New camera design wishlist

[Muggs]

Hello all,

Well after much debate with myself, I have decided to look into the cost effectiveness of producing a folder made of ABS and hard anodized aluminum. I would like to pick your collective brains about what is and isn’t essential, and what to actually produce.
I have in mind that a 4x5 would be the logical first piece to produce, but there are many very nice 4x5’s out there. Or is there more of a market for 8x10, 5x7, 4x10…?

What I hope to be able to produce (and how I plan to compete in the market) is a rigid camera design, made to high quality offered at a very reasonable price. Through the use of modern materials and manufacturing techniques I believe that I can make something pleasing to look at, but that is “bullet proof” in terms of field use.

So, my questions to you all are:

1. What movements are a must have?
a. Is lens axis tilt a must or is base tilt acceptable?
2. What do you like/dislike about the competition that I should incorporate/avoid?
3. Minimum focusing distance / Maximum bellows length?
4. Are removable/replaceable bellows a must have (i.e. for using bag bellows or replacing damaged bellows) or is that just a luxury?

And last but not least; If I should decide to go down this rabbit trail, are there any of you (three or four) who would be willing to “test” the Prototype for a week or so and give feedback? I was thinking that if someone doing a workshop could “loan it out” to some of the participants for comments and report back, that would be very helpful. (Steve are you listening?)

Maybe I’m crazy for even considering this, but as an Industrial Designer now and a Machinist in a past life, it would be very gratifying to produce something that is useful and economical.

Thank you,
Muggs

[lithophotos]

IMO you can't get much better than looking at the specs for Mike Walkers Titan SF. It pretty well does all that you want it to and then some. I am a Linhof user normally, but the Walker is probably more versatile. It is also ABS, but surgical Stainless steel rather than Aluminium

http://www.walkercameras.co.uk

Good luck

Robin

[lithophotos]

sorry, that should read http://www.walkercameras.com

[Jack Flesher]

1) Rear: rise and base tilt. Swing and shift are nice options, but not mandatoryon the rear. Front: rise, shift swing and axial tilt.
a) Axial is preferred and both is better.
2) Weight -- make it light and rigid AND fast to set up.
3) 475mm in 4x5, 650mm in 8x10.
4) I prefer it and it allows for bag bellows with short lenses.

[Frank Petronio]

I'd like it to use inexpensive, readily available parts -- Technika sized boards without needing a light baffle -- and be ultra lightweight but more robust than a Toho. You don't need a full Graflock back that is heavy -- give me a nice spring back with a lever riser. And a folding focusing hood option.

There are already plenty of great mid-weight cameras, as well as bargain priced studio monorails and exquisite Arca monorails... but doing a 3 or 3.5 lb flexy 4x5 that is a little sturdier than a Gowland, Toho, or Tachi would be pretty sweet. And I bet of all the categories, more paying customers would want a solid ultra-light than anything else.

[Wayne Crider]

I really don't think it wise to fund the R&D and go to production at this time. Better off building a camera for yourself, or maybe that's what you are thinking? I just don't see the market supporting another player against the likes of the lower end Tach's or Shen Hao's or the high end and more popular Ebony's. You might instead consider producing the odd size film holders at reasonable prices.

[Ole Tjugen]

Front rise, shift and tilt. Rise and shift can be on a sliding lens panel, but tilt should be axial.

Rear axial tilt and swing. I don't need rear rise/fall and shift if I have that on the front.

With a sliding lens panel you don't need bag bellows, so it should be possible to make a 4x5" camera that will focus a 47mm lens at infinity. I know it's possible - my 24x30cm (9.5x12") plate camera can do that!

Maximum bellows length - the more, the better. At least 500mm for a 4x5" / 5x7" camera - why not make a 5x7" with a 4x5" back? :)

[Muggs]

Thanks for all of the great suggestions.

I am 49 and wanted to come up with something that I could produce in my area of interest. Therefore I am open to any suggestions. I obviously would like to fill a “need” in the LF community, so if you think there is a more pressing need than a lightweight rigid 4x5 or 8x10 I’m all ears.

Wayne, what size film holders do you think there is a need for?

Ole, do you think that people would overlook a heavier camera for the ability to shoot 5x7 as well as 4x5?

Thanks,
Muggs

[Ole Tjugen]

Muggs, I don't think the difference in weight is so great that it would swing the decision. After all much of the "structure" is the same, and of the same dimensions. The weight difference between a dedicated 4x5" camera and a 5x7" with a 4x5" back can easily be as low as a few hundred grams! This also leaves a little more room for the bellows, making both shorter and longer lenses easier to handle.

[walter23]

Make it come standard with a mount for a light box & a negative holder so that we can hang it on the wall and use it as an enlarger as well ;)

[Sal Santamaura]

...
1. What movements are a must have?
a. Is lens axis tilt a must or is base tilt acceptable?
2. What do you like/dislike about the competition that I should incorporate/avoid?
3. Minimum focusing distance / Maximum bellows length?
4. Are removable/replaceable bellows a must have (i.e. for using bag bellows or replacing damaged bellows) or is that just a luxury?Give me a 5x7 Phillips Compact II clone. Dick Phillips has for years declined my request to make a 5x7 and is winding down his business, so he likely wouldn't object.

1. Center tilts front, base tilts rear, front shift and swing, rear swing.
a. Lens axis tilt is a must.
2. Weight. Make it under, even if just slightly under, 5 lb.
3. Extension from 100mm to 500mm.
4. Removable bellows are not necessary if you use a "light" or "universal" bellows that accommodates this extension range and doesn't bind with a 150mm lens using 50mm of front rise plus 5 degrees of tilt.


...what size film holders do you think there is a need for?...Definitely 5x7. I think you'd do better to produce high quality versions of those than the camera!

[Oren Grad]

To follow up on Sal's point: if you want to understand something about creativity in camera design and finding one's niche, about customer service and more generally about what it's like to play this game and what it takes to be successful, you could do a lot worse than to talk to Dick Phillips.

There will never be another Dick Phillips, but as he winds down his business I think it would be terrific if someone 20 years younger could learn about and build on his ideas and his principles, and carry on for another generation.

[Frank Petronio]

Peter Gowland too...

[Muggs]

Thanks Sal & Oren,

Do either of you (or anyone) know how to get in touch with him?

Muggs

[Bruce Watson]

1. What movements are a must have?
a. Is lens axis tilt a must or is base tilt acceptable?
2. What do you like/dislike about the competition that I should incorporate/avoid?
3. Minimum focusing distance / Maximum bellows length?
4. Are removable/replaceable bellows a must have (i.e. for using bag bellows or replacing damaged bellows) or is that just a luxury?

First, consider building a niche camera just to get your feet wet. The 5x4 market is, um, well represented. The 10x8 market is doing pretty well too. You could do 7x5, but that format is well represented on the used market. You might want to consider a format that isn't well represented on the used market, and not crowded on the new market. Like... 10x4. You make a good, rigid, lightweigh 10x4 and I'll be interested!

1) Gotta have front tilt, rise, and fall. Gotta have rear tilt. Gotta have swing and or shifts on one or both ends, front would be nice.

1a) Either base, axis, or asymetric is fine with me. Given a choice I'll take the one that weights less and is least expensive.

2) I love the design of the Toho FC-45X. I find it's really light and really rigid, and all movements on both ends are really handy.

What it needed that it didn't have, was levels on the rear standard, an arca-swiss quick release plate, and a Maxwell screen. When you design in your levels, make sure you can level and plumb the film plane for both horizontal and vertical orientations, and you can see the levels without having to be on a step-stool!

I for one will trade looks for better functionality, lighter weight, and lower cost any day.

3) For a 10x4 you'll need the same bellows draw as a 10x8. I'd like to see it able to handle a 110mm lens up to about around, say, 600mm or so (handle a 720mm telephoto, whatever that is).

4) I would really, really like a single fixed bellows. I don't want to have to carry an extra bellows into the field, nor do I want to do that kind of assembly and disassembly in the field. I think the belows on the Canham cameras and the Ebonies can handle a range about like that.

5) Consider using the Toho round lens boards. Their already designed eccentric board would let you use short lenses without putting much strain on the bellows for movements. The eccentric lets you move the lens off axis, while the round lens board lets you rotate it thus giving you control over both rise/fall and shifts.


And last but not least; If I should decide to go down this rabbit trail, are there any of you (three or four) who would be willing to “test” the Prototype for a week or so and give feedback? I was thinking that if someone doing a workshop could “loan it out” to some of the participants for comments and report back, that would be very helpful. (Steve are you listening?)

I'd be glad to take it on the trail and pound it some.

[Sal Santamaura]

...Do...you...know how to get in touch with him?...Don't have his phone number handy right now, but Dick's email address is:

rhphill@sbcglobal.net

[Bill_1856]

Just copy the 5x7 Gandolfi in exotic materials, and you've got a winner.

[Oren Grad]

Don't have his phone number handy right now, but Dick's email address is:

rhphill@sbcglobal.net

Dick checks his email only sporadically. Phone is usually a better bet:

989-835-7897

I know he was planning some travel, so don't be alarmed if he doesn't respond immediately.

[Ed Richards]

Before you get too excited, remember that most of this crew prides themselves on never buying anything new.:-) Do you mean for this to be a real business, or just a hobby that you hope will not lose too much money? If you want to make money, the suggestion of getting into the odd-size film holder niche could be a good one. No matter who people buy their camera from, there is a continuing need for holders, and holders would seem to lend themselves to some efficiencies in manufacturing.

[Frank Petronio]

Another good and needed profession might be restoration and repair of classic cameras. I can't imagine that some of these 70- and 80- something repair people are going to be around forever. Now would be a good time to learn from a good one.

[Muggs]

Thanks for Dick's #. I'll give him a shout tomorrow.

Ed, I'm an Industrial Designer, so I have a real job. However, I work for myself and I plan to use my downtime to make a camera that I can sell occasionally to help keep me in film money.
But, yes I would like this to be a "real" business, although I'm under no illusion that it will make me wealthy.

Muggs

[Mark Sawyer]

I would point out that in equivalent models, an 11x14 costs three or more times what an 8x10 does, but in small production runs, costs little more to produce.

Nice 4x5's are in over-abundant supply, and are produced in such numbers by larger manufacturers that an independant custom-producer would be hard-pressed to match their manufacturing sophistication.

Mind you, this comes from someone who wants an 11x14 himself, and presumes a potential interest in that format on your part...

[Dean Jones]

Thanks for Dick's #. I'll give him a shout tomorrow.

Ed, I'm an Industrial Designer, so I have a real job. However, I work for myself and I plan to use my downtime to make a camera that I can sell occasionally to help keep me in film money.
But, yes I would like this to be a "real" business, although I'm under no illusion that it will make me wealthy.

Muggs

Muggs, it most probably won`t make you wealthy, but it sure can be great fun. The challenge of finding something new is a real driving force and the more you get involved...the more involved you become!
The mechanics is what lures me, as a kid I always pulled things apart to see how they worked. I then became a qualified auto mechanic with my own shop, but that gets harder as you get older. I always had a love of machinery and an interest in cameras and so it follows.
You can check my Custom Cameras website for simple cameras that I`ve built and tried. There`s always an idea or two going around in my head so I would be most interested to hear how you progress.

Thanks for the offer of the 800.......:)

http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~razzle/Custom_Shop/custom_shop.html

[Ernest Purdum]

My vote would be for the 5" X 7" size with a reducing back. This because having two format sizes (or even three with a roll holder) available makes better use of your expensive optics. Further, it is easier to provide a nice long extension on a 5" X 7" body.

Are you familiar with the Deardorff Triamapro? I think they had a very good basic design. A look at the even more ancient Sanderson front standard might give you some ideas.

I would vote against all-geared movements. I think they just add weight, complexity and fragility. Just be sure that the movements are easy to center and lock down really solidly.

Since I hate recessed lensboards, interchangable bellows are attractive.

I alos have an idea for a simpler, but to my mind very desirable product. There are vast numbers of Crown and Speed Graphics out there which have almost no movements. A replacement front standard with shift, full tilt and a long rise seems feasible and would provide additional capabilities to a rugged and relatively inexpensive camera.

[David R Munson]

What I want in a camera is this:
A field camera made of durable, weather-proof materials. If it gets rained on or gets hit with a rogue wave whilst shooting seaside, I can wipe it off and go on with life. I want it to be stiff with moderate movements, not wiggly and flimsy with all the movements. I can do without front or rear shift and also without rear rise. Rear tilt/swing, and front tilt/swing/rise are enough. No gearing on the movements. I want it to be a 5x7 with a very good 4x5 Graflock back, so I can shoot 4x5 with my Grafmatics but still have the option to shoot 5x7 if I fancy. Finally, I want the cost to be reasonable enough that my eternally-broke self can buy it while paying for grad school and still be able to eat that year.

Edit: Oh yeah - and I'd be more than happy to provide thorough testing for you. :D

[Scott Rosenberg]

my ideal camera would be one that is as compact, precise, quick to use and bombproof as a technika, but has the range and mass of a canham DLC. 4x5 is big enough for me, so i would much rather the camera come in a smaller package then enable me to shoot the occassional sheet of 5x7 film. as for geared movements, they sure are nice when you've got them, but i find i don't miss them when i don't.

[George Stewart]

I've thought of building an ultra compact 8x10 camera for myself. First I'd have one small lens (300mm) permanently attached to the front and would not allow for an interchangeable lensboard (saving weight and size). The back would be fixed (in either the landscape or portrait orientation) saving further size and weight. The front standard would be the only adjustable one, with simple rise/fall and tilt. The focusing screen would be Plexiglas and not require protection. I'd shoot for 3 lbs. (with the lens).

This would be my camera for the Himalayas.

[Henry Ambrose]

I'd look at the Kodak Master View design. The 8x10 folder not the 4x5 rail camera. I think Hoffman made cameras to this design some years back. I can't find any current information on Hoffman so I assume they have stopped making cameras.

Anyway, I'd think that design in 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 (any and all of those sizes) might be popular. I'd try to alter the design it so it would fold with a modern lens mounted.

[Ole Tjugen]

I've thought of building an ultra compact 8x10 camera for myself.

I'm a lazy bastard with more money than woodworking skills (doesn't take much), so I'm planning to have Argentum make me one.

Front shift and rise on sliding lensboard, rear tilt and swing, handles lenses from 121mm (yes, that old Super Angulon) to 240mm. That's about all I need from an 8x10".

[Muggs]

Hello All,

Well I’ve gotten a lot of great comments! Keep them coming! So many options!

4x5 – Agreed, there is a lot of competition, and some very nice cameras.
5x7 – Is there really a market for a 5x7?
8x10 – See 4x5.
11x14 – I agree that the way I have planed to manufacture (basically one off CNC) that they could be made very close to 8x10 prices.
Odd balls:
4x10 – Very interesting! Would there be much of a market?
8x20 – See 4x10.
14x17 – See 4x10 although, see 11x14 as well.

OK, here’s what I’m thinking. Tell me if this sounds stupid.
Make a camera that would accommodate each or all of the following: 5x7, 4x5 and 4x10!

Basically a slightly wider 5x7 that could incorporate a 4x10 back and of course a 4x5 reducing back.

Maybe the scenario goes like this: You buy the “Really cool name here” with a 5x7 back, and you think that you might like the 4x10 format. No problem, just purchase a 4x10 back and you’re ready to go. If you find it not to your liking you’re only out the price of the back, not for an entire camera.

Thanks for you time in response so far. It is very much appreciated!

Muggs

[Herb Cunningham]

What you described is a Canham Woodie except it weighs 6 lbs not 5. lenses and film
holders, meter,etc add more.

Unless you are handholding, I think camera weigh is over emphasized.

[Oren Grad]

Make a camera that would accommodate each or all of the following: 5x7, 4x5 and 4x10!

Basically a slightly wider 5x7 that could incorporate a 4x10 back and of course a 4x5 reducing back.

Maybe the scenario goes like this: You buy the “Really cool name here” with a 5x7 back, and you think that you might like the 4x10 format. No problem, just purchase a 4x10 back and you’re ready to go. If you find it not to your liking you’re only out the price of the back, not for an entire camera.

This is what Keith Canham has done with his smaller wooden camera chassis, which can be outfitted as a 4x5, 5x7, 4x10 or 5x12. Note that for the panoramic cameras, you need to exchange the bellows as well, not just the back.

On a more general point, count me among those who say that weight is really important.

[alec4444]

1. What movements are a must have?
a. Is lens axis tilt a must or is base tilt acceptable?
2. What do you like/dislike about the competition that I should incorporate/avoid?
3. Minimum focusing distance / Maximum bellows length?
4. Are removable/replaceable bellows a must have (i.e. for using bag bellows or replacing damaged bellows) or is that just a luxury?

Wow, I have a feeling this really depends of the type of photographer... i.e. a portrait photographer is going to have very different needs than an architectual photographer. If I were to build LF cameras (no worries, I can barely hammer a nail straight) I would design a model for a specifc type of photographer and market it as such.

I like buildings and architecture, and I like 11x14 and 7x17 formats, so I'm answering your questions with that perspective in mind:

1) Front rise. TONS of front rise. No camera can have enough rise. Front and rear swing. Front & rear tilt, because even the most amount of rise you can add isn't enough.
1a) Lens axis tilt is a must.
2) Current models are too heavy (still thinking 11x14 and 7x17) or lacking rigidity. There seems to be a direct weight / rigidity tradeoff. On 7x17 (and other panoramic models) the camera needs to be able to be used in horizontal or vertical format. Richard Ritter developed a clever way to deal with that, but it looks like it involves taking the camera apart and putting it back together a different way.
3) Should be able to handle the 180mm B&L Protar V to 600mm.
4) Hmm, I think it depends on what the tradeoff is. Are we giving up the removable bellows for weight? How much weight? If we're giving it up for cost, I'd probably want to keep it.

YES, I'd be interested in testing your camera!

Cheers!
--Alec

[alec4444]

4x5 – Agreed, there is a lot of competition, and some very nice cameras.
5x7 – Is there really a market for a 5x7?
8x10 – See 4x5.
11x14 – I agree that the way I have planed to manufacture (basically one off CNC) that they could be made very close to 8x10 prices.
Odd balls:
4x10 – Very interesting! Would there be much of a market?
8x20 – See 4x10.
14x17 – See 4x10 although, see 11x14 as well.

4x5 – Yup. No need to bother.
5x7 – Yes there is a demand for 5x7. That will be my next (and likely last) LF camera.
8x10 – Yup. No need to bother.
11x14 – Definitely. The format is either growing more popular or collectors are falling over themselves. Likely the former given the 11x14 activity on the 'Bay. I think four 11x14 cameras sold over the last four days, for good prices.
Odd balls:
4x10 – Questionable market, I think, but I may be wrong. How about 5x12 instead?
8x20 – Absolutely, though my guess is 7x17 is more popular. Just a guess.
14x17 - I think this is an odd format, but someone disagreed with that on another post a while back. Plus one just sold on the 'Bay for a tidy sum.
12x20 - You left this one off. In terms of ULF this is an important format.

My goal is to supplement my 11x14 camera with an 8x10 reducing back, and have a 5x7 camera with a 4x5 reducing back. I think that would satisfy my camera needs. And if a 7x17 showed up on my doorstep, I wouldn't object. :D

Cheers!
--A

[archivue]

i will go for a light weight 8x10 such as the discontinued Phillips Compact 2...

in 4x5 i'm fond of the new arca Field 141x110... it's difficult to beat !
But in 8x10... the shen hao version weight much more...