Pristine used field cameras... are they hangar queens?

[picker77]

I just got back from an afternoon shooting some FP4+ at windmills and similar stuff in the county road boondocks a few miles from my house, using my old Super Speed Graphic and a vintage Ektar 203mm. I noticed when I took my stuff out of my truck I had a rip in my shorts from a barbed wire fence, sticktights in my socks, weeds in my shoelaces, and cow poop on one leg of the tripod, not to mention a light coat of dust on just about everything (I was working near gravel roads).

This made me think of the many, many used but totally like new, pristine, unscratched, mint unmarred high-dollar field cameras I saw for sale on the auction place when I was hunting for a beginner 4x5 a while back. I wonder what I'm doing wrong here--I can't seem to keep my gear in that perfect a condition, even when I think I'm being careful. So am I just naturally careless or are some of these folks not ever actually using these cameras after spending all that money on them?

[Gem Singer]

When you spend a large amount of money on an upscale field camera and expensive lenses, you learn to take good care of your equipment and use it carefully.

If I were driving a Ferrari, I would keep it in a garage, polish it often, and have it serviced regularly. Probably only drive it on Sundays.

A Speed Graphic with a vintage Ektar lens is far from a Ferrari. When I used a SG, back in my college days, I gave very little thought to the value of the camera. As long as it worked and did the job, that was good enough for me. Besides, the camera was an old beater when I bought it.

[Dan Fromm]

Gem, Ferraris, not to be confused with modern FIATs, used to be made to be driven. Back when, I knew a fellow whose daily driver was a 250 GTE. After one of his sons took it out for an unauthorized spin (literally), he replaced the wreck with a 250 Lusso that he used as his daily driver. He used to joke that most of his mythical wealth was tied up in Appias and 250 GTs.

Harley reported exceeding the GTE's rev limit in an impromptu drag race with an XKE -- he won, perhaps 265 UK horsepower were even more inflated that 240 Italian HP -- and then removing the rocker covers and checking valve lash. Real people can deal with rocker arm engines.

If cameras are used much they'll show it. I doubt, though, that your camera was exposed to ground-level nasties or the barbed wire that you stumbled through. Thinking of barbed wire, have you noticed that chest waders have an affinity for it?

Cheers,

Dan

[Gem Singer]

Dan,

If I had spent 250K for an automobile, I would never drive it at high speed over a dirt road full of potholes and rocks.

You're correct about the barbed wire and nasties. Last week our Sat. morning photo group found itself slogging through mud and drizzling rain. Climbing over barbed wire fences. Didn't even bother to take our Linhofs and Canhams out of the car.

However, we did manage to make a few photographs with our beat-up old 35mm cameras. Didn't care as much when they got muddy and damp.

[Gene McCluney]

Every camera I own gets used in the field. All equipment can be cleaned, and after a whole 18 hour day of driving down dirt roads and trails looking for antique bridges, the whole inside of the Land rover is covered in a fine layer of dust...but you know what? Dust can be vacuumed off cameras and equipment. Cow poop can be removed from tripods, and lenses can be cleaned. Cameras were meant to be used, and better cameras make the shooting experience easier. I am not keeping my equipment pristine so I can sell it for a premium price at some point in the future, rather I am using it to get the images I want. If it gets scratches and wear, so what.

[Mark Sampson]

Unlike cars, which suffer fom lack of use, 'hangar queen' view cameras are the ones to buy used. Many of us have seen for sale 8x10 Deardorffs, and other cameras too, that that were beaten to within inches of their lives in a catalog, advertising, or portrait studio. They're usually restoration candidates or parts machines. My own wooden 4x5 just came back from Richard Ritter for refurbishment; it shows lots of 'patina' and honorable scars from 17 years of field and studio use. It's paid for itself many times over, and I'm not worried about its resale value. In one sense, I admire those shooters who keep their wooden cameras pristine-looking; it just hasn't worked out that way for me.

[Dan Fromm]

Gem, in the late '60s $6K would buy a Lusso. Nowadays prices for old Ferraris are just plain silly.

[BarryS]

I shoot a lot, but take good care of my equipment. It usually travels in a well padded bag and I clean everything regularly. It gets handled with care in the field and stored in the same environment as me at home. I've seen photographers trash their equipment in a few hours, so you never know the history of gear.

[picker77]

Very entertaining and informed observations. Well, I'm certainly not worried about damaging the resale value of my venerable old SSG, and I've been cleaning cow poop off shovels and boots for 60 years, so no problem there. No doubt if I had been able to afford one of the nice Canhams, Horsemans, or Wistas that I saw for sale I'd have been very careful with it while afield. It just struck me as odd that of the many dozens of initial candidates I looked at (before reality set in and I lowered my sights), none looked as if they had been actually used in the field. In fact, it was rare for one to have even a single tiny scratch or dent. As mentioned above, this is great for prospective second or third owners, but it did make me wonder a little about why some of the owners bought the cameras in the first place, or, if they were actually used, to marvel at the meticulous care they must have received.

[Jim Rhoades]

I have two Deardorff's and while not closet queens I will admit that when I go out to photograph on my Dakar (dual sport motorcycle made for boonie bashing) I take my Crown Graphic. If I crash my bike or body that's one thing but there no reason to harm a Dorff.

[eddie]

not sure how they do it. i bet they never used the camera that is why it is so nice. i try and be as careful as i can with my stuff but it does get the occasional bump and bruise. they still work great though.

as for the Ferraris...i may not drive it down a dirt road as that is not really what they were made for but i would hammer the sh!t out of it on every turn i could find....and then maybe head up to watkins glen for a proper thrashing.....just like i take my camera out for picture taking.

[Diane Maher]

Every camera I own gets used in the field. All equipment can be cleaned, and after a whole 18 hour day of driving down dirt roads and trails looking for antique bridges, the whole inside of the Land rover is covered in a fine layer of dust...but you know what? Dust can be vacuumed off cameras and equipment. Cow poop can be removed from tripods, and lenses can be cleaned. Cameras were meant to be used, and better cameras make the shooting experience easier. I am not keeping my equipment pristine so I can sell it for a premium price at some point in the future, rather I am using it to get the images I want. If it gets scratches and wear, so what.

I agree completely. I use my cameras/lenses in the field too. Any minor wear that is seen on them means that it is used and well loved.

[Gem Singer]

The point I was trying to make by using the Ferrari analogy was:

Of course a Ferrari has the ability to stand up to hard use. But why take a valuable vehicle out on the road and purposely abuse it?

I certainly would not take my $3500 8x10 Canham out and subject it to abuse.

Professionals subject their equipment to much more usage than hobbyists. They need to make a living. Used equipment that was previously owned by professional photographers naturally shows more signs of wear and tear.

[Frank Petronio]

I've bought several used dslrs with shot counts of only a couple thousand, and these were owned for months or even years by their original owners.

When I read of people taking 60 minutes to set-up a 4x5 shot, or 5-10 minutes just to zero and level their camera, I can understand why they look mint.

All the better for me. I love buying inexpensive, yet mint cameras.

That said, we'd probably all get better pictures if we kept a "beater" in the car, ready to go abuse.

[evan clarke]

I think people are attracted to view cameras and just buy them to try them, find out it's not their thing and later sell them...EC

[Michael Gordon]

They're tools and are meant to be used and abused. My Ebony has dents, dings, and a small crack in the mahogany, and my Schneider Super Symmar has pits from being dropped on basalt. They still work just fine.

Some buy the gear for the gear, and some buy it to actually use it.

[Kirk Keyes]

Back when, I knew a fellow whose daily driver was a 250 GTE. After one of his sons took it out for an unauthorized spin (literally), he replaced the wreck with a 250 Lusso that he used as his daily driver.

The kid wasn't named Cameron with his friend Ferris, was it?

[Kirk Keyes]

My Technika IV was like a new Ferrari when I got it in 1983, and now, it's more like a Fiat. Except the Technika works every time I put the film in. Unlike my departed 1970 Fiat 124 Spyder.

[Michael Alpert]

How could any of us know how or why cameras are used (or not used) by strangers? It's their business. One thing is obvious. Large format photography is more demanding in time and money than people often expect. The hours and effort needed just for processing film can be a big surprise. So the fact that there are people who decide to sell their newly bought large-format cameras is not that startling. It is especially understandable for busy people who have high standards and do not want to be cornered into a situation of unavoidable mediocrity.

[walter23]

Dan,

If I had spent 250K for an automobile, I would never drive it at high speed over a dirt road full of potholes and rocks.


Then by analogy I guess you'd never take your camera out where it matters and shoot images with it ;)

[Turner Reich]

So am I just naturally careless or are some of these folks not ever actually using these cameras after spending all that money on them?

Yes it looks like you are naturally careless. That said I use all of my equipment with care, from the old and used to the mint new. It's a method of working and an attitude. Take care of your equipment and it will take care of you.

[Carioca]

It all ends up to one question:
Do you shoot, or do you collect.

What I haven't used in the past 12 months, I sell.

[Gem Singer]

Walter 23,

I go out shooting here in northern Texas almost every Sat. morning, along with two or three of my buddies. Twelve months out of the year, regardless of the weather conditions. They shoot with 4X5 Linhof Techs, and I shoot with a Canham 5X7 Traditional and/or a Canham 8X10 Traditional.

I use one, or more of my cameras, depending in the subject matter, lighting conditions, etc. Sometimes I even shoot medium format, or digital. One of my buddies was using his Nikon 35mm camera last weekend.

However, I always do my best not to abuse my valuable camera equipment. I have been photographing for sixty-three years and I have never dropped a lens or seriously damaged a camera.

[Brian Ellis]

You didn't say that your gear was damaged in any way, just dusty. Dust it off and you'd have a pristine, like new, camera just like you see occasionally on ebay (assuming there was no previous damage to it). You can use a camera without turning it into a beater.

[Lachlan 717]

Only thing that I do when I get a new camera is put Gaffer Tape around the tripod hole before I mount the quick release tripod plate. This generally stops the circular scratching that tends to come from (even minimal) movement of the camera around the tripod head...

Whilst I mostly think that people's fascination with pristine tripod plates is misplaced, I do believe that a mint 'dorf plate is a thing of beauty!

[Renato Tonelli]

I would say that if a 10+ year-old camera is in mint condition, it hasn't been used much.
I am very careful with my equipment and always clean it up after a day of shooting but things happen. The Wisner 4x5 I purchased when it first came out was pristine until this past Summer when the tripod mounting plate scratched the bottom by being less than my methodical self. This annoyed me to no end. It still annoys me. I had loaned the tripod to a friend and needed to use another tripod with a different plate. Most of my cameras have some signs of use, but not abuse (except the Wisner which I use less than the others).
The tripod is another matter altogether. It is used and abused on a regular basis: river/stream beds, mud, hard rock, cow and sheep dung. Because a tripod has gotta-go where it has gotta-go to get that shot!:)

[picker77]

You didn't say that your gear was damaged in any way, just dusty. Dust it off and you'd have a pristine, like new, camera just like you see occasionally on ebay (assuming there was no previous damage to it). You can use a camera without turning it into a beater.

Nope, it's not damaged at all. OTOH this old camera is as near bulletproof as 4x5's get (Super Speed Graphic). Can't say the same for my skin. The barbed wire fence was new, and sharp as razor blades. I probably could have gotten the shots from outside the fence but somehow that seemed like cheating. Like most people I take good care of my stuff, partly because I like to take good care of my stuff, and partly because I can't always afford to replace it.