Starting 8x10 view camera

[kev curry]

Chamonix Camera 8x10 six minute exposure

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9j7axnQhQWg

[GPS]

...
Ultimately, the camera is just something to put between the lens and the film holder to keep the light out...

No, definitely it is not. Were it the only and the main function of a camera you could put there just a shoe box, couldn't you...

[Frank Petronio]

Chamonix Camera 8x10 six minute exposure

That's Porn!

[Ken Lee]

When it's all said and done, 8x10 photography weighs a lot - because of the film holders and tripod - no matter what camera you use. You might say that a monorail adds only a little more weight to the total, than a field camera.

But a monorail provides all view camera features, and they are easy to work - as opposed to most field cameras, with which you often have to... fiddle. Also, monorail camera are ready to use: they don't require folding and unfolding. Depending how you carry them, you can leave a lens on them too.

When I use field cameras, I almost always wish I had the real thing with me instead. However, when I have a monorail, I never wish I had brought a field camera. To me, that's telling.

[Once]

The same logic can be used for the 4x5 format too. Thinking of Arca Swiss, I never looked back.

[Chris Strobel]

Also don't discount the Calumet C-1.It was used by Brett Weston, Cole Weston, Kim Weston, and is still used today by world class landscape artist Christopher Burkett.I bought one on the auction site for $250.00 with 2 lens boards, 4x5 back, 2 film holders, and a Nikon process lens.After a day of cleaning and detailing it is mint like new.It was my intention to learn 8x10 with it then move on to something better, but well over two years latter I still like using it, and even bought a second one as a spare and for parts if needed.Its very easy to use, very intuitive, and things just stay put and don't move after adjustments, even in mojave gale force winds.Just don't expect to do any hiking with it as its heavy.Its a work out of the back of your SUV kind of affair, or baby jogger for walking around.Here are a few pics, brett weston working with his magnesium C-1, Christopher Burkett and his wife on a shoot with Aluminum C-1, and finally the first photo I ever took with my Aluminum C-1......................C

[Mark Sawyer]

No, definitely it is not. Were it the only and the main function of a camera you could put there just a shoe box, couldn't you...

Well, the shoebox is a rather extreme example, but if it kept the light out and held the lens and film steady, could you tell the difference in the final print?

My point is that while we often talk of a certain aesthetic look from developers, films, papers, and certainly lenses, there is no "Deardorff" or "Chamonix" look, and all other things being equal, work from a crappy old Korona will be identical to work from an Ebony or Lotus... And maybe it's just because I've had it forever, but I really prefer the simplicity of my old 2D over "newer and better" cameras.

So the choice comes down to whatever camera feels best design-wise (and kharma-wise), and comes along at the right price in the right shape at the right time.

Then again, if someone is going to be successful in 8x10, it's a long term commitment, and one should get the "right" camera. DSLR's and such come and go, but your first 8x10 could well be a lifetime companion...

[Daniel Unkefer]

I owned an 8x10 Deardorff for a while, ended up selling it. Have always preferred the Sinar Norma 8x10, especially once I get it deployed, in the field. It's like comparing the Apollo Moon Buggy, to the Model T. However, some may prefer the Model T. Ansel Adams used the Norma, he's listed as a user, in one of my Norma brochures.

[GPS]

Well, the shoebox is a rather extreme example, but if it kept the light out and held the lens and film steady, could you tell the difference in the final print?

My point is that while we often talk of a certain aesthetic look from developers, films, papers, and certainly lenses, there is no "Deardorff" or "Chamonix" look, and all other things being equal, work from a crappy old Korona will be identical to work from an Ebony or Lotus... ...
...

Of course I could tell the difference and you too could. Why? Because it's not just to keep the light out and to hold the lens and the film steady (notice how you already started to add to the qualities of the box that was there just to keep the light out...) It's also about to be able to move the standards in a specific way (rise, fall, swings, tilts, focusing -and that for both standards), to keep their positions tight in one way when using the other ways, to have easy controls of all these movements and precision in them too...
The final print is a result of all these qualities, otherwise nobody would care to create them on the camera in the first place. Surely, a final print that is half that sharp as it could be doesn't tell you - your tilt was not exact, your registration is a way off, your focusing is crappy, etc. It just tells you - something is wrong with your camera, with your photography. Does it then mean the registration, the precise tilting, the camera construction qualities don't count?
Your reasoning, so often trumpeted by amateurs, means to judge a camera abstracting from its construction requirements and technical pitfalls which are there for a good reason. Ultimately it's just complete nonsense in the same class like a generalization of a car being a box on some wheels etc.

[Drew Wiley]

With so many good options out there, I think the Dorf is overrated and overpriced,
and overly heavy, even if you can find one for sale still in good condition. And I've
always thought of the Wisners being overly cute in relation to their actual functional
durability. I guess a lot depends on whether you want a nice-looking piece for
Antiques Roadshow or a practical camera that will take punishment. If weight is not
the issue, a modern Sinar or Toyo G (basically a copy of the Norma) are good buys at the moment.