Eastman View Camera No. 2-D

[Stanley Kubrick]

Hello, I've been shooting with a Shenhao 5x4 for many years and am looking to get a 10x8 camera for making some larger contact prints. I saw this Eastman View Camera No. 2-D camera linked beneath for quite cheap and am wondering if anybody has any opinions on it? I have also looked at Deadorfs and Tachihara cameras, I prefer the style of the field cameras, though they are a liitle more expensive, although better quality so would be better in the longer run even if they are a bit more pricey.


https://wycameras.com/collections/la...era-no-2-d-exc

[Jim Jones]

I've owned a 2-D for many years, and found it to be well-made and adequate for everything I've needed. However, the lack of a movable tripod base and rear rail might be problems for you: they would be for me, as might be the modifications to the tripod mounts. I certainly wouldn't buy this without an opportunity to personally inspect it. Lens boards can easily be made from 1/8 inch plywood. The price seems quite high by American standards.

[Vaughn]

I have an earlier 7x5 version and quite like it. The movable tripod base is very nice to have as one can balance the camera's weight over the tripod. Without it (and a rear extension), using a heavy lens might need additional support (2nd tripod) under the front on the camera.

The lack of front movements allow for a sturdy front-end and the full rear geared movements are usually sufficient to counter the lack in the front. Your other examples have better front movements and additional weight as a result. I have a Zone VI 8x10...a beast, but a fine machine in use.

The linked example seems particularily nice from the images, and seems to be priced reasonably if the bellows are in very good condition.

[Two23]

I've been using one for the past two years, mostly for wet plate but also for film. The camera was made for professional use and is very solid. I bought it to use heavy 18th C. lenses on. I have the extension rack and sliding tripod block. This works very well to balance the camera over the tripod. The camera is easy to use and set up. It does have limited movements (no front tilt). However, it can be found at a good price. If you don't do a lot of architecture it's a good value and sturdy.


Kent in SD

[DannL-USA]

I just received an Eastman View No. 2, an eBay purchase ($100), the other day. Not at all what I was expecting, though. I believe it comes from the same bloodline as the 2D. I'm sure this No. 2 will make a fine studio portrait camera, but I consider it way too weighty for hiking around. I suppose I could invest in some donkeys to carry it around. I'm guessing the 2D is similar to the No. 2 in the weight department. Appears though that there are plenty of folks that are very happy with theirs. I think the 2D pictured above is a bit pricey, considering the non-original lens-board hardware and modified front-end. It looks like someone tried to perty it up, but didn't have the hardware. I know 8x10s and up have taken a huge leap in price recently.

Attachment 243066

[Dugan]

A 2-D is a continuation of the #2.
The "D" stands for "Dark Finish".
Check www.piercevaubel.com for more info.

[ic-racer]

I have a Century, which is similar. Price was only $5, but it needed restoration.

I found it super light weight but a little flimsy. If I were still using it I was going to make an adjustable rod to stabilize the front and rear standard.

[brucetaylor]

Sounds a bit expensive considering the lack of tripod slider and missing rear rail. But if you’re not using long focal length lenses or close ups and you lenses aren’t to heavy it could be a good choice at a nice price.

[Greg]

Used one for years. Photographer's (me) limitations exceeded the camera's limitations. I did fabricate a moveable tripod base for it based on the one on a Burke & James Commercial view and it definitely was an improvement in the camera's usability in the field.