Early Tachihara help needed [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

awldune

5-Jul-2010, 21:17

I won an auction for a 4x5 Tachihara, somewhat unexpectedly (I bid not expecting to win.) The camera is missing the tripod base plate and maybe part of what attaches the front standard to the focusing bed.

I've been trying to find pictures of the complete camera to figure out what is missing on mine, but almost every picture I find is of the newer model with graflok-type back and moving rear standard.

Here is a shot:
http://www.usedcamerabuyer.com/MagnumOpus/eBay/ShutterbladeOutlet/114130_5692_49369_June_24_2010_740x480.jpg

If anybody has an older one like this, it would be a great help if you could share a picture of the bottom of the front standard and of the tripod plate.

Thanks,
Sam

Gem Singer

6-Jul-2010, 04:54

Are you sure the camera is a Tachihara?

In addition to being able to slide the rear standard forward, modern Tachiharas have metal reinforcing at the top corners of the rear standard, instead of tongue and groove, and do not have Graflok sliders.

Also, the latch that holds the camera closed when it is folded is different on the Tachihara than the one shown in the picture.

The round cut-out in the base is a recess that allows the camera to be folded with a lens attached. None of the three Tachis that I have owned have this type of cut-out.

A camera builder like Richard Ritter should be able to help you put this camera back into service.

awldune

6-Jul-2010, 05:44

It could indeed be something else. I don't have the camera yet so I don't know if there are markings on it somewhere.

However, reading about Tachis on this site and elsewhere, I have seen references to an early model without a sliding rear standard and with a spring back. I haven't been able to find a picture of that model to compare with this camera.

Michael Roberts

6-Jul-2010, 05:55

Hi Sam,
Congrats on the new (vintage) camera. Can't help with the base plate, but from the pic I don't think you are missing anything w/re to the front standard. Looks like the two thumb nuts (the ones sticking up vertically, connected to the front tilt brackets) loosen and there are grooves to slide both all the way forward. Also looks like this model is meant to house the front standard in the camera back w/o needing to fold down the lens board keeper frame, so it should set up faster than more modern Tachis.

The large opening in the base reminds me of the Rajahs and some early English style folders.

awldune

6-Jul-2010, 06:46

It is a little confusing, the auction seller says the front standard is missing parts, but maybe they only think that because they're comparing it to a newer Tachi?

When the camera arrives I'll have to see if the tripod mounting threads are there. Could be this camera is entirely intact but just not what the seller was expecting.

Seller is Shutterblade, who is generally reliable but usually sells smaller format stuff.

awldune

6-Jul-2010, 07:18

Gem Singer

6-Jul-2010, 07:44

Calumet called their camera "The Woodfield". It was made by Tachihara.

The round cut-out opening in the base extends all the way through the metal base plate.

Can't tell from the picture that you included, but I'll bet that the metal base plate on your camera is not missing.

Also, I don't see any missing parts on the front standard.

The threaded hole for the tripod mount is located in the base plate under the rear standard.

ic-racer

6-Jul-2010, 07:46

Camera looks complete based on that e-bay comparison. Maybe he means the lensboard is missing from the front standard??

Michael Roberts

6-Jul-2010, 08:07

awldune

6-Jul-2010, 08:18

Thanks for all the replies.

FYI, here is the auction I won:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160449115539

It says the front standard is "broken" but I'm not sure how. It looks fine from the photos but maybe the threads (or the wood) are stripped on one of the adjustment knobs. I'm confident I could fix that.

Feeling cautiously optimistic I got a good deal. Figure I will probably need to replace a piece of hardware or two. We'll have to see about the bellows too.

I'll try to relax and wait to inspect the camera when it arrives! I have a Speed Graphic and a Cambo, so this would be my first proper field camera.

Oren Grad

6-Jul-2010, 08:26

After lots of searching on photo sites and Flickr, I found what I needed in a completed auction for an almost identical camera, this one sold as a "Calumet Tachihara"

http://cgi.ebay.com/Calumet-Tachihara-4x5-Wooden-Field-Camera-/180524479968

That auction has a ton of pictures, including the metal tripod mount plate which is supposedly missing on my camera. We'll have to see about the front standard -- I don't see any difference between this one and mine.

I suspect that was mislabeled by the original seller (i.e., the store in Rochester that's mentioned by the seller of that lot). It doesn't look like a Tachihara; it looks more like a late-model Nagaoka. The Tachihara name is widely known, so many sellers just call any lightweight wood-field camera a Tachihara if there's no label on the camera and they don't have any information as to its origin.

I have a 4x5 camera that's very similar to the one shown in that auction, except that it has Graflok sliders on the back. Mine doesn't have a brand label on it either; it's possible that more than one vendor sold cameras with this design.

It may well be complete and ready to use when it arrives.

One thing to watch out for is that earlier versions of some of these Japanese wood-field cameras used proprietary wooden lensboards rather than Technika boards. I have an early Nagaoka 5x7 that uses odd-size wooden boards; later ones take Technika boards. The cameras are perfectly usable - it just means you might have to have lensboards made rather than buying off the shelf.

Brian Ellis

6-Jul-2010, 09:35

I've owned two Tachiharas. A good friend owned another one. His was a very early version, probably from the mid or early 1980s, one of mine was bought new around 1995 and the other was bought used so I don't know when it was made but it looked identical to the one I bought new.

My impression is that Tachihara made quite a few relatively subtle changes to the cameras over the years that weren't identified as different models. For example, my friend's camera had nickel-plated hardware rather than brass and felt a good bit lighter than mine but otherwise looked the same despite being lighter.

In the absence of a name plate this can create some uncertainty as to whether a wood field camera that looks somewhat like a Tachihara really is. But FWIW, I think Oren is right. I'm not sure Tachihara ever failed to put an ID plate on the front of the cameras. I know my friend's had one as did both of mine. I also have never seen the little gizmo underneath the leather strap that's shown in your picture. Also, my two as well as my friend's very early Tachihara had a letter "L" on the side of the front standard to show where Linhof lens boards should be aligned (to center the lens after taking into account the Linhof offset). I don't see that on yours.

None of which is conclusive, I certainly haven't seen every single version of every Tachihara ever made. And who cares? For $350 you got what looks like a nice 4x5 camera as long as the front standard problem, whatever it might be, doesn't affect use of the camera and the camera is otherwise functional. Enjoy.

Gem Singer

6-Jul-2010, 10:47

Seller stated that the camera is missing the tripod plate and did not include a photo of the bottom of the camera.

All bets are off now that I read that statement

The seller also stated that the camera is being sold for parts. Bad news.

Can't see it on the photo. Let's hope the damage to the front standard that he mentions is not serious.

goodfood

6-Jul-2010, 11:44

I own this camera. The tripod plate is a rectangular shape with a 1/4 in. hole for tripod and position by 4 or 6 screws. The plate is sink plate with the base. You can cut a metal plate and DIY. The lens board is a really odd side you never find. Try to contect Calumat. I cut the lens board my self. I get the wood from flooring or hobby shop. The bellow is really short, around 27 cm. It's really light weight. My backpack camera.

awldune

6-Jul-2010, 12:11

Thanks for the extra info. I am not averse to DIY and was planning to manufacture a tripod plate and lens boards when I bid.

We'll have to see about the front standard damage. It says this keeps it from having full movements but I'm not sure what that would be. Ultimately there is not too much sense worrying about it until I have the camera in my hands.

Frank_E

6-Jul-2010, 13:27

the camera you bought is not a Tachihara
it is a Nagaoka

I know because I have the same camera, with the proper nameplate
I have seen these often mislabled as Tachihara's on Ebay

On a previous occassion I emailed Calumet that they were listing the item incorrectly
on their Ebay ad and they did change the name

the price you got it for is about the "going" price for used Nagaoka's
they typically go in the range of $300 to as high as $450

the Nagaoka apparently came in two models
the model you have is the older version

there is a brochure on line for the newer version
here is a link

http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/nagaoka_1.html

you will notice that the linkages at the bottom of the rear standard are different

the camera takes the normal "technica style" lens boards which are used by many other field cameras such as Wista

I have both purchased lensboards on line and made my own from thin plywood

with regards to getting pictures of the camera if you clarify exactly what you need I can take some pictures and email them to you
simply send me a PM with your email address

in looking at the pictures you posted it looks complete to me, the base plate is a metal plate screwed onto the bottom of the camera just behind the large hole you see in the bottom of the camera. The hole is there to allow smaller lens to remain mounted on the camera when it is folded together.

it is a fun camera, very light (which regretably sacrifices some solidity)...

further edit:

I looked at your post number 6 which shows the other Ebay listing, that is also the same camera (in much better condition than mine) and has a pretty complete set of pictures. It shows the mounting plate which I described.

awldune

6-Jul-2010, 13:43

Thanks Frank, I think you're right about it being a Nagaoka.

At this point I don't need any images since I found that other Ebay auction (that went for $500) with very good pictures.

When I get the camera, if something is broken I might need a good picture of a working copy. We'll have to see.

Thanks for your help everyone, I'll check back in when the camera arrives.

Edit: here is my exact camera being called a Nagaoka:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/madrigalrose/3623011159/

awldune

7-Jul-2010, 14:56

Got the camera! Very quick shipping, although I guess it was only one state away. Still, that's nice.

There is no identifying marking anywhere on the camera, which I believe is consistent with this early Nagaoka model.

The tripod mount plate is present and functional, although it shows quite a bit of wear. Hex plate holds the camera just fine.

The front standard is indeed broken, but I think I've fixed it. The connector rod at the bottom of the standard is anchored to the sliding thumbscrew pieces by a little metal cup. One of these had come loose from the sliding piece, but it is a very tight fit and seems to hold OK if I just press it back in. It seems reasonably sturdy now, but I might try to solder or glue it if it comes loose again.

The rest of the camera seems functional but has definitely seen some use as might be expected. It also reeks of cigarettes, but I think I can fix that. I believe the camera might be 35-40 years old? The model II Nagaokas were introduced in 1978, so this would presumably be older than that.

It appears that not too long ago this camera was given some attention as the bellows and GG are perfect (if dusty!).

Overall I think I came out OK on this one. Now to cut out a board so I play with it! :)

Oren Grad

7-Jul-2010, 15:08

I believe the camera might be 35-40 years old? The model II Nagaokas were introduced in 1978, so this would presumably be older than that.

Which of these types is newer is not obvious. I bought mine, which is very similar to yours, in sparkling like-new condition about ten years ago, and the same basic type continued to be listed in the Nippon Camera annual as Nagaoka's current offering up to very recent editions, while the type labeled "model II" disappeared long ago.

Anyway, that doesn't matter. Sounds like you've got a nice, functional camera to play with. Enjoy!

Fotoguy20d

8-Jul-2010, 13:26

I have the identical camera - mine is badged as a Calumet Wood-Field. If you need any photos or dimensions, let me know. Lensboards are a funny size, and fairly thick so you need to deeply c'bore them from the back if you want to use a retaining ring instead of a front mount flange. I found some nice birch plywood at Michaels that does the trick - it's 5 ply in 3/8" thick, which works well for this camera. Mine came with a lens board drilled for Copal 0 so I templated off that.

Dan

awldune

8-Jul-2010, 13:55

I definitely noticed the thick board! I have some 3/8'' board I will play around with. Very loose fit when I use my usual 1/8'' chipboard.

Don't think I need any photos, although I was wondering, does your camera have any "stop" mechanism to prevent the bed from being focused too far out or back? Mine doesn't have anything and the gears try to eat into the wood if you rack it out too far.

Oren grad, that is interesting about these cameras overlapping the "Model II." I guess I will never know the age of this camera since there's no serial.

Fotoguy20d

8-Jul-2010, 13:58

No stop on mine either - it's a bit of a sickening feeling when the gears start chewing into the wood.

Dan

awldune

8-Jul-2010, 14:03

Actually I thought of a couple of other questions:

It seems like the front standard is tilted slightly forward when tightened at the detent position. Is this normal? I can't think of what would go wrong to change this, unless they just machined the detent in the wrong place.

Also, the front rise/fall does not seem to have a zero detent. However, it looks like the bottom of the "biscuits" at the top corners of the front standard lines up with the top of the metal posts at roughly the zero position. Does that sound right?

Oren Grad

8-Jul-2010, 14:46

It seems like the front standard is tilted slightly forward when tightened at the detent position. Is this normal? I can't think of what would go wrong to change this, unless they just machined the detent in the wrong place.

Mine's just the opposite - it looks as though it has an ever so slight backward tilt. I don't worry about it. I'd choose a different camera if I had an application where the utmost in precision and accuracy were required.

Also, the front rise/fall does not seem to have a zero detent. However, it looks like the bottom of the "biscuits" at the top corners of the front standard lines up with the top of the metal posts at roughly the zero position. Does that sound right?

Mine doesn't have an alignment mark either, and I don't miss it. (I actually prefer not to have a zero detent, because that makes it harder to make small adjustments around the neutral point.) I just eyeball rough alignment of standard against back when I'm setting up the camera, and I don't worry about whether I have an exact zero point. I'll almost always tweak the rise/fall anyway once I'm viewing the ground glass, to get the composition I want. I've never taken a picture where having the theoretically exact zero alignment mattered. Again, if I were doing some sort of scientific documentation where everything had to be precisely and accurately characterized, I'd use a different camera.

awldune

8-Jul-2010, 14:54

Thanks Oren.

I expect I will be using my 90mm at f/22 and up most of the time, so precision shouldn't be too big a deal.

Heroique

8-Jul-2010, 15:00

I expect I will be using my 90mm at f/22 and up most of the time, so precision shouldn't be too big a deal.

Sounds like your shooting habits wouldn’t make alignment critical, but indeed, it is nice to know whether one’s front and back standards are parallel when they’re in the neutral position. I recall confirming this on my Tachi by mounting it on my Ries tripod, then pointing the camera straight down. I used a small level to compare the two standards – front to back, side to side. The standards were sufficiently parallel, but rarely do my landscape shots require perfect alignment. But it’s nice to know.

goodfood

9-Jul-2010, 13:31

If you want neutral position, open the camera, loose the lens rise or fall nut. push the bellow to closest position and tight the nut. This is the neutral position. Hope can help.

awldune

9-Jul-2010, 13:40

If you want neutral position, open the camera, loose the lens rise or fall nut. push the bellow to closest position and tight the nut. This is the neutral position. Hope can help.

This does not appear to work for my camera, the standard is lower than the neutral position when I do that.

I have found that obtaining a neutral position is not really important with regard to rise-fall, however.

Thanks for your input though :)