What is the lightest 8x10 generally available (new or used)?

[Bill_1856]

I guess the Phillips is super light, and the legendary Nagaoka, but they are not generally available.

[Carl J]

Ritter 8x10, http://www.lg4mat.net/LFcamera.html. 6.4 lbs.

[David A. Goldfarb]

My 8x10" Gowland without a lens, including 24" of rail, the slightly heavier late-style mounting block, and heavier knobs that I added myself, is 5 lbs. 14-3/8 oz.

My version has a non-reversible back, which means you have to loosen 4 knobs to flip the whole bellows and frames to switch between horizontal and vertical, which is why I installed more comfortable knobs, but it would be more convenient to have a reversible back, which some of the later cameras have, presumably at the expense of a little extra weight.

If I want to go lighter, I just bring one 12" rail, instead of both of them, and I can use the lighter mounting block, which is fine for a lot of landscape uses, if I don't need to use a long lens and can use a wider lens for close focus, and with maximum 12" of extension I can get away with a lighter tripod and head.

It's not generally available new, but if you keep an eye out, they turn up occasionally.

[James Pierce]

Non folding Ebony 810 gets down to around 3.2kg which is 7 lbs. Extremely practical and rigid too - most of the ultralight designs are ultimately frustrating to shoot with because of flex, shifting and vibration etc. They are also available brand spanking new from the factory.

[Mark Sampson]

When you look at the whole kit, it's the film holders where the weight adds up. But having used 17-pound and 13-pound 8x10 cameras in the field, I can see where a lighter camera body is a good thing.

[Alan Gales]

My Wehman weighs 8.7 pounds. The lightweight version is 7.2 pounds.

[Oren Grad]

The lightest wooden 8x10 camera I'm aware of is the Phillips Explorer, which has a back fixed in horizontal position and weighs around 6 lb, maybe a shade less. Unlike the 4x5 and 5x7 versions, the 8x10 Nagaoka is not especially light - it's around 8 lb, which is not bad at all, but not a low outlier for its format like the smaller ones.

I suspect 8x10 Gowlands were probably all made-to-order custom jobs. They were built over the years in a variety of configurations. With enough patience, to find one, and then some tinkering, it should be possible to come up with a usable Gowland that's not a whole lot more than 5 lb.

All of this assumes a bellows camera which accepts interchangeable lenses. With suitable choice of materials and design it should be possible to build a single-FL box camera that will weigh less than the lightest Gowland.

[Dan Fromm]

http://www.argentumcamera.com/eng/pages/other/home.htm

Cataloged weight of the Excursor I 8x10 without back is 2.1 kg.

[David A. Goldfarb]

http://www.argentumcamera.com/eng/pages/other/home.htm

Cataloged weight of the Excursor I 8x10 without back is 2.1 kg.

The back according to the catalogue is approximately 0.8 kg.

[mike rosenlof]

The Ilford Titan 8x10 weighs 800 grams.

You might be able to make something lighter out of cardboard.

:)

[StoneNYC]

The Chamonix 8x10 weighs 9.5lbs and is super rigid.

This is mine.

121822

This is the website to buy them new.

http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/810.html

[jnantz]

I guess the Phillips is super light, and the legendary Nagaoka, but they are not generally available.

certainly isn't a szabad, weighs a ton and they don't come up used & 8x10 very often...

[Jeffrey Arthur]

Century Universal is around 9 lbs, inexpensive and comes up on eBay on a regular basis.

[gleaf]

Century needs light glass not process lens weight as the front construction and hardware is not up to big glass weight. Ansco's come up as well and are more robust.

[Tin Can]

+1 on the Ritter.

It's on my list, a list of one.


Ritter 8x10, http://www.lg4mat.net/LFcamera.html. 6.4 lbs.

[mdarnton]

I have an Agfa-Ansco and agree that it's got some nice features, including the built-in track extension, both front and rear focus, and the fact that when the back folds up it protects the GG. I can weigh mine tomorrow and post--I don't think it's going to fall among the light ones, though--probably around 12 pounds. My 5x7 A-A is around eight, if I remember right.

[Ari]

Toyo 810M weighs only 15.1 lbs.





:p

[Jeffrey Arthur]

Just remember robust front standards and heavy lenses sometimes defeat the purpose of a light camera.

[jcoldslabs]

Century Universal is around 9 lbs, inexpensive and comes up on eBay on a regular basis.


Century needs light glass not process lens weight as the front construction and hardware is not up to big glass weight. Ansco's come up as well and are more robust.

I regularly put a 15" f/4 Petzval that weighs six pounds on my Century Universal without issue. I agree that the Agfa/Ansco cameras are more sturdy, but that comes at the cost of extra weight and bulk.



Just remember robust front standards and heavy lenses sometimes defeat the purpose of a light camera.

True. Plus the lightest possible 8x10 camera and lens combination still takes the same heavy film holders as every other camera.

Jonathan

[mdarnton]

At 12 pounds 5 ounces, the Agfa-Ansco isn't going to make the lightweight list!

I went into a store a couple of weeks ago that was using a Seneca 5x7 and it weighed just about nothing. I wonder what the 8x10 Seneca weighs.

[Alan Gales]

Toyo 810M weighs only 15.1 lbs.





:p

Ari, it sounds like you eat your spinach! ;)

[Ari]

Ari, it sounds like you eat your spinach! ;)

That's why I'm strong to the finich!

[Daniel Stone]

An Arca F-Line 8x10 doesn't weigh much(at least mine didn't when I owned it), and you get the simplicity of a monorail design, along with it's potential "expansion" capabilities.

-Dan

[David A. Goldfarb]

I saw a photo of the Arca-Swiss booth at Photokina with a banner mentioning an 8x10" Misura. It apparently exists, but I don't think it has the metal clamshell or leather case options of the 4x5". The B&H website lists the weight as 4.5 lbs with a rail that extends to 30cm, but the description doesn't entirely make sense, and it looks like there might be a little cut-and-paste from the description of the 4x5" Misura. For instance, it says that it's ideal for use with rollfilm and digital backs. Well, that's true if you have an 8x10"->4x5" reducing back or a 4x5" rear standard, back, and bellows, but then we're talking about more than a 4.5 lb. 8x10" camera.

Ok, The View Camera Store says it's 9 lbs with a 26" bellows-- https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.487065718029851.1073741830.159930977409995&type=3

[StoneNYC]

David the Chanonix 8x10 is 9.5 lbs and has 800mm bellows draw compared to your 26"(660mm).

What's an extra half lb... Lol

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've occasionally used a 750mm lens on my Sinar P, which has a 40" bellows, and at that length, it becomes a 2-tripod operation, negating any weight savings anyway. The 8x10" Gowland is under 6 lbs with 24" of rail/bellows.

[jeroldharter]

Ritter for current cameras and Wehman for used cameras.