Is there a need for another hand made camera?

[Henry Ambrose]

Well is there?

I have a few ideas on making cameras. I'm thinking something along the lines of a Phillips or Canham. Not so much design wise but in that category of craftsmanship and lusciousness or higher. It'll be light and it'll be pretty.

What do you think?

Is there room for a great $2500- $3000 8X10?

Please let me know your thoughts about what would make you buy the new camera.

[Ben Syverson]

I would focus on extreme light weight and fine control over movements. There are plenty of light cameras and plenty of geared monorails, but there aren't many cameras that are able to combine the two. I would think with modern materials and technology you could make a 5-7 lb camera that has nice smooth movements.

[jeroldharter]

Extreme lightweight (ideally under 7 pounds)
Durability (not regular wood, just my opinion)
Clamshell type design (e.g. Wehman, Carbon Infinity)
Extension for 600 mm lens
Geared movements for rise and tilts
Bail back
Affordable 4x5 back like the Wehman


The real holy grail would be a corresponding 8x10 enlarger that has a modern light source (LED or cold light) and simple alignment.

[Dave Wooten]

What Jerold said...

I'd like to see a small 8 x 10 enlarger that is capable of 16 x 20 from 8 x 10 negs....2 to 2.5 x's enlargement is enough....Glenview has a design for the enlarger.....Richard Ritter is making a pretty fine 8 x 10 right now, that is innovative and light weight.

[Dave Wooten]

Check out the Ritter 8 x 10....just google Richard Ritter.

It is under 7 lbs, has 32 inches of bellows, uses carbon tube design features, is under 3k. If I were to replace my Wista, the Ritter 8 x 10 would be at the top of my short list.

[Henry Ambrose]

Anyone else?

[Eric Woodbury]

I'm not interested in 8x10, but 4x5 interests me. I've designed and built several homemade cameras over the years, but for now I'm not using them. I use a 57 Deardorff and a 45 Ebony. I like them both, but I feel there is room for much improvement if the design approach were different. I know that my tastes aren't necessarily others. Lightweight is important, but folding isn't. I don't care what the materials are as long as they are the right ones for the job. I don't need every movement, but the ones I'd pick are surely different than what others would pick. I use lenses from 58mm to 450mm (non-tele) and 600mm tele.

I can see a camera that is a cross between an Ebony and a Canham wood where the buyer picks the movements and bellows and each camera is specialized to the user.

[imagedowser]

Sounds a little like a "blind date" ... Thin and beautiful ... You'll just have to introduce her to us, so we can tell if we would want to have a long term relationship or not... You must know it's all about "personality", don"t you? Make a few up, that seems to be how everyone else starts out.... Be true to what you like, or it will just be "another hand made camera".

[Renato Tonelli]

A 5x7 with 4x5 reduction back
Light enough for short treks
Smooth, precise movements
Bail back

I would nickname it "my Linhof-Lite"

As far as an enlarger goes, I think we might be hoping for too much.

[fuegocito]

I think there are enough options on lightweight 810's out there though having one more option with a competitive price tag does not hurt.

What is really needed is lightweight film holders, really really lightweight film holders, If only someone can bring along a new and improved version of Mido II for 8x10

[Acheron Photography]

A 5x7 with 4x5 reduction back
Light enough for short treks
Smooth, precise movements
Bail back

What he said. For me 5x7 is the sweet spot. Movements ideally geared. Extension at least to 450mm. And not fiddly, little controls: things which fall naturally under the hand. (Just my prejudice.)

David.

[Henry Ambrose]

snipped..........

The real holy grail would be a corresponding 8x10 enlarger that has a modern light source (LED or cold light) and simple alignment.

An enlarger would not be that hard to accomplish if there was sufficient demand. I've done a bit of that work with the LED head that I use now. Making a bigger one is not that different. But are there enough people who'd pay a couple of thousand dollars for the ultimate enlarger? I fear that "ultimate enlarger" means too many different things to too many people - but you tell me.

Please keep telling me about the camera you'd like to see.
I think I can make "the lightest practical 8X10 ever" but I don't think the same camera can have geared movements or supreme rigidity. Those two features seem mutually exclusive, but I'm not saying "no" to the possibility so keep talking.

[Steve Barber]

I liked this one.

http://www.laytoncamera.com/index.html