mystique of an 8x10 Deardorff?

[Greg]

Lately have seen quite a few 8x10 Deardorffs on the market FS for substantial prices and they seem to be selling. Was wondering what the "mystique" was or is for an 8x10 Deardorff?

Back in the 1980s I was the second owner of an 8x10 Deardorff. It was offered to me in mint condition for a very reasonable price that I couldn't refuse, so I bought it. Used it for a couple of years and liked it but did not fall in love with it.

Eventually sold it (being in mint minus condition, got a premium price for it) and bought an 8x10 Sinar Norma system which I much more enjoyed using. Did use an 8x10 Sinar P in work for many years but for my personal work preferred the classical Norma.

For location work (hiking in the woods of New England) the 8x10 Norma was not exactly the optimum camera to carry around, so purchased an 8x10 Chamonix, an f/64 backpack and could't be happier.

As for the Dearforff, I am perplex on the attributes of an 8x10 Deardorff. To me the Chamonix 8x10 is so far easier to use. Chamonix's weight may be less, but not a factor for me. I even prefer the locking knobs on the Chamonix.

So why do so many photographers idolize and prize their 8x10 Deardorffs?

thanks in advance

[Alan Gales]

Have you compared the price of a new Chamonix 8x10 versus a nice used Deardorff? Used Chamonix 8x10 cameras are hard to find and are still much more than a lot of used Deardorff's. I don't own a Deardorff but I bought my Wehman used for $1500. I had to sell equipment to finance that.

Nothing against Chamonix but sometimes you prize what you can afford. :)

[Jac@stafford.net]

In my modest experience the Deardorff V8 is suitable for studio work, and a major pain in the field.
I have no idea why the US military contracted to buy it unless they were enamored with
battle ship metrics with two operators to a camera.

[DennisD]

I have no idea why the US military contracted to buy it unless they were enamored with
battle ship metrics.

Considering some of the weird things the government (and/or military) buys and the prices paid, Deardorfs might be some of the better purchases !

[Jac@stafford.net]

Considering some of the weird things the government (and/or military) buys and the prices paid, Deardorfs might be some of the better purchases !

Did it substitute for a toilet seat?

[Willie]

My Uncle has one of the 300 made for the U.S. Air Force. It is an 8x10. Works well. After using his I bought one tho not the military camera. I like how they feel and operate. Do use it on location and in the field. No studio use.
It works. It lasts. It is well built. It is also a nice piece of History and I'm glad I bought it.

I did try two metal cameras before I got the Deardorff. A Kodak folding metal and a Calumet metal monster. The deardorff fits me while both of those gave me fits. They work fine and the new owners like them. I like the Deardorff.

[karl french]

Here we go again... Really, it's one of the most friendly 8x10 field cameras ever made. Everything falls right where it should be. Some think it's heavy, but 12.5 pounds isn't that bad. Some modern cameras have more features, most modern cameras are lighter, but a Deardorff is a fine example of American craftsmanship and engineering at it's best. There is a reason it was (and still is in some cases) the choice of professional photographers for decades. Of all the cameras I own, (and that's a lot) and in light of the fires in Napa and Sonoma, the one bag I would grab on the way out of the house in an evacuation situation is the one with my 8x10 'dorff, Cooke 311mm XVa, and Schneider 21cm Angulon.

[Jac@stafford.net]

My Uncle has one of the 300 made for the U.S. Air Force. It is an 8x10. Works well. After using his I bought one tho not the military camera. I like how they feel and operate. Do use it on location and in the field. No studio use. [...]

Willie, I am guessing you, and maybe Karl French are built like a bull. A good thing. I'm just a small guy who somehow lived through six years military service; 1964 to 1970. Joy of joys. Be well, Brothers.
--
Jac, a wimp

[Ari]

Like most objects with a cult following, either you like it in spite of its shortcomings, or you dislike it despite its advantages.
I fall into the latter group; borrowed a friend's mint-condition 'Dorff for a while, I absolutely hated the thing.
Every time I opened it and set it up, I was reminded of the oft-maligned car that handles like a shopping cart.
Not that it was a bad camera (it's a very good camera), it just felt wrong in my hands.

[BrianShaw]

Did it substitute for a toilet seat?

Hammer.

[William Whitaker]

To each his/her own. I danced with the Deardorff. Three times in 8x10 and twice in 5x7. My card wasn't full, but she never asked me to dance again....

[Vaughn]

I started 8x10 with a borrowed Deardorff. The operation of it was familiar since I used a copy (India) of a Deardorff Special (w/ 4x5 and 5x7 backs) for a few years.

I have a Zone VI 8x10 now -- a nice camera but it has its faults. As good as a Deardorff in most ways, but it has been too long since I handled a Deardorff to say how.

[Corran]

A friend of mine has a Deardorff 8x10 that he was given, and I've handled it a few times. Also my 8x20 is half of a Deardorff glommed onto a Korona...

The 8x10 seemed not significantly different in operation to the Wista/Tachi I used to have. I wouldn't want one - too heavy, nothing much to make it better or worse than anything else I don't think. Perhaps Deardorff is similar to Leica and Hasselblad - a name that adds to the mystique and cache. It certainly has a better ring to it than Shen-Hao (someone asked if my Shen-Hao 617 was a Hasselblad recently) or "Cham-oh-nicks" as it is apparently supposed to be said, as opposed to the French-ified version I use in conversation.

To each his own, but I won't be owning a Deardorff, unless the previous mentioned one gets passed on to me someday.

[John Kasaian]

All I can add is that my ol' V8 'dorff works for me.
I enjoy the heck out of mine.
Sometimes, it's like it's going to speak.
Weird, huh?

[Alan9940]

I don't know of any magical powers that my 'Dorff may bestow upon me when in the field. ;) And, I've never owned or used any other 8x10. It's simple...for me. Nearly 40 years ago, I asked my mentor what 8x10 I should buy and, without a bit of hesitation, he said Deardorff. I've dragged that puppy through hip deep snow, carried it through the deserts of the southwest, and generally have used it many times under rather intolerable weather. It has never broken or let me down! Regardless of any cult status it may hold today, it's one of the cameras that will be with me to the end. I won't even tell you what I bought it for new...it would be too embarrassing! ☺

[Willie]

Willie, I am guessing you, and maybe Karl French are built like a bull. A good thing. I'm just a small guy who somehow lived through six years military service; 1964 to 1970. Joy of joys. Be well, Brothers.
--
Jac, a wimp

5'6" and 140 lbs. Grew up bucking hay bales on a farm and milking cows.

The deardorff balances well. Looks nice also. I think the quest for lightness in large format cameras is a case of diminishing returns. Too light and you don't have a solid camera and it is subject to movement and vibration.

[LabRat]

I don't own, but used them, and they are solid... Having used other cameras, I'm thinking it's like a big, old classic car (or truck), where the newer hi-tech cameras are like modern racers, but both do the job...

But I like a camera that I learn (by touch), but the camera also learns me, so we can dance together... :-)

Steve K

[Pali K]

I love mine and besides the bulk, I never understood why others complain about that it has clunky controls. Maybe my camera is just in better condition than most but I find that it locks down steady and has plenty of controls for fine tuning a composition. My most used lense is a 360mm F6.8 Symmar-S which is a heavy monster and the camera handles it perfectly.

This is from last evening with 360 Symmar-S:
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171015/3876bddaea9fc8260a6747e090742e36.jpg

Pali

[neil poulsen]

I bought a Deardorff which happened to be in almost new condition. Very tight adjustments, which is a plus. It was an NFS camera, so I bought and installed a new upgrade for front swings. The camera felt right in operation, and I especially liked the Deardorff front rise mechanism to fine-tune that adjustment.

Then at a swap meet, I stumbled onto a complete Sinar Norma camera kit for very little money and bought it. I was going to turn it over, but began comparing the two 8x10 cameras. I know that many photographers use, like, and produce great results with Dearodorff 9x10's, but I preferred the stability of the rail camera. The Deardorff was just a bit wobbly for my tastes, especially at longer extensions.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

I've never had a Leica nor a Deardorff, but perusing through old catalogs from the 1940's it's clear that the were both once within the same order of magnitude as other cameras, even though they cost somewhat more. (Same was true with Linhof, incidentally.) My guess is the mystique came about later. All sorts of mass-produced items from mid-century were poorly engineered and built. When folks found something that would hold up to use, not instantly break or fall apart from hard use, it was indeed something to crow about. (Excepting kitschy stuff like Diana camera-clones, there's just no tolerating that now.)

[Leszek Vogt]

Some of this mystique could be attributed to AA's vortex of his work. Personally I don't have one and don't wish to have one. Perhaps that could have been tweaked and my arm twisted....have we had someone responsible in the follow-up dept. Fortunately it's not a must-have camera.

Les

[Willie]

You guys do know Edward Weston never had a Deardorff. If he had we would all be marveling at Pepper #3 rather than Pepper #30 since it is common knowledge that using a Deardorff makes everything so much easier... ;-)

[John Olsen]

I've got the same setup as Pali K above, Deardorff plus 360 mm lens. It works for me, but I've never thought about whether it had any mystique. It has the movements I need, it locks down firmly, and it's lighter than my 4x5 rail system. Thinking about mystique and prestige is not good for my creative process - better I should think about doing something worthy with whatever I have.

170927

[karl french]

Ansel never liked Deardorffs and Edward complained about his Century Universal.

[Mark Sampson]

Deardorff gained its reputation because in the 1930s and 40s, it was a more capable machine than the competition.
The 'mystique' comes from the work many well-known photographers did with the cameras. So people still value the Deardorff... and that shows in the used prices today.
Sinars (and Linhofs) must have cost more than a new car back in the day, and being large and heavy, were meant for studio use. Probably sold in small numbers, there are fewer to choose from today (if often bargains when found).
Being bulky and heavy, they are perhaps less popular with today's 8x10 users, who tend to be amateurs and artists who work on location, with no client to bill or budget for assistants. So field cameras are more popular, and people may prefer an original, rather than a modern derivative.
I've used several other 8x10 cameras, both professionally and personally. I wouldn't hesitate to try a Deardorff 8x10, if I ever go back to the format. They were and are well-built professional tools that were chosen by a demanding clientele... because the camera could do the job. Today? Still true.

[Jonathan Barlow]

170943 170944 170949

[John Olsen]

170943 170944 170949

Avedons?

[diversey]

I love Deardorff cameras and have 4x5/5x7, 8x10 and 11x14 ones. Deardorff cameras are all-round cameras in terms of looking, feels, functions/movements, studio/field, etc.

[Mark Sawyer]

The one thing that always bugged me about Deardorffs is the rounded lens board corners. Not interchangeable with other common 6x6 lens board cameras, (Kodak 2d, Burke & James, Rembrandt, Noba, Agfa-Ansco...)

[karl french]

Actually, you'll find that the 6x6 round cornered boards work just fine on many of those cameras. Using 6x6 Deardorff boards on my 8x20 Korona with no trouble.

[jp]

I've used someone elses a couple of times. They are a little lighter than the other clamshell like the KMV. It's a little smaller than the wooden B&J field camera, it's less expensive than the new choices like Chamonix and Canham. THe big metal plate on the bottom works nicely with tripods with a big top like the Ries A series heads. I liked it but don't lug around an 8x10 enough to warrant trading up from the B&J I have to save a couple of inches.

[Willie]

The one thing that always bugged me about Deardorffs is the rounded lens board corners. Not interchangeable with other common 6x6 lens board cameras, (Kodak 2d, Burke & James, Rembrandt, Noba, Agfa-Ansco...)

It is said that Jack Deardorff notices many lensboards through the years had been dropped and the square corners chipped, dented and rounded from that happening. That is why he went with the rounded corner.

[Jim Galli]

Lads, we haven't done a very good job of addressing the original question. There is a certain mystique to the thing. It's the Eames chair of cameras. The Harley Davidson of the photo world. Just accept it. Whether you like it or not changes nothing. They are beautiful things. Superbly made. In a time when most of the west coast school was using old Ansco's or 2D's the Deardorff had all the moves. Up front.

I've had 3. I settled on a Kodak 2D that isn't worth $300. Alas the Deardorff front standard does not like old heavy brass petzvals. And you can't put a Packard inside, like the Kodak. But I still am tempted often by the siren of the Deardorff. I have 5X7 and 11X14 and love them both. Neither is for sale, unless you wish to pay mystique prices.

[Luis-F-S]

I have 6 at present from 4x5 to 11x14. I think that folks who don't understand or appreciate them should certainly use other capable cameras and leave the Dorffs for those of us who do. L

[Mark Sawyer]

Actually, you'll find that the 6x6 round cornered boards work just fine on many of those cameras. Using 6x6 Deardorff boards on my 8x20 Korona with no trouble.

But try putting the Korona boards on the Deardorff...


It is said that Jack Deardorff notices many lensboards through the years had been dropped and the square corners chipped, dented and rounded from that happening. That is why he went with the rounded corner.

Or you could not drop your lenses...

[karl french]

In a perfect world all cameras would take the same boards and no one would drop their lenses. That is not the case. Back to the original question. I think the mystique of the Deardorff really boils down to the fact that they are beautiful, functional and have been used by many famous photographers over the past 90 years.

[Bernice Loui]

Deardorff, image making tool of personal preference. No more, No less. if a given image maker is comfortable with a Deardorff and does what is required, there can be zero wrong with that choice. Much the same a painters favor certain brushes, paints, oils or technical folks who favor specific brands to types of instrumentation.

Mass acceptance of a given item does not always mean that item is ideal for any given individual, in this case, the image maker.


Bernice

[DrTang]

Leica M camera, Nikon F2, Hasselblad 500CM, Deardorff 8x10

always wondered why they were thought of so highly until I got one

[goamules]

I'd like to try one. But I always figure my $250 Kodak 2D, or Seneca Improved were 80% as good as a $1800 Deardorff, so pass on them. If mystique is worth a thousand words, it's not going to make your pictures a thousand times better. I have shot Leicas too (used one last weekend), but a good Canon or Nicca rangefinder is always as good....or better....and cheaper.

[Alan Gales]

Leica M camera, Nikon F2, Hasselblad 500CM, Deardorff 8x10

always wondered why they were thought of so highly until I got one

When I was young I dreamed of owning a Hasselblad 500CM. I eventually acquired one in trade. It was a very nice camera and everything I had hoped it to be but I couldn't understand the mystique behind it. I actually preferred shooting a Mamiya RZ67 but I think most would be happier with the smaller and lighter weight Blad.

Certain cameras have a loyal following because they are great cameras to use. I think mystique is just something imagined.

[Gudmundur Ingolfsson]

I went to a workshop in Virginia City Nevada in 1987 where I met Luis-F-S. He had brougt two Deardorffs, an 8x10” and a 4x5” and the teacher/master Oliver Gagliani had a 4x5” Dorff as well so I was bitten by the bug and ordered an 8x10” from Helix in Chicago right when I came back from the west. I never realy took to the camera. It sure was beautiful on the Ries tripod, but it was very heavy and I was always in panic that I would scrape of the glossy finish. So I sold it in Germany with good profit since there it was considered exotic. Then I got a Phillips Advanced Series 8x10” which has been my camera ever since. It’s light and if there is a mark on the stealth surface you make it black again with a permanent marker.

[profvandegraf]

Mystique? Maybe. I picked up my 8x10 Deardorff (most of it anyway)from a retiring photographer in Chicago. I was a poor student in 1990 and was told about the studio closing by word of mouth so I walked over to the building. It seemed huge to me, lots of studio and lab equipment in use since at least the 1950's. I was looking for cameras, he had 2 old beat up V8s and one slightly less beat up Burke and James 4x5. I wanted them all but could only afford one of the Deardorffs. No back, shredded bellows beat to hell and back. $50.00. Didn't eat much that week. Fast forward 20 years after lugging that hulk half way across the country decided it was finally time to put it back together. Added an Ebay bellows and a back by Richard Ritter, haven't refinished it, but cleaned up and lubed the moving parts and it works pretty good for me. Yes I kinda have a soft spot for these old wooden cameras especially Deardorffs and especially mine.

[diversey]

I once met a Chicago photographer and he used to work for Sears Catalogs years ago. He said Sears Catalogs owned sixty 8x10 Deardorff cameras when he was there.

[Jac@stafford.net]

I'd like to try one. But I always figure my $250 Kodak 2D [...]

By pure luck I found a Century 1 8x10 complete with matching numbered extension rail. It is a joy to carry folded into the field. Not such a thrill to deal with how it blows in the wind like a sail. I simply work in the wrong places, but I recommend it, and the many clones for a reasonable price.

I'm too decrepit to schlep a Deardorff V8 today. Getting old is okay considering the alternative.

[John Kasaian]

The OP's question was re mystique, right?

171011

'Nuff said?

[domaz]

170943 170944 170949

Where can I find a lens hood that big? I haven't looked hard but never seen one that style.

[paulbarden]

When I bought my Deardorff, I didn't know squat about its "mystique" - I just saw a camera that looked capable of doing what I needed it to do, and the kit came with a fantastic Kodak Ektar 14" lens. I couldn't care less if it has "magical properties", imagined or real. Its simply a solid camera that is easy to work with and performs as I need it to.

[Mark Sampson]

In 1982 when I was first shopping for a view camera, I could have purchased a new 4x5 Deardorff. But I was unaware that they were still in production; they didn't advertise (and of course no internet, oh the horror). So I bought a Tachihara, which was a fine machine, and then on to other cameras, eventually. 35 years later, I admire the 4x5/5x7 Deardorff, although I'm not likely to ever use one. But you never know!

[Jonathan Barlow]

Where can I find a lens hood that big? I haven't looked hard but never seen one that style.


The large square hoods that he's using might be from motion picture cameras of the day.

[Jim Galli]

Where can I find a lens hood that big? I haven't looked hard but never seen one that style.

On Ebay in the cameras and photography section do a search for "barn doors" and you might find something you could adapt for the purpose.

[Michael Kadillak]

I remember clearly the digs on Deardorff over the years on the forum here and steered clear of them until I happened upon a 1940 Marine V11 locally several years ago. Could not pass it up and I must confess that although I had my doubts that it would work out it has been a joy to use. Yes, it is heavy and big but it is simple to use in the field and locks down perfectly to make fine images. You just need to grab it with both hands and finess it a bit. Great Camera!

[Luis-F-S]

............. if there is a mark on the stealth surface you make it black again with a permanent marker.

Liquid gold and a little brown shoe polish if necessary works wonders on the Dorff...............

[Greg]

Very interesting responses to my Deardorff post. Was able to contact a fellow photographer and was gratefully able borrow his 8x10 Deardorff with a 12" Dagor for a couple of days. Having owned and used one in the past, was familiar with the controls after a short time of using the camera in the field. Now the two 8x10s I use are a Sinar Norma and an 8x10 Chamonix. Inside my lab/studio or from the back of my Q5 SUV use a classic Sinar Norma. For shooting any distance from the Q5, I backpack the Chamonix in s f/64 backpack. Over the years have used many 8x10 view cameras. Without a doubt the Sinar 8x10 P was the easiest to use but the most bulky to transport. My first 8x10 a B&J wooden, the hardest to accurately use but boy was it solid.

Shot some images outside with the borrowed Deardorff.

Final impression: I might compare the 8x10 Deardorff akin to a classic 1965 VW Beetle (I actually own one!)... very basic with no frills, reliable, sturdy, dependably that always gets you from point A to point B. etc. Does the Deardorff feel "heavy" to me? not really considering its solid construction. I like to use my '65 Beetle (2 years old) to pick up the mail and to do local in town chores. Feelings towards the Deardorff very similar, but for "studio" work prefer the Norma and for backpacking the Chamonix. Final feelings... if I were to only have a Deardorff as my only 8x10 view camera, I'd be a happy photographer for sure.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Final impression: I might compare the 8x10 Deardorff akin to a classic 1965 VW Beetle (I actually own one!)...

I compare the V8 to a Harley dresser, and this is how I've remade (http://www.digoliardi.net/butcher.jpg) one to my liking. Can't do that to a Deardorff.

Beetles? Here is my '58 (http://www.digoliardi.net/58bug.jpg)that I finally gave away last year.

Next to go is the Deardorff which I might list here at my estate closing price.
.

[John Olsen]

I compare the V8 to a Harley dresser, and this is how I've remade (http://www.digoliardi.net/butcher.jpg) one to my liking. Can't do that to a Deardorff.

Beetles? Here is my '58 (http://www.digoliardi.net/58bug.jpg)that I finally gave away last year.

Next to go is the Deardorff which I might list here at my estate closing price.
.

Is that a hard-tail? I rode across Minnesota to get a new tire in St. Paul on the way to NYC and the slabs near-to-killed me. Nice bike though.

[Don Dudenbostel]

My first Deardorff was an early 5x7 model with 4.5" square lens boards. I bought it in 1968 and used it a year and sold it to buy a new 4x5 Sinar Norma that I still have. The Norm was the 4x5 backbone of my business until digital came.

In 1972 I worked for a commercial studio that had a Calumet green monster. It was ok but not as nice to use as the Deardorff I had. I left that job and worked for a large ad agency that had a new 8x10 Deardorff. What a pleasure to use. It was smooth and precise and very stable in the studio as well as the field. In addition with the sliding front panel was a huge plus for wide lenses.

In 1972 I bought a commercial photo friends extra 8x10 Deardorff. My friend was the 2nd owner of this well used early 1930 machine. I bought it for $75 and a Wollensak wide angle for another $75. I replaced the bellows and put a swinging front turntable on it. I used this camera for thousands of catalog shots until a few years ago when I went all digital in the biz.

I wound up selling the V8 and bought a beautiful Canham traditional 8x10. The Canham was beautiful but fussy to use. I also had a 4x5/5x7 wood Canham too. Same fussy controls and locks plus there was a swelling issue with the wood in the humid south eastern US where I live. Both cameras required frequent adjustments.

I sold both cameras and bought a 4x5 Special in very clean condition and a mint 8x10 Deardorff. Both cameras now sloth my need for large format along with my Vera sweet Ebony SV45TE which is the absolute ultimate in large format.

For me the Deardorff cameras are a familiar part of my workflow. When under the cloth my hands naturally go to the appropriate control and I never have to come out from under my dark cloth until I'm ready to set the lens.

[Jac@stafford.net]

Is that a hard-tail? I rode across Minnesota to get a new tire in St. Paul on the way to NYC and the slabs near-to-killed me. Nice bike though.

Oh yes, a hard-tail. The frame was a '56, straight leg they made for only half a year. Harley had not yet made a rear suspension in 1956. (and note the rare front springer). Any relief was in their sprung seat post which I deleted. Primitive? You bet. I laced an early Gold Wing rim with fat tire to the stock HD star hub using custom made spokes and aired the big tire down to 9 pounds. :) We did what was necessary so long ago, and that was in the days before blister-packed after-market parts. I built my bike from stuff collected off the floor of swap meets when that was still possible a long, long time ago.

[Jonathan Barlow]

171621

[Willie]

Has anyone figured out how to put front shift on a Deardorff? I know about swinging front and rear to get the effect but would like to have an honest inch or so of front shift.
On the Deardorffs, my Uncle quotes his friend Tillman Crane often with "one can never own too many Deardorffs".

[Andrew Plume]

Hi Willie

Shift is the main reason why I probably will never buy a Dorff, that's despite the paucity of ones for sale in the EU. I just cannot get by without it

Good luck anyhow

Andrew

[Luis-F-S]

Has anyone figured out how to put front shift on a Deardorff? I know about swinging front and rear to get the effect but would like to have an honest inch or so of front shift.
On the Deardorffs, my Uncle quotes his friend Tillman Crane often with "one can never own too many Deardorffs".

It's explained in Ken Hough's website. You rotate the camera slightly then you swing the front standard and rear frame and the opposite direction to get the shift.

[paulbarden]

It's explained in Ken Hough's website. You rotate the camera slightly then you swing the front standard and rear frame and the opposite direction to get the shift.

Exactly - its easy to emulate an inch or two of shift this way.

[Willie]

Exactly - its easy to emulate an inch or two of shift this way.

And a pain in the butt and takes more time and fiddling. Would like a quick shift left or right without all the fiddling around.

[Fred L]

I'd be asking Richard Ritter if he could work his magic to add shift to a Deardorff if I was wanting front shift.

[Andrew Plume]

Thanks for the explanation

Andrew

[Luis-F-S]

And how often are shifts used? I can't recall using them on my Sinar in some 20 years

[Willie]

And how often are shifts used? I can't recall using them on my Sinar in some 20 years

Photographing glass in old doors. Front shift helps keep the reflection out of the image. Tweaking both front and back and doing swing with each takes longer and is not as easy in really cold weather.

[Thom Bennett]

Photographing glass in old doors. Front shift helps keep the reflection out of the image. Tweaking both front and back and doing swing with each takes longer and is not as easy in really cold weather.

One of the reasons I got rid of my Deardorff and got a KMV; KMV has front shift, quicker focus, easier to grab knobs, and a bit more rise/fall. Plus it is metal and not as precious as a wooden camera. Having said that, I very rarely have the need for shift. And I certainly enjoyed the mystique of the Deardorff for all those years I owned it.

[Jonathan Barlow]

172181

[William Whitaker]

Some things simply are - and cannot be explained. The Deardorff V8 is an odd combination of features both refined and crude. The bottom line is that it works. And has worked - for decades. And for some notable people. And I think those last two factors largely support the mystique.

Personally, I came to the Deardorff with the naive expectation that it would be the end of the line. As in, "This is the end of the line, bub. Offa the train! T'ain't no more stops!"
Ironically, it was just the beginning. I have had or used 3 8x10 Deardorffs, 2 5x7's and a Triamapro or whatever that thing was. Never thought a monorail camera was for me, oh no. But I settled (such as it is) on a Sinar Norma, appreciating its engineering, fit & finish and overall aesthetic beauty. But I also prize my Ansco. Especially on a cold morning!

For a while I prized an 8x10 Gandolfi. But that was like taking my grandmother's heirloom furniture camping.

To each his own.
fwiw, ~W

[Jac@stafford.net]

I will be selling the better preserved V8 soon because it becomes heavier every year.
When I was fifty it wasn't so bad, but it has doubled its weight over the past twenty-one
years. So has everything else!