I purchased the Linhof Technikardan primarily because I was moving
into large format for the first time and was not sure exactly what I
would be doing with the 4 x 5 format (i.e. using it in the field, "table
top" photography, architectural photography, etc.) and so I wanted the
maximum possible flexibility in terms of bellows extension and number
and extent of movements. After spending much time studying
specifications and reading everything I could get my hands on, I opted
for the Technikardan because of its movements (extensive front and rear
swings, tilts, rises, falls, and shifts except no fall on the back
standard), plus a long bellows and relatively low weight (about 6.5
pounds) or approximately the same as a Wisner or Zone VI but with the
advantages of a metal vs. a wood camera). The camera can be purchased
used for a few hundred dollars more than a new Wisner Tech Field and
quite a bit more than the Zone VI but I had read and heard enough bad
things about the Zone VI that I didn't seriously consider it. At the
time of my purchase Canham hadn't made its metal field camera or else I
would certainly have looked into that.
After using the camera for about a year I found it to have the
following advantages and disadvantages. For me the disadvantages
outweighed the advantages and so I sold it but other people might feel
differently about it.
What I liked
(1) the bellows is about 20" as I recall and is more than
adequate for any normal lens up to about 400mm with movements or even
longer with a telephoto. This was important to me because I tend to use
longer than normal lenses. (2) As would be expected from Linhof, the
camera was beautifully made, everything fitted perfectly, when movements
were locked they stayed locked without any play, all movements were
smooth, and for anyone who appreciates precision-made machinery, the
camera was a pleasure to hold and use. (3) There is an extensive (but
extremely expensive) line of accessories available for almost any
conceivable need - as far as I know, the accessories for the Technika
line are all usable with the Technikardan. (4) Somewhat unusually for a
"field" camera, the camera had bubble levels and all movements were
marked in degrees or milimeters, making it easy to be sure that (for
example) the front and rear standards were parallel if both were swung
or tilted (assuming, of course, that you wanted them to be parallel) or
that the camera was level. I did find that, for me, extensive movements
were not as important as I thought they would be because I ended up
using the camera mostly for landscape work. Nevertheless, they were nice
to have on the few occasions when I needed them.
What I disliked
(1) For me, the single overwhelming disadvantage, and
the one the ultimately led me to sell the camera, was the method of
folding and unfolding it. The camera standards and bellows are fitted
into a three-section telescoping monorail along which the standards
slide. When the camera is closed for transporting in a bag or backpack,
the monorail is telescoped into a single section and the front and back
standards (with the bellows in between them of course) are rotated on
the monorail so that they eventually become parallel with it, thus
significantly reducing the overall bulk of the camera and making it
relatively easy to fit into a bag or backpack. In order to open the
camera for use, the standards slide from the back of the monorail to the
front (a distance of perhaps eight inches or so) by turning a small knob
on the right side of the camera approximately ten or twelve full turns.
As the standards approach the front of the monorail they begin turning
simultaneously and eventually they (and the bellows) end up at a 90
degree angle to the monorail with the help of your hands and the camera
is in a position to be used. To close the camera, the reverse procedure
is followed (i.e. the standards slide to the rear of the monorail by
turning the small knob and they simultaneously turn back to a point
that, with some assistance from your hands, they hopefully are again
parallel with the monorail and the camera will then fit into your bag or
backpack.
There are two problems with this system. The most significant is that,
for me at least, it was extremely difficult to keep the two standards
exactly parallel to each other throughout the closing procedure so that
the camera could be closed without pinching the bellows (keep in mind
that, when closed, the front and rear standards are no more than an inch
or so apart and there is a 20" bellows folded up in between them so that
the fit is very tight). Although I occasionally could close the camera
without pinching the bellows, this was rare and most of the time the
bellows was pinched and wrinkled to some degree. After doing this often
enough, the bellows begins sagging and eventually (about six months
after acquiring it and using it perhaps twenty times) the camera became
unusable because the numerous wrinkles caused the bellows to sag so much
that it interfered with the space between the lens and the film.
A new Linhof bellows costs over $500 so replacing it every six months
or so is prohibitive (at least for me). I had a new bellows made (by a
company called Flexible Products in Largo, Florida) at a cost of about
$250. In order to make sure that the new bellows didn't suffer the fate
of the original bellows, I began removing it from the camera when
storing the camera and putting it back on each time I was photographing.
This actually was not too bad a system because the bellows is easy to
remove and install but it meant that when in the field I had to leave
the camera on the tripod and carry the camera and tripod over my
shoulder, which I didn't like if I was walking any distance.
The scond disadvantage of the above system is that it is very
time-consuming and tedious to open and close the camera. I never put a
stop watch on it but I would guess that it took something on the order
of a minute or two because so much care has to be exercised in an effort
to avoid wrinkling the bellows. I also learned the down-side of having
so many movements - each movement must, of course, be zeroed before
folding the camera, which meant checking something like eight or so
different things to make sure that everything had been returned to zero
before beginning to close the camera. This is obviously not a "fault" of
the camera but it did add to the time necessary to close the camera.
Another, far less significant, disdvantage for me was the fact that
swings of the front and rear standards, as well as fine focusing with
the front standard, are controlled by four levers, two on each side of
the camera, and each of the two sets of levers is very close together.
On one side the two levers are unlocked (i.e. the function they
controlled can be performed) if the appropriate lever is moved forward
and on the other side the two levers are unlocked if the levers are
moved backwards. Each of the four levers has identical plastic covers on
the ends, so that you couldn't tell by feel alone which lever you were
moving forwards or backwards, which sometimes meant that if, for
example, you wanted to swing the front standard, you had to come out
from underneath the dark cloth to see which lever needed to be moved and
which direction it needed to be moved in. If the camera was used on a
frequent basis this might have become second nature but using it once a
week or less, as I did, made it quite aggravating. If I hadn't sold the
camera, I would have tried to devise some system of distinguishing among
the four levers by feel so that I could perform the desired functions
while viewing the effect on the groundglass, without first having to
come out from under the dark cloth to see which lever need to be moved
and which direction it needed to be moved in.
Two other minor complaints - the ground glass that comes with the
camera (or at least that came with my camera - I did purchase it used)
is in my opinion useless. It doesn't even have a fresnel lens so that
the scene as viewed in the ground glass consists of a "hot spot" in the
center of the glass, that gradually tapers off into complete darkness
near the edges of the ground glass. This problem was solved by the
purchase of a Bosscreen (at a cost of another $150). The other minor
problem is that, because the camera doesn't fold into a "clam shell"
like most field cameras, it is somewhat unwieldy to pick up and handle
(for example, when putting it on the tripod). I ended up usually just
grabbing one of the "L" standards because that was about the only thing
you could grab onto. Again, not a big deal by itself but another small
aggravation.
Conclusion
In sum, Linhof advertises the camera as a field camera that is
sufficiently flexible that it can also be used in the studio. For me it
was more like a studio camera that could be transported in the field a
little more easily than most studio monorail cameras. I do wish to
emphasize that the difficulties I had with folding and unfolding the
camera may have been more my problem than the camera's. However, the
camera manual came with a special insert that described a somewhat
different way of folding and unfolding the camera than was described in
the manual itself, which leads me to think that Linhof itself had some
questions about the best prcedure to use and that I wasn't the only one
who had this problem. Also, I used the camera during a workshop with
Phil Davis, who certainly has much more experience with large format
cameras than I do, and Phil had the same problems I did in trying to
fold and unfold it. Nevertheless, I do not mean to condemn the camera at
all just because of the difficulties I had with it. Although I don't
think I am a mechanical klutz, perhaps there is some easy way of folding
and unfolding it without wrinkling the bellows that I never figured out.
Setting aside the other problems discussed above, which really are
relatively easy to deal with, the camera is outstanding. I would only
suggest that if you are considering a purchase, you get it on approval
or make some other arrangements so that you can use it for a few days
before commiting to a purchase.
The ‘TK’ is my current large format
camera of preference. In achieving this status, it displaced by a
fairly significant margin the previous large format camera of
preference, a Wisner Technical Field 4x5.
The TK is a camera that seems to be either
loved by people or else hated by them. Generally, the hatred
centers around the procedure to fold the camera up, or else
around the various locks to secure the movements, or else some
combination of the two. My opinion of the camera falls well
toward the love end of the spectrum.
Things I like about the TK45s:
- it folds up into a relatively compact
package, roughly 8" x 10" by perhaps 4"
thick, which fits handily into the bag I haul my large
format gear around it (the bag is a Lowe-pro Omni-Trekker
sized to fit inside a Pelican 1520 case). At one
point I did fairly extensive hiking with the Wisner, and
the TK is a better camera for this sort of use, partly
because it folds up so nicely.
- plenty of bellows extension – the TK
runs about 20" fully extended. At full extension
it’s not the most rigid thing in the world, but
there’s an accessory bar that fits below the camera
that can be used to make it extremely rigid. I don’t
own one and haven’t felt a need for it. One of my
objections to the bar is that it won’t fit on the
camera unless I remove the Arca-Swiss style plate that I
have on the bottom of the camera. My other objection is
that Linhof want a truly obscene amount of money for this
chunk of aluminum. I'm pretty much inured to the
expensive of high end camera gear, but I blanch at the
prices Linhof put on their stuff. I've said it before,
but I'll say it again - if I wanted to avoid expense, I'd
take up a cheaper hobby, like plating all of the
automobiles in existence in 18K gold.
- roomy bellows – the standard bellows
is really big, and is tapered at both ends, so that the
center is larger than the ends. I find this cuts down on
bellows flare considerably. Yes, I use a lens hood (a
Lee, in fact) but the roomy bellows is a nice security
blanket, and I never worry about bellows droop vignetting
the image. To top it off, I find that I can do most of
the work I do with a 135mm lens without resorting to the
bag bellows.
- bag bellows is excellent - The Linhof TK
bag bellows comes in a nice plastic bag with the amusing
label of ‘Weitwinkelbalgen’. You might be
tempted to think that this would translate into
‘wide angle bellows’ but I can tell you for a
fact that ‘weitwinkelbalgen’ is German for
‘outrageously expensive bag bellows’.
Nevertheless, changing bellows on the TK is a 4 second
job, and the bag bellows, unlike some, is a delight to
use. It’s lined with some sort of velvet that seems
to reflect not at all. It probably falls into that
annoying category of ‘expensive but worth it’
- uses Linhof Technika/Wista lensboards
– Different people like different lensboard
standards. I like the Linhof Technika/Wista standard
because it’s small, has an opening large enough for
the lenses I like to use, and is in common use among
field photographers (so that you can, in a pinch, borrow
a lens from another photographer and not swap lens
boards).
- I find it easy and intuitive to use, with
all the controls in the right places, very smooth
movements.
- The camera can be folded with a lens in
place. This can be a time saver.
- Good rigidity – I think the TK is
more rigid than the Wisner it replaced. Other people
whose opinions I respect disagree with that. It probably
falls into the category of ‘items on which
reasonable minds can disagree’.
- Smooth handling – There’s a
certain sensual smoothness to operating the camera. The
telescoping rail sections slide over each other as if
they’re oiled (but in fact the rail is meant to be
NOT lubricated). Everything is machined ‘just
so’. Tilt, swing, shift all are very smooth, despite
the fact that the only geared movement is rear focus.
Naturally, there are some things I dislike
about the TK:
- It’s not a modular, expandable system
like the Arca-Swiss line of cameras.
- When folded, the bellows is not protected,
and the folded camera has to be treated with some modicum
of care to avoid damaging the bellows.
The ground glass on my TK has been replaced
with a BosScreen, which I consider to be a real improvement on
the fairly decent stock Linhof groundglass. When I replaced the
groundglass, I evaluated other ‘bright’ screens,
including the Linhof Super Screen and the Beattie. I thought the
Beattie was awful, found that the Linhof Super Screen bowed in
the Technika I saw one installed in, and bought the BosScreen
based on the recommendation of John Sexton (and against the
advice of several people). I’ve got to say that the
BosScreen was more expensive but I’d never work without it
now that I have it. It’s not particularly bright but it sure
is easy to focus on, primarily because the ‘grain’ is
so fine. If mine broke I’d replace it immediately, and if I
start traveling with my large format gear extensively I’ll
probably buy a spare just in case.
Since some people seem to have trouble folding
the camera, I’ll outline my procedure:
When unfolding the camera, I stick the
tips of my forefingers between the ends of the standards
on the left side (as you face the front of the camera)
and the 90 degree bends on the right side. Then, as I
pivot the two standards to unfold the camera, I let my
fingertips sort of buffer the space between the two
standards. This has, so far, prevented any pinching of
the bellows.
I timed myself unfolding the camera, and found
it took me about 18 seconds, including mounting the camera in the
Arca-Swiss style QR adaptor using the plate fitted to the camera,
but not including mounting a lens. That 18 seconds includes
zeroing the camera for all movements.
Folding the camera takes me about the same
time, including unlocking the movements that must be unlocked to
fold the camera. When the camera is off the tripod, I leave those
movements unlocked. This hasn’t seemed to increase the risk
of damage, although if I were to subject the camera to lots of
vibration, I’d probably lock it all up when folded.