Deardorff cameras

[Pamelageewhizz]

Hello
I had read that Deardorff had shut down in the 50s but I found a site saying it's the Deardorf and Sons. Have they reopened or is this a scam site??? It says the cameras are new, etc. They are truely beutiful cameras. Price high but on the 8x10 just a couple hundred higher than a used one on ebay.
Anyone have any info on this? Its at: http://www.deardorffcameras.com/

I'm still in search of a lf 8x10 or possibly larger. I've been thinking though if it might be better to get a larger size and a reducing back if I choose at some point to go bigger. That is if I can afford it! I assume that going wet plate would require a different back. Would one need a special camera for this or mearly a back?

[Jim Noel]

I is not a scam site.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Hello
I had read that Deardorff had shut down in the 50s but I found a site saying it's the Deardorf and Sons. Have they reopened or is this a scam site??? [...]

In terms of intent it is not a scam, but in terms of performance the new Dearforff company is entirely unreliable for supplying new cameras. It is a one-man operation which simply does not deliver. Your down-payment goes into limbo and you are likely to wait for years for a camera, and you may never get one.

I would look for the best condition used Deardorff on a big auction site, and not pay more than $1200 USD. If you are a talented handy-man, look for less and rebuilt it - or not if it is functional then just use it.

Dearforff is dead. The proprietor is a thief.

And it is an entirely over-rated 8x10. Look around. There are better.

.

[William Whitaker]

In terms of intent it is not a scam, but in terms of performance the new Linhoff company is entirely unreliable for supplying new cameras.

Linhoff??? You do mean Deardorff, no?

[Dan Fromm]

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

[Jac@stafford.net]

Linhoff??? You do mean Deardorff, no?

OMG, a classic typo. Thanks for catching it.

D E A R D O R F F

I'm so embarrassed.

[Luis-F-S]

I own 4 Deardorffs and IMHO, nothing has superseded it in a field camera. While I have had positive experiences with the "new" Deardorff company, it's only been purchasing parts through their Ebay store. I've not heard anyone who has had positive experiences purchasing complete cameras. As the Part-Deux link above will show, there are many on this forum who will share their first hand experiences in trying to purchase complete cameras. I would personally look for a good condition used camera through this forum and the V8's regularly appear in the under 2K range, which is fair. You can look at the Deardorff Historical site for a lot of good information:

http://deardorffcameras.0catch.com/

FYI, I purchased my last new Deardorff from Central Camera in 1987; I believe Jack shut down operations around 1988. Below is a 1951 Deardorff V5 on left, and the one I bought in 1987 on right.

131069

[Vaughn]

...I'm still in search of a lf 8x10 or possibly larger. I've been thinking though if it might be better to get a larger size and a reducing back if I choose at some point to go bigger. That is if I can afford it! I assume that going wet plate would require a different back. Would one need a special camera for this or mearly a back?

Depending on ones size, ones physical strength and the transportation needs for the type of photographing one will be doing, the 8x10 is the practical limit for carrying a camera any significant distance. Most 11x14 cameras would be a large jump in size and weight over an 8x10 camera...an 8x10 reducing back on an 11x14 for field work would just be a lot of extra work...but fine in a studio. But baby buggies/carts are options for heavier cameras.

I would suggest an 8x10 camera with either (or both) 5x7 or 4x5 reducing backs. Once you get the process down with 8x10 , then you will know enough to figure what the next big jump would work best for you..perhaps 11x14, or perhaps 7x17...I just think the experience of handling an 8x10 will be invaluable in figuring where to go next.

And 8x10 is a reasonable size to learn a process with -- I think 5x7 would actually be better, especially if there are expensive chemicals involved. When I was learning carbon printing going from 4x5 to 5x7 was not much of a jump in difficulty. However, going to 8x10 was more than twice involved...as was the jump from 8x10 to 11x14!

I have not done wet plate, but I believe a wet plate back for your camera is all you need -- tho I understand there is a bit of staining going on, so one might as well start out with a well-used but solid camera.

[Pamelageewhizz]

I have looked all over this site but can not find where used equipment is listed for sale. Help

[Pamelageewhizz]

Clicked the link but it says I don't have sufficent access? or that I"m trying to change a post....???

[William Whitaker]

I have looked all over this site but can not find where used equipment is listed for sale. Help

Forum sez: This is a private area open only to those who have been members for 30 days or more.

[Louis Pacilla]

30 day waiting period before you can use or see that section.

[biedron]

As a new member you must wait 30 days before you can see the For Sale section on this site

[John Kasaian]

There are plenty of good used Deardorff V-8s still around for a lot less than many new 8x10s, including the new Deardorffs. They are old and some here would say too heavy compared to the newer cameras, but they are still one of the most intuitive designs in use.

[Pamelageewhizz]

After the 30 days, where is it located at?

[biedron]

In the "Community" section

[Alan Curtis]

Since you are looking at 8x10 or larger, you should look at the cameras made by Richard Ritter. Excellent craftsmanship and a very reliable individual.

[goamules]

I do not recommend anyone try to buy a current made Deardorff. Certainly their "half down" business model has caused a lot of people to lose money and spend months and years agonizing over it.

But - if anyone MUST buy from the "new" Deardorff, remember that salesmen are on their best behavior while trying to get your money. They will answer the phone and email, talk to you encouragingly, and promise short deadlines. If they then ask for half down, or more than a hundred bucks, flags should go off. You don't build a business where you take no risk, and make the customers pay up front. Heck, I ordered a new Ford truck in 2002, with $100 down I believe it was. When it was delivered, I inspected it, then paid for it. THATS how a proper business is run. I ordered a custom rifle once, that had a several year wait. Again, I paid $100 down (for a $2,000 rifle), and they called me when it was done to send the rest of the payment. Oh, and they were very well known for really shipping, the instant you paid. Deardorff is known to NEVER ship, and to give people the runaround for months and years. So if you must buy from them, when you call and get the sales talk, say this:

"I have heard you have trouble delivering cameras on time, or at all. Therefore, I will pay you a $100 good faith deposit only. When my camera is done, I'll come to your shop to inspect it and pick it up and pay the remainder." I guarantee he'll balk..... But he wouldn't get my money, and that's what he wants. If everyone quit buying up front, he might get his ass in gear.

[Bruce Barlow]

Since you are looking at 8x10 or larger, you should look at the cameras made by Richard Ritter. Excellent craftsmanship and a very reliable individual.

+1

[fishbulb]

Indeed, there are tons of good 8x10 manufacturers out there now. Deardorffs were great for their time, but there are lighter, easier to use, and more flexible cameras being made today. Take you pick: Ritter (http://www.lg4mat.net/LFcamera.html), Ebony (http://www.ebonycamera.com/), Shen Hao (http://www.shen-hao.com), Chamonix (http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/810.html), Walker (http://www.walkercameras.com/XL_8x10.html), Lotus (http://www.lotusviewcamera.at/cameras/lovica_8x10_e.html), Canham (http://www.canhamcameras.com/), Argentum (http://www.argentumcamera.com/), Svedovsky (http://svedovsky.com/) or any of the many used models available.

It's unfortunate that you can't access the for sale forums for 30 days, because there are several 8x10s for sale, including a really nice Wisner Expedition. But the sellers on this forum haven't seemed to realize how much the 30 day rule limits their potential sales and protested about it, so that rule will probably will never change. You might try looking on the APUG for sale forums, which are open to everyone.

[David Lobato]

Clicked the link but it says I don't have sufficent access? or that I"m trying to change a post....???

You need to wait 30 days from when you join to view the For Sale ads.

[Tin Can]

30 days will pass in a LF wink of a slow shutter, LF world moves slow and deliberately.

It is well worth your patience to wait 30 days. You may be pleasantly surprised. This forum is where the action is...

Any camera is just a fancy box. The right lens for wet plate is more important, as are other parts of the process.

Study now and save big.

I suggest you start here. http://collodionbastards.org/

And ask more questions!

[StoneNYC]

Indeed, there are tons of good 8x10 manufacturers out there now. Deardorffs were great for their time, but there are lighter, easier to use, and more flexible cameras being made today. Take you pick: Ritter (http://www.lg4mat.net/LFcamera.html), Ebony (http://www.ebonycamera.com/), Shen Hao (http://www.shen-hao.com), Chamonix (http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/810.html), Walker (http://www.walkercameras.com/XL_8x10.html), Lotus (http://www.lotusviewcamera.at/cameras/lovica_8x10_e.html), Canham (http://www.canhamcameras.com/), Argentum (http://www.argentumcamera.com/), Svedovsky (http://svedovsky.com/) or any of the many used models available.

It's unfortunate that you can't access the for sale forums for 30 days, because there are several 8x10s for sale, including a really nice Wisner Expedition. But the sellers on this forum haven't seemed to realize how much the 30 day rule limits their potential sales and protested about it, so that rule will probably will never change. You might try looking on the APUG for sale forums, which are open to everyone.

What he/she said, many to choose from, if your heart is set on the Deardorff get a used one, if you want something lighter but "cheap" go with Ritter or Chamonix (I went Chamonix, AMAZING CAMERA) if you want a Mercedes get an Ebony. If you want custom made, there's a new Italian maker (Allesandro?) making them, he has a WATERPROOF view camera! (bellows and body, not lenses obviously).

Many to choose from

[Fred L]

Not that it's unaffordable but I wouldn't call a Ritter 'cheap'. Maybe a better description would be 'more affordable than Ebony or Lotus' perhaps ? Never handled a Ritter but familiar enough to have explored getting an 8x10 with 7x17 back option.

[Joseph Kayne]

What about the Wista DX810?

[Fred L]

Had a Wista, liked it but when a Zone VI came up...the Wista is now in Italy last I heard ;)

[StoneNYC]

Not that it's unaffordable but I wouldn't call a Ritter 'cheap'. Maybe a better description would be 'more affordable than Ebony or Lotus' perhaps ? Never handled a Ritter but familiar enough to have explored getting an 8x10 with 7x17 back option.

Cheap as in inexpensive, I didn't mean of poor quality, hence the quotes, and also I grouped Chamonix as cheap, in terms of NEW LF gear, $3,000 IS CHEAP for an 8x10 as an example. That's all I meant, Ebony is what? $8,000 or something? And Linhof 4x5's are also like $8,000+? So Chamonix and Ritter are less expensive. Shen or Wista is a lithe less but still up there and why get the at when a Chammy fr example is so close in price and a bit better in quality? (I don't know ALL brands but after seeing a few, I can say the Chamonix has few drawbacks, most can be overcome easily with simple mods).

[Luis-F-S]

if you want a Mercedes get an Ebony. If you want custom made, there's a new Italian maker (Allesandro?) making them, he has a WATERPROOF view camera! (bellows and body, not lenses obviously).
Many to choose from

Only thing an Ebony will get you over a Deardorff is a depleted bank account. I still have not seen any wooden field appreciably "better" than a Deardorff. Waterproof, isn't that wonderful! :confused:

[Fred L]

I know what you meant Stone ;) cheap is still a term I would not apply to large format cameras re: cost. semantics yeah but it just sounds demeaning is all. for example, I wouldn't want a client to say I'm cheaper as that denotes inferior quality no matter what one meant. words are very powerful so we should use and choose them wisely ;)

[Kirk Gittings]

Deardorffs have substantial LF street cred. They have proven their functionality, durability and long term value like very few VCs have. They may not be the absolute best in any conceivable category, but at the end of the day they simply just work well and last.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Stone, there is Value and there is Price. Two entirely different things.

If, for example, you stumble upon a very reasonably priced item, it
does not translates into WORTH in practical application.

Application - get it?

Prompted by Mr. Gitting's post: :) To me, personally, the Deardorff 8x10 has the peculiar physics that it becomes heavier as I grow older. But I like it, as I love my wife whom I am not about to do the old 'carry over the threshold' act.

All in good sport, I hope.
Jac

[koh303]

Deardorffs have substantial LF street cred. They have proven their functionality, durability and long term value like very few VCs have. They may not be the absolute best in any conceivable category, but at the end of the day they simply just work well and last.

Lots of things have street cred, like american made cars... That does not make them good, usable or say anything about their durability functionality which deardorffs severely lack. Said "cred" comes from some inexplicable mystique, some famous people using them, and the fact they were innovators when they first came out (more then 80 years ago...). Since then, things have changed. The "cred" in this case does not come from a gun wielding teen drug dealer, and not from popular opinion (as there are so few deardorffs, and so many photographers, who use not deardorffs) but from threads like this one, where experts proclaim their opinion as fact.

They are not the best camera in any category, they do not last, and they work well... well, that depends on what work it is you are doing. They last as well as any other similar made camera, and in most cases not as well as anything made in Japan.

Don't get me wrong, i lovez my deardorffs and thing they are wonderful pretty things. I photograph with other cameras for sake of my sanity and longevity.

[koh303]

...(I went Chamonix, AMAZING CAMERA)....

Really? You bought a chamonix? 8X10? That's news to me, and everyone else... I have not yet seen you mention that in every thread on the LFPF ever before.

I think you were talking about Allesandro Gibellini:
http://largeformat-camera.jimdo.com/

All the bellows i use when i restore deardorffs are waterproof too, thought i am not sure how that helps in any way... It is a cool feature nonetheless.

[Tin Can]

Really? You bought a chamonix? 8X10? That's news to me, and everyone else... I have not yet seen you mention that in every thread on the LFPF ever before.

I think you were talking about Allesandro Gibellini:
http://largeformat-camera.jimdo.com/

All the bellows i use when i restore deardorffs are waterproof too, thought i am not sure how that helps in any way... It is a cool feature nonetheless.

Oy! Nice link to cool cameras.

I want the 8X10 red body with white bellows, that is a dream I won't realize. :(

[Jac@stafford.net]

Oy! Nice link to cool cameras.

I want the 8X10 red body with white bellows, that is a dream I won't realize. :(

Is the bellows interior also white?
.

[koh303]

The Gibellini cameras are not cheap. They are however excellently made, and guy making them is using all the latest high tech manufacturing techiniques available today, such as laser cutting, CF construction, high tech nylon fabric bellows, teflon bearing racks etc....

[Tin Can]

The Gibellini cameras are not cheap. They are however excellently made, and guy making them is using all the latest high tech manufacturing techiniques available today, such as laser cutting, CF construction, high tech nylon fabric bellows, teflon bearing racks etc....

Good to see full adoption of modern materials.

Ritter also does his own higher tech designs.

[Colin Graham]

The Gibellinis seem oddly designed. What gives the front standard torsional rigidity? The standard sides appear to move independently- there's nothing tying them together except the lens board stage. Seems like it would be difficult to zero out the movements.


http://u.jimdo.com/www60/o/s93bd203158a4abdd/img/i1bd288b1026a1db4/1416408583/std/image.jpg

Maybe it has a few ball detents in the lens stage that pop into the standard slots when aligned.

[Jac@stafford.net]

When I master CAD I will submit my idea for an LF (wide angle) camera which I have built as a prototype.

I am encouraged by the fact that an Apple engineer and photographer saw it and said, "I don't know what I am looking at!" Yeah, it is that radical. Or stupid.

So far, there's nothing new under the sun, the moon, the stars above.
.

[dsphotog]

An Ansco will make just as good an image.

[StoneNYC]

On the waterproof comment, if you don't understand the benefits of a waterproof bellows and body, then you aren't shooting in any interesting weather :)

I don't get the draw of Deardorff only because weight to me is a huge issue, such a bulky camera is a negative to me, and then the whole uncertainty of parts from the new Deardorff guy, just think there are better options. But I've never seen one in person or used one, maybe you should come to Whitey's picnic in CT this summer with one and we can all meet the catlabs guy and check one out if you have something to show us in stock?

[neil poulsen]

I think that the design of an 8x10 Deardorff camera gives it the potential of being a really excellent camera. It's long enough to handle my longest lens with room to spare, which is 600mm. I really like the adjustable front rise/fall. After aligning the standards to vertical, one can make up to a 1.25" adjustment up or down, without compromising that alignment. It collapses into a package that fits my Photobackpacker case, that conveniently fits inside my backpack. The 8x10 weighs about 11lbs, which isn't too bad. It it has to, say with a 4x5 or 5x7 reduction back, it can handle a 90mm lens and still have that 1.25" rise or fall. With both front and rear swing, one can obtain all needed adjustments for any reasonable 8x10 lens. (Swing, shift, rise fall, tilt, etc.) One can find a variety of reduction lensboards to other mounts, or make their own. If the finish is good, the camera can be absolutely beautiful.

Given all these design features, much depends on the condition of the particular example. I've seen 8x10 Deardorffs that are pretty loose, whose use would cause me concern. But, one can find tight examples that can also be cosmetically appealing. Depending on the age of the camera, there are a variety of installable upgrades that can be purchased on EBay from that website to whom others have referred. (On one such purchase, I had to open a case to obtain delivery. So, I would not purchase outside of EBay.)

I found one that I really like, and I look forward to using it for a very long time.

[StoneNYC]

I think that the design of an 8x10 Deardorff camera gives it the potential of being a really excellent camera. It's long enough to handle my longest lens with room to spare, which is 600mm. I really like the adjustable front rise/fall. After aligning the standards to vertical, one can make up to a 1.25" adjustment up or down, without compromising that alignment. It collapses into a package that fits my Photobackpacker case, that conveniently fits inside my backpack. The 8x10 weighs about 11lbs, which isn't too bad. It it has to, say with a 4x5 or 5x7 reduction back, it can handle a 90mm lens and still have that 1.25" rise or fall. With both front and rear swing, one can obtain all needed adjustments for any reasonable 8x10 lens. (Swing, shift, rise fall, tilt, etc.) One can find a variety of reduction lensboards to other mounts, or make their own. If the finish is good, the camera can be absolutely beautiful.

Given all these design features, much depends on the condition of the particular example. I've seen 8x10 Deardorffs that are pretty loose, whose use would cause me concern. But, one can find tight examples that can also be cosmetically appealing. Depending on the age of the camera, there are a variety of installable upgrades that can be purchased on EBay from that website to whom others have referred. (On one such purchase, I had to open a case to obtain delivery. So, I would not purchase outside of EBay.)

I found one that I really like, and I look forward to using it for a very long time.

Cool, thanks for the review, I was under the impression that the 8x10 was much heavier (16lbs or something?) but 11lbs isn't that far from the Chamonix in weight, but I'm confused, I don't understand the comment about 1.25 inches, does it go more than that in either direction? I think the Chamonix has all movements except rear rise.

[Tracy Storer]

Cool, thanks for the review, I was under the impression that the 8x10 was much heavier (16lbs or something?) but 11lbs isn't that far from the Chamonix in weight, but I'm confused, I don't understand the comment about 1.25 inches, does it go more than that in either direction? I think the Chamonix has all movements except rear rise.
Neil was referring to the sliding panel in the front standard that gives you rise/fall without loosening the main rise/tilt locks.

[Kevin Crisp]

I don't really care if anybody else likes Deardorff cameras. But claiming they aren't funtional, or durable? They set up fast, the sliding front panel comes in handy, mine is 75 years old and works fine.

[StoneNYC]

Neil was referring to the sliding panel in the front standard that gives you rise/fall without loosening the main rise/tilt locks.

Oh! Gotcha, neat feature, the Chamonix seems to "stay put" when adjusting even though it's all one lock. But for ultra critical stuff I guess that's a nice feature.

[dsphotog]

It really is a great feature, I'm surprised more modern cameras don't have the sliding lens panel.

[karl french]

Yes, the sliding panel is perhaps the best of many great features on Deardorff field cameras. It's amazing how often I use it to get that last little bit of front rise to straighten out verticals, where otherwise I might start fighting with the bellows.

[fishbulb]

It really is a great feature, I'm surprised other cameras don't have the sliding lens panel.

It's an interesting feature that provides some additional flexibility - for example, being able to do this (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/14/7d/09/147d097c8da3b09069d797c390edc363.jpg) - but the dimensions of the lens board opening (the "frame" of the front standard) have to be tall enough to accommodate up and down movement of the lens' rear element within the opening.

This adds to the weight and complexity of the design. The Ebony and Canham 8x10s, among others, use basically the same type of front standard design as a Deardorff, but without the sliding lens panel, and are consequently much more compact in their design.

[Tin Can]

If OP is still here,


A few of us have the largest Deardorff's ever built for Chicago Catalog Sales companies such as Sears and Montgomery Wards, in the 1920's until 1970's, for high definition corrective imaging.

I have the 11x14 SC11 which in this PDF is near the bottom. It is so big it takes 2 men a day to disassemble, get it out the door, on a truck and to a new location. Mine never leaves my studio.

Some us love traditional things even if their time has passed. I use mine for Portrait and Macro.

The below link, has some interesting Deardorff history.

http://deardorffcameras.com/deardorffcameras/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/15a.pdf

[djdister]

Yes, the sliding panel is perhaps the best of many great features on Deardorff field cameras. It's amazing how often I use it to get that last little bit of front rise to straighten out verticals, where otherwise I might start fighting with the bellows.

But in practice, how does that provide an advantage over a front standard with the same rise and fall capability?

[StoneNYC]

If OP is still here,


A few of us have the largest Deardorff's ever built for Chicago Catalog Sales companies such as Sears and Montgomery Wards, in the 1920's until 1970's, for high definition corrective imaging.

I have the 11x14 SC11 which in this PDF is near the bottom. It is so big it takes 2 men a day to disassemble, get it out the door, on a truck and to a new location. Mine never leaves my studio.

Some us love traditional things even if their time has passed. I use mine for Portrait and Macro.

The below link, has some interesting Deardorff history.

http://deardorffcameras.com/deardorffcameras/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/15a.pdf

Wow! That must be huge! The only 11x14 I used was this Century and it was so light and compact!

131125
131126

I couldn't imagine taking 2 days to move a camera, definitely for studio only!

[Kevin Crisp]

The front panel can slide even with a compressed bellows.

[8x10 user]

The S11 is a great camera for studio work and large lenses. Century's are nice too but don't offer as many movement options. My S11 came with revolving 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10 backs. I dont have a place to use it right now but I plan for that to change in a few months.

The Deardorff field camera seems pretty nice to me. I have used one of the modern field cameras but it V8 is a whole lot more sturdy then my old improved Seneca and a ton more portable then the 8x10 Sinar that I started with. The deardorff seems like a great option for heavy lenses such as the larger modern lenses and classic up maybe 8lbs. I might look for an 5x7 version to replace my seneca when I get the money. I do like that my Seneca has an internally mounted packard shutter. I'm not sure if that is an option for deardorff and the packard shutter boxes for deardorff all seem to reduce the lensboard size.

In terms of build quality I think the wood work would be equal to anything today. Doesn't one of the deardorff clones use aluminum? Its cheaper and easier to machine but I believe nickel plated brass still has the highest wear and corrosion resistance for use in gearing. I know titanium parts are lighter and also have good corrosion resistance.

[8x10 user]

I saw someone nearly loose and hand or some fingers when trying to put one of those 60lb lead counterweights into a 14' Bi-Post stand. Luckily the camera was at the bottom so the weight did not travel the 14' whole distance. Surprisingly we were able to get his hand unstuck without significant damage.

[Tin Can]

I saw someone nearly loose and hand or some fingers when trying to put one of those 60lb lead counterweights into a 14' Bi-Post stand. Luckily the camera was at the bottom so the weight did not travel the 14' whole distance. Surprisingly we were able to get his hand unstuck without significant damage.

That's because somebody was doing it wrong. It is possible to install and handle the weights if you use your head more than than your hands.

Despite my physical issues, I almost could have inserted and raised the uprights myself.

The trick is to insert and remove the weights with the uprights horizontal, first feed the cable from the bottom to the top and slide the weight into the bottom. Or the reverse for disassembly. Then leave the heavy weights at the bottom and lift the poles upright. The wheel spreader bars are not attached during this. I wrote this all up in DIY some time ago.