A growing number of mid-format cameras are used for aerial surveying projects. To achieve a reliable and geometrically precise result also in the photogrammetric workflow, awareness on the sensitive parts is important. The use of direct referencing systems (GPS/IMU), the mounting on a stabilizing camera platform and the specific values of the mid format camera make a professional setup with various calibration and misalignment operations necessary. An important part is to have a proper camera calibration. Using aerial images over a well designed test field with 3D structures and/or different flight altitudes enable the determination of calibration values in Bingo software. It will be demonstrated how such a calibration can be performed. The direct referencing device must be mounted in a solid and reliable way to the camera. Beside the mechanical work especially in mounting the camera beside the IMU, 2 lever arms have to be measured in mm accuracy. Important are the lever arms from the GPS Antenna to the IMU's calibrated centre and also the lever arm from the IMU centre to the Camera projection centre. In fact, the measurement with a total station is not a difficult task but the definition of the right centres and the need for using rotation matrices can cause serious accuracy problems. The benefit of small and medium format cameras is that also smaller aircrafts can be used. Like that, a gyro bases stabilized platform is recommended. This causes, that the IMU must be mounted beside the camera on the stabilizer. The advantage is, that the IMU can be used to control the platform, the problematic thing is, that the IMU to GPS antenna lever arm is floating. In fact we have to deal with an additional data stream, the values of the movement of the stabiliser to correct the floating lever arm distances. If the post-processing of the GPS-IMU data by taking the floating levers into account, delivers an expected result, the lever arms between IMU and camera can be applied. However, there is a misalignment (bore side angle) that must be evaluated by photogrammetric process using advanced tools e.g. in Bingo. Once, all these parameters have been determined, the system is capable for projects without or with only a few ground control points. But which effect has the photogrammetric process when directly applying the achieved direct orientation values compared with an AT based on a proper tiepoint matching? The paper aims to show the steps to be done by potential users and gives a kind of quality estimation about the importance and quality influence of the various calibration and adjustment steps.