This could be good.

[Greg Blank]

http://deardorffcameras.com

[Ronan87]

Already mentioned. I already contacted him, nice fellow to chat with.

Too expensive for me (for my new interest in LF).

[Roger Cole]

$3000 for a 4x5 and $4000 for an 8x10? Um, I'll pass. I'm sure they'll be nice but given the price of used gear, and even many new 4x5 and a few 8x10s, I just can't imagine them being $3k and $4k nice.

[NicolasArg]

$3000 for a 4x5 and $4000 for an 8x10? Um, I'll pass. I'm sure they'll be nice but given the price of used gear, and even many new 4x5 and a few 8x10s, I just can't imagine them being $3k and $4k nice.

Perhaps, but it's just great to know that if you have the cash, it is possible to go on and buy a brand new dorff. A digital leica costs more than that and'll be obsolete in a couple of years....

[Greg Blank]

You saw the 7,000 11x14? :) Not saying I could afford that but, the fact as Nicolas states its nice to know a well known company feels the industry is strong enough to warrant that sort of price and that they will have buyers to offer it to. All in all I think people and employers are becoming more optimistic. I know I am. Personally with my experience in building stuff my next project is going to be a camera....of yet undetermined format size. I would like a bit larger than 11x14 but not 8x20 thats too narrow for me, 16x20 a bit big....but it has lots of appeal :D

[Roger Cole]

Oh I agree in principle but - most people who COULD buy one if they really wanted one badly enough, by sacrificing other things, still probably wouldn't. I wouldn't if I could, considering what a good camera I can get for way less money. I wouldn't give up the other things I could get with that kind of money just for the Deardorf name. But those who can drop this sort of cash without sacrifices or much thought may - and I can't say I blame 'em. ;)

[atlcruiser]

While there is a great market for used cameras there is a VERY small pool of new 810 cameras out there. The pool of 45s new is larger but the quality difference is night and day.

Next year they will have a brand new, original/NOS parts 820 and 1220!

Another thought is the pricing on used deardorffs. A nice, used 810 sells for between $2500 and $3000. Semi restored usually gets the most money. I have seen so called restored 810 got for 4k! Now these guys have new 810s for 4k. The market is strong for these cameras.

I have a 810 deardorff and I know deardorff and sons very well so I might be a bit biased :) I know for sure I am scheming hard for a new 45 from them!

[gevalia]

A digital leica costs more than that and'll be obsolete in a couple of years....
Photographers need to stop thinking and talking in these terms.

[Steve Hamley]

BTW,

I posted this thread from my visit there in August.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=79336&highlight=deardorff

Cheers, Steve

[NicolasArg]

Photographers need to stop thinking and talking in these terms.

Why?

[Brian Ellis]

Photographers need to stop thinking and talking in these terms.

I agree. This notion that a camera becomes "obsolete" because a newer one hits the market is kind of silly. It certainly goes down in value but it hardly becomes obsolete. There's a difference between monetary value and functional value.

[Thom Bennett]

If you want to run with the big dogs you've got to piss in the high weeds.

[NicolasArg]

I agree. This notion that a camera becomes "obsolete" because a newer one hits the market is kind of silly. It certainly goes down in value but it hardly becomes obsolete. There's a difference between monetary value and functional value.

So? Who questioned the difference between monetary value and functional one? I mentioned the digital Leica just because someone said that 3-4k for a brand new dorff is waaaaay too much money. The price was always the central point of the comments mentioned. Under the circumstances I think it's correct to mention other photographic tools that cost much more and have a potentially shorter MARKET life.

[Scott Walker]

It actually sounds like a great deal, spend 4k on a brand new dorf knowing that restored ones are commanding the same price. How often do you have the opportunity to purchase a new product that is not going to depreciate by 20% or more just because you have owned for a few moments. If I was in the market for an 8x10 field this would be at the top of my list.

[Len Middleton]

It actually sounds like a great deal, spend 4k on a brand new dorf knowing that restored ones are commanding the same price. How often do you have the opportunity to purchase a new product that is not going to depreciate by 20% or more just because you have owned for a few moments. If I was in the market for an 8x10 field this would be at the top of my list.

Scott,

But do not forget the maintenance costs. I mean you are not going to be able to oeprate it more than 50 years or so without an overhaul (e.g. new bellows, etc.) or at least a tune up / adjustment. :D

Then of course, getting supplies for it, I mean film is only likely to be avilable only what another 20 years... :eek:

Wait... I probably need to review that thread on how old are we...:confused:

Besides where does everyone think all this low cost used equipment came from. Someone had to buy it new.

If I add the estimated cost to refinish it, plus the money I put into the used one I purchased, it would be within 60 to 70% of the cost of a new one.

Len

[cdholden]

If you want to run with the big dogs you've got to piss in the high weeds.

Thom,
Everything is relative. Are we Great Danes or Dachsunds?
The most important fact remains: even if you and I don't buy a new camera from them, they are supporting the decades of cameras produced before now. They have acquired original stock, as well as having new parts created to repair/replace the parts on older cameras.
Life is good for current and future Deardorff owners.
Chris

[unixrevolution]

Why?

I imagine it's for reasons like, "Well, why would I get all this FILM for my 4x5 for $200 when I can spend the same and get an older lens?" And then you end up with tons of equipment, no money and no film.

Then again, it could be because the Leica is useful in the two years it's "top of the heap" and beyond.

It could also be that like me, the OP thinks that the term "obsolete" is overused, especially when applied to things that aren't actually obsolete, but aren't the absolute best in their class anymore.

[NicolasArg]

It could also be that like me, the OP thinks that the term "obsolete" is overused, especially when applied to things that aren't actually obsolete, but aren't the absolute best in their class anymore.

Well, here is what I posted earlier:


So? Who questioned the difference between monetary value and functional one? I mentioned the digital Leica just because someone said that 3-4k for a brand new dorff is waaaaay too much money. The price was always the central point of the comments mentioned. Under the circumstances I think it's correct to mention other photographic tools that cost much more and have a potentially shorter MARKET life.

[E. von Hoegh]

Scott,

But do not forget the maintenance costs. I mean you are not going to be able to oeprate it more than 50 years or so without an overhaul (e.g. new bellows, etc.) or at least a tune up / adjustment. :D

Then of course, getting supplies for it, I mean film is only likely to be avilable only what another 20 years... :eek:

Wait... I probably need to review that thread on how old are we...:confused:

Besides where does everyone think all this low cost used equipment came from. Someone had to buy it new.

If I add the estimated cost to refinish it, plus the money I put into the used one I purchased, it would be within 60 to 70% of the cost of a new one.

Len

My V8 is the 54th one made with front swings, in 1950. Has the original bellows. I refinished it, heavy use had scarred the original finish to the point that it was no longer doing it's job. I also added a baseplate, but retained the rubber feet.
Will that Leica be functional in 60 years? Probably not. Will it be repairable? Almost certainly not, due to parts availability, probable software changes, etc.
The Deardorff, in 2071, given any decent care, will still be useable, repairable, and probably desireable.

[Michael E]

Often enough, it is just not possible to buy something of high quality, because manufacturers adapt to the price-sensitive crowd. You walk into a store and ask for the best possible quality and all they have are "on sale" and "best value" articles. I'm glad for offers like this, knowing that not everybody is willing or able to pay the extra money for a new Deardorff.

Michael

[Roger Cole]

While there is a great market for used cameras there is a VERY small pool of new 810 cameras out there. The pool of 45s new is larger but the quality difference is night and day.

Next year they will have a brand new, original/NOS parts 820 and 1220!

Another thought is the pricing on used deardorffs. A nice, used 810 sells for between $2500 and $3000. Semi restored usually gets the most money. I have seen so called restored 810 got for 4k! Now these guys have new 810s for 4k. The market is strong for these cameras.

I have a 810 deardorff and I know deardorff and sons very well so I might be a bit biased :) I know for sure I am scheming hard for a new 45 from them!

Ok, ok. It was more or less an off the cuff remark in response to sticker shock. There's also the concept of "perceived value." As beautiful as a nice wooden camera is, and as rewarding as large format can be to use, it's essentially still a light proof box made of a wooden upright at each end of an adjustable sliding holder for them connected between by opaque leather. I'm always going to look at that and say, "four grand? Really?"

I grew up very working class, still can't believe I can afford the things I can now, and still look puzzled when contemplating the price of some of them.


I agree. This notion that a camera becomes "obsolete" because a newer one hits the market is kind of silly. It certainly goes down in value but it hardly becomes obsolete. There's a difference between monetary value and functional value.

That's true - still use my circa 2001 Nikon Coolpix 995 for my digisnapper. Thing cost almost a thousand bucks with a "huge" 1 GB CF card back then - actually an IBM micro drive. Remember those? It wasn't officially supported on the 995 and was slower than flash drives but the cheapest way by far to the most storage at the time. Nearly three hundred bucks of the cost IIRC was that thing, but a gig, holy cow, won't ever fill that up - and in fact I haven't but only shoot it in jpg.


My V8 is the 54th one made with front swings, in 1950. Has the original bellows. I refinished it, heavy use had scarred the original finish to the point that it was no longer doing it's job. I also added a baseplate, but retained the rubber feet.
Will that Leica be functional in 60 years? Probably not. Will it be repairable? Almost certainly not, due to parts availability, probable software changes, etc.
The Deardorff, in 2071, given any decent care, will still be useable, repairable, and probably desireable.

Provided we can still get film and other supplies in 2071. For black and white there's a good chance, but it's by no means certain. Of course the dedicated may be making their own wet plates or something.

Not that a compatible memory card and reader for that Leica is any more certain, in fact I'd say it's far less likely to be available even if the camera did still work.


Often enough, it is just not possible to buy something of high quality, because manufacturers adapt to the price-sensitive crowd. You walk into a store and ask for the best possible quality and all they have are "on sale" and "best value" articles. I'm glad for offers like this, knowing that not everybody is willing or able to pay the extra money for a new Deardorff.

Michael

I totally hear that, and I've had that sort of experience before too. I guess it's back to that "perceived value" bit.

There's another discretionary purchase I'm seriously considering right now that costs more money than these cameras, but I want that badly enough to make sacrifices to have it, like giving up getting a really expensive camera. Meanwhile my old Linhof I paid less than $400 for with three lenses works, albeit annoyingly clunky with some of its age related problems, and so will the Shen Hao or Chamonix I'll likely replace it with soon-ish. A Deardorf would be much nicer, but I'm just not willing to shell out that kind of bucks for one, at least not now.

Again it was more an off the cuff remark than a thought out one. I understand wanting one that badly, I just don't happen to want one that badly. Maybe if I ever saw a real Deardorf in person and played with it I'd fall under the spell and have to have one, dunno.

[dsphotog]

When I'm shooting with my old V8 DD. and people ask about my "antique, old fashioned camera", I can now say,
"They still make these!" Cool!

[Roger Cole]

When I'm shooting with my old V8 DD. and people ask about my "antique, old fashioned camera", I can now say,
"They still make these!" Cool!

Now that IS cool!

I'm always telling people they still make the descendant of my Tech III, or that my Yashica Mat is a sort of Japanese copy from a German design that was still made until a few years ago, but neither can be said to be still made.

[Ronan87]

My V8 is the 54th one made with front swings, in 1950. Has the original bellows. I refinished it, heavy use had scarred the original finish to the point that it was no longer doing it's job. I also added a baseplate, but retained the rubber feet.
Will that Leica be functional in 60 years? Probably not. Will it be repairable? Almost certainly not, due to parts availability, probable software changes, etc.
The Deardorff, in 2071, given any decent care, will still be useable, repairable, and probably desireable.

Completely wrong.

You can fully restore Leica's from before WWII to the SAME finish (if you choose to paint) and functionality as when it left the factory. Not only by Solm but by dedicated people/shops too.

It's no myth, i have a couple Leica's on my collection shelf that can fully proove my point.

Heck last year my 1078### (1963 if i recall correctly) black paint M3 was fully CLA'd back to normal after a shutter jam. I also have much older Leica's that have been recovered and CLA'd back to factory spec.

If anything, i have more issues with NEW/MODERN gear that simply gets swapped/replaced instead of repaired.

I won't go into Digital Leica's, i find them utter trash (nothing against Digital, but against Digital Leica). From personal experience, and colleagues, stay away from M8/M9. Blah.

I do not know about old Nikon/Canon slr's, funnily, i'v never had to get a CLA for them...:rolleyes:

[D. Bryant]

From personal experience, and colleagues, stay away from M8/M9. Blah.



It's not at all unusual to find 60 year old Leicas still going strong.

But the digital M's are also fine cameras.

As for 4K for a new 8x10, that's not anymore expensive than new 8x10 wood field cameras being made 10-15 years ago, so by today's dollar they could be considered a bargain, though I'm not much of a Deardorf fan I wish them success.

[Michael E]

Completely wrong.

You can fully restore Leica's from before WWII to the SAME finish (if you choose to paint) and functionality as when it left the factory.

If you had read carefully, you wouldn't have to get all worked up. E. von Hoegh was talking about new, digital, Leicas 60 years from now. I think you would actually agree to what he said. :-)

Michael

[Ronan87]

It's not at all unusual to find 60 year old Leicas still going strong.

But the digital M's are also fine cameras.

As for 4K for a new 8x10, that's not anymore expensive than new 8x10 wood field cameras being made 10-15 years ago, so by today's dollar they could be considered a bargain, though I'm not much of a Deardorf fan I wish them success.

They suck. I have a long list of complaints about them, and same for my friends/collegues that own them. And the pricetag!? LOL



If you had read carefully, you wouldn't have to get all worked up. E. von Hoegh was talking about new, digital, Leicas 60 years from now. I think you would actually agree to what he said. :-)

Michael

Comparing film view cameras to inferrior/crappy digital 35mm cameras? Ok...

If you want to talk Leica, talk M bodies and lenses.

[Michael E]

If you want to talk Leica, talk M bodies and lenses.

The M9 is a Leica M body, and by comparison the Deardorff's price seems cheap.

[E. von Hoegh]

Completely wrong.

You can fully restore Leica's from before WWII to the SAME finish (if you choose to paint) and functionality as when it left the factory. Not only by Solm but by dedicated people/shops too.

It's no myth, i have a couple Leica's on my collection shelf that can fully proove my point.

Heck last year my 1078### (1963 if i recall correctly) black paint M3 was fully CLA'd back to normal after a shutter jam. I also have much older Leica's that have been recovered and CLA'd back to factory spec.

If anything, i have more issues with NEW/MODERN gear that simply gets swapped/replaced instead of repaired.

I won't go into Digital Leica's, i find them utter trash (nothing against Digital, but against Digital Leica). From personal experience, and colleagues, stay away from M8/M9. Blah.

I do not know about old Nikon/Canon slr's, funnily, i'v never had to get a CLA for them...:rolleyes:

1) If you had read the thread, you would have noticed that I was talking about the latest, digital Leica.

2) Have a lovely day.:) :) :)

[D. Bryant]

They suck.



Oh really? I guess Dick Arentz who uses the M9 in lieu of a LF camera now must not know what he is doing.

I've looked at output from these cameras and it is very impressive, inkjet prints, digital direct to silver gelatin, and alternative processes, all look awesome, particularly with the M9. Yeah the cost is very high, out of my league. If I could afford one I'd own a Leica S2.

If you've had bad results with the digital Ms perhaps you've gotten defective cameras or have had user error.

At any rate I disagree with your assessment and will let it go at that.

[E. von Hoegh]

'Tis a poor workman that blames his tools.

Actually, I can't tell if it's the Leica digicam or the Deardorff V8 that sucks.