View Full Version : questions about metal 8x10 field cameras

steve barry
6-Apr-2009, 12:20
Hello. I am considering going to 8x10. I have only shot about 100 frames of 4x5. I am in love though, and i figure, why not go 8x10. seems about the limit for my utility, and everything else I care about seems comparable (sans the cost of shooting/developing. i develope/print myself - all BW if it matters). In order to get the gear, I would likely have to sell all my other cameras. Ill keep a few, but most of the small and medium formats would have to go: hasselblad, leica, rollei etc. I am done trying to cobble things together on the cheap.

I was wondering if anyone had gone this route and regretted getting rid of all the smaller gear? I have just graduated and need to start working on portfolio of prints.

I use a sinar norma and just recently a cambo wide 650 for LF. I like both and will keep both. I think my 8x10 sould be a folding field camera of some sort. I would really prefer a metal camera i think. Wide angle to normal lenses. I only use two or three lenses. extreme wide, wide, and normal.

I would like the camera to be steady, rugged, full movements and the movements feel good, zero dentents, tight locking, quick(est) set up / break down. I don't care about weight, or cost really. I mean, of course i do, but that is what i am willing to compromise. I looked at the toyo 810 but read that the knobs and little piddly stuff sticks out when folded shut? I may have to live with this but i would prefer a box when folded. I looked at the canham and the phillips and the toyo. my understanding is the metal canham is not built as well as the wood one? i looked at another one that starts with an M i think, holes drilled all over it for the "light weight" version. Is the Lotus worth the effort and cost? It is really hard for me to judge from the little i am able to find online. i have no chance of renting or borrowing this gear.

I also have great tripods. for MF. they get a little funky with the 5x7 norma on them. So I will need a new tripod. any suggestions? same compromises apply for tripod as camera. rugged, feels good to move/use. overkill.

I will be looking for a 810 durst too i guess, and rebuilding my darkroom.

I really appreciate it. I have been reading every post i can on here, i just don't post much.

here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/stevebarry/3417628878/sizes/l/) is mostly the types of stuff i shoot.

Paul Greeves
6-Apr-2009, 12:39
Hi Steve,

I have been going through the same turmoil. I have been shooting large format for a couple of year on 5x4 and thought the same as you, should I try 10x8? I got my hands on a Sinar Norma 10x8 which allowed me to try the format and see if I could cope with the added camera size.

The results over 5x4 are amazing. My Sinar F1 has not been used since I have had the Norma. I have considered selling it to buy more 10x8 kit but decided that the camera has its own uses and decided to keep it. I scan my negatives on an Epson V750 which has a 10x8 by light box and print out on an Epson 7800 inkjet printer. The prints can be 24" by any length. This may be an alternative to a huge enlarger?

I recently sold the Norma and I am awaiting the delivery of a Canham JMC810 which is half the weight of the Norma and folds to a compact size. The only other camera that I considered was a Walker Titan 10x8. The only down side to the Walker was that it has a fixed back but all the normal movements are available on the front standard.



AJ Edmondson
6-Apr-2009, 12:46
I recently went down this path "in reverse" having downsized from 8x10 to 4x5 and I don't regret the move. Your experience may differ of course but I find that I don't do well trying to manage multiple formats because the manner of "seeing" or previsualizing seems to suffer. I loved 8x10 - still do - but with retirement and the change in photographic direction it seemed the right choice. In terms of image quality (in my opinion only) I don't think you will see much change but the actual process of composing and managing the image (again, just my opinion) is considerably different and in my experience much more satisfying with 8x10. Good luck!

Walter Calahan
6-Apr-2009, 12:48
I'd look at the Canham before the Lotus.

Paul Greeves
6-Apr-2009, 13:03
I will agree that there is little difference in actual image quality between 5x4 and 10x8. I have put same size prints next to one another and it is difficult to see a noticeable difference. I have had 5x4 printed up 5'x4' on canvas and they do look stunning. I haven't done the same with 10x8, yet! I did ask myself, only yesterday, whether 10x8 wasn't just overkill. The problem is, once you have seem the image on a 10x8 ground glass it is difficult to go back to 5x4. It is the same as going back to 35mm after using roll film. There is a learning curve to 10x8. I found it far more difficult to use the camera movements to find the plane if focus, somethings that is very easy on the F1 Sinar.

One word of caution. If you are on doing photography on a restricted budget then you should consider that 10x8 film is at least x4 the price of 5x4.

I did consider selling the Sinar F1 and Norma 10x8 and going in the middle and buying a Canham 7x5. The only thing that stopped me was the lack of choice when it comes to film stock.

Gem Singer
6-Apr-2009, 13:12
The Canham MQ57, that begins with "M" is a 5X7 camera.

I have owned the all-metal DLC45 and the JMC810 Canham cameras. I agree that the
Traditional (wood) Canham cameras are more stable and seem to lock down tighter than the all-metal versions.

Traded my all-metal versions for a 4X5/5X7 Traditional and an 8X10 Traditional, which i still have.

These are beautiful cameras that have black anodized aircraft grade aluminum rails and fold into American Walnut wooden boxes. Easy to stow and carry.

Keith Canham is easy to reach on the phone, and is very generous with his time and advice. That's an advantage that few other camera manufacturers can claim.

Ron Marshall
6-Apr-2009, 13:37
The Wehman is pretty solidly built and lightweight.

I opted for a 5x7, the groundglass is plenty big. Color neg and pos are available as well as slow and fast b/w.

Dan Schmidt
6-Apr-2009, 15:40
I find the Wehman to be great. I often use it with a 5x7 reducing back. I probably shot less 4x5 negs than you before going to 8x10. Two factors for going to 8x10: contact printing and ease of composition on bigger ground glass.

Gene McCluney
6-Apr-2009, 16:05
I just acquired an 8x10 Kodak Master View, and it is a metal (aluminum) fold up camera that folds up very similar to a Toyo 4x5 Metal field camera, when folded it is completely covered like a compact box with a nice handle on top. I got the 8x10, 5x7, and a 4x5 back, and this camera has a very generous bellows extension, and it also allows you to bring the back forward almost to the front so you can use wide-angle lenses without the danger of showing the bed of the camera in the shot. In my opinion, almost a perfect field camera. If you get multiple backs for your camera, you can shoot whatever size film you want. The only disadvantage of the Kodak, is that they are hard to find. This camera has full movements-except for rear rise-and is quick to set up, and the rear has geared focusing.

Mark Woods
6-Apr-2009, 16:50
I have my Sinar P with all the backs. Only the 4x5 goes out. I recently sold my 2D 8x10 and was able to pick up a Deardorff 8x10 for $720. Cosmetically is it has issues, but it's solid and light tight and I like it very much. I have 2 5x7 wood cameras my father built when he had a portrait studio. I take them out on occasion with their old uncoated lenses. I still shoot in all three formats. My landscapes are mostly 8x10, my still lifes are 4x5. 5x7 fits in when I'm nostalgic and want to connect with my dad's cameras.

6-Apr-2009, 16:59
I myself just upsized from 4x5 to 8x10. I live in a city and tend to walk instead of drive to shoot, so I needed a setup that would be both strong and versatile, and like you I also just graduated from College and found my funds to be "lacking" for top notch gear.

After much internet lurking, I found some cheaper alternatives for the switch. As you may know Gitzo have beautifully strong, and extremely expensive tripods, but you can buy an old used g320 for pretty cheap, I think around $200(?). And it can handle up to 22lbs I believe

I myself bought a new Giottos GB 4180 a year ago for around $200 (I think) and just got the Manfrotto 3039 head for $230. Not cheap in real world, but cheap in photo world. The setup is solid enough for my sinar p 8x10.

I also have a beast of a tripod: an old Manfrotto 3058. I have no idea how much it weighs, but it feels like I'm dragging the titanic around with me. It could handle a hurricane, though. I'm SURE someone out there has one they'd LOVE to get rid of after buying a newer, lighter Carbon Tripod

6-Apr-2009, 17:49
My first 8X10 was a Calumet C-1, very stable but it's kinda heavy, For field use. I prefer a Deardorff, it's main issue is, the lens must be removed to fold the camera.
My free advice, Buy whats available, & start shooting!

steve barry
6-Apr-2009, 18:07
wow. thanks for all the replies. its a huge help. i think i have narrowed it down a little further. i cant seem to find any used toyo 810mii's around. Does anyone know what I could expect to pay for a new phillips 8x10 exlorer, and a used toyo 810mii? do the other prices look realistic?:

1 Toyo 810MII
new: $4,515.00 used: ??

2 Canham 8x10 traditional standard
new: $3,495.00 used: $2,500.00

3 Phillips 8x10 explorer
new:?? used: 3,600.00

i will be wanting to go huge on the prints. so cost alone puts me under an enlarger, with black and white for now. searching for a durst or saltzman and a moving company. in the mean time i would be happy with contact prints. i would continue doing contacts for organizing and viewing anyhow, once i was set up with enlarger.

in your opinions, 8x10 is not at least twice as good as 4x5 when it comes to large (4-5 foot) wet prints? i have not even looked into the idea that both formats would be close to equal in this regard???? maybe i am missing something from the posts, did you mean at 20x24 you would be hard pressed to tell the two apart?

thanks for the tripod ideas - i have the 3058 as well....but never use it because it has an old abused bogen head on it with the octogon locking deal and it does not fit my norma proper, and its way too much to lug around for MF. i cant help but think some lighter legs would just be more fun. i have a tiltal (the good old school marchioni bros one) and its more than a little stressed with the norma on top. would love to find its beefier counterpart.

6-Apr-2009, 18:37
I don't understand why you wouldn't get a Deardorff or something cheaper if you're just getting into the format, and then keep the 4x5 stuff. I just came from wandering around a forested hillside with an 8x10 and it was a load. I keep my 4x5 in the trunk also and will use it if I'm likely to be going much distance from the car. I've got a lensboard that takes the boards my 4x5 uses so I can share lenses.

I love my 8x10 and have gotten some good shots with it recently, but I wouldn't want to be limited to just that negative.

steve barry
6-Apr-2009, 19:41
mandoman7 - i will be keeping my LF cameras. contemplating getting rid of the MF and 35mm stuff. I will keep my favorite stuff, but I have acquired too many expensive cameras that will likely go unused for the remainder. unless i had a special project - my everyday cameras will be LF for as long as i can carry the equipment.

6-Apr-2009, 19:47
I use one for 8x10 and also 4x5 with a reducing back. All my lenses from 90-600 work with the 4x5 back too.

Paul Greeves
6-Apr-2009, 22:53
The two prints that I compared were 20x24. The difference may be less because I am scanning the negatives. The 10x8 scan needed no Unsharp Mask in Photoshop, where as the 5x4 needed a little. Two wet prints, I would imagine, would show a more noticeable difference.

With regards to tripods, I use a Giotto carbon. Its sturdy enough to hold the 10x8 and very light. Just make sure that you buy a good head to go on the top. I use a Manfotto ball head.

One point on the Canham Traditional. I owned one for three weeks before one of the joints on the wooden frame came apart. The camera would benefit from some extra strength on the corners. I would hope that this is an isolated fault. One other small issue was the complexity of folding the camera. This does take several goes to perfect. I have opted for the JMC810 as a replacement for this faulty camera, in a hope that it will be stronger and easier to fold. It is a slightly lighter too.

Larry Menzin
7-Apr-2009, 04:51
I ended up getting an 8x10 format set for my 4x5 Arca Swiss F-line camera. If you can swing the cost, Arca is a fantastic metal camera. It is a good compromise between weight and rigidity. Although others state they can find no difference between 4x5 and 8x10 in their prints, this is less true for those without a drum scanner. Using Epson-type flatbeds with 8x10 gives reasonable results for 3x magnifications, i.e. 20x30 prints. When you start with 4x5, 11x14 seems to be the reasonable limit.

Richard M. Coda
7-Apr-2009, 06:07
Arca-Swiss? While, not technically a field camera, it is relatively light, very sturdy, has all the detentes you want, and is easy to use. They ARE expensive, but you may be able to find a used one. Call Rod Klukas at Photomark in Phoenix. (602) 244-1133 - (800) 777-6627

Frank Petronio
7-Apr-2009, 06:33
I would just buck up and get an 8x10 Norma set-up and the biggest Gitzo. Not only will it be a fraction of the price of these lightweight cameras, but it will be more robust and in the end you'll get better photos because nothing will be shaking/breaking/messing up.

Unless you are an ultra-lightweight backpacking nut, 8x10 is heavy and bulky no matter what you do, with all the holders, larger lenses, etc. so you might as well accept it. Some of the old guys here use baby jogging strollers to move their stuff around out-of-doors. Others have Chevy Suburbans.

You're young and strong -- another 5 to 8lbs for a camera that is much more capable than the flyweights is a good trade-off imho.

If I wanted a folding metal camera, a restored Kodak Master View is probably the best choice, I like them better than the Toyos. And the wooden Canhams and Phillips also have a great reputation, I'd look at the Chamonix too.

Brian Ellis
7-Apr-2009, 07:06
35mm and medium format I'd have no trouble getting rid of (I haven't owned a 35mm camera since I sold my Leica about 12 years ago, I think it's a horrible format for high quality prints larger than 6x9) and I sold my Pentax 6x7 medium format stuff about two years ago, when I bought a Canon 5D that does the job just about as well. 8x10 has been hard though. I've bought and sold 3 8x10 cameras over the course of about 8 years (two Deardorffs, one Kodak 2D). The problem is I love working with the format but found that because of the weight - not just the camera but the film holders, heavier tripod, larger lenses and boards, etc. - I couldn't go to a lot of the kinds of places I liked to photograph - places that involve a fair amount of walking. If you're younger or in great shape this might not be a problem but for me my 8x10 photography was confined to places that involved very little walking, like around the city or maybe half a mile otherwise. Anything longer that could be done but only with difficulty. And despite what some say, IMHO there is no significant difference in technical quality between 4x5 and 8x10 if you're a good printer unless you get into huge prints. But it is a really cool format to work in so I'd encourage you to give it a try with an inexpensive system to start.

John Kasaian
7-Apr-2009, 07:23
It's "horses for courses." Put your efforts into the camera you'll enjoy using---and shooting---the most.

Not neccesarily money. Spending more money won't usually get you a better anything. Developing your skills most likely will. You've got lots of good recommendations for 8x10 cameras to look at. Go ahead and sell the stuff you don't use to bankroll your project but remember there are some places an 8x10 can't physically travel. For back ups I like Speed or Crown Graphics, since they can be handheld and that is one thing most 8x10s can't do. A TLR is handy (look dad, no film holders!) but a Hassy or Mamiya SLR with a butt load of neat glass would give me more options (as well as being far heavier to schlepp around than the 8x10) and a point and shoot for family snap shots (a role in which a mini digi would likely shine.)
My 2-cents. YMMV

steve barry
7-Apr-2009, 08:17
thank you all.

I was thinking of adding an 8x10 kit to my norma from the beginning, but i just thought a folding field camera would be easier to travel with (planes, trains, cars) than a monorail. i am not concerned about the weight or bulk when i am out shooting - more the transportation of the gear while im getting to the spot im going to shoot. if that makes sense.

but the 8x10 norma would have 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10 covered. maybe i would be better figuring out how to travel with this set up than i would be with a field folder. the 8x10 norma would be significantly stronger than these mentioned folders? all other things being equal (tripod,etc)>?

so, the largest gitzo. OK. what about heads?

Frank Petronio
7-Apr-2009, 08:49
Sinar Pan-Tilt head of course.

Without disassembling, with a Norma you can get it to 13 x 11 x 9 I think, using the base rail, which makes it not much different than the folders except for the base rail sticking out. When I had mine I had a Pelican case all picked out for it, which is probably the safest way to go. Take it all apart and wrap it with padded wraps and you can get it smaller and more packable than the folders I think (at the expense of a couple of minutes of assembly).

Advantage? It will be $1000 less than most of the other cameras other than the Kodak Master View. It will have more and wider movements than any folder. It will be more rigid than almost anything (the Arca might be equal) and if you want to travel with a 4x5 too, then it will be more compact than having two cameras. Plus it is infinitely expandable, easy to work on, etc.

Ron Marshall
7-Apr-2009, 09:20
Another vote for the Norma. I have a 5x7 Norma rear standard and bellows for my f1, and I makes a fairly compact package on the six inch rail.

As Frank said, if you go that route, definately get the Sinar pan tilt head.

7-Apr-2009, 09:34
The Canham Traditional 8x10 offers excellent quality, design, and workmanship, and one can start with the 8x10 camera and add reducing backs to shoot 5x7, 4x5, and 4x10 without having to physically alter the camera and no more effort or time to change backs than it takes to change a lens, basically the same maneuver at the opposite end of the camera (larger formats are also possible but require swapping out the back assembly and a more significant investment). Very versatile, but only just over 9 pounds. It is mostly metal construction with very nice wood framing, thus quite stiff and able to handle plenty heavy and long lenses (with 36" bellow extension, which is really sweet when the wind is not blowing too hard). Rear standard slides forward for wide lenses. Keith can set the camera up to work with virtually any lensboard you might like (mine can take Deardorff 6x6", Wehman, Graflex, and Technika boards with appropriate adapters, which I guess tells a bit of my camera use history). I also have his 4x5/5x7 camera and have thus far chosen to keep it (despite my original intention to sell it when I purchased the 8x10) because of its lighter weight, not just of the camera but of the lenses that I carry for the smaller formats, and because I'm just too attached to the camera to let it go if I don't absolutely have to do so. Keith's service is simply outstanding, used cameras included.

Anyway, my two cents, if it's even worth that--I really like the Canhams. The Wehman is also a great camera, a little lighter, but I wanted the longer bellows and more precise control and greater variety of movements afforded by the Canham (and I am a bit of a sucker for wood), so swapped and haven't regretted it. You won't go wrong with either.


If you're thinking about a Gitzo tripod you may want to check out the Feisol offerings at Reallybigcameras.com. Very happy with mine.

steve barry
7-Apr-2009, 10:26
cool. i did not know about the sinar pan-tilt head.

i have played with my 5x7 norma, breaking it down and packing it down as small aspossible too. for some reason i did not think of the dedicated pelican case route. i will have to look into back pack options as well. i made a case for it now which allows me to leave it all open, lens on etc for quick shooting from the trunk. but i guess opening up a field camera would take just as long as popping the standards open and attaching bellows to norma. or close to it.

i will probably look for a complete 8x10 norma as opposed to getting the kit for my 5x7 so id have some spare parts. i already broke one of the alum standard pieces on the 57.

8x10 sinar norma
largest gitzo legs
sinar pan tilt head

then i could bring my 5x7 standard with 4x5 reducing back, and have them all covered and stay within the sinar family.

thank you all very much.

steve barry
8-Apr-2009, 20:18
150mm on 8x10 needs bag bellows yes?

8-Apr-2009, 20:37
150mm on 8x10 needs bag bellows yes?

Yep. A 150 is pretty wide on 8x10, around a 21mm equivalent to 35mm. You can get away with it, but you wont have the movements possible without the bag bellows. It'll be just like a really big point and shoot.

Gem Singer
8-Apr-2009, 20:45
A 150 on 8X10 is equivalent to a 75 on a 4X5 camera.

I can use my Nikkor 150SW on my Canham 8X10 Traditional with the normal bellows and can still utilize a lot of front rise. No need for a bag bellows.

steve barry
8-Apr-2009, 20:51
Hey Andrew. i was looking at lenses and coverage ciricles and noticed a nikkor w 150 5.6 had a circle of 400mm. would give me some movements.

steve barry
8-Apr-2009, 20:52
Gem, good to know. maybe i will try first on reg bellows before i try tracking down a bag bellows for 8x10, and paying an arm and a leg for it.

steve barry
8-Apr-2009, 20:58
i think the nikkor w 150mm 5.6 will give me more movements on 8x10, than my current nikkor SW 90mm 4.5 does on 4x5. i could be wrong. but, the 90 on 4x5 is plenty of movement for me, so the 150 should be good.

Andrew O'Neill
8-Apr-2009, 21:09
Isn't it the Nikkor 150 SW that will cover 8x10?

steve barry
8-Apr-2009, 21:18
oh your totally right. SW. Gem even said that too and i missed it.

9-Apr-2009, 13:23
Hey Andrew. i was looking at lenses and coverage ciricles and noticed a nikkor w 150 5.6 had a circle of 400mm. would give me some movements.

Oh, I wasn't talking about image circle size. Even when I'm shooting with my 240, I have to put a little elbow grease into the actual camera movement due to the bellows cramping up on me. But I'm also doing some drastic movements. I only assume that since a 150 is wider, the lens will be physically closer to to rear standard, making movements more difficult because the bellows are restricting you. Your camera and lens might be able to handle much more movements then the bellows would allow with a wide angle lens, hence the need for bag bellows. Thats all I was trying to say:)

Michael Kadillak
17-Apr-2009, 08:54
I currently own and shoot four 8x10 cameras. A wooden Canham 8x10 (that I have the conversion back to 8x20), a Linhof Color Karden, A Toyo tan M and a black Calumet C1.

Over the last year here is what I have learned. The wooden Canham stays converted to 8x20 unless I want to backpack 8x10. I do not do a heck of a lot of backpacking for LF/ULF. The older I get the more I realize that there are plenty of images to be made with LF within a reasonable distance from my truck. The Color Karden is my studio and/or architecture camera because it is as rigid and precise as it gets. The Toyo is a great camera that is quick to set up and shoot. I like the fact that the back goes in reverse unlike the Kodak Master that I had years ago that has the back fixed.

But at the end of the day if I find myself not pressed for time and not far from the truck the Calumet C1 regularly sits on the top of my tripod. The bellows never sag, the adjustable base plate balances the camera effectively, the standard ground glass is the best I have ever used and the bail back and the dark cloth wire are simply marvelous. It was the best $350 I have ever spent in LF. I was terribly disappointed that I let many entrenched in personal paradigms convince me that this camera was a waste of time in years past. Nothing could be further from the truth. The modest increase in weight over the Toyo is not that big a deal. Fact is that when I spread the tripod legs out and put it on top I know that it is going to stay there.

To each their own. At the end of the day as long as we are all consuming sheet film it really does not matter what camera or lens it is shot with.

steve barry
17-Apr-2009, 09:07
thanks everyone for the recommendations and the information.

I settled on another Norma. She arrived the other day, as did my nikkor sw 150 and sinar pan tilt head. I was very surprised that the 8x10 norma does not seem to weigh any more than my 5x7 norma with a 4x5 reduce back on it. all together, it feels very right. hopefully i will be able to shoot with it tomorrow. i think film holders and film are on my doorstep. only thing left to find is some tripod legs - my bogen 3046 with center column wobbles quite a bit.

Gene McCluney
17-Apr-2009, 09:11
I like the fact that the back goes in reverse unlike the Kodak Master that I had years ago that has the back fixed.

I recently acquired a Metal 8x10 Kodak Master View, and I don't understand your statement above. The Kodak 8x10 back, as well as the 5x7 back and the B&J accessory 4x5 back are all "reversible" in that you can clip them on for Horizontal or Vertical orientation. They fit just like the reversible backs on wood field cameras.

Michael Kadillak
17-Apr-2009, 09:51
I recently acquired a Metal 8x10 Kodak Master View, and I don't understand your statement above. The Kodak 8x10 back, as well as the 5x7 back and the B&J accessory 4x5 back are all "reversible" in that you can clip them on for Horizontal or Vertical orientation. They fit just like the reversible backs on wood field cameras.

What I meant Gene was not that they the backs are not changeable from vertical to horizontal but that the back assembly is "fixed" in its position on the camera. In other words the camera extends forward from a fixed back position ie. the back does not go in the reverse direction toward the photographer.

The Toyo M 8x10 is nearly an identical camera to the Kodak Master 8x10. One of the big differences is that the Toyo has a two bar machined gear that allows the camera back to go backward or reverse away from the base plate on the camera and the forward similarly goes forward. With long lenses it allows the tripod mount to be more balanced as opposed to having the tripod mount on the end and the bellows extending to the front only.

It is not good or bad, it is just a difference. Cheers!

Brian Ellis
17-Apr-2009, 09:53
150mm on 8x10 needs bag bellows yes?

Not on a Deardorff, at least not the two I had. I used a 159mm Wollensak without any trouble. I don't think another 9mm would have made any difference.

Michael Kadillak
17-Apr-2009, 10:01
thanks everyone for the recommendations and the information.

I settled on another Norma. She arrived the other day, as did my nikkor sw 150 and sinar pan tilt head. I was very surprised that the 8x10 norma does not seem to weigh any more than my 5x7 norma with a 4x5 reduce back on it. all together, it feels very right. hopefully i will be able to shoot with it tomorrow. i think film holders and film are on my doorstep. only thing left to find is some tripod legs - my bogen 3046 with center column wobbles quite a bit.

I have a Bogen 475B that similarly manages 26# and was surprised that you say that your tripod wobbles. It is worn out or is something not locking down properly?

You have a great camera that should serve you for a very long time. Congrats!

steve barry
17-Apr-2009, 12:05
Hi Michael, i found the 150 moves pretty freely in the regular bellows on the norma. I am waiting to see if i really need bag bellows. i missed an a fleabay auction one went for 80 bucks in really decent shape. i can get full rise/fall/shift at infinity, so i might not even bother. it binds up a little but.

my Bogen's instability comes from the geared center column i think. it is in pretty good shape, but is missing the locking handle for the center column. i replaced it with a wing bolt that tightens down just fine. maybe i will try replacing that with stock bolt before i buy a new tripod, but i cant see how it would make a difference? or maybe bogen makes a plate that would let me do away with the center column, i will look into that.