New article by Ernest Purdum: Cheap View Cameras

[Michael Jones]

gps:

Please read more carefully. My second sentence is: Have you ever owned a wooden field camera?
Thus qualified, I spoke of light tight wooden boxes. And yes, I have owned and used several Sinars, Linhofs and Masterviews. What's your point? The only way you know what will be on your negative is by looking at the ground glass and then only if the gg to film plane is matched to your holders.

You also seem to have missed the point of the Ernest’s article which is that an introduction to large format need not cost a fortune. The goal is to get out and create images.

Mike

[GPS]

michael, please read more carefully. I have not said one thing about Ernest's article. I reacted at the Leonard's point. Yes, I owned and I own a wooden field camera. What's your point? You seem to have missed the point of my post.

[windpointphoto]

Good grief! I meant it's only a tool as in that it's meant to be used. It can and should be replaced if need be. I just think that a lot of folks spend big bucks on a beautiful camera that make pictures no better than an economical one. Case in point; friend of mine spent 300.00 and about 50 hours building a 12x20. Does the job just as good as a Wisner. So if you got the money spend it. If you're like me, buy the most usable camera you think you'll need and buy the best lens you can afford. My 8x10s were a Kodak 2D and a Burke & James field. Oh yeah, there's a couple of real precision pieces of equipment. Of course when you use the economical cameras you can't stand there with your nose in the air looking oh so intense.

[Ole Tjugen]

At present count I own six hammers and nine view cameras. The hammers are far more specialised than the cameras, but they are all basically metal lumps at the end of a shaft. In the same way all these cameras are a light tight bellows between a lensboard and a film plane.

I wouldn't use the 12x16" tailboard camera for tabletop photography, just as I wouldn't use a 6kg sledgehammer to drive nails. I have a 4x5" monorail (Linhof Color) for that use, and a carpenter's hammer for the nails...

[Mark_3632]

Hell my precision Sinar cost me a whoppin 250 US dollars. Now is the time to get in on LF cheap. The glass will still kick you in the butt but since you did not spend a ton on the body then that is not too bad either.

I think this comment from leonard sums up those who feel the need to spend a ton of money of LF equipment: "Of course when you use the economical cameras you can't stand there with your nose in the air looking oh so intense".

[GPS]

Now that's what I call a great and cheap start in LF! No reason that you couldn't stand behind your precision Sinar (for 250 $!) with your nose in the air loking oh so intense!

[John_4185]

As a former professional framer (construction), let me say that a hammer is not a lump on top of a stick. A good hammer is a marvel, and I paid more for the hammers and especially handles I went through in a year than I did for my Century 1 8x10. So _there_! (... as I walk away in feigned selfrighteousness...)

(And is it a Bad Thing that I used a Leica M2 as a hammer once?)