PDA

View Full Version : 5x7 Deardorff or Canham?



Daniel Stone
16-May-2013, 17:39
Hey all,
I'm stepping down(or stepping up, let's call it meeting in "the middle" :)) to using 5x7 as my primary LF format from now on, from using 4x5 and 8x10. I shoot color film primarily, this has been the core reason, due to budget and the rising cost of film :eek:. I will still continue to shoot b/w 8x10, but right now I'm bent on shooting color, but 5x7 B/W is fine in the interim until another 8x10 camera is acquired down the road.

So, I'm looking at my options here. I've essentially narrowed it down to either a 5x7 Deardorff or a Canham woodie. Both seem to be solid, and since I haven't really read anything negative about either, I'd assume both have very happy users!
I'm asking this because I DO NOT want to continue "trying this, trying that". I want to make pictures. Simple enough. I'd like to find the core differences between the two, and if you can lend a hand with some knowledge, I'd be very grateful!

Here is what I NEED in the camera:
1. Front shift
I do know that the DD doesn't have "direct" shift capability, but has to use swing on the f+r standards to achieve it. Not ideal, but not a deal breaker since I don't use shift THAT much anyhow.
2. Center FRONT tilt.
I cannot seem to work efficiently with base tilts. I need center(axis) tilts. 'Nuff said ;)
3. Ability for a wide variation of lens FL's.
My widest lens at the moment is a 90mm Nikkor-SW, I'd love to be able to get a bit of rise potential out of it.
My longest lens right now is a 450 Fujinon-C, I'm not sure if I'll get another 600mm(24") lens again...

I don't plan to shoot with a roll film back, even though I know the Canham has that capability. Just sheet film.

Is it possible to change the flat "bar" style knobs on the canham to round ones by chance?

Ideas/thoughts and experiences would be greatly appreciated.

Thx,
Dan

Bob Mann
16-May-2013, 18:00
Canham - I have owned a 5x7 - its a great camera and customer support is there if you need it. Odd control layout which will take some time to get adjusted to. It has a huge rear shift ability if you need it. The metal looks light weight, but it is a solid camera when set up. Takes 110mm lens boards which are a little "beefier" than the Linhof type which helps if you are mounting larger shutters/lens combinations.

I have not used a 5x7 Deardorff so any comparison I would leave to others who may have experience with both.

Gem Singer
16-May-2013, 18:35
The Canham 5x7 Traditional (wood) does not have Graflok sliders on the back.

I used the Cambo (Calumet) roll film back, that slides under the ground glass, on mine.

The base tilts are no problem. Just focus on the far and tilt for the near.

The "T" knobs are a pleasure to use once you get used to them.

IMHO, the Canham MQC57 all metal version would be a better choice. Very versatile.

I think of my Canham MQC57 as the Swiss Army Knife of cameras.

Daniel Stone
16-May-2013, 18:43
The base tilts are no problem. Just focus on the far and tilt for the near.




so am I correct in reading(or mis-reading?), the Canham 5x7(metal or wood) is BASE TILTS ONLY, FRONT & rear?

please confirm

thanks,
Dan

Gem Singer
16-May-2013, 18:44
Yes. Base tilts only on the MQC57.

However, the Traditional 5x7 has base and axis tilts on the front.

(I almost forgot).

Richard Rau
16-May-2013, 21:09
As an previous owner of both, I liked each for different reasons. The Canham is a much more stable camera that the Deardorff IMHO. I had both 4x5 & 5x7 backs for each and primarily shot 5x7 because I liked the image ratio. Ergonomics for me seems to tip the scale toward the Deardorff, I could set the thing up in seconds flat, compose and be ready to shoot inside of a minute or two if I needed to, and the controls just seem to fall eactly where I'd want them. The Traditional Wood Canham takes some getting use to, to both set up and fold away, but if it's your main camera, you'll get use to it and it will all become second nature. You need to get each into your hands and use them and decide for yourself. Keith Canham is always willing to help you with any problem you'd have with your camera, and I've called him on several occasions and he is always willing to help.

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
16-May-2013, 21:22
A 5x7 Deardorff was my second LF camera, and for the past 12 years I have used a wooden 5x7 Canham. Good things can be said about both cameras. Much like my family, I love my Canham but it irritates me at times. Folding and unfolding, even after 12 years, is not as automatic as I think it should be. On the other hand, folding a Deardorff is a joy. Of course, as you know there is no direct shift on a Deardorff, and this was the deal breaker for me. The rear shift on a wooden Canham (there is no front shift) is massive, I have done panoramics of three vertical 5x7s only using rear shift. I can't say that either camera is rock solid, my Canham has some play in the back (Keith has inspected and felt it was within spec) and Deardorffs, depending on condition, can be quite loose. In either case you can't really go wrong.

Jonathan Barlow
16-May-2013, 21:51
I own an 8x10 Deardorff (1952 V8) and an all-metal 8x10 Canham. Everything everyone has said sounds about right.

swmcl
17-May-2013, 00:19
Hi,

Shen Hao HZX57-IIAT by a mile.

Movements of the others and 140mm or 95mm lensboards which can take up to Ilex #5 and Compound #5, extension of somewhere near 600mm. The Canham has more of one or more movements but the Shen Hao does have movements where it counts.

I can run from 72mm SAXL to 20" Ilex Caltar.

:-)

Daniel Stone
17-May-2013, 00:40
Thx Steve for the recommendation.

I have all of my lenses on Technika boards, and don't feel like moving them to new ones again. I actually have a leftover Toyo /canham 110x110->technika adapter, so I could use that if I got the canham.

Just finished watching a video on YouTube from Fred Newman, he was demonstrating the 4x5 Canham woodfield(same chassis as the 5x7 IIRC?). Well the thing just looked FIDDLY! Having owned a few KMV 8x10 cameras in the past few years, I'd love to have a 5x7 with the same ease of setup, albeit just a 5x7.

-Dan

Leszek Vogt
17-May-2013, 01:38
Daniel, don't want to rain on your parade, and you probably looked into this, but there seem to be rather skimpy amount of color film out there (in 5x7).

Les

Daniel Stone
17-May-2013, 01:58
Daniel, don't want to rain on your parade, and you probably looked into this, but there seem to be rather skimpy amount of color film out there (in 5x7).

Les

Hi Les,
I plan on cutting down 8x10 film for the interim, until I've saved enough to put in an order(or participate in a s.o.) for fresh Kodak Ektar in 5x7.

-Dan

peter schrager
17-May-2013, 04:13
own a 5x7 deardorff and previously owned the wood 8x10 canham...people are entitled to their own opinions but the Canham was a pain in the butt...the deardorff I can set up blindfolded...good luck in your elusive hunt because there is no perfect camera..
Best, Peter

ScottPhotoCo
17-May-2013, 04:54
Daniel,

I own the Deardorff 4x5 special with 4x5 and 5x7 backs. Happy to meet you sometime and you can take a look first hand. I'm in LA county as well.

Tim
www.scottphoto.co

evan clarke
17-May-2013, 05:11
Chamonix..Lighter, better made..

Jason Greenberg Motamedi
17-May-2013, 07:00
...Just finished watching a video on YouTube from Fred Newman, he was demonstrating the 4x5 Canham woodfield(same chassis as the 5x7 IIRC?). Well the thing just looked FIDDLY!...

They are fiddly, so make sure you can play with one before buying. Also, check to see if the Toyo to Technika converter works on the wooden Canham, as I recall it needs to be modified for the slides to work

Brian Ellis
17-May-2013, 07:23
I wouldn't say base tilt is "no problem." Certainly you can tilt and focus with base tilt. But having had cameras with both axis and base, I found that axis required fewer iterations of "focus near, tilt, focus far, refocus near" etc. etc. to get things right. Not a huge deal but I don't think I'd by another camera without axis tilt.

I've owned an 8x10 Deardorff, never owned a Canham, so I can't compare from usage. The thing I'd most like about Canham is Keith's reputation for quality service. The thing I'd most like about Deardorff, assuming it's just a scaled down 8x10, is the ease of use. Very simple to unfold, adjust, shoot, fold up. The two I owned were plenty solid. The thing I'd most dislike about a Deardorff is the age (I assume you'd buy a used one rather than the Cochran version) and the problem of making sure you get a good one if you have to buy sight unseen.

Kevin Crisp
17-May-2013, 07:26
I am currently using both and I like them both. The range of movements with the Canham is better and you get used to setting it up and then you don't think about it. But it can be daunting while you're getting used to it. Then you won't even think about it. The Canham has a ton of front rise, which I use often. The Deardorff is just plain simple and fun to use. It can be awkward with wide angles, though; you need to lean the front standard back and then square up the front standard by eye ball. (I think they used to call this "wide angle mode" and I think it kicks in around 110mm. You will certainly need to do this with the 90mm.) On the other hand, even in that position the nifty sliding front rise panel becomes very useful. So they both have many strong points. To get a ground glass as good as the Canham you'll have to get a Maxwell for the DD, which will set you back something like another $325. Or more. If you ask Bill M. about upgrading a Canham gg he'll suggest you not do that, I strongly suspect they are his. The standard Canham bellows is very nice but you can add something like it to a DD.

I wouldn't say either is more stable or less. My DD has no front swings which makes the front standard more stable than the later ones. Both cameras are plenty stable enough to use in significant wind.

Drew Wiley
17-May-2013, 16:07
I've always considered Keith Canham's wooden 5x7 to be the "sweet point" is his selection. A very nice machine indeed. Finding an old Deardorff in good shape might
be a challenge. Keith's design seems more ergonomic to me, and is relatively affordable. It you have a big budget, there's always Ebony or Lotus for twice the price
of a Canham, but they won't take any better pictures. As you already know, I opted not to get into 5x7, but if I did, that wooden Canham would be at the top of
my list as a reasonable compromise between functionality and price.

Daniel Stone
17-May-2013, 19:28
Hey everyone,
thanks for the help on this. I'm still up a creek about which one to choose, as they're both nice cameras. Either can be potentially purchased used(I'm actually in talks with a guy in Boston who has a front-swings DD w/ both 57 and 45 backs, for $1200. Also comes w/ the 4x4 ->Technika adapter


by chance, does anyone here in LA who owns a 5X7 Canham woodfield going to the Pasadena camera show this upcoming Sunday(19th)?

If possible, could you bring it along with you? I'll be selling some odds & ends there along with a buddy, and would
1. love to meet fellow, local LFF members who I've not had a chance to meet yet, and
2. see the camera "in the flesh" so to speak...

If you plan on attending, and can help out with my slightly odd request, I'd be very grateful :)

please send me a message if you can help, so we can coordinate a meet-up time during/at the show.

thx,
Dan

Gudmundur Ingolfsson
18-May-2013, 11:10
A big guy like you Daniel should have a Technika 5x7" . OK it's heavy but is ridged like no other 5x7". A model III or V is affordable only watch out for one with good bellows. I like my Canham too but I only take it out when there is no wind and you know how often that happens in Iceland.

Daniel Stone
18-May-2013, 12:54
Hey Gudmundur,

that's a good suggestion, I tried sending you a message, but it says your messages are all full

-Dan

Gudmundur Ingolfsson
18-May-2013, 14:52
I have now emptied out my massage box !

ashlee52
18-May-2013, 17:53
I have the Deardorff... but 90% of the time I use an Agfa-Ansco. A bit larger and heavier but so much easier to work with. Obviously a little less well known. The lens boards are big enough that you can easily make an adapter to Technika boards. Not an ideal camera if you use a lot of shorter lenses. No camera is as good as the Deardorff there because of the unique front rise arrangement where you can raise the lens without moving the bellows.

Sal Santamaura
18-May-2013, 22:32
...Fred Newman...was demonstrating the 4x5 Canham woodfield(same chassis as the 5x7 IIRC?). Well the thing just looked FIDDLY!...


They are fiddly, so make sure you can play with one before buying...


...there's always Ebony...Ebony's what I chose after evaluating Canham. See:


http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?89687-4x5-quot-to-5x7-quot-is-it-worth-changing&p=876469&viewfull=1#post876469


...Shen Hao HZX57-IIAT by a mile...If an SV-57 is not in the budget, that Shen Hao is the one based on it. I can't speak to construction quality, but they appear to have copied Ebony's design very well. An HZX57-IIA is the camera I'd be looking to get my hands on for tryout. It's rather inexpensive even brand new:


https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=3514

Daniel Stone
18-May-2013, 22:58
Hi Sal,
Thanks for the recommendation.
Looking at more of the "options" available, the Technika 5X7 is looking like the best option to me.
Not because of "snobbery" or sex appeal(although it is a sexy looking machine, I will not lie!), but purely out of a reliability standpoint.
I know wooden cameras can be very durable, and I do not argue that point. But to me, metal still trumps wood any day of the week.

I'll definitely keep the Shen-Hao in mind, as well as the other options, but if a well-kept Tech/Super Technika 5X7 comes along sometime soon, I might just bite!

please keep the suggestions coming guys, its not just for me, remember this is a community forum, and I know there are many people who just read, but don't write on here :)

cheers(AND THANKS!)

-Dan

Teodor Oprean
18-May-2013, 23:15
There's more than one Super Technika 5x7 currently listed on ebay.

Sal Santamaura
18-May-2013, 23:20
...the Technika 5X7 is looking like the best option to me...I understand you're a big guy, but that's an awfully heavy option. :)

Miguel hasn't updated this thread for a while; he might still have the camera available:


http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?94979-FS-Linhof-Technika-V-5x7-late-model-4x5-camera-back-extras

Daniel Stone
19-May-2013, 00:18
Ya, I'm no lightweight, but that doesn't mean I WANT to carry a big camera around ;)!

I've decided to use 5x7 simply because of the following reasons:
1. I like the proportions of the format w/o the need to crop(much, if any at all)
2. B&W film is readily available in this format(at least from Ilford, or Kodak TXP(which I've been using in 4x5 and 8x10)).
3. I shoot primarily color film at the moment, and the quality of the drum scan is quite a bit higher than from even a well done 4x5. I have a rather large(ish) stockpile of 8x10 color film I can cut down to 5x7 easily(Thank you Drew for the cutter!). An 8x10 still trumps both resolution-wise, but DOF and f-stop necessities to attain such can lead to longer exposure times. We've all read these discussions before :)
4. Holders are smaller. This allows for more holders to be carried in the pack/satchel/case, and I plan on returning to Iceland again in the next year or two, and traveling by air with LF, well its easy to see how 5x7 will work better for that as well.
5. 4x5 is just too small(to me) for a decent contact print.
At the present time, I make contact prints from the best b/w negatives I have. 5x7 will stretch my small stash of 8x10 Lodima 2x as far as if I shot 8x10. But for me, 4x5 is too small for a decent contact print of my own work.

-Dan

swmcl
20-May-2013, 01:59
Would you be swayed by the purpose-built 6x17 holder for the 5x7, also a 6x12 holder that fits onto the 4x5 reducing back, leather bag bellows, the option of a red standard bellows, a 140mm square 28mm recessed lensboard drilled to your requirements for those wide-angle lenses ... ?

I'm not sure what is available for the Ebony or other competitors.

And I just ordered some 5x7 Velvia 100 from Japan Exposures ... (I'm crossing my fingers this will turn out.)

It has taken me some time and a fair expense to find the solution I should say.

Jiri
22-Jan-2016, 05:29
Hi folks. I'm interested in wooden Canham 5x7 camera. Is the effective front rise really only 1.125" = 29 mm ? Seems to be quite limiting ....

Luis-F-S
22-Jan-2016, 07:57
So Dan what did you end up getting?

djdister
22-Jan-2016, 08:13
Hi folks. I'm interested in wooden Canham 5x7 camera. Is the effective front rise really only 1.125" = 29 mm ? Seems to be quite limiting ....

Having had both, I kept the Canham MQC 5x7 (all metal), which has a front rise of 2.625 inches...

enidhunt
22-Jan-2016, 08:16
Hey all,
I'm stepping down(or stepping up, let's call it meeting in "the middle" :)) to using 5x7 as my primary LF format from now on, from using 4x5 and 8x10. I shoot color film primarily, this has been the core reason, due to budget and the rising cost of film :eek:. I will still continue to shoot b/w 8x10, but right now I'm bent on shooting color, but 5x7 B/W is fine in the interim until another 8x10 camera is acquired down the road.

So, I'm looking at my options here. I've essentially narrowed it down to either a 5x7 Deardorff or a Canham woodie. Both seem to be solid, and since I haven't really read anything negative about either, I'd assume both have very happy users!
I'm asking this because I DO NOT want to continue "trying this, trying that". I want to make pictures. Simple enough. I'd like to find the core differences between the two, and if you can lend a hand with some knowledge, I'd be very grateful!

Here is what I NEED in the camera:
1. Front shift
I do know that the DD doesn't have "direct" shift capability, but has to use swing on the f+r standards to achieve it. Not ideal, but not a deal breaker since I don't use shift THAT much anyhow.
2. Center FRONT tilt.
I cannot seem to work efficiently with base tilts. I need center(axis) tilts. 'Nuff said ;)
3. Ability for a wide variation of lens FL's.
My widest lens at the moment is a 90mm Nikkor-SW, I'd love to be able to get a bit of rise potential out of it.
My longest lens right now is a 450 Fujinon-C, I'm not sure if I'll get another 600mm(24") lens again...

I don't plan to shoot with a roll film back, even though I know the Canham has that capability. Just sheet film.

Is it possible to change the flat "bar" style knobs on the canham to round ones by chance?

Ideas/thoughts and experiences would be greatly appreciated.

Thx,
Dan

I would leave to others who may have experience with both.


http://hautavis.net/117/o.png

Louis Pacilla
22-Jan-2016, 08:50
So Dan what did you end up getting?


Dan has owned just about EVERY camera under the sun and was changing his camera/format every year and sometimes twice a year. At least until he seemed to go mostly digital? I don't seem to see him around as often as he was several years back.

He owned one each of the three he was asking about if memory serves. Including but not limited to the 5x7 Technika, Deardorff and Canham.

This is not meant to be an insult to Dan just my memory of him changing and asking about different formats and makers.

Drew Wiley
22-Jan-2016, 09:36
In my opinion the wooden 5x7 is the sweet spot in Canham's entire line. I've always coveted one of these, and have handled them along with the classic 4X5/5x7
Deardorff "Special", but never did buy into any 5x7 system due to the trouble routinely getting my favorite color films. I love the proportion of 5x7, but one simply
can't afford just anything. And you can still get Canham new. It takes a lot of luck finding a clean Dorff. So my vote would be for the Canham. Too much front
rise on a folder just equates to too little support on the front standard. All you have to do is angle the bed upwards then reset both standards to vertical, pretty much standard practice with flatbeds.

Jim Noel
22-Jan-2016, 10:12
Thx Steve for the recommendation.

I have all of my lenses on Technika boards, and don't feel like moving them to new ones again. I actually have a leftover Toyo /canham 110x110->technika adapter, so I could use that if I got the canham.

Just finished watching a video on YouTube from Fred Newman, he was demonstrating the 4x5 Canham woodfield(same chassis as the 5x7 IIRC?). Well the thing just looked FIDDLY! Having owned a few KMV 8x10 cameras in the past few years, I'd love to have a 5x7 with the same ease of setup, albeit just a 5x7.

-Dan

If you want that same ease, your only choice is the Deardorff.

neil poulsen
22-Jan-2016, 10:33
For 8x10, Deardorff is the way to go for me.

But, I had a 5x7/4x5 reconditioned Deardorff, and I was concerned about how tightly one had to pack the bellows to use wide angle lenses. As I recall, 90mm was the minimum focal length that I could use. I also saw evidence of light being reflected off the inside compacted bellows onto the film for wide angle lenses. It's possible these two problems may have been caused by the particular, new bellows that were installed on my camera? They were more a dark gray color, versus a deep black on the inside, and it's possible that Deardorff bellows pack more tightly. I sold that camera and never looked back.

If going clam shell, I would look for a camera for which one can purchase a bag bellows. Also, I wouldn't let having to change lensboards have too much influence on the decision. That's a one-time inconvenience, versus an on-going inconvenience, if you get cornered into a camera that my have this or that disadvantage.

Don Dudenbostel
22-Jan-2016, 19:49
I've owned both the Deardorff and Canham wood. I'll agree with pretty much everyone's comments. One thing I'll add, for wide lenses the Canham is the way to go. With my Canham traditional I had a wide angle bellows that made wide use so much easier.

If youre primarily a wide shooter the Canham is the one otherwise it's a tossup between the two.

I purchased my first Deardorff 5x7 (not special) in 1969 and my first Deatdorff 8x10 in 1972. The 5x7 was sold in the 70's to fund the purchase of my 5x7 Norma back. The 8x10 was my workhorse machine for catalog work for decades. Eventually I sold the 8x10 (1930's vintage) and bought a Canham traditional 8x10 and 5x7 with both 4x5 and 5x7 backs. I'll say I really liked both but really missed my Deardorffs so I sold them and bought a reconditioned 8x10 and a clean 5x7 / 4x5 special which I have both still and plan to keep them. In the mix of this I found a like new Baby 4x5 at bargain basement prices in an antique store. I bought it and used it for about ten years. Regrettably I sold it.

Both cameras are winners. If I did a lot of wide work I'd buy a Canham. For general mixed work and simplicity I'd pick the Deardorff.

I live in a humid part of the country, south east US. I found the Canham required regular adjustments due to expansion and contraction of the weed. The Deardorff takesxvery little attention. Lube the rails once in a whe and candle wax on wood parts that rub together and that's it.

Both cameras are still made. Deardorff is made about an hour from where I live. I've had no occasion to talk to them but I know they sell parts and service cameras as well as making a full line of new ones.

I did have a couple of occasions to talk to Keith Canham and he was always most helpful.

neil poulsen
23-Jan-2016, 00:18
Out of curiosity, why not a rail camera?

Sal Santamaura
23-Jan-2016, 12:59
...still made. Deardorff is made about an hour from where I live. I've had no occasion to talk to them but I know they sell parts and service cameras as well as making a full line of new ones...Before considering a "new" Deardorff, I suggest thoroughly read through all the posts in this thread:


http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?108716-Cochran-and-the-new-Deardorff-Part-Deux

Don Dudenbostel
28-Jan-2016, 21:17
I've read a lot of complaints about how they treat customers but the limited contact buying a few parts has been fine but then I didn't have them building a camera for me. Really though I don't know why anyone would buy a new one or less the just want one. There are so many good usable Deardorffs available.

Like I mentioned I sold my Canham and bought a very clean 4x5 Special with a 5x7 back. I have the 4x5 back but hardly ever shoot 4x5 in it. I also have a 4x5 Ebony SV45Te and for 4x5 I like using it over anything else. You ask why I didn't buy an Ebony 5x7, cost.

Luis-F-S
28-Jan-2016, 22:24
I've had both, using the Canham was an exercise in frustration. Not that it was not a good camera, just not intuitive like the Deardorff. I presently have 2 V5's & 2 V8's. I'll never own another field camera. L

Daniel Stone
28-Jan-2016, 23:26
So Dan what did you end up getting?

I have a Linhof Technika V 5x7. Heavy, but very versatile. The 4x5 back comes in handy too from time to time as well.


Dan has owned just about EVERY camera under the sun and was changing his camera/format every year and sometimes twice a year. At least until he seemed to go mostly digital? I don't seem to see him around as often as he was several years back.

He owned one each of the three he was asking about if memory serves. Including but not limited to the 5x7 Technika, Deardorff and Canham.

This is not meant to be an insult to Dan just my memory of him changing and asking about different formats and makers.

I never owned a Canham. Used one, but never owned one. The Deardorff 5x7(actually a 4x5 Special with a supplementary 5x7 back) was very nice to work with, and I made some terrific pictures with it. Miss the warmth of working with a wooden camera a bit actually. I now have the Linhof Technika V 5x7, and despite not shooting much these days, still enjoy the camera, despite the weight of it.
I do not currently shoot any digital other than a few small point 'n shoot style cameras I've been gifted over the years. But not much photography in general the past year, hence not checking in here as much as I used to.
Doing my best to change that up this year though, my cameras are collecting too much dust ;)!

Louis Pacilla
29-Jan-2016, 09:37
Hey Daniel.
Sure glad you checked in & it's great to see your still in the LF game even if on a temporary hiatus . You should at the least check in from time to time so we know how it's going in your life.


BTW- Anyone see or here from Jonathan lately? Miss him too. His images made around his house and using older films was/is inspiring work.

Sal Santamaura
29-Jan-2016, 09:43
...Anyone see or here from Jonathan lately?...
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/search.php?searchid=5457916

Kevin Crisp
29-Jan-2016, 10:17
I currently use both the Canham MQC and a NFS Deardorff V5. Not at the same time. My list of pros and cons for them:

Canham. Pretty light for a 5x7. Sturdy enough set up and locked down. Ton of front rise. Nice sturdy available lens boards. I've always viewed it as an attempt to make a folding field camera with the versatility of a monorail. Great bellows, long and still works well for shorter lenses. Excellent ground glass which certainly appears to be a Maxwell. (If you ask Bill M. about putting one of his screens on your MQC he will suggest during your 45 minute conversation that you not do so.) Excellent customer service. Relatively tough when the gg protector is inserted. I have not found it that "fiddly" to set up once you learn how to, but it does take longer especially if unlock all controls so they don't stick out. The wood Canhams I do find more mysterious to set up but then I don't use one regularly. The wood camera locked down is rock solid, more so than the MQC. Any film holder seems to work fine. These are getting rather expensive new, I think around $3100 now. A 4x5 back is another $800.

Deardorff. It's cool and I enjoy using it. Quick to set up. It is lacquered wood so you have to be aware that it is more vulnerable to damage than a metal camera. If you don't treat it like a guitar you'll get finish checking. Lens boards that are after market often require custom fitting. Originals are hard to find. (In my case the round cornered boards.) Much less expensive to purchase used vs. even a used MQC. Shorter lenses than about a 120 require putting the front in 'wide angle mode' which is inconvenient. The sliding front panel is clever and sometimes very useful. The standard ground glass is nothing to write home about. The knobs can fall off when running the bed rapidly into position. Adding a Maxwell screen will run $325+. It can be a bit of a conversation piece when I am getting permission (or getting caught) on private property. It weighs at least a pound more.

Of the two, I use the DD much more often, I guess because it is cool and I like it. Looking at this list it is objectively hard to justify that.

Louis Pacilla
29-Jan-2016, 10:42
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/search.php?searchid=5457916

Hey Sal
Thanks for the link you provided but is not working for me. Coming up as 'no matches' Was it a recent post from Jonathan?

Sal Santamaura
29-Jan-2016, 11:00
Hey Sal
Thanks for the link you provided but is not working for me. Coming up as 'no matches' Was it a recent post from Jonathan?I'm not sure why it's not working for you if you're logged in, which you must be in order to have posted. In any case, it's a link to Jonathan's "recent posts," which include many from the last week, including today. They're mostly For Sale/Wanted posts. Perhaps your preferences are set up to ignore those? Try scrolling up this thread, then clicking on his name in his post, then click on "View Forum Posts." He's logged in right now.

djdister
29-Jan-2016, 11:04
I currently use both the Canham MQC and a NFS Deardorff V5. Not at the same time. My list of pros and cons for them:

Canham. Pretty light for a 5x7. Sturdy enough set up and locked down. Ton of front rise. Nice sturdy available lens boards. I've always viewed it as an attempt to make a folding field camera with the versatility of a monorail. Great bellows, long and still works well for shorter lenses. Excellent ground glass which certainly appears to be a Maxwell. (If you ask Bill M. about putting one of his screens on your MQC he will suggest during your 45 minute conversation that you not do so.) Excellent customer service. Relatively tough when the gg protector is inserted. I have not found it that "fiddly" to set up once you learn how to, but it does take longer especially if unlock all controls so they don't stick out. The wood Canhams I do find more mysterious to set up but then I don't use one regularly. The wood camera locked down is rock solid, more so than the MQC. Any film holder seems to work fine. These are getting rather expensive new, I think around $3100 now. A 4x5 back is another $800.


Of the two, I use the DD much more often, I guess because it is cool and I like it. Looking at this list it is objectively hard to justify that.

Regarding the Canham 5x7 options - I had both the Traditional Wood and the Metal MQC. For whatever reason, using the MQC just worked out better for me, so I sold the 5x7 wood. And although you can use the Canham 6x17 rollfilm back with either one, it just looks cooler on the MQC...

145747

Louis Pacilla
29-Jan-2016, 19:08
I'm not sure why it's not working for you if you're logged in, which you must be in order to have posted. In any case, it's a link to Jonathan's "recent posts," which include many from the last week, including today. They're mostly For Sale/Wanted posts. Perhaps your preferences are set up to ignore those? Try scrolling up this thread, then clicking on his name in his post, then click on "View Forum Posts." He's logged in right now.

Hey Sal
Thanks for the link/ heads up. Great to know Jonathan's active and has posted recent work.
I'll head over to the images section of the forum and I'll start w/ the thread 'things around the house'.

Scott Davis
5-Feb-2016, 15:09
I'm a bit of a Canham fanboy- I have three of them if you count the 5x12 conversion for the 5x7 chassis. Yes, the controls are different than you're used to on older, simpler view cameras. But they have an astonishing range of movement for a field camera, including the ability to use a 90mm lens focused to infinity, and some movement applied, without a bag bellows (on a 5x7! Not such a big deal on a 4x5, but that's pretty impressive on a larger camera).

With regards to the question of a 110mm lensboard to Technika adapter, I have one on my Canham that works just fine - it does stick out a little from the front standard, but nothing serious - maybe 6-8mm thicker when it's all said and done.

And as other folks here have said, Keith Canham's customer support is second to none. I've called him up on the phone to discuss some customizations, and I spoke directly with him and was able to get answers (and the actual parts I wanted) with lightning speed. He serviced my 5x7 under warranty even though it was at least 10 years old AND I was at least the third owner of the camera. You can't ask for better than that.

BradS
12-May-2016, 22:01
Canham...for so many reasons.