Modern film holders for old view camera like Korona/Kodak 2D/Ansco?

[Peter Yeti]

I'm thinking about getting an old 8x10 view camera like a Korona View or Kodak 2D or Ansco Universal or comparable. Now I'm wondering, do modern film holders have the correct dimensions to be used with such cameras? Or would I need to find old compatible wood holders or adjust the ground glass position?

Any help in this question is highly appreciated.

Peter

[Drew Bedo]

I use "modern" film holders with my Kodak 2D. I am pretty sure that the Ansco will too.

[Louis Pacilla]

The cameras you mention all take the the modern standard holders. The generation of cameras before the models the OP mentioned most all took proprietary holders.

[Pete Watkins]

My 1926 5x7 Ansco is OK with modern film holders, no problems. I doubt if the 8x10 would be any different.
Pete.

[Andrew Plume]

The cameras you mention all take the the modern standard holders. The generation of cameras before the models the OP mentioned most all took proprietary holders.

exactly

good luck
andrew

[Peter Yeti]

Thanks a lot for your answers, gentlemen. This sounds quite promising. Does anyone know whether this film holder standard somehow correlates with the introduction of spring backs? I have an old 5x7 tailboard where you still have to swing the ground glass open like a door to replace it by the (plate) holder. That one needs proprietary holders.

Peter

[John Kasaian]

Thanks a lot for your answers, gentlemen. This sounds quite promising. Does anyone know whether this film holder standard somehow correlates with the introduction of spring backs? I have an old 5x7 tailboard where you still have to swing the ground glass open like a door to replace it by the (plate) holder. That one needs proprietary holders.

Peter
Not all spring backs conform to the standard, but the cameras you mentioned do. If you're considering a more esoteric antique camera, ask here and anyone with experience with that model camera can let you know.

[Oren Grad]

There are two issues. Does the holder physically fit, and is the GG register correct? Don't assume the latter, even if a camera theoretically conforms to a standard. With old wooden cameras we don't know about production tolerances, or about how much the bearing surfaces might have worn during decades of use. For many types of use we can get away with a bit of slop. But if you have very critical requirements, you should be prepared to measure and shim as necessary if your results seem off.

[mdarnton]

Good advice for any camera, old or new, that's new to you. I have a Cambo split back that must have been used for a billion ID photos; the leading edge of the focus panel is so worn that the focus rocks on its center, and when you take it off, it's very easy to see the wear and the effect it has. I'm going to have to plane it flat and shim the glass back to compensate.

[Peter Yeti]

Thanks a lot for all the valuable information. For sure one has to check for tolerances and wear with those roughly century old wooden cameras. I know it's nothing like my "atomic bomb proof" Sinar or Linhof Technika. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that if it was originally designed for a standardised holder complying with current standards it might be easier to shim (if necessary) than if it was meant for a different proprietary standard. And of course I don't expect the same precision from an old wooden view camera as I get from the afore mentioned models I'm used to. However, I'm confident that one still can get excellent pictures with them as our ancestors did and many of you as well.

Peter

[Oren Grad]

To be clear, I own several 80-100 year old cameras and have used them with all sorts of holders old and new, some of them at least theoretically matched to the backs but many not. Somehow I've managed to make pictures I'm happy with.

How difficult it is to fix a mismatch depends on the direction of the error. If the GG is too close to the lens, it's easy to use shims to move it outward. But if it's too far, you have to do surgery on the back to bring it closer.

Good luck and have fun! :)

[Peter Yeti]

Yep, as I wrote. One certainly can get fabulous results with those old cameras, otherwise I wouldn't be looking for one.:) And the age would match that of many of my favourite lenses.

You are right, the direction of the error makes a big difference in the way how to correct it. What I assumed was that the necessary amount of correction (if any) would be smaller if the standards would be the same. Right?

Peter

[Oren Grad]

What I assumed was that the necessary amount of correction (if any) would be smaller if the standards would be the same. Right?

That's a plausible speculation if we assume that departures from standard are random and distributed in a well-behaved way. But I doubt anybody has systematic data on vintage view camera manufacture that would enable that assumption to be verified.