PDA

View Full Version : New 8x10 camera review



Michal Makowski
20-Nov-2014, 01:58
At the end you can find English version.

http://dadanmafak.blogspot.com/2014/10/ito-svedovsy-8x10-recenzja.html

richardman
20-Nov-2014, 02:06
http://svedovsky.com shows a WP login page? What's the max bellow draw? Price? etc. etc.

Michal Makowski
20-Nov-2014, 02:36
This is from Hubert Banaszkiewicz blog (member of this forum). He is one of the best printers in the Europe. Price? I will call to Stanisław Szwedowski (camera maker) and I will ask.
Regards
Michal



Ito 8x10 – the first impressions

After a couple of years of contradictory information, uncertainty and wating it is finally there...! Stanislaw Szwedowski, on the Internet better known as Ito, decided to create an outdoor 8x10 camera which wouldn´t have the typical faults of 8x10 outdoor cameras and be at the same time lightweight, durable and beautiful.
To be honest I did not expect to get to see such a great camera. Opinions one can find on the Internet are often biased by the positive impression of the reviewer-owner and only after buying it shows whether the camera is indeed as good as expected... These are not cheap toys and in my case it took some time before I found a perfect camera for my purposes: it is a Canham Traditional 8x10. In this review therefore, I allow myself to compare some features of Ito´s to the Canham – a camera coming from a completely different price range, anyway (about 4100 $ + custom fees and tax).
Stanislaw´s cameras are made from glued mahogany layers, a fact which assures the maximal wood stability and increases its resistance to time-related changes. This is very important because once the wooden elements of a camera start to buckle they usually need to be completely replaced or at least refixed in a high degree. This is not a nice thing to do... Ito 8x10 is available in three different colours: natural wood, black and red mahogany. 




The design is well known: first of this kind of cameras were produced by Philips, today they are made by Shen Hao and Chamonix. Ito 8x10, though, has two unique features the mentioned brands don´t:
⁃ The rear standard cannot be tilted (it can be swung forth and back, though) because rear tilting causes unpleasant perspective distortions and is used in landscape photography approximately once in two hundred years.
⁃ The front standard is led on two powerful titanium rails.

⁃ Thanks to these solutions the rear standard is much more stable, the camera gains size and weight, and the front standard is so extremely stable that it far exceeds all outdoor cameras that I have ever known. It can be easily compared in this context to a Sinar „Norma“ (not to confuse with Sinar F or P).
⁃ What does it mean for photographers who like using long focal lengths? For a 8x10 negative long focal lengths start from 480 mm on, at which lens the majority of cameras turn into shaking toys... One starts waiting for the wind to stop blowing, at the same time trying to shorten the exposure time as much as possible. With a filter on and a small apperture typically used in landscape photography (for this particular focal length f45 and more)... it is an impossible task.
⁃ A similar problem can be observed in pictorial photography where using long but tiny and lightweight antique lenses often requires to extend the camera bellows maximally. Only after developing the negatives we discover that a part of them is unsharp. (Unfortunately, even my Canham doesn´t positively stand out here and shakes like a cloth at the max. bellows extension of about 97 cm. One feature helps though, it has namely a monopod support which can be fixed underneath the front standard, and stabilizes the camera. Ito 8x10 has a similar support but I do not think it would ever be necessary. This camera has just an incredible stability.


Also the focusing assures stability: The leverage is small and sometimes it means turning a lot but thanks to this the precision of focus is amazing and and shaking issues could be eliminated. Big applause here!
The lens board is based on Sinar system, so both, Sinar and the wooden lens boards that come with the camera fit without problems.

The focusing screen is simply great. The front standard has individual knobs for regulation: one pair for the up-down shift and another for the forth-back tilt. The two independent regulation possibilities are a useful feature. In many other cameras it drove me crazy to losen one pair of knobs responsible for two things and see that I can´t lift up the standard without changing the angle of tilt. In case of Ito 8x10 (just like in Canham cameras), this is the way it should be done.


Another nice extra thing is a tiny spirit level placed in the bottom (not on the top) – a hard to overestimate feature, usually missing in outdoor cameras where you have to stand on tip-toe in order to see the spirit level situated on the very top of the camera (like in case of Canham). Apart from this one, Ito 8x10 has two more spirit levels placed on the side and on top, as well.

The maximum bellows extension is 80 cm. This allows granting all possible photographer´s wishes. And the camera... stands still like a rock. Just about everything can be done with it: a tight portrait with a 500 mm lens on? No problem... A landscape with a 65-70 cm monocle lens? No problem at all...



It doesn´t matter if you go for a walk with a „basic“ 8x10: a 210 mm wide angle, a 300 mm standard and a 480 mm long focal lens – working with this camera is a pure pleasure. At the 210 mm lens the bellows slightly limits the movements of the front standard – this must be said – but it is a normal situation while using long bellows. Luckily it is possible here to exchange a bellows if one desires to get absolutely unlimited possibilities or wants to apple small beasts like Super Angulon 165 mm or Grandagon W 155 mm.
And all this at the weight of... 5,2 kg... Canham and Chamonix are about 1 kg lighter, but this only at the cost of much worse stability of the camera. Canham offers almost absurdly huge possibilities, while Chamonix doesn´t offer anything instead...

Ito 8x10 comes with a focusing screen cover and two lens boards (shutter #1 and #3). I am now looking forward to hear about the final price of Ito 8x10, which most probably is going to be amazing. If you´re looking for a great 8x10 outdoor camera, I suggest you wait a tiny bit more...

A couple of test pictures coming soon...
At the end: an almost 2 kg heavy beast of Tele Anachromatique 400 mm doesn´t impress the stability of Ito 8x10. This camera could probably handle a 3 kg lens, as well. 


http://dadanmafak.blogspot.com/2014/05/ito-8x10-pierwsze-wrazenia.html

Michal Makowski
20-Nov-2014, 03:22
I just call to Mr Szwedowski - camera maker. So the basic price is 1800 $ (camera, groundglass cover, 2 wooden Sinar size lens boards #1 and #3). He had over 40 cameras ready to sell. In the nearest future will be available 4x5 reducing back and wet plate back. The website should be working next Wednesday.


Michał

richardman
20-Nov-2014, 03:30
Thanks! So the max bellow is 950mm? Nice.

Michal Makowski
20-Nov-2014, 03:36
Thanks! So the max bellow is 950mm? Nice.

Richard, max bellow is 800mm.

Old-N-Feeble
20-Nov-2014, 05:36
I wonder how much shipping costs to USA.

Jody_S
20-Nov-2014, 05:48
⁃ The rear standard cannot be tilted (it can be swung forth and back, though) because rear tilting causes unpleasant perspective distortions and is used in landscape photography approximately once in two hundred years.
Well then, I guess I won't be using it again for 5,000 years or so ;)

Nice looking camera, great price point, I hope he makes a go of this. I am in the market for a new (to me) 8x10, I just haven't been able to pull the trigger on anything in the last year. This might end up close enough to my budget that I might consider buying new.

Michal Makowski
20-Nov-2014, 06:25
I wonder how much shipping costs to USA.

I will check the shipping costs from Poland to USA (major companies DHL, UPS), and I will let you know.

Michal

Old-N-Feeble
20-Nov-2014, 06:28
Would the builder consider adding tilt to the rear standard? I want a lightweught camera for landscape images so the distortion isn't a problem... and it's sometimes desirable.

richardman
20-Nov-2014, 12:40
I am blind, where do you you all see a price?

Thanks

Jody_S
20-Nov-2014, 12:44
I am blind, where do you you all see a price?

Thanks



Michal Makowski

Re: New 8x10 camera review

I just call to Mr Szwedowski - camera maker. So the basic price is 1800 $ (camera, groundglass cover, 2 wooden Sinar size lens boards #1 and #3). He had over 40 cameras ready to sell. In the nearest future will be available 4x5 reducing back and wet plate back. The website should be working next Wednesday.

Lachlan 717
20-Nov-2014, 16:09
Ito 8x10, though, has two unique features the mentioned brands don´t:
⁃ The rear standard cannot be tilted (it can be swung forth and back, though) because rear tilting causes unpleasant perspective distortions and is used in landscape photography approximately once in two hundred years.

I would argue that this is actually missing a feature that the other brands have. It also excludes this camera for architectural use as not having rear tilt will not allow perspective correction. I also don't subscribe to your thought on rear tilt not being used in landscape photography. It is a very useful tool when using wide angle lenses to emphasise foregrounds, and is critically important when using lenses with limited image circles.

Seems strange to me, given that all that is/was required to allow rear tilt is to extend the groove in the bracket to allow the back standard to go past vertical - a function found on many, many LF cameras. A simple detent slot on this groove would allow quick zeroing of the standard for those who do not use rear tilt. Again, a function found on many, many cameras. I just don't understand not having this additional function...

vinny
20-Nov-2014, 16:47
No rear tilt=FAIL.
Makes ZERO sense for a folding camera. Other than that, it looks to be very well made.

evan clarke
20-Nov-2014, 17:10
It's sort of crude compared to a Chamonix..

richardman
20-Nov-2014, 18:01
The 800mm draw though is a huge plus, and for $1300 less....

Michal Makowski
21-Nov-2014, 14:08
⁃ The rear standard cannot be tilted (it can be swung forth and back, though) because rear tilting causes unpleasant perspective distortions and is used in landscape photography approximately once in two hundred years.




Sorry guys, but in the English description is mistake :-(. Svedovsky 8x10 off course have rear tilt. There are no shift and swing :-)

125384

125385

Photos by Piotr Niewierowicz

hoffner
21-Nov-2014, 14:30
At the end you can find English version.

http://dadanmafak.blogspot.com/2014/10/ito-svedovsy-8x10-recenzja.html

It would be difficult to imagine anything more positive for large format photography in 2014.

Michal Makowski
21-Nov-2014, 14:46
It would be difficult to imagine anything more positive for large format photography in 2014.

I'm not sure what you mean :confused:

djdister
21-Nov-2014, 14:49
I'm not sure what you mean :confused:

I think he means this camera is a good thing for LF photography...

hoffner
21-Nov-2014, 15:01
I think he means this camera is a good thing for LF photography...

Thanks djdister, for the correct translation.

Old-N-Feeble
21-Nov-2014, 15:04
It appears the back rotates??

Michal Makowski
21-Nov-2014, 15:14
Yes this is great camera. We compered Canham 8x10 and Svedovsky 8x10 side by side (author of the review is using wooden Canham 8x10 since two years). Off course Canham have more movements, but if you compere stability and rigidness Svedovsky is clear winner. Hubert’s Canham after 2 years of usage is showing some minor gimmicks (small “cracks” in the glued parts of wooden frame). Svedovsky’s wooden parts are much more robust. And yes, maybe the camera is not so pretty when you compared to Chamonix or Canham (not mention Ebony) but it is true work horse, my first and last 8x10 :cool:

Michal Makowski
21-Nov-2014, 15:17
It appears the back rotates??

You mean vertical / horizontal ? Yes back is reversible

Michal Makowski
22-Nov-2014, 03:38
Stability test: Svedovsky 8x10 vs 4.4 lbs Tele Anachromatique 400mm
Results: solid as a rock :cool:

125405

Photo by Hubert Banaszkiewicz

Michal

hoffner
22-Nov-2014, 06:55
I wouldn't be surprised if it kicked out Chamonix from the market, at least in Europe. And with the Czech Cassiopeia camera there is what to choose from. Well done!

Michal Makowski
2-Dec-2014, 00:54
http://svedovsky.com/

The web site is finally working.

Regards

Michal

RawheaD
2-Dec-2014, 22:34
Looks very nice... I've been thinking about the Chamonix 8x10, but it looks like Svedovsky 8x10 would be more than good enough for me. I'd like a 5x7 reducing back, though.

Michal Makowski
2-Dec-2014, 23:49
Looks very nice... I've been thinking about the Chamonix 8x10, but it looks like Svedovsky 8x10 would be more than good enough for me. I'd like a 5x7 reducing back, though.

Yes it is very nice :-)
The 4x5 reducing back is on the way, it will be available on February 2015. I think that 5x7 back will also be avaliable in the future, everything depends on fellow photographers interests.

Michal

peter schrager
2-Dec-2014, 23:58
i don't see why people are all ga ga about some camera made in some far off place when we already have the best camera made right here in the USA..that's right; buy a Ritter 8x10 and know you can get it serviced anytime/anywhere
it looks like a clumsy box to me...nothing new here at all...
have a nice day
peter

Lachlan 717
3-Dec-2014, 00:06
i don't see why people are all ga ga about some camera made in some far off place when we already have the best camera made right here in the USA..that's right; buy a Ritter 8x10 and know you can get it serviced anytime/anywhere
peter

Nice bit of Nationalistic trolling...

(FWIW, I'm pretty sure Ebony might take umbrage with your claim, as, too, might Sinar if you want to include studio cameras).

richardman
3-Dec-2014, 00:23
The difference is $1000-$1300, not a small amount of change.

As for servicing, if 100+ years old 8x10s can be made to work, shouldn't any new camera last awhile before needing services?

I know "you get what you pay for," but the price is right...

Michal Makowski
3-Dec-2014, 01:26
i don't see why people are all ga ga about some camera made in some far off place when we already have the best camera made right here in the USA..that's right; buy a Ritter 8x10 and know you can get it serviced anytime/anywhere
it looks like a clumsy box to me...nothing new here at all...
have a nice day
peter

I thought that LF forum is international community... :( Not restricted only for US citizens
Maybe it looks clumsy and not as sexy as Ritter, not mention Ebony. This is allways very personal opinion. Svedovsky is truly workhorse. We compered side by side 8x10 Canham and Svedovsky, and when you extend bellow beyond 500 mm Canham is far behind (in case of stability). Focusing is also more accurate and smooth.
Price of the Ritter (with removable bellows) above 3500$ + tax + duty... no thank you. I will buy negatives, chemistry and paper instead.
I want to remind you that: Ebony, Chamonix, Toho, Shen-Hao, Arca Swiss, Toyo, Lotus, Sinar, Linhof, Walker are not American cameras :-)

Michal

Old-N-Feeble
3-Dec-2014, 01:57
I thought that LF forum is international community... :( Not restricted only for US citizens
Maybe it looks clumsy and not as sexy as Ritter, not mention Ebony. This is allways very personal opinion. Svedovsky is truly workhorse. We compered side by side 8x10 Canham and Svedovsky, and when you extend bellow beyond 500 mm Canham is far behind (in case of stability). Focusing is also more accurate and smooth.
Price of the Ritter (with removable bellows) above 3500$ + tax + duty... no thank you. I will by negatives, chemistry and paper instead.
I want to remind you that: Ebony, Chamonix, Toho, Shen-Hao, Arca Swiss, Toyo, Lotus, Sinar, Linhof, Walker are not American cameras :-)

Michal

Pay no attention to naysayers, Michal. You'll see those on all forums involving all subjects. The Svedovsky appears to be a very fine camera at an excellent price. You are correct to be proud of it. If I can ever get back on my feet financially it will be near the top of a very short list of 8x10 cameras I'll be wanting to buy.

richardman
3-Dec-2014, 02:20
... it will be near the top of a very short list of 8x10 cameras I'll be wanting to buy.

Wait, I thought you were getting rid of your 4x5 but staying with the 8x10?

Old-N-Feeble
3-Dec-2014, 06:42
Wait, I thought you were getting rid of your 4x5 but staying with the 8x10?

Yes, probably. Some folks in another thread have "nearly" convinced me to go with 8x10. Since I can't walk far anyway a lightweight 8x10 kit is probably almost as usable for me as a 4x5. I'll have to sell my Toyo 810G though because that's an absolute no-go to carry and set up. Something like this Svedovsky or a Chamonix might be just what I need. Frankly though, for now it's just a pipe-dream because I'll not have the spare funds for quite awhile.

Tav Walraven
3-Dec-2014, 20:57
I e-mailed Svedovsky last night as to the possibility of making a 14x17. I got a response this morning with 3 questions as to function that I would require. I would say they are on the ball as to communication and I'll chime back in when I get their response. I could care less if it's made in Poland or Peoria. Go figure..........................

Shootar401
4-Dec-2014, 05:49
It's sort of crude compared to a Chamonix..

Maybe, but it's Made in Poland which is better than china (or wherever Chamonix are made) A nice European camera will always be better even if it is missing a few features.

Sal Santamaura
4-Dec-2014, 10:06
Maybe, but it's Made in Poland which is better than china (or wherever Chamonix are made) A nice European camera will always be better even if it is missing a few features.Other than an obvious political agenda, what possible reason can you have for making such a claim?

richardman
4-Dec-2014, 15:05
May be it's a response to the "Amurikan is always better" nationalistic post.

Can we leave nationalistic agenda out of this forum please? I am sure the camera's quality and features can stand by themselves.

Old-N-Feeble
4-Dec-2014, 16:27
May be it's a response to the "Amurikan is always better" nationalistic post.

Can we leave nationalistic agenda out of this forum please? I am sure the camera's quality and features can stand by themselves.

Sadly and embarrassingly... surely that's true. My country is full of arrogant control freaks.

peter schrager
4-Dec-2014, 19:40
you folks got it all wrong. first of all I'm no troll. I've been here longer than most of you. go send your camera over to poland for repairs. it will end up at Richard's house anyway because he's one of the few people in the world that does repair work on large format cameras.
it is always the motto that you pay for what you get in this life. Richard's 8x10 on a tripod is under 10 lbs...
If you want heavy weight then there are many used 8x10 on the market that will suffice...sinar; linhof etc
I do wish the gentleman the best on his camera making venture. I find it extremely immature for people to go off on me when I am a neutral person here on L.F.
I'm also entitled to my opinion..
have a nice day everyone...go take pictures
peter

angusparker
4-Dec-2014, 21:58
Ritter 8x10 is a great hike-able camera (I own one) but there is a good argument to be made for a heavier more stable in the wind Chamonix/Shen Hao/Polish option. The quality of the finish, design and woodwork on my Chamonix in 4x5 and 14x17 is very high. While the Ritter is the master of minimalism and economy - precisely designed for what it is intended to do. I guess I do go in for the "there is no perfect camera" philisophy. Perhaps that's why I have too many of them!

Old-N-Feeble
5-Dec-2014, 06:22
Peter... FWIW my comment was not directed at you. It was just a generalization.

Tav Walraven
5-Dec-2014, 08:50
Just an FYI. They got back to me on the 14x17 and the cost is $4500. The turnaround is about 3 months. Looks like they make nice cases also................

speedfreak
5-Dec-2014, 19:30
What I find really great about this camera is not the features it has or its price really, it's the fact that someone in 2014 has decided that it makes good business sense (due to demand) to start producing new cameras. To knock someone for taking the financial risk to start a business that supports our niche hobby is pretty crappy. With digital photography so prevalent that it's essentially pushed film photography off a cliff where support by large companies is becoming less viable, we have to band together and bolster anyone that's investing in what we do.
And to make it a nationalistic thing is just tacky in this day in age. We are truly a global society. China only makes cheap crap because WE want cheap crap. As we've seen from Chamonix, there are people in China that can also produce top quality, precision products.
I don't really get the synical attitude. The more large format cameras the merrier! This one looks pretty nice! Once I decide that the almost 20lb Calumet is too heavy to lug around, I may look into one of these, or a Chamonix, or Ritter, or any other that might come along from any country :)

Fred L
5-Dec-2014, 19:45
agree but I saw it as more of a 'the LF crowd is small enough, can it support *ANOTHER* manufacturer' kind of thing and I think this is a legitimate question in the big picture sense. Are there enough photographers out there to keep 6-8 (or more) companies flush ?

Randy Moe
5-Dec-2014, 19:52
Ritter 8x10 is a great hike-able camera (I own one) but there is a good argument to be made for a heavier more stable in the wind Chamonix/Shen Hao/Polish option. The quality of the finish, design and woodwork on my Chamonix in 4x5 and 14x17 is very high. While the Ritter is the master of minimalism and economy - precisely designed for what it is intended to do. I guess I do go in for the "there is no perfect camera" philisophy. Perhaps that's why I have too many of them!

+1

angusparker
5-Dec-2014, 20:46
agree but I saw it as more of a 'the LF crowd is small enough, can it support *ANOTHER* manufacturer' kind of thing and I think this is a legitimate question in the big picture sense. Are there enough photographers out there to keep 6-8 (or more) companies flush ?

Some of the makers are more artisanal in nature, like Richard Ritter, who build relative few cameras and take on other repair and custom work. Since they are such low volume I don't think they have much impact on the sales of larger brands. There does seem to be a divide between wooden field camera companies (cheaper to make, and relatively low tooling costs) and more technical monorail camera companies where most of the buyers are pros, some with digital backs, doing product shots etc. I don't think the technical companies are affected at all by more wooden field camera offerings. Also, as key people in essentially one man operations retire, a spot opens up for someone new. Used camera prices and their lack of availability in certain markets like Europe and Asia are probably a bigger issue / opportunity for new low priced entrants.

Randy Moe
5-Dec-2014, 20:58
I wish we knew how film, paper and chem sales are really doing. Is it still rapidly degrading or have we established a new market set point. A market that can sustain or even grow.

l notice Forum members dumping complete sets of equipment, meaning everything analog. Whole darkrooms, cameras and lenses.

Yet, I also notice less big enlargers for sale and less ULF cameras on the gambling site. Miniature cameras are plentiful, but 8x10 and up are not.

Demand drives a market. But where are we going?

angusparker
5-Dec-2014, 21:21
I wish we knew how film, paper and chem sales are really doing. Is it still rapidly degrading or have we established a new market set point. A market that can sustain or even grow.

l notice Forum members dumping complete sets of equipment, meaning everything analog. Whole darkrooms, cameras and lenses.

Yet, I also notice less big enlargers for sale and less ULF cameras on the gambling site. Miniature cameras are plentiful, but 8x10 and up are not.

Demand drives a market. But where are we going?

The great darkroom dump is over. While there are still many cheap MF enlargers in garages across the country, I suspect that higher end 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 enlargers are now scarce and in mostly good hands. The market is tightening for sure. Lens prices seem to be ticking up for rare offerings but not for more common focal lengths. ULF prices seem to be stable - it remains pretty hard to offload anything over 8x10. You can still get deals on banquet cameras with short bellows. Holders still seem to be an issue especially since there are no real standards above 8x10.

I hope we are in a new stable state, if anything an uptick? Ilford would probably know what was going on, at least in B&W, perhaps they could share some info with the community. Don't think there is much public info on their sales since they aren't traded as far as I know they had a management buyout at some point.

Lenny Eiger
6-Dec-2014, 19:08
I have considered all of these folding cameras and own a Canham 8x10 Lightweight. I think there is something missing on all of them. All of the front and rear standards on all of these cameras move about when you put a hand on them - even lightly. They would all be greatly improved by a not-yet-invented device that linked the front and rear standard.

I have the Wind Stabilizing Kit from film holders.com and its a good start. I'm guessing that these creative camera makers could come up with something even better. It should be fairly easy to lock these standards down...

Lenny

Randy Moe
6-Dec-2014, 19:23
I have considered all of these folding cameras and own a Canham 8x10 Lightweight. I think there is something missing on all of them. All of the front and rear standards on all of these cameras move about when you put a hand on them - even lightly. They would all be greatly improved by a not-yet-invented device that linked the front and rear standard.

I have the Wind Stabilizing Kit from film holders.com and its a good start. I'm guessing that these creative camera makers could come up with something even better. It should be fairly easy to lock these standards down...

Lenny

I think my C1 is too wiggly and it's like new and all magnesium.

Old-N-Feeble
6-Dec-2014, 20:05
I have considered all of these folding cameras and own a Canham 8x10 Lightweight. I think there is something missing on all of them. All of the front and rear standards on all of these cameras move about when you put a hand on them - even lightly. They would all be greatly improved by a not-yet-invented device that linked the front and rear standard.

I have the Wind Stabilizing Kit from film holders.com and its a good start. I'm guessing that these creative camera makers could come up with something even better. It should be fairly easy to lock these standards down...

Lenny

I've considered adapting some miniature ball joints or gimbal joints from a RC model hobby store and connect them with metal rods from the same source. At least one end would need to have some sort of slip connection so rod length could be adjusted... either that or add a slip joint between two shorter rods. The joints would have to be mounted to the upper corners of the standards as near the inner edges as possible. Really though, that seems awfully fiddly.

Randy Moe
6-Dec-2014, 20:08
I've considered adapting some miniature ball joints or gimbal joints from a RC model hobby store and connect them with metal rods from the same source. At least one end would need to have some sort of slip connection so rod length could be adjusted... either that or add a slip joint between two shorter rods.

Make the rods solid aluminum rectangles let them slide against each other in a small box coupling with a lock screw.

Round the ends so you don't poke holes in things.

Old-N-Feeble
6-Dec-2014, 20:35
Make the rods solid aluminum rectangles let them slide against each other in a small box coupling with a lock screw.

Round the ends so you don't poke holes in things.

That's a good idea but the reason I was thinking of round rods is because the hobby store sells the correct sizes to fit the joints they sell.

Randy Moe
6-Dec-2014, 20:55
That's a good idea but the reason I was thinking of round rods is because the hobby store sells the correct sizes to fit the joints they sell.

No hobby shops. I get small orders all the time for cameras from McMaster Carr, no order is too small! Take your pick for rods. http://www.mcmaster.com/#standard-aluminum-sheets/=uwwdc6

Look around they have lots of great stuff.

Roger Cole
13-Mar-2015, 18:57
This is from Hubert Banaszkiewicz blog (member of this forum). He is one of the best printers in the Europe. Price? I will call to Stanisław Szwedowski (camera maker) and I will ask.
Regards
Michal



Ito 8x10 – the first impressions

After a couple of years of contradictory information, uncertainty and wating it is finally there...! Stanislaw Szwedowski, on the Internet better known as Ito, decided to create an outdoor 8x10 camera which wouldn´t have the typical faults of 8x10 outdoor cameras and be at the same time lightweight, durable and beautiful.
To be honest I did not expect to get to see such a great camera. Opinions one can find on the Internet are often biased by the positive impression of the reviewer-owner and only after buying it shows whether the camera is indeed as good as expected... These are not cheap toys and in my case it took some time before I found a perfect camera for my purposes: it is a Canham Traditional 8x10. In this review therefore, I allow myself to compare some features of Ito´s to the Canham – a camera coming from a completely different price range, anyway (about 4100 $ + custom fees and tax).
Stanislaw´s cameras are made from glued mahogany layers, a fact which assures the maximal wood stability and increases its resistance to time-related changes. This is very important because once the wooden elements of a camera start to buckle they usually need to be completely replaced or at least refixed in a high degree. This is not a nice thing to do... Ito 8x10 is available in three different colours: natural wood, black and red mahogany. 




The design is well known: first of this kind of cameras were produced by Philips, today they are made by Shen Hao and Chamonix. Ito 8x10, though, has two unique features the mentioned brands don´t:
⁃ The rear standard cannot be tilted (it can be swung forth and back, though) because rear tilting causes unpleasant perspective distortions and is used in landscape photography approximately once in two hundred years.
⁃ The front standard is led on two powerful titanium rails.

I looked up this thread when I saw this camera in the "show off your LF camera thread" and when google turned up a price for it better than, as far as I'm aware, any other brand new 8x10 field camera. I can't do it yet but I'd like to get an 8x10 some day.

But then I searched, found this review and stopped reading right there.

What a bizarre notion that back tilt is used seldom in landscape photography. I use it regularly and precisely BECAUSE it causes this "distortion." It makes foreground objects appear larger relative to background objects which tends to accentuate distance. Not always but often enough this is a benefit in landscape work. This decision ruled out the camera for me. (Granted I have a Tech III 4x5 which does back tilt easily but tilting the lens requires turning the camera on its side and using front swing as tilt - doable, and much easier than trying to use the drop bed configuration for the same thing, but a bit of a PITA - but I've come to learn I quite like back tilt.)

Joe O'Hara
14-Mar-2015, 14:19
Not to worry, Roger, someone raised this point earlier and the OP realized that he should have said it that lacks "swing", instead of "tilt" on the rear. So yes it has the critical rear tilt movement. The corrected description is buried somewhere near the beginning of this thread.

Roger Cole
14-Mar-2015, 14:43
Not to worry, Roger, someone raised this point earlier and the OP realized that he should have said it that lacks "swing", instead of "tilt" on the rear. So yes it has the critical rear tilt movement. The corrected description is buried somewhere near the beginning of this thread.

Ah, well then, that's entirely different of course. I don't actually recall ever using rear swing myself. Most often if you use swing at all it's something like a wall or fence where you don't want shape distortion and yes, I agree, front swing is preferred.

Back to a possible serious contender among 8x10 fields available new. :)

DavidBon
15-Mar-2015, 02:33
good camera

pdh
17-Apr-2015, 01:12
I've been looking (online) at a lot of 8x10 cameras recently, and the Svedovsky seems to have a lot going for it, not least the price.

However, the thing that puts me off selling a kidney and a few lenses to get one is that the rear standard appears to be attached to the rails by four screws into the end grain, which strikes me as a poor choice for long term strength and durability.

It's a few decades since I last had any woodwork lessons, but I do remember being taught this is not a good way to screw things together if there is any load to be borne on the fixture.

Anyone else noticed this and have any comments?

Mick Fagan
17-Apr-2015, 02:01
I've been looking (online) at a lot of 8x10 cameras recently, and the Svedovsky seems to have a lot going for it, not least the price.

However, the thing that puts me off selling a kidney and a few lenses to get one is that the rear standard appears to be attached to the rails by four screws into the end grain, which strikes me as a poor choice for long term strength and durability.

It's a few decades since I last had any woodwork lessons, but I do remember being taught this is not a good way to screw things together if there is any load to be borne on the fixture.

Anyone else noticed this and have any comments?

Hmm, good point that.

I do a fair bit of woodwork, self taught, I agree that attaching a load bearing part of anything to end grain, does need either quite well thought out fittings, or some additional method of support.

I'm not saying this is a bad method, just that it isn't one I would use. There is the possibility that the maker has used some fitting one cannot see, that would be similar to those used by businesses like IKEA to join MDF board together. The insertion of some female type of screw into device, for the end bolt to grab and lock into, could have been used. bit of a long shot thought, but a possibility.

You really have been poring over this camera with an obvious posibility of purchasing one. Sort of the thing one does, you research and research and inspect pictures with the intensity of a mad person hoping to know if this will be what you have been searching for.

Mick.

pdh
17-Apr-2015, 02:12
There is the possibility that the maker has used some fitting one cannot see,

I've dropped them a line to ask.


you research and research and inspect pictures with the intensity of a mad person hoping to know if this will be what you have been searching for.
.

Hmm have you been spying on me?
But then, my current car cost me less than a new field camera, so it's not a trivial purchase !

Actually, what I'm searching for is a Chamonix for £500 :D :D :D

Bruce Schultz
17-Apr-2015, 07:09
I see one foto in the gallery shows a bail instead of springs on the back, but that's not shown as an option. I've thought about a Chamonix and I like the bail so the Sved is something to consider.

pdh
17-Apr-2015, 08:08
If you look at the camera main pages at svedovsky.com you'll see the bail back is offered as an option . Ordinary sprung back $1800, bail back $1900.

vdonovan2000
17-Apr-2015, 08:39
My Svedovsky just arrived! I will be posting more about it, but PDH is right, the rear standard is attached by four screws on the end of the rails. But I think that Mick Fagan is probably right too, in that it seems that all of the screws I can see go into steel threaded fittings and not right into the wood. I could unscrew it to find out, but I won't. Better to email the seller. I found Piotr to be very friendly and responsive to questions.

I got the bail back option and I'm glad I did. It seems very sturdy and well put together, and has a clever feature of two magnets that hold the bail in place when not in use.

pdh
17-Apr-2015, 09:31
Svedovsky just got back to me about this, here is a quote verbatim from the email:


This is really strong connection.
It is the connection made of the metric screw and the sleeve with a thread inside which is embedded in the wood (not a wood screw screwed directly into the wood)
Every connection in our camera is made this way.
The only wood screws are those four tiny screws which hold the ground glass.

vdonovan2000
17-Apr-2015, 16:16
Well there you go. Looking at my camera, I can see that the screws on the end of the rails have allen-key type heads, not Phillips heads, so they are surely not wood screws. As he says in his email, almost all of the screws I can see are this type of screw.

prendt
18-Apr-2015, 03:29
Svedovsky just got back to me about this, here is a quote verbatim from the email:

Seems a well thought camera construction to me.

ndwgolf
25-May-2017, 05:17
Any comments 2 years later..........is the Svedovsky still holding up??
Neil