Best 100-year old Rochester-Made 8x10 to Restore?

[Frank Petronio]

Seeing how nice some of your camera restoration projects have turned out -- especially William's 12x20 the other day -- I am wondering which of the early 1900s 8x10s made in Rochester (Korona, Folmer, Ansco (close enough!)) wooden field cameras are the best candidates for successful restoration?

In terms of getting a nice "user" out of the process, especially one that is tight and solid and not "a bundle of sticks" so to speak. Speaking about making restorations and even improvements -- not collector's items.

Somebody had a beautiful chrome and dark wood wide angle model pictured here a couple of weeks ago but I can't find it... but that was so nice. But more of a normal all-arounder that isn't a beast would be my choice. Maybe even a hot-rodded version with a fresnel and other enhancements?

[ic-racer]

I can comment on my Century (I think it was made in Rochester).

Depending on what you are after, it is somewhat of a 'labor of love.' My camera is a little wobbly on both standards and requires special care. However, I am amazed at how well the negatives come out. I don't think I have lost any negatives to anything I would ascribe to camera movement or focus shift. I do take extra measures to minimize the wobble, like removing the dark-cloth for the exposure and using a extra long floppy release cable. Sometimes I think I should get a contemporary camera, but the Century's value is in its light weight, compact design and simplicity. I just printed a recent negative from the Century last night (after not using it for a few months) and the focus and edge to edge sharpness were awesome.

I thought about 'hot rodding' mine during the restoration, but it seemed every little part was already very well designed and engineered by someone smarter than myself. So it seemed that to really improve it would require almost building a whole new camera. I use a f5.6 lens and it is fine with no fresnel. I did modify the bellows design by making them about 1/4 shorter because I'm using a 210mm and don't even have the focusing rail extension to use the original bellows draw.
My guess is that any of them will perform only a well as the operator and the degree to which they have been restored to functioning condition.

[Mark Sawyer]

I'd say look for an Eastman Commercial View. It's only a little heftier than other similar field cameras, but more solid (if you find a good one) and has full movements. It may take a while to find one, though...

The 2D is a wonderful camera, and is the culmination of quite a few evolutionary steps. There are quite a few of them around, so they're not hard to find.

If you want something lighter in weight, a Seneca Improved. Those are finished in black laquer or enamel.

And there's always the Deardorff from Chicago...

[Kirk Keyes]

I have an Improved Seneca, and I can't say it's light, but I haven't really compared it with the others...

But it has its original black laquer and chrome finish and it looks beautiful.

[Mike Castles]

Hmmmm, Let's see. The Kodak/Eastman No. 2 is a nice camera, have an example in 7x11. Then there is the Korona 8x10 I have, love everything about it EXCEPT Korona's tend to jump the teeth on the front rail more often than the K/E does (which is quite smooth I might add). The next 8x10, and while it is a dog needing some TLC, is the Rochester Optical Company Empire. One look at it and you see where some cameras got their inspiration. It folds up into a nice small (ok resonable) footprint, is light compared to the others and had some movements. If I recall, Tri has the same camera in 11x14 (in much better condition I might add). The ROC cost all of $100, and just need a little work to get it in user service - though right now it seems to be headed to a new home, where it will used for wet-plates.

[Glenn Thoreson]

Those black Senecas are a striking camera. I have an old Conley 8X10 tail board camera that is very light and easy to use. I only have enough bellows draw to use a 14" Commercial Ektar for landscapes. It weighs about half what the camera weighs. I stick to a 240/5.6 Sironar N for most things, though. I have a Kodak 2D that I resurrected, also. It weighs about twice as much as the Conley. A more rigid camera, though. I still like the Conley better.

[Pete Roody]

I second the vote for the Century Universal. Ed Weston used one. Smaller and lighter than a Deardorff with more movements.

[SAShruby]

Those black Senecas are a striking camera. I have an old Conley 8X10 tail board camera that is very light and easy to use. I only have enough bellows draw to use a 14" Commercial Ektar for landscapes. It weighs about half what the camera weighs. I stick to a 240/5.6 Sironar N for most things, though. I have a Kodak 2D that I resurrected, also. It weighs about twice as much as the Conley. A more rigid camera, though. I still like the Conley better.

You wouldn't believe how beautiful Seneca looks if you strip that black paint. I restored Seneca's back and it looks lovely.
BTW, Did you know that with very slight modification, Seneca's back fits Deardorff spot on? I wonder if Seneca in fact wasn't a foundation for Deardorff cameras.

[wfwhitaker]

Frank,

There are a lot of wood 8x10's out there. Aesthetics determine much of what makes one more desirable than another. My advice would just be to find one which appeals to you and go for it. It helps if you find one which has all its hardware and which hasn't been sitting in a damp basement for the last eighty years. Likewise, extension rails, the correct back, tripod blocks and other peripheral items are nice to have. Almost no camera of the vintage you're talking about has a bellows which doesn't have at least pinholes. Bellows can be replaced fairly easily. So don't let a raggedy bellows dissuade you. If the camera is solid and you like it, it's worth restoring. Good shooters include Agfa's and 2D's. But there are others. Conley's and Korona's can be quite pretty. I have a weakness for Folmer & Schwing cameras. But some of their 8x10's take Sterling holders which are different from standard modern holders. You might be able to make a new back or adapt one from another camera, but sometimes it's a lot of work to get it to look right as well as work right.

[Jim Galli]

Contact me off line for pics of an Eastman #1 8X10. Complete and easily made very pretty but you'll have to do the new bellows thing like Will did.