Luxurious Cameras vs. Plain Jane Cameras and your Camera of Choice!

[Paul Fitzgerald]

I have to agree with Captain_joe6,

"Finally, I wanted to skip the enlarging process entirely, so I bought a Calumet C1 8x10 from a member here, and spent a few unemployed weeks refurbish and repainting it. It weighs more than I ever want to think about, is big enough to frighten small- and medium-sized children, and is almost completely devoid of any precision movement mechanism. I paid $325 for it, and it is the best camera I have ever owned. Setup and takedown is a pain in the cold, and it doesn't have but basic movements, but is is still the best camera I own because it is 100% mine, there is no other like it. I have it fitted with a Turner-Reich triple-convertible lens that I also love dearly."

It does weigh enough to hold the tripod down, locks-up tighter than a bank vault, has the finest focusing of any camera made, can easily hold any lens that can fit a 6x6 board with no movement, 34 inches of bellows draw, movements only limited by the bellows, virtually bullet-proof.

www.cameraeccentric.com

Not for everyone but I think the word got out:

ebay Calumet C-1 #1

ebay Calumet C-1 #2

[Eric Rose]

What I love doing is taking the cheapest, crapiest LF camera out when I'm with camera snobs and then taking (or should I say making) better photos than they do. I have a Linhof Tech as well but to me it's just a tool, not a status symbol. It's missing leather, it looks like it's been thru a war and it works wonderfully.

[Wayne R. Scott]

I have to agree with Captain_joe6,

It does weigh enough to hold the tripod down, locks-up tighter than a bank vault, has the finest focusing of any camera made, can easily hold any lens that can fit a 6x6 board with no movement, 34 inches of bellows draw, movements only limited by the bellows, virtually bullet-proof.

www.cameraeccentric.com

Not for everyone but I think the word got out:

ebay Calumet C-1 #1

ebay Calumet C-1 #2

I have to agree also!! My C-1 holds my Vitax No. 3 with ease and the C-1 almost weighs more than the Vitax!!

I figure if the C-1 was good enough for Yousef Karsh it is good enough for me.

Wayne

[CP Goerz]

I have THE ugliest Dorff on the planet...I may also have the prettiest Wisner...which photographer am I?

CP Goerz

[David A. Goldfarb]

My Tech V probably falls into the "luxury" class, but I don't really think of it that way. It's versatile (rangefinder press camera or view camera), solid and precise, and sets up quickly. It's not perfect for everything, so I have other cameras as well for other purposes.

The 8x10" Sinar P is a luxury camera I bought for pennies on the dollar. Thankfully, digital has made some luxuries affordable. The same could be said of my APO enlarging lenses, which I couldn't have afforded years ago.

[John Kasaian]

A photograph dosen't know beans about the camera that took the picture. My "shooters" are:
12x20 Folmer & Schwing
8x10 Deardorff and Gowland Aerial
5x7 Speed Graphic and Keystone F-8(currently undergoing a bagmag reconstruction)
4x5 Graphic View II
plus a brace of 5x7 AgfaAnscos for instruction & the children's use(when they get old enough)
All of 'em except the Gowland are antiques, none of 'em except the Graphic View even approach "minty" condition---these bad boys are experienced to the point of being downright mangey, but I love working with every one of them---especially the old 'dorff.

[Patrik Roseen]

The cost of a camera and lenses can have an influence on which type of situations one is willing to get into (or try to get out of). It's much easier for myself to stand in a wet slippery waterfall during rainfall with my Linhof Technika III, and a Symmar 150mm or 6.8/90mm Angulon than with an expensive equipment that cost me a fortune.

It's like when I as a teenager got a new tennis racket for birthday, a wonderful wooden Slazenger, sleek as a puma, weighing almost nothing, really amazing actually. It made me play worse than ever for my fear of scratching it against the ground.

I also own a Linhof Kardan Standard from the 70's.This was sort of the cheapest they could bring to the market in those days. It has no geared movements, the shift and swing is loosened with the same knob, as is the rise and tilt etc. I have understood that a professional photographer would not survive physically using this for a longer time due to the very bad ergonomics using it.

I also have a CAMBO system, where one of my biggest concern is the large lensboard that need to be packed away together with the lens.

[Vaughn]

I have a Zone VI 8x10...probably not upper tier...middle tier, perhaps? Certainly not the perfect camera, but it matches the photographer.

It was in excellent shape when I bought it used...definitely a user now. I'll put up with its faults because it puts up with mine and I can't afford to get anything better -- and if I could I'd go bigger instead. It is no lightweight but what is 5 or more pounds...I'd still would carry around 60 pounds even if the camera was lighter.

I suppose it is "transparent" -- that is more of a state of mind rather than a quality of a piece of equipment.

Vaughn

[John Bowen]

I too have usd a Zone VI 8x10 for the past few years. I also have a Zone VI standard (ie HEAVY) tripod I use with it. Just this week I've ordered one of Richard Ritter's new 8x10 carbon fiber cameras. It weighs about 1/2 as much as the Zone VI. (7 lbs vs 13) BUT, the lighter camera means I can use a lighter tripod (Ries J-800) and lighter tripod head. I figure the total weight savings is way over 15 lbs.

I anticipate the lighter weight will permit me to get a little farther from the SUV when photographing. I know my sherpa will certainly appreciate it.

[evan clarke]

My Arca 141mm 4x5 F-metric/Orbix. It just runs on automatic for me, seamless....EC