Asymetrical vs symetrical tilt.
What are the pros and cons with an asymetrical tilt like I have on a Sinar F1
camera? What are your appreciation on the field? It supposed to have more refocus with an asymetrical tilt. What else?
Thank you for tips
On a Sinar P, the tilt and swing axes coincide with the dashed lines on the groundglass, so you can tilt on the rear standard to find the optimal tilt angle, read the angle off the scale, apply the tilt to the front standard if you wish and reset the rear standard to vertical. The advantage is that you can see what is happening to the plane of focus on the groundglass without having to refocus.
On a Sinar F, you have a tilt/swing calculator that is best understood by reading the Sinar manual, which I believe was linked in another thread just yesterday, or you can check the Swiss Sinar website, where they have a description with good illustrations as I recall. The basic idea is that you set the needle on the calculator on the rear standard to zero, use the front standard to focus on the bottom dashed line, use the rear fine focus to focus on the top dashed line, and then read the tilt angle off the calculator. Use the same procedure with the left and right dashed lines for swing.
Asymetrical vs symetrical tilt
They evolved so that the photographer could be sold whatever system he didn't have.
See: metaphysical angst.
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
What's the best metaphysical angst?
Originally Posted by df cardwell
I use the Ebony 45SU which has an assymetrical back tilt. The main advantage it offers is that where time is short, you can quickly focus so that the fore- and backgrounds are sharp. If time is no problem then it is a luxury, nevertheless it is one I would not wish to be without. I need to admit though that because I am disabled, standing for any length of time can leave me in extreme pain, so personally the assymetric tilts are worth the money. I found it very handy in Svalbard last Summer, where I had limited time in certain places and it made the difference between getting an LF image and missing it. For landscape & studio still life, it's invaluable, but obviously for architectural work it would be superfluous unless you were using a Sinar and transferred the tilts across to the front.
Film Cameras currently used:
Large/Stort-format: Ebony 45SU (field camera), Medium/Medlem-format: Mamiya 7, Hasselblad 503CW
35mm/Små format: Nikon: F4, D800 (yes digital, I know)
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I have asymmetrical tilts on my 3 Ebonys and would not want to be without them. When you shoot people with a view camera, you have to work really fast. The A tilts speed things up considerably. A difficult picture may be focused in a few seconds.
I used the Sinar F2 for three years before getting a 45SU last fall. The F1/F2 has base tilts, not asymmetric tilts. While I did use tilts with the Sinar, I find I use them a lot more with the Ebony because it is so easy to see. Even if you have time, light changes, so limiting time messing with movements is very nice. (OTOH, I really miss the depth of field guide on the Sinar.)
As EPR points out above, the F1 doesn't have asymmetric swings/tilts. That is a feature found on the Sinar P/P2/P3 cameras and it's described in various posts above. (Yes, some Ebony cameras have them too...)
On the F-line cameras you have some scales and gadgets to help you find the correct swing and/or tilt angle(s), so with the F-line cameras you can acheive the same final result, but it takes a bit more time and a few more steps to do it. This is described in both the excellent Sinar camera manual and on various places on the net. (I wrote a page on it too: "SinarF Tilt and Swing".)
I got an F2 myself which is OK in the field. As I don't go for long hikes but stay within working distance from my car I can deal with it. If I intend to shoot LF while being on long treks, I would probably get me a Chamonix or something similar (i.e. light and compact). On the other hand, the Sinar is very stable and easy to operate. When at home I replace the back standart with an old P standart, which gives me asymmetric tilts/swings for still lifes etc. I shoot at home.
As long as you have base tilts, asymetrical or symetrical does not matter. Actually symetrical is better.
Asymetrical tilt or Orbix functionality as Arca likes to call it, is in fact a marketting hype originated from limitation as they don't use L or U type frames. On the other hand Horseman LX, Cambo Legend PC, Cambo Master, Linhof Kardan Master GTL are better cameras for table top product photography since they are both yaw free and their tilt axis are continuously adjustable (symetrical to asymetrical up/down) For field if you need yaw free camera probably the Arca F-Line Orbix is the best then Sinar X. For studio for sure nothing beats Linhof Kardan Master GTL.
Here is why.
Pretty much that.
Originally Posted by df cardwell
Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO
"We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin