Murray, The way I would see it, without those movements you don't really have a view camera, just a big, clunky, hard to carry around camera that uses big film. The movements are the main (perhaps only) reason I use a view camera. The control of focus plane and perspective is the main attraction. If you are not able to employ any movements then a medium format camera would be easier to use and produce nearly equal results.
Many times people discuss the great depth of field available with a view camera. This is a misconception since the DOF is actually less with a normal lens on a 4x5 camera than you would have with a smaller format. What a view camera does allow, which is often confused with DOF, is the ability to adjust the plane of focus. In any other camera the plane of focus is parallel to the film. With a view camera employing front tilt the plane of focus could run from your toes to the top of the light post down the street. Now the depth of field, that is the sharp focus on either side of that plane, may be quite small. Small enough that while the top of the light post could be in sharp focus the no parking sign tacked to it 6 feet above the ground may be very out of focus. I would consider front tilt, swing and rise to be essential. There are many good camera designs that have these movements and no, or very limited, rear movements. The rear movements are almost a luxury in the sense that you can accomplish everything with front only movements if you are willing to move the camera around on the tripod after you made the front movements. If you are doing landscapes and similar things where only limited movements are used a front movement only design would not be very limiting. But don't go to all the work of building a camera without any movements. Dave _______________________________________________ Cameramakers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://rmp.opusis.com/mailman/listinfo/cameramakers
