Pristine used field cameras... are they hangar queens?

[picker77]

I just got back from an afternoon shooting some FP4+ at windmills and similar stuff in the county road boondocks a few miles from my house, using my old Super Speed Graphic and a vintage Ektar 203mm. I noticed when I took my stuff out of my truck I had a rip in my shorts from a barbed wire fence, sticktights in my socks, weeds in my shoelaces, and cow poop on one leg of the tripod, not to mention a light coat of dust on just about everything (I was working near gravel roads).

This made me think of the many, many used but totally like new, pristine, unscratched, mint unmarred high-dollar field cameras I saw for sale on the auction place when I was hunting for a beginner 4x5 a while back. I wonder what I'm doing wrong here--I can't seem to keep my gear in that perfect a condition, even when I think I'm being careful. So am I just naturally careless or are some of these folks not ever actually using these cameras after spending all that money on them?

[Gem Singer]

When you spend a large amount of money on an upscale field camera and expensive lenses, you learn to take good care of your equipment and use it carefully.

If I were driving a Ferrari, I would keep it in a garage, polish it often, and have it serviced regularly. Probably only drive it on Sundays.

A Speed Graphic with a vintage Ektar lens is far from a Ferrari. When I used a SG, back in my college days, I gave very little thought to the value of the camera. As long as it worked and did the job, that was good enough for me. Besides, the camera was an old beater when I bought it.

[Dan Fromm]

Gem, Ferraris, not to be confused with modern FIATs, used to be made to be driven. Back when, I knew a fellow whose daily driver was a 250 GTE. After one of his sons took it out for an unauthorized spin (literally), he replaced the wreck with a 250 Lusso that he used as his daily driver. He used to joke that most of his mythical wealth was tied up in Appias and 250 GTs.

Harley reported exceeding the GTE's rev limit in an impromptu drag race with an XKE -- he won, perhaps 265 UK horsepower were even more inflated that 240 Italian HP -- and then removing the rocker covers and checking valve lash. Real people can deal with rocker arm engines.

If cameras are used much they'll show it. I doubt, though, that your camera was exposed to ground-level nasties or the barbed wire that you stumbled through. Thinking of barbed wire, have you noticed that chest waders have an affinity for it?

Cheers,

Dan

[Gem Singer]

Dan,

If I had spent 250K for an automobile, I would never drive it at high speed over a dirt road full of potholes and rocks.

You're correct about the barbed wire and nasties. Last week our Sat. morning photo group found itself slogging through mud and drizzling rain. Climbing over barbed wire fences. Didn't even bother to take our Linhofs and Canhams out of the car.

However, we did manage to make a few photographs with our beat-up old 35mm cameras. Didn't care as much when they got muddy and damp.

[Gene McCluney]

Every camera I own gets used in the field. All equipment can be cleaned, and after a whole 18 hour day of driving down dirt roads and trails looking for antique bridges, the whole inside of the Land rover is covered in a fine layer of dust...but you know what? Dust can be vacuumed off cameras and equipment. Cow poop can be removed from tripods, and lenses can be cleaned. Cameras were meant to be used, and better cameras make the shooting experience easier. I am not keeping my equipment pristine so I can sell it for a premium price at some point in the future, rather I am using it to get the images I want. If it gets scratches and wear, so what.

[Mark Sampson]

Unlike cars, which suffer fom lack of use, 'hangar queen' view cameras are the ones to buy used. Many of us have seen for sale 8x10 Deardorffs, and other cameras too, that that were beaten to within inches of their lives in a catalog, advertising, or portrait studio. They're usually restoration candidates or parts machines. My own wooden 4x5 just came back from Richard Ritter for refurbishment; it shows lots of 'patina' and honorable scars from 17 years of field and studio use. It's paid for itself many times over, and I'm not worried about its resale value. In one sense, I admire those shooters who keep their wooden cameras pristine-looking; it just hasn't worked out that way for me.

[Dan Fromm]

Gem, in the late '60s $6K would buy a Lusso. Nowadays prices for old Ferraris are just plain silly.

[BarryS]

I shoot a lot, but take good care of my equipment. It usually travels in a well padded bag and I clean everything regularly. It gets handled with care in the field and stored in the same environment as me at home. I've seen photographers trash their equipment in a few hours, so you never know the history of gear.

[picker77]

Very entertaining and informed observations. Well, I'm certainly not worried about damaging the resale value of my venerable old SSG, and I've been cleaning cow poop off shovels and boots for 60 years, so no problem there. No doubt if I had been able to afford one of the nice Canhams, Horsemans, or Wistas that I saw for sale I'd have been very careful with it while afield. It just struck me as odd that of the many dozens of initial candidates I looked at (before reality set in and I lowered my sights), none looked as if they had been actually used in the field. In fact, it was rare for one to have even a single tiny scratch or dent. As mentioned above, this is great for prospective second or third owners, but it did make me wonder a little about why some of the owners bought the cameras in the first place, or, if they were actually used, to marvel at the meticulous care they must have received.

[Jim Rhoades]

I have two Deardorff's and while not closet queens I will admit that when I go out to photograph on my Dakar (dual sport motorcycle made for boonie bashing) I take my Crown Graphic. If I crash my bike or body that's one thing but there no reason to harm a Dorff.