pancake cameras. I am sure they are amazing technically. But with having every lens to be mounted in a helicoid, it's a non starter right from the beginning. Too expensive and not flexible enough for my taste and wallet.
Edit 2: I don´t need tilt or swing on the back, I am fine with just linear movements there. But I do like tilt AND swing on the front. Another reason against the pancakes.

My take on the Techno, just from the appearance was that it should be pretty nicely packable. Folded together it has quite a big footprint, but it is not very deep. The front standard seems to be nicely protected. Tech lenses are small. Tripod on the side of the backpack... Should work out nicely for my needs.

I did a lot of stitching with the T/S adapters, but it was on smaller sensor cameras. I do not want to base my workflow on stitching. For the instances it would come in handy, I could actually live with either the latest db adapter, or even with front shift and compensating with moving the camera on the tripod to avoid paralax.

I do not expect the camera to work perfectly accurate like pancakes do. I would either look up combinations of tilt, focus and aperture to get the DoF that I want, but I would always check that in live view, or, start the whole process like I do it now, from the ground. Focus, tilt, refocus, tilt.. check near and far point in live view till I am were I want to be and take the shot.

Ah yes, I tend to use medium and longer focal lengths. If I want to get a very wide field of view, I can alway do cylindrical panos. But I do have a 20mm lens, then from 47mm up, wich leaves me with a gap that will be closed by the time I will get a smaller tech cam and db.

The Pico though... it still looks very very good! But I think the Techno is a viable option for me. And I find them regularly on the used market with quite acceptable price tags. Already! I guess the price will not drop dramatically any more at this point but that's fine.

Thanks for the pictures Alkibiades! The sliding back with rotation looks very nice and compact. Is it possible to have the back in portrait orientation and do shifts? Would be a bad oversight if it wasn´t..
Edit: I guess I can see that already. The whole plate the db is mounted on can be turned, so it is possible. Nice!

So techno seems to be the camera you will need.
Techno use Technika lensboards but some older lensboards need to be adjusted, as the frontstandart of the techno and also the new Technika cameras are made in higher precision.
You must also check if the lensboard are 100 procent flat- any imperfections will effect image quality at the edges pretty hard.
Yes, you can do shift in all directions in any position of the sliding back.