Chamonix Holders - Worth the Cash?

[dodphotography]

I have holders, but those 4x5 look nice and light.

Worth the cash over the Liscos and Fidelity's of the world?

On a side note, what's the ideal amount of holders you like to have? I have like 25-30 holders but I seem to never load more than 6 at a time.

[djdister]

On a side note, what's the ideal amount of holders you like to have? I have like 25-30 holders but I seem to never load more than 6 at a time.

I have about 22 4x5 film holders, but the most I ever load and go out with at one time is about 12-13 (a 25 sheet box worth of film), but I also plan on reloading holders each night.

[vinny]

I've never paid more than $10 for 4x5 holders (Toyo), usually more like $5 (others). The only one's I've had issues with were beat up or cracked. I've got close to 50. I usually carry a dozen when out shooting, more in the car. Everything Chamonix makes is nice. Sure, they're lighter but will your pictures turn out that much better? I'd rather spend $$ on the important stuff.

[evan clarke]

In 4x5, you can find Toyos used and even new. In large formats, they are the best I have 11x14 and 8x10..

[Ari]

I didn't know Toyo made 11x14 holders; does that mean they also made an 11x14 camera?

[vinny]

I didn't know Toyo made 11x14 holders; does that mean they also made an 11x14 camera?
He's speaking of chamonix holders.

[dodphotography]

This is in regards to 4x5 holders. 60 bucks a whack is tough.

[Oren Grad]

I have a bunch of Chamonix holders in 6.5x8.5 which I use regularly. They're good holders overall, but there's nothing about them that would induce me to pay a big premium to replace my Fidelity holders for 4x5 (or 5x7 or 8x10 or 11x14).

[Louis Pacilla]

I didn't know Toyo made 11x14 holders; does that mean they also made an 11x14 camera?

Ari I believe Evan is saying his 11x14 & 8x10 holders are Chamonix, not Toyo. I also believe he is saying his 4x5 are Toyo holders.

BTW- I don't think Toyo manufactured an 11x14 camera.

BTW2- Sorry for the duplicate answer.

[mdarnton]

I have a whole bunch of wood 4x5 holders, and don't understand why people would prefer the heavier, less cool, plastic, or need to pay big money for new holders. I don't think I paid more than $3 for any of them, and many of them are practically new, don't leak, and put the focus right where I put it. With $3 holders being perfectly fine, and accurately made, I don't understand the lure of the high priced spread at all. But I guess some people equate spending obscene amounts of money with quality? There's a certain irony when people prefer plastic because it's not wood, and then they're willing to spend multiples of what plastic costs to buy expensive wood. Someone needs to make a $300 plastic 4x5 holder, and it would probably sell like hotcakes, because it's not wood, and better than the holder that's not plastic, which was better than the plastic holder that's better because it's not wood.

[Bill_1856]

For 4x5 I take 3 Grafmatics (18 sheets), and leave at home the 50 or so Riteway holders that I've collected over the years.
With 3.25x4.25 BagMags it's even better, since each one holds 12 sheets (or even 18 in later ones).
For whole-plate there are 6-8 Kodak holders.
I don't know why anyone would pay the extra tariff for Chaminox.

[vinny]

I have a whole bunch of wood 4x5 holders, and don't understand why people would prefer the heavier, less cool, plastic, or need to pay big money for new holders. I don't think I paid more than $3 for any of them, and many of them are practically new, don't leak, and put the focus right where I put it. With $3 holders being perfectly fine, and accurately made, I don't understand the lure of the high priced spread at all. But I guess some people equate spending obscene amounts of money with quality? There's a certain irony when people prefer plastic because it's not wood, and then they're willing to spend multiples of what plastic costs to buy expensive wood. Someone needs to make a $300 plastic 4x5 holder, and it would probably sell like hotcakes, because it's not wood, and better than the holder that's not plastic, which was better than the plastic holder that's better because it's not wood.

Well there's that. And how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck plastic?

[Ari]

He's speaking of chamonix holders.


Ari I believe Evan is saying his 11x14 & 8x10 holders are Chamonix, not Toyo. I also believe he is saying his 4x5 are Toyo holders.

BTW- I don't think Toyo manufactured an 11x14 camera.

BTW2- Sorry for the duplicate answer.

Thanks, guys; I really mis-read that post.

[Collas]

They are much lighter and much more pleasing on the eye, but pricey and will be less robust, i.e. they'll pick up dents and scratches in the wooden parts fairly easily, but you can claim that as patina.

I managed to get some 4 x 5 examples second-hand, but I haven't had an opportunity to use them, yet.

Nick

[C. D. Keth]

If you want light and compact, swap your holders for grafmatics.

[jnantz]

i usually take between 15-20 loaded holders with me
if i am using a graflex slr i have 4 12shot bagmags as well as holders.
the graflex holders i have are obviously old and wood
and a little bookbinder's tape fixes the hinge.
the international/graflock/normal 4x5 holders are
a mix of fidelity, and random holders i have picked up over the years.
( also a grafmatic with the number wheel removed is in the mix )
i can understand the yearning for new beautiful film holders, but
the old ones seem to work fine and for me getting new holders would be a frivolous expense
besides having something new and beautiful i'd always have the worry in the back of my mind
tha it is going to get scratched and "patina'ed" and look like hell after a few uses so i probably
would spend too much time being "careful" ... old and used it doesn't matter if it gets a scratch
or scrape or patina ... and i have no worries if i drop it on the darkroom floor ( or anywhere else ) either



If you want light and compact, swap your holders for grafmatics.

+1

[angusparker]

I go with Toyo for 4x5 and 8x10, I find them easier to use than Chamonix which I did own in 4x5. For ULF though the Chamonix are a dream. I have two in 14x17.

[Liquid Artist]

I've never weighed any of my film holders, and don't feel that there's enough weight difference in 4x5 or 5x7 to worry about it.

However I can certainly understand wanting the lightest in ULF, and possibly even 8x10.

[StoneNYC]

Speaking from someone who owns both, I'm going to just give you my impressions.

In 4x5 I only have Grafmatics and Fidelity/Riteway plastic holders
In 8x10 I had gotten a set of 4 Fidelities from KEH and 4 from a guy on Craigslist.

After checking them all, I found a very obvious leak in one of the KEH holders which they refunded my money for, and of the 4 from craigslist 3 had light leaks of various kinds which I only discovered after developing my first batch of film used with them...

....I bought a new Chamonix 8x10 holder... No leaks... No wasted trips in the freezing snow with no shots to show for it and wasted film and time and gas and energy. The loss on a single trip due to light leaks more than covers the cost of the new Chamonix holders.

I also noticed the film sits tighter so the contact print framing looks cleaner (you know where the black indents from the edges show it was shot in a holder?) the fidelity ones are always off for me because the film shifts in the holder as there's too much play in the 8x10's.

I don't really notice much difference in weight between the 8x10 Chamonix and Fidelity, but I haven't physically weighed them. I suspect the 4x5 holders will show more of a weight savings. Grafmatics are lighter than 3 fidelity plastic holders by a small margin (I did weighed them) but the space savings for hiking is the appeal.

I think because the 4x5's are smaller and less prone to flexing, they are built tighter and hold up better than larger holders. I probably wouldn't replace them with Chanonix holders unless I start having light issues but so far so good...

If your images are important to you, then YES new holders that are built well are worth it. If you're not having any issues with the ones you have, then no it's not worth getting new ones. I'll most likely keep the good holders but I've ordered my second 8x10 Chamonix holder, I'll be using my new sheets of Velvia50 in the guaranteed good holders.... At $20/sheet I want to know that the holders are good!

One comment I want to play Devils advocate about ... "I'd rather spend $$ on the more important stuff." ... Nothing more important than the barrier keeping your film protected from unwanted exposure...

[Cor]

If getting new or old holders what is more easy than sticking sheets of uniformly fogged and or outdated RC paper in it and check for light leaks..provided you still practice the darkroom route for your negatives..

Best,

Cor

[StoneNYC]

If getting new or old holders what is more easy than sticking sheets of uniformly fogged and or outdated RC paper in it and check for light leaks..provided you still practice the darkroom route for your negatives..

Best,

Cor

Not everyone has a darkroom, (as you hinted at) so cutting 4x5 pieces of paper in a dark bag is difficult and dangerous (as you might cut the bag) and not everyone would own print paper if they don't print, and the cost of a 25 sheet box of 8x10 paper is the same as a 4x5 sheet box of film.

That said 8x10 is doable, but again requires the same amount of time to process and then you would have to buy additional print developer that you normally might not have just got testing.

So it's not the solution for everyone.

Again it's like taking a trip across country and having to decide at the car dealership between the 1980's Honda Accord and the 2015 Nissan 370Z they both are cars but you're going to most likely get their safer in the new car than the old one and the old one is more Likely to cost you more in repairs when it breaks down in the hot desert sun. The Z will be so cool with the top down and get you there with no worries about breaking the down. I suppose the Ebony would be like the Tesla roadster ;)

[Kodachrome25]

I have a dozen of the Chamonix holders in 4x5, they really are great holders and light too, really noticable when carrying all 12 in my backpack.

I have about 20 Toyo and 20 fidelity holders too that don't seem to have issues but do add up in the area of weight. About graftmatic holders, I have two of them and two 10 shot Kinematic holders. They seem to move dust around a lot when in operation so they have given me the most trouble in terms of that. Also, their operation is not "delicate" so I am not fond of how much more force is needed to use them over a good cut film holder.

But the Chamonix holders are my favorites for sure, just perfect holders and look nice when in the company of clients.

[vinny]

so you didn't test the used holders and you aren't going to test the new one's either?
It's paper with an iso of about 3. wait til dark, close the curtains. grow a pair.
you can process any photo paper in rodinal or just about any other film developer. I hear you can even use baking soda for fixer:)

[StoneNYC]

so you didn't test the used holders and you aren't going to test the new one's either?
It's paper with an iso of about 3. wait til dark, close the curtains. grow a pair.
you can process any photo paper in rodinal or just about any other film developer. I hear you can even use baking soda for fixer:)

I don't know why I said baking soda, really, I must have been really tired when I wrote that part.

As for holders, I inspected them with a high powered flashlight in the light traps as that's generally where the issue is, but sometimes it's in the cracks of the tabs, which I've found often times only shows up with HP5+ (or similar) shot at 800, but doesn't show up even on 100 speed films, so a 3 speed paper wouldn't really tell me anything, I'm not talking about obvious completely blown out light streaks I'm talking about the subtle ones. But you're right, maybe I'll just load up all holders with 8x10 x-ray film and 4x5 arrest(foma400) and leave them out in the sun for an hour one day and just go to town developing everything and finding all the bad ones. But again, why waste all that time and energy when you can just buy brand new ones and not worry at all. Lessons learned, sometimes the money is worth it. And yes, the wooden ones look good to the clients (not that I have many).

[jnantz]

so you didn't test the used holders and you aren't going to test the new one's either?
It's paper with an iso of about 3. wait til dark, close the curtains. grow a pair.
you can process any photo paper in rodinal or just about any other film developer. I hear you can even use baking soda for fixer:)


vinny

i know exactly what you are talking about -
but some people don't like do bother paper testing new or old holders .
they trust something is new its gotta be perfect, or if it is old its gotta be like hell.
and it is too much trouble waiting till dark or pulling a shade or anything else
besides i heard everyone who shoots LF is loaded
and getting everything new is worth it, especially when
are flush with cash and have the $$ to spend on "brand new" ...

that said, i have not sure 10-12? 7x11 and 16-20? 8x10 film holders
all old ( 7x11 are over 100 years + 8x10s 20-60years )
all register film and paper just fine, no leaks, no shifting, no problems
and they didn't cost me an arm and a leg.

[Old-N-Feeble]

vinny

i know exactly what you are talking about -
but some people don't like do bother paper testing new or old holders .
they trust something is new its gotta be perfect, or if it is old its gotta be like hell.
and it is too much trouble waiting till dark or pulling a shade or anything else
besides i heard everyone who shoots LF is loaded
and getting everything new is worth it, especially when
are flush with cash and have the $$ to spend on "brand new" ...

that said, i have not sure 10-12? 7x11 and 16-20? 8x10 film holders
all old ( 7x11 are over 100 years + 8x10s 20-60years )
all register film and paper just fine, no leaks, no shifting, no problems
and they didn't cost me an arm and a leg.

Wha-a-a-a-a-t??? You trust the crummy old stuff??? :D

[jnantz]

Wha-a-a-a-a-t??? You trust the crummy old stuff??? :D

why coy-ten-lee ! ( nuk nuk nuk ):)

stood the test of time
whats a few more years to something
that has been around for 60 ( and taken care of )

not much .. :)

[Old-N-Feeble]

why coy-ten-lee ! ( nuk nuk nuk ):)

stood the test of time
whats a few more years to something
that has been around for 60 ( and taken care of )

not much .. :)

Too bad we human beings aren't as durable and resilient. :)

[Kirk Gittings]

And yes, the wooden ones look good to the clients (not that I have many).

You must have fools for clients.....

[jnantz]

Too bad we human beings aren't as durable and resilient. :)

i am part cyborg, like the telemarketers that keep calling me :)

[StoneNYC]

You must have fools for clients.....

No, just young girls who don't even know what film is half the time. Everything mysterious looks interesting to them, especially nice looking wooden devices.

[Kirk Gittings]

Any client who cares about anything but the final product is a fool. Any client that makes assumptions about the photographer based on the equipment he uses is usually a poser himself and wanting his photographer to be a fellow poser too (change the sex of the pronouns to taste).

[Christopher Barrett]

I got 6 Chamonix holders for my 4x10. They are absolutely lovely. The wood is well shaped, the carbon fiber darkslides are a beautiful touch. Really nice stuff. For 4x5, I can't imagine why anyone would use anything besides the common and inexpensive standard holders. I used Fidelity holders for years until we went to Readyload and carried maybe 45 holders on the road. They work. They hold the film and keep it light-tight. What else could you want?

Unless you want REALLY pretty holders for some reason...

http://christopherbarrett.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/4x10_holders.jpg

CB

[vinny]

Any client who cares about anything but the final product is a fool. Any client that makes assumptions about the photographer based on the equipment he uses is usually a poser himself and wanting his photographer to be a fellow poser too (change the sex of the pronouns to taste).

can we get this on a t-shirt?

[Kodachrome25]

I got 6 Chamonix holders for my 4x10. They are absolutely lovely. The wood is well shaped, the carbon fiber darkslides are a beautiful touch. Really nice stuff. For 4x5, I can't imagine why anyone would use anything besides the common and inexpensive standard holders. I used Fidelity holders for years until we went to Readyload and carried maybe 45 holders on the road. They work. They hold the film and keep it light-tight. What else could you want?

Lol! So it is ok for you to love all the nice things about your 4x10 holders but not OK for a user of 4x5 to have the same thing? Gotcha....

I got them because they are super light and really well made. 2/3rds of my holders are either like new or new, time, gas, food and all the rest is money for me so why the hell not have some really great film holders???

There seems to be some kind of country club law against that here. Kind of silly....like those people who call them selves "Large Format Photographers" instead of just photographers...

[jnantz]

...

[richardman]

How could a thread about HOLDERS be 4 pages already and threatening to descend to "you rich swine posers" vs. "you cheaparses"? Does it really matter whether someone is shooting with a $10 lens vs. $10,000 Dreamagons? Why so much hate?

Facts: Chamonix holders look nice, slightly lighter. If one can afford it and want it, why not? It's not like it's anyone else's money.

If you can't afford it or don't want it, great. There are plenty other choices.

[Sevo]

Lol! So it is ok for you to love all the nice things about your 4x10 holders but not OK for a user of 4x5 to have the same thing? Gotcha....


I'd take plastics over wood any time. But I'd have a hard time finding a plastics cast frame 4x10" (or other odd size) holder...

[RichardRitter]

So why pay a hundred dollars plus for a holder when you can buy a wood holder that is the same thing but painted black and 40 years old for 5 dollars it does the same thing. If you are in the right place at the right time they could even be free.

You may have to spend a little time with the holder to re-tape the bottom and re-felt the light trap.

In the 4 x 5 size plastic is a very good way to go.

When I was working as a tool and die maker way back. I was working on R & D parts for the fiber optic line and learned how you can transmit light. Knowing what I know and what I have seem in the last few years with all the different holder out there I would go with all black holders. Clear finish will transmit light. Black on the other hand will not.

[StoneNYC]

So why pay a hundred dollars plus for a holder when you can buy a wood holder that is the same thing but painted black and 40 years old for 5 dollars it does the same thing. If you are in the right place at the right time they could even be free.

You may have to spend a little time with the holder to re-tape the bottom and re-felt the light trap.

In the 4 x 5 size plastic is a very good way to go.

When I was working as a tool and die maker way back. I was working on R & D parts for the fiber optic line and learned how you can transmit light. Knowing what I know and what I have seem in the last few years with all the different holder out there I would go with all black holders. Clear finish will transmit light. Black on the other hand will not.

The inside is flat black and the finish stops on the inside edge, also by now if there were ever a light issue someone would've spoken up about it with the holders.

I find it funny that of all people you think that only buying used is the way to go, first of all not everybody has the machining and tooling capabilities to repair a broken holders, but also if we don't support new large-format gear, there won't be anymore,., The lens market is proof of that. Everyone said that buying new lenses is silly because you can get used lenses at a fraction of the cost, so everybody did that, and now there are no new lenses being produced, I think one company still has a few in stock but I doubt that will last long, same with the shutters because no new lenses are being sold, the shutter industry had to stop making the copal shutter.

It's all penny wise and pound foolish thought processes, if it really matters to you and you want a better chance that your images won't be ruined by damaged holders, you're more likely to have success with the new holder.

As I mentioned, especially with 4 x 5, I don't think there's as much a need for new holders, but that's all really about the physical size and stress on the joints over time, the larger holders will have more of that and will end up bending and cracking and becoming loose are much more quickly than the smaller 4x5's so it's more a matter of physical size as to the risk of a worn out one.

It's the same thing with large format and ultra large format cameras, if no one's making them the ones that exist will slowly where outcome of the joints will fail and it will be more difficult to find light tight ones that will hold up to strenuous long term hiking conditions. The joints will become less stiff and it will be more play in the camera and your shots will look like crap in the wind.

If I could figure out how to buy some holders from your website in 8x10 size I would have gone to you first before Chamonix. :)

[RichardRitter]

Stone yes your right on the number of photo manufacturer that are stopping to make equipment. That trend is going to keep growing in numbers.

My feeling is I have $500 to spend, do I buy 2 very expense holders and a box of film, or do I buy a lot of film and 6 cheap holder?

I for one would go with the film and cheap holders. $500 buys a lot of film and supports the manufactures that we can not do with out.

There will always be someone out there that will be making holders as a custom item or someone will find that there is a market for repairing holder and reselling then. Right now I don't see the cost to make 8 x 10 and smaller holders justifying the time and money needed to do it.

I have been in the photo business since the early 80's and know that there are thousands of 4 x 5 and 8 x 10 holders out there. When I was at Zone VI in one year we sold over 3000 holders.

[jnantz]

Lol! So it is ok for you to love all the nice things about your 4x10 holders but not OK for a user of 4x5 to have the same thing? Gotcha....

I got them because they are super light and really well made. 2/3rds of my holders are either like new or new, time, gas, food and all the rest is money for me so why the hell not have some really great film holders???

There seems to be some kind of country club law against that here. Kind of silly....like those people who call them selves "Large Format Photographers" instead of just photographers...

hi kodachrome25
i am fortunate to not have to purchase 7x11 film holders
because they would have to be custom made for the back i have
like so many of the older ulf cameras. backs and holders seemed to
be a matched set. and they would have cost me hundreds each ...
with 4x5 though if something works and doesn't cost a
small fortune why not see what works for you? new chamonix work for you,
great, they look nice for you clients great... but they aren't the only thing out there
in smaller formats or in larger standard ( now graflock/international backs are standards ) formats.
personally, an extra few oz or grams per holder that i have to carry isn't going to break my back,
i don't do ultralight camping, so it isn't an issue. and 30 years of client work no one has cared what my holders look like.
with regards to the club. its really not a club i don't think.
there are plenty people who claim to be one thing or another and it is just a title.
the work typically speaks volumes whether it is a fine art photographer, an image maker, artist or photographer or whatever ...


How could a thread about HOLDERS be 4 pages already and threatening to descend to "you rich swine posers" vs. "you cheaparses"? Does it really matter whether someone is shooting with a $10 lens vs. $10,000 Dreamagons? Why so much hate?

Facts: Chamonix holders look nice, slightly lighter. If one can afford it and want it, why not? It's not like it's anyone else's money.

If you can't afford it or don't want it, great. There are plenty other choices.

you should know by now richardman
that there is no cut and dry answer ...
there are 2 cults of extremists
and it is kind of funny to see.

[StoneNYC]

wow 3000!

Thanks for the reply, and I see your point, and the 11x14 and bigger are harder to come by anyway and seem to fetch higher used prices, I suspect they are also easier to handle and repair and make for a number or reasons relating to physical size of the cuts and tolerances etc.

Trust me if I had the machining tools I would already be making my own 14x17 holders, I have one single 11x14 holder that I cart around with a borrowed 11x14 camera while I finish my own home made monstrosity, but it would be nice to be able to take more than two images during an outing... alas the holder was sent to me out of encouragement to venture into ULF and it worked, but certainly limits my choices and forces me to bring my 8x10 system with me as well, which means carting two systems. Sometimes film isn't the only expensive thing...

Pretty sure we've sufficiently answered the OP's questions.... OP, want to weigh in?


Stone yes your right on the number of photo manufacturer that are stopping to make equipment. That trend is going to keep growing in numbers.

My feeling is I have $500 to spend, do I buy 2 very expense holders and a box of film, or do I buy a lot of film and 6 cheap holder?

I for one would go with the film and cheap holders. $500 buys a lot of film and supports the manufactures that we can not do with out.

There will always be someone out there that will be making holders as a custom item or someone will find that there is a market for repairing holder and reselling then. Right now I don't see the cost to make 8 x 10 and smaller holders justifying the time and money needed to do it.

I have been in the photo business since the early 80's and know that there are thousands of 4 x 5 and 8 x 10 holders out there. When I was at Zone VI in one year we sold over 3000 holders.

[Christopher Barrett]

Lol! So it is ok for you to love all the nice things about your 4x10 holders but not OK for a user of 4x5 to have the same thing? Gotcha....

I got them because they are super light and really well made. 2/3rds of my holders are either like new or new, time, gas, food and all the rest is money for me so why the hell not have some really great film holders???

There seems to be some kind of country club law against that here. Kind of silly....like those people who call them selves "Large Format Photographers" instead of just photographers...

Heh... not really. While I love my Chamonix holders as beautiful objects... I guess what I'm saying is that if I was shooting something as readily available as 4x5 gear... I (personally) would just get plastic holders. If they were good enough for me to fly 50k mile a year with (when I shot film commercially) they're good enough for just about anything.

[Colin Graham]

Just a personal preference but I like wooden holders more than plastic. They seem to attract less dust, and they can be made to be considerably lighter in larger formats- even in 5x7, my 12 wooden holders combined weigh 2.6 lbs less than 12 plastic NOS Fidelities. Also, wooden holders are much more repairable for the so-inclined. I never really made peace with Fidelity holders. They bulge, the film slots are way too loose, the film slips around too much in the rebate, and the slides frequently bind.

[Kirk Gittings]

It's all penny wise and pound foolish thought processes, if it really matters to you and you want a better chance that your images won't be ruined by damaged holders, you're more likely to have success with the new holder.

There are probably, what, a hundred thousand used film holders in standard sizes out there doing nothing sitting on someones shelf that trickle into the market? You buy them, test them like I did-twenty five years ago-and use them flawlessly for the next 25 years. I have only had to replace two holders in that time because I dropped them and cracked the side seam. I don't ever remember buying a new film holder. It is wrong to promote the idea that one can't get perfect results with used holders. The only instance when I agree with you would be non standard outside of 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 where enormous numbers weren't produced.

[Fred L]

I for one would go with the film and cheap holders. $500 buys a lot of film and supports the manufactures that we can not do with out.

This pretty much sums it up for me. No film ? Then the holders are shelf queens. And to reiterate what has been brought up...buy a bunch of plastic holders and test them out. Simple as that.

[BetterSense]

Any client who cares about anything but the final product is a fool. Any client that makes assumptions about the photographer based on the equipment he uses is usually a poser himself and wanting his photographer to be a fellow poser too (change the sex of the pronouns to taste).

This is well and good but also irrelevant. Any one who argues with or resists a client's expectations, preferences or biases , no matter how ignorant or foolish they are, is either destined to go broke, has no competition, or is so good as to be a tastemaker, which is rare indeed. See: Peter Lik

[Kirk Gittings]

Really? I've done fine without following your advice since 1978. I have tons of competition-always have-17 competitors in my local market right now between Santa Fe and Albuquerque. Part of my job is to educate clients when they are wrong and they are wrong a lot because......I am a recognized expert in my field. They are not. They are recognized experts in their fields. I am not. When I work with clients I consider it a partnership and many of these have lasted 30 years now. Its called mutual respect. I have never owned or bought equipment to impress clients. Many of my clients have as good equipment as I do. I could care less about anything more than utility and proper function. Clients that mention crap like that get educated, or in some cases that is a signal that I probably don't want them as a client anyway.

[Christopher Barrett]

Word. I've just returned from a 4 day project that had a shoot budget around 50k (including the art director). I shot all the stills on a tiny little Sony and left my 60megapixel digital back at the studio.

[richardman]

BTW, I could use a few more (plastic good quality) 4x5 holders :-) I will put a call-for-help in the FS/Wanted section :-)

[Kirk Gittings]

For those of you who don't know Chris, he shoots architecture like I do. I consider him a consummate professional.

[John Kasaian]

8x10 film holders are a funny business. When I got my camera there was a used gear dealer in Shutterbug that sold 2 plastics for $30 or 3 woods for $35---Clayton Classic Camera, I think. Most of my 8x10 film holders came from him. Now if you're lucky $50 will get you a used film holder from a dealer while on eBay you'll pay $90 or 100 for a single holder!
Mine are all either Graflex "Made for Eastman Kodak" or Lisco Regal IIs. They look worn, but work fine. Any problem children get voted off the island and into the cannibal box until there are enough parts to put together a Frankenstein-holder. Then it's back into nursery. I think I have around 20 at last count.
I enjoy fixing up old 8x10 film holders. I'd like to learn how to replace the velvets but so far I haven't found any instruction.

[jnantz]

8x10 film holders are a funny business. When I got my camera there was a used gear dealer in Shutterbug that sold 2 plastics for $30 or 3 woods for $35---Clayton Classic Camera, I think. Most of my 8x10 film holders came from him. Now if you're lucky $50 will get you a used film holder from a dealer while on eBay you'll pay $90 or 100 for a single holder!
Mine are all either Graflex "Made for Eastman Kodak" or Lisco Regal IIs. They look worn, but work fine. Any problem children get voted off the island and into the cannibal box until there are enough parts to put together a Frankenstein-holder. Then it's back into nursery. I think I have around 20 at last count.
I enjoy fixing up old 8x10 film holders. I'd like to learn how to replace the velvets but so far I haven't found any instruction.

clayton classic camera ..
just bought graflex stuff from leon hertzson and before that
a mil.D3v from some guy in arizona ...
i did manage to get all my 8x10s used and about the same price / style as you
from mpex. also got loads of plate holders from him
even cheaper than the film holders. never had a problem, and saved enough money probably
5 100 sheet boxes of film ... i'd rather spend my $$ on film + chemistry and paper anyways.

[jnantz]

...

[StoneNYC]

8x10 film holders are a funny business. When I got my camera there was a used gear dealer in Shutterbug that sold 2 plastics for $30 or 3 woods for $35---Clayton Classic Camera, I think. Most of my 8x10 film holders came from him. Now if you're lucky $50 will get you a used film holder from a dealer while on eBay you'll pay $90 or 100 for a single holder!
Mine are all either Graflex "Made for Eastman Kodak" or Lisco Regal IIs. They look worn, but work fine. Any problem children get voted off the island and into the cannibal box until there are enough parts to put together a Frankenstein-holder. Then it's back into nursery. I think I have around 20 at last count.
I enjoy fixing up old 8x10 film holders. I'd like to learn how to replace the velvets but so far I haven't found any instruction.

This is sort of what I meant.

Kirk, as I said I have fidelity/lisco in 4x5 (22 elite plus 3 older metal ones) and they are fine, I have 4x5 Grafmatics and they are fine. I probably wouldn't replace them however if I would, it would be for 5 Chamonix and load each with 10 sheets of Velvia50.

The 5x7's I can't talk about.

8x10's after all the bad experience with half going bad at $50 each (that's 4x $60=$240...) I COULD buy 4 more used and risk 3-4 of them being bad, or order 1 new guaranteed one, plus I can't sell these... So I'm out $240 buying used.

I agree at $10/4x5 holder or less, the 4x5's make sense used, but not 8x10 no way, not after my bad experience, lost potentially EIGHT (potentially more) 8x10 color sheets that haven't been sent to the lab and possibly 4 sheets of 8x10 EFKE IR820 plus a trip through Nova Scotia and New Brunswick from Connexticut... So truly the used holders cost me almost $3,000... Now how many holders could I have had for that?

But I agree the 4x5's make more sense used.

Harder formats of course plus as someone mentioned they don't always fit the ANSI standard so best to buy them made for your specialty format.

Cheers and Respect to Kirk and Chris and Dan who know more than me and have differing opinions, one thing they all agree on, the final image is most important even if the client doesn't respect your gear ;)

Also I plan to use my new holders for 25 years too ;)

[Kodachrome25]

For those of you who don't know Chris, he shoots architecture like I do. I consider him a consummate professional.

What does that have to do with someone buying new, used or both new and used holders or not? No one is dumb or out of touch for choosing to do things their way if they choose to, as long as it works. I'm very successful in a highly desired niche in photography because I do things my way....

[Kirk Gittings]

hmmmm get up on the wrong side of the bed? It has to do with introducing him to people who may not know him.

[Kodachrome25]

Ok, well it still is about film holders, we can all buy and use what we want for whatever the reasons, consummate professional or not. So I treated my self to a dozen new film holders, money well spent I figure, ymmv....

[Corran]

Hmm...just a data point here but I bought 12 8x10 holders from various sources for roughly $25-$40 a piece last year. Every last one was perfect save one that had a tiny little gash in the DS that I fixed with liquid electrical tape.

Some people want "piece of mind" with their holders, some people know how to get the best bang for their buck or just simply how to fix little problems that aren't a big deal, others just have more money than sense.

[Kirk Gittings]

Ok, well it still is about film holders, we can all buy and use what we want for whatever the reasons, consummate professional or not. So I treated my self to a dozen new film holders, money well spent I figure, ymmv....

Of course. Kodachrome, my main interest here is to dispel the idea for newbies that you need new holders to do quality work like this statement-"it's all penny wise and pound foolish thought processes, if it really matters to you and you want a better chance that your images won't be ruined by damaged holders, you're more likely to have success with the new holder." Which is pretty silly as I have never owned a new holder in my entire life and did just fine. While nice to have certainly they are not necessary.

[Old-N-Feeble]

All I have to say about it is this: If one has the money and they want something then they should buy it if it makes them happy. I do think it's a disservice to noobs to insist that most used DDS are a risk to use. It's simply not true unless they're extremely worn and/or abused. It is a good idea to test newly acquired holders... used or new.

[dodphotography]

Didn't mean to create so much drama.

[Old-N-Feeble]

Drama? What DRAMA!?! :mad: :p :D

[Kodachrome25]

While nice to have certainly they are not necessary.

Indeed, there are some inexpensive aspects to trying out LF and the holders are certainly one of them. Just as long as we don't all start saying "Never buy new film holders" because that is when the trouble starts, not being a one size fits all world.

[StoneNYC]

Of course. Kodachrome, my main interest here is to dispel the idea for newbies that you need new holders to do quality work like this statement-"it's all penny wise and pound foolish thought processes, if it really matters to you and you want a better chance that your images won't be ruined by damaged holders, you're more likely to have success with the new holder." Which is pretty silly as I have never owned a new holder in my entire life and did just fine. While nice to have certainly they are not necessary.

Kirk,

But it's not a silly statement, it's just logic, you have a higher chance of having a bad holder buying used than buying new. That's true with everything, I have a better chance buying a reliable car that is new than one that is 20 years old.

If you dismiss that logic as false then you're lying to yourself and others, I didn't say that you couldn't get good images with older holders, I said you have a better chance with new.

My grafmatic holders are older than any and only one had issues (which I fixed).

I'm glad you had good luck with your holders, I did not... You also bought yours 25 years ago and took care of them, mine have cycles through various owners and probably weren't taken care of as well, there are no guarantees with used holders, new ones will be replaced if bad.

Just things to think about.

[jnantz]

suggesting one has to buy new 4x5 film holders is a but overly dramatic.
if one wants to, and has the $$, more power to them !

but FWIW, often times fixing a 4x5 film holder is about as hard as making ramen soup.