Do I own a Deardorff?!

[TexT]

Some time ago, while I was attending community college, I happened upon an advertisement selling some camera gear by a retired Nat Geo photographer local to me, who had also worked for Kodak around fifty years ago.
I didn't end up purchasing anything from the want ad (it was for a horseman, which while very nice, I don't have the space for the bulky case. However, he showed me around his home, all fifty years of his career that is coming to a close, and he mentioned and gestured to and old field camera on the shelf. At the end of the conversation; I agreed to buy the field camera, as it would suit my needs far better, and I got what I felt was a good deal on it ($350 with an old, cheap-ish lens).

We were unsure of the make; he recalled it being an "Arista" (one might recall the brand of entry-level films, papers and chemicals) but after some research we both settled on it being a "Rajah" or some other late Deardorff clone.

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=240505&d=1689472888


I noticed the remnants of an "O" in silver decal on the side; such as this:

240504s


However, while perusing the internet I found this link:

https://www.ebth.com/items/11500513-deardorff-and-sons-chicago-viewfinder-folding-plate-camera-1920s

Which shows photographs of a camera exactly like mine spare an intact label - and it purports to be a Deardorff!

Is this genuine? If nobody here knows; who could I contact to verify?

P.S. I am very new here and still figuring out how the photo upload system works!

[Greg Y]

Sure looks like it. I had a 1938 Deardorff w no front swing that looked identical to the camera in your post240516240517

[Mark Sampson]

The Rajah cameras were made of teak, as I recall. Deardorffs were made of mahogany.

[TexT]

Thank you, Greg. Indeed it does look similar!


The Rajah cameras were made of teak, as I recall. Deardorffs were made of mahogany.

I hadn't noticed that in the photos of them I had seen, but you seem to be entirely correct.

...and this looks like mahogany, judging from my experience with guitars and other instruments!
I am quite excited.

To be honest, the camera feels very solid and I quite wondered why a few people (not here but elsewhere) sometimes put down the copies, considering that I thought that I owned one and it seemed quite solid.

I recall having read that the one of Deardorff's friends or relatives had bought the name and parts and had continued production and repair; though I can't seem to find any sort of contact information...

With all of this in mind, I feel rather sure that I have an original older-model Deardorff, with the original finish no less. Wonderful!

Of course, if anyone has noticed anything awry I would certainly not be opposed to hearing it.

[TexT]

Actually; now I'm curious - I thought only 40s and later Deardorffs had rounded lens board corners?

[Jim Noel]

I still own my pre1939, 5x7 Deardorff. The pictures look exactly like my camera. It still has most of the identifying decal on the rigt side.

[John Kasaian]

FWIW, check this out:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190330122042/http://deardorffcameras.0catch.com/

[Drew Bedo]

A nice camera and a nice surprise!

Yet, the thread title actually asks a dee question. When it comes to these classic vintage or antique cameras . . .do we actually OWN them. or, like the retired Nat-Geo photographer in the OP, are we just caring for them until some other young photographer comes along?

I have enjoyed my Kodak 2D and Zone VI for years now, but lately even the 4x5 Zone VI kit seems heavy and a little unwieldy for me as I get older. I have it all packed in a shoulder bag that weighs in at 25 pounds with a CF tripod. The 8x10 2D alone iis bulky and heavy in a medium sized LowePro trekker of 1980 vintage. The film holderds and wooden tripod make it even more of an expedition to work with. . . .which lately is less and less.


I just picked up a Turner Reich convertible for the 2D. The shutter needs a deep CLA. After it is refurbished, I intend to do some photography with it. However, the long game plan is to store them together as a "period correct" shooting set. I have no illusions about our son or any of the grand kids wanting to use it. To be clear . . .they won't.

With that realization I tend to look on my ownership role as being more a steward or curator, just holding on to it all till it passes to some, perhaps yet unborn, photographer.

So, the opening question "Do I own a Deardorff?" . to me has a wider and deeper meaning . .do you?

[Tin Can]

We all live and die

What happens next is always unknown

War is a Human constant

Most of our good stuff is buried

by humans, by aliens, by earth rolling plate subduction

ice, mud, nukes, flood

nothing lasts in this universe

or does it

Planet of the Apes, movie

'You bastards'

[Drew Bedo]

^^^^

Not my favorite movie.

Whie it is not a "good" movie, I do enjoy the energy, enthusiasm and forward-looking positive attitude of "Bill and Teds Excellent Adventure".

[gypsydog]

No! It now owns you.

[TexT]

Drat! Oh, well. I suppose I'll have to take care of it before it migrates to its next "victim" in some sixty years.
I found a 5x7 back that fit with very little modification (To the back, not the camera!) and so I am even more excited - I prefer the format, even if the film is a bit more of a pain by virtue of being too large for my AgiTank.

[Drew Bedo]

Check The-By. Reucing bavks for Deardorffs come up from time to time.