Photographer to Camera connection

[TheDeardorffGuy]

In another thread theres a question as to if a camera has a soul.
My question is far more simple. How many dofferent manufactures cameras did you play with or listened to other owners before you chose "the camera for you"? When I started I was 14 with a Pre Aniversary Speed Graphic. I did not like the limitations at all. I still do not. A friend gave me a copy of "Corrective Photography" Printed by Deardorff n 47. It shows movements and how to use them. Thats what I wanted. But in between there was a 5x7 Seneca an EKC 2D. They still had limitations and did not "feel" good. I found my first Deardorff when I was 16 and pictures became fun. My fingers landed on the knobs comfortably and was easy to use. I've used otherr cameras. In college there were Sinars we could check out. I thought they were very precise. But Photography has a emotional basis that only a field camera can deliver for me. So Whats YOUR story. Why do you like your camera and what was the journey to get there?

[Jay DeFehr]

My story is too long and boring to go into here, but suffice it to say an SLR with a rotating back is the camera for me. I have a V8, and it suits me well enough for an 8x10 field camera, but whenever I use it I wish it could be an SLR w/ a rotating back.

[cyrus]

This is an interesting issue for because I was going to ask how long it took board members to really feel they "knew" their camera. More than just being comfortable with it, knowing it in the sense of it being second-nature. I was curious about this because I know an ace marine mechanic who has a 'favorite wrench' which he never leaves behind. I asked him why not get any old wrench and he looked at me like I was crazy

After 5 years of owning my Deardorff, I think we're only now really starting to get to know each other. It is sort of like having a long-term relationship with someone - you think you know everything about them, then you notice something new!

[jp]

I haven't found a single "camera for me". Every one is a compromise or a tool better suited to certain purposes.

I consider having that connection with the camera when I can talk to someone or otherwise be distracted while setting it up and readying for a photo, without needless fiddling or being unsmooth.

I have photographed since 1988 or so. I had a couple olympus SLRs, then a Nikon f4s which I think has been my most useful, productive, and comfortable camera, as I was using it every day back in the early 90's for lots of things. This is what I learned to really use Tmax film on. I got real comfortable with a Nikon d2h as well, but it wasn't enough megapixel or low light sensitive to meet ongoing needs so I sold it while it was worth something.

For medium format, I have two TLRs that help me make a high ratio of excellent images and are very convenient. A yashica-C and Rolleiflex automat mx tessar. They don't have super high shutter speeds is the primary downfall. The focus knobs turn in opposite directions on these cameras, so unless I get rid of one, I'm not apt to build a super second nature connection in operating this. The backwards viewfinder is no problem at all.

For 4x5, I've got a couple speed graphics too. My newer pacemaker's focal plane shutter is broken, but it's useful just the same with just enough movements and a graflok back. I've got an older pre-anniversary with an excellent focal plane shutter and bigger lensboard, but no graflok back or good movements. Someday I'll come across a graflok back equipped pacemaker with a good shutter and I'll have something nice to use. I've got two monorails (graflex and calumet) going unused, but I really like the old barrel lenses and need the speed's shutter much of the time to go along with those lenses.

For bigger cameras, I've used at workshops Canham, Deardorff, Kodak, Calumet. If I had the time to travel and hike further, I'd want a Deardorff or Canham. For now I have a B&J 8x10 field camera which is portable but not really backpackable, a B&J 8x10 rembrandt which I bought for the big solid front standard for big old lenses, and a century studio 8x10 camera for indoor use of big old lenses.

I have too many photo interests to be a fanboy of one camera. But the cameras I like, I keep and I use. I don't really need this many, but I sometimes can't say no to some of the prices and will get it for the learning experience without any pretense of it being a daily camera.

[RichardRitter]

I did allot of field work with allot of different cameras. I finely ended up designing a camera that did what I wanted it to do. And as an added plus was able to cut the weight of equipment I had to carry in half. It is such a joy to go out photographing with an 8 x 10 camera that weight the same as a 4 x 5 camera. Camera, lens and tripod weights a little more then most 8 x 10's with no lens or tripod.

[Andrew Plume]

In another thread theres a question as to if a camera has a soul.
My question is far more simple. How many dofferent manufactures cameras did you play with or listened to other owners before you chose "the camera for you"? When I started I was 14 with a Pre Aniversary Speed Graphic. I did not like the limitations at all. I still do not. A friend gave me a copy of "Corrective Photography" Printed by Deardorff n 47. It shows movements and how to use them. Thats what I wanted. But in between there was a 5x7 Seneca an EKC 2D. They still had limitations and did not "feel" good. I found my first Deardorff when I was 16 and pictures became fun. My fingers landed on the knobs comfortably and was easy to use. I've used otherr cameras. In college there were Sinars we could check out. I thought they were very precise. But Photography has a emotional basis that only a field camera can deliver for me. So Whats YOUR story. Why do you like your camera and what was the journey to get there?



Hey Ken

An interesting thread, definitely - flashback to 1998 or so, I'd exhausted 35mm to the hilt, I traded the lot in for a MPP Press Camera - could I get any satisfaction out of that guy, no way........so I put it away for six or so months and I traded it in as part of the cost for a new Wisner Traditional (as recommended by Robert White, who was then the sole selling UK dealer for Ron's cameras).....straightaway we (that's the camera and me) struck up a fluid relationship and although I scarcely do any 5x4 anymore, the instinctive understanding is still there - ok, it can be an irritating camera in that one of the screws holding down part of the rear standard is 'sloppy' to say the least but I've got over that by removing the back before I slot in either a holder or the rf back....................


................and from there I bought a used 5x7 Canham woodie (scarcely seen in the UK) and although it's a very different camera, with it's lever's etc etc, it's similarly a very instinctive beast and I have a similarly better than good relationship etc

now I also have (amongst others) a 10x8 Tachi - in theory far easier to use/operate than both of the above but it just doesn't have the same feel or connection with me

fwiw, I did not have any contact with like minded photographers, then, so my decisions were nothing other than 'gut ones' at the time

anyhow you have a long standing Deardorff connection (as does George Tice for one), what keeps you so positive about Dorff's, when compared to other cameras, please (simply out of interest)?

andrew

[Michael E]

There are two cameras that I absolutely adore: My Hasselblad 500 C/M and my 4x5" Tachihara. But much more than with cameras, I have fallen in love with lenses. I always tried to restrict my load to very few focal lengths and really get to know them. I remember many times when I would see something out of the corner of my eye, stop right there and set up my tripod in that exact spot. I just knew in advance what the image on my ground glass would look like. Combined with a well practiced use of a spot meter and a film I knew well, I could really concentrate on images.

Right now, I'm getting mixed up in too many cameras, from DSLRs to 30x40cm ULF. Too many lenses too...

I know the feeling of uncomfort with a camera. At the art academy where I work, we have a 1999 Gandolfi 8x10". I could use it every day, have indeed checked it out for weeks at a time. I just never got comfortable with that camera, so I bought a beat up 2-D. Much better.

Michael

[IanG]

Like Andrew I exhausted smaller formats, although earlier, I moved to LF 5x4 commercially in 1976, and then for personlal work in 1986.

For small format 35mm I found a Spotmatic perfect, but was frustrated by Pentax's early K mount cameras, these days I'm happier with an old M3 Leica. However moving to a Wista 45DX for my personal work was a decision that I can still say was excellent 25 years later.

10x8 I went down the Agfa ansco route, best buld quality of all US LF cameras :D

Ian

[TheDeardorffGuy]

[/QUOTE]
anyhow you have a long standing Deardorff connection (as does George Tice for one), what keeps you so positive about Dorff's, when compared to other cameras, please (simply out of interest)?

andrew[/QUOTE]

In 1982 I was in the process of buying a camera shop. A high school classmate came in the store with a grocery bag. It had the remains of an mid 30s 8x10. It was all disassembled and the owner had no idea how to put it together. So I said I would for a price. Since I had a 5x7 to use as a model it went together just fine. But it needed parts. I called Deardorff and went up to the factory. I was expecting an old world experience. Didn't get it. Anyone who visited there knows exactly what I mean. I had refinished the wood on this camera and Jack asked me how I did it. Then he showed me how they did it. I tried their method on some scrap in their spray room and duplicated their finish. Upon leaving with the parts and the old V8 Jack handed me
3 V8s that needed refinishing. I was in the Deardorff refinishing business! But I also started driving to Chicago 3 days a week for a year or so to learn all the things Deardorff. Merle got tired of me asking questions so he and Jack made me historian of all things Deardorff that were fit to print. So from 82-89 I did new camera builds, refinishing and repairs for Deardorff. I visited lots of studios to do repairs and saw and used lots of other brands. Each had strong points and weak points (Including Deardorffs lack of built in horizontal shift). But thats really not needed. Just lift the tripod! In the end the Deardorff was "my" camera. The one that just felt right and did become a forward extension of my hands and eyes. It still is.

[Two23]

I've owned all sorts of cameras from a Kodak Brownie Flash to a Nikon D300. I'd have to say my favorite one to use is a 1937 Voigtlander Bessa. Something about it really clicks with me! As for LF, I've owned a Cambo 4x5 monorail, Shen Hao 4x5, and just bought a Watson & Sons half plate tailboard and a Chamonix this past summer. Something about the Chamonix really "hooked" me! I like its sleek lines and warm dark walnut. It's very "minimalist" and at the same time very capable.


Kent in SD

[Jim Jones]

I started with a 1911 vintage folding Kodak, advanced to a Mercury II and a Nicca, and then a new Leica IIIf, eventually replaced with a M4. The first LF was a New Vue, later an Anniversary SG, and then the flatbed 5x7 B&J that I've used more than other LF cameras. As the advertisments said for another shooter, the Leica fits in your hand like the hand of a friend. Alas, no Deardorffs; I don't drive a Cadillac, either.

[ashlee52]

I have had WAY too many cameras over the years. Three have seemed perfect... the Leica M2, Rollei TLRs, and the 5x7 Ansco. I can make other cameras take exactly the same pictures... Nikon F3's, Hasselblads and Deardorffs will do anything the first three will do and are also "special". But there is just a simple zen perfection to the first group. At least for me.

[Brian Ellis]

I finally made an actual count and it turns out that over a period of 18 years I've owned 14 different LF cameras though some have been duplicates (seller's remorse followed by realization I shouldn't have been remorseful) - 8x10 Deardorff (2), 8x10 Kodak 2D (2), 4x5 Linhof Master Technika and Technika V, Linhof Technikardan, Tachihara (2), Shen Hao, Chamonix, Ebony (2), and 5x7 Agfa Ansco. I never felt comfortable with the Technikardan and the Ebonys. The rest I liked a lot and it didn't take long, maybe a couple weeks of fairly heavy use, to feel at home with them. My favorites were the Master Technika and the Deardorff. The only thing I didn't like about the Deardorffs was the bellows sag with a long lens. With the Technika it was the four-knob-system for using back movements. But otherwise those cameras fit my way of photographing perfectly.

In non-LF I really liked my Pentax 67, a wonderfully simple throwback to the 1950s kind of system. That's the only medium format camera I owned. I had a Leicaflex SL2 and several different Nikons, didn't really care much for any of the 35mms though the Leica lenses were far and away the best lenses I've ever owned. And today I absolutely love my Canon 1Ds MarkIII digital camera. It's taken a long time - like 8 months - because there are so many options and choices to make. But once you make them and get used to them it's almost like designing your own camera.

[DrTang]

I've owned about a zillion cameras in my time..at one point I noticed I could take a pix everyday with a new camera and not use the same one for a month and a half


saying that..some have really stood out.. the Leica M2 w/ a 35; Olympus OM1; Nikon F2 with a 55 micro; - for awhile..I went to square format with a hassy..and then added a Mamiya 6 - which is my all time favorite camera system and a robot 24s (24x24 rangefinder) - that was a great idea but way, way too heavy so I sold it..but recently bought another one.

for LF... I kinda have a thing for Linhof techIII's..I have a 4x5 (the third one I've owned) and a 5x7... I used to own a 8x10 deardorff, but sold it when they stopped making Pfilm for 8x10.. it was old and the fittings loose..but it was pretty sweet

I'd get another one is I find a screaming deal and it comes with a 5x7 back



oh yeah.. the 8x20 Banquet was..um..interesting to play with




some cameras just seem to work well in my hands and some just don't (cough-contaxG2-cough)... I don't know why exactly

[Darin Boville]

I've had Leicas, many 4x5s, an 8x10 (that I didn't really use), a Pentax 67, and have borrowed many others. The only camera that I ever really loved was the Hasselblad 500 C/M.

I bought it just after high school on minimum wage--had to get a loan. Bought the personal camera kit from the owner of a big northern Ohio camera store. Two bodies, five lenses, four backs, etc etc. Traded one body for an enlarger.

Had to eventually sell it all to pay bills.

Oh, the Hasselblad....sigh.

If one of those high-res digital backs gets cheap enough I'd love to go back---sell everything else.

I'm trying to love the Linhof. In for repairs still :(

--Darin

[TheDeardorffGuy]

Folks I want to steer this thread back to its original intent.

Which camera fit you? Or you fit it? Comfort, Ergonomics, etc....
And WHY did it fit?

[Darin Boville]

Ken, you wrote in th original post:

>>My question is far more simple. How many dofferent manufactures cameras did you play with or listened to other owners before you chose "the camera for you"? ...So Whats YOUR story. Why do you like your camera and what was the journey to get there?>>

Are we off topic?

--Darin

[Jim Galli]

I'm probably the only guy that went backwards from a 'dorff to a Kodak 2D 8X10.

I loved everything about the Deardorff but as I became more and more interested in vintage lenses, the Deardorff got used less and less.

An old Kodak with a grand (crappy looking red vinyl) bellows came along and I discovered that a Packard 6 1/2" shutter could live inside of it. Lens boards were simple to construct, and with the Packard plugging up most of the hole, I can put the most shabby looking old lens boards on the camera with no light leaks. It has both an 8X10 back and a 6.5X8.5 back so that offers even more versatility. The front standard is strong enough to hold up a 7 pound portrait lens, and it's actually lighter in weight than the Deardorff.

It's like an old favorite pair of shoes. I'm totally in my comfort zone with it, and I can throw it up and have an image made in seconds. Also, it's the camera that is so at home to me in it's feel that I can totally concentrate on solving other problems on the fly and not have to think about what my hands are doing.

I kept the 8X10 'dorff around for about 3 years but finally had to admit it wasn't probably going to get used again, so finally sold it. I DO however have a V11 that is a keeper, and also a V5 that isn't used a lot, but I've no plans to part with.

One parting story; I was in Bodie Ca. a couple of years ago, and wanted to do a shot of the gas pumps reflecting in the window of the old store. There's only one oblique angle where you can do that from and the depth of focus to get shop details 3 feet away and pumps 40 feet away is difficult. I couldn't do the shot with the 2D and packed it up untaken. If I'd had the Deardorff, the front swing would have made the focus problem solvable. Obviously, there's no perfect system. But the 2D has proved wonderful for the other 3600 sheets of film I've done with it.

[jnantz]

there is 2 cameras i have gravitated towards
after having used everything from a 8mm movie camera to enlarge stills
to a 11x14 portrait camera ... they are both 4x5 box cameras.
simple to use no worries about anything, just push the button.
my graflex slr is a box too ( 1 shutter speed and all ) .. i guess its a tie ...

[TheDeardorffGuy]

there is 2 cameras i have gravitated towards
after having used everything from a 8mm movie camera to enlarge stills
to a 11x14 portrait camera ... they are both 4x5 box cameras.
simple to use no worries about anything, just push the button.
my graflex slr is a box too ( 1 shutter speed and all ) .. i guess its a tie ...


At tractor shows I shoot with a RB series B that I customized. Frensel, A custom machined round winding knob that makes winding the shutter so much easier, A early style rollfilm back that I calibrated to the Ground glass screen. The point was to make it comfortable and sharp. It has a side mounted grip. It is an extension of my left arm in addition to extending my left arm!

[TheDeardorffGuy]

Ken, you wrote in th original post:

>>My question is far more simple. How many dofferent manufactures cameras did you play with or listened to other owners before you chose "the camera for you"? ...So Whats YOUR story. Why do you like your camera and what was the journey to get there?>>

Are we off topic?

--Darin


I'm interested in the why and "feel". I was not sure If I made that clear.

[ashlee52]

OK... for me the rear focus of the Ansco 5x7 just works better than the front focus employed by most view cameras. The knobs are just the right size. And while I love the sliding rise panel on the Deardorff, the geared rise on the Ansco is just that bit more certain. I use the geared back tilt much more than the ungeared front tilt. And I love that I can fold the camera and leave absolutely any lens attached. Note that many other people love the Koday 2D, which is darn close to the Ansco (but lacks the built in rear extension and front tilt, and swing). Heck, I even like the grey.

[jnantz]

At tractor shows I shoot with a RB series B that I customized. Frensel, A custom machined round winding knob that makes winding the shutter so much easier, A early style rollfilm back that I calibrated to the Ground glass screen. The point was to make it comfortable and sharp. It has a side mounted grip. It is an extension of my left arm in addition to extending my left arm!

that sounds beautiful !

mine is not as aesthetically pleasing ;)
it looks like it went through the war, but
works like a charm :) ( its a rb series d )

[Frank Petronio]

I think the camera is secondary to the photo, and there are only a handful of cameras that are so awful that you can't enjoy using them.

(Many consumer-level digitals, DeGolden Busch and Nue-Views, rickety Korona banquet cameras, many Russian cameras -- to name a few that are really horrible to use.)

But most decent, name-brand professional cameras are all very good and easy to adapt to. It shouldn't take weeks or months to "bond". Just go take some pictures and stop being fussbudgets over where a knob is or how to fold a bellows.

I think the notion of "loving your tool" is pretty much just that... a bunch of men loving their tools, a little too much ;-p

Of course I've had hundreds of tools myself. That's a lot of loving.

[Struan Gray]

I was about to jump into this thread with my list of favourite transparent tools, but realised they were mostly just the first of each type of camera I happened to own. That's a sign that I tend to choose versatile tools over specific ones, but also that I am an adaptable skinflint who is happy with an 80% solution.

The exception is in MF, where I used a Kowa 66 for several years. I could never complain about the image quality, but switching to a Hasselblad 2000-series after I dropped the Kowa on a rock felt like coming home. The Hasselblad handles just right for me and my hands - and I love the fast F lenses.

In LF I chose a Sinar Norma as the best mix of versatility and price. It helped that I had used one at work, and borrowed it on occasion to test in the field. Over the last year or so I have been trying to like and use a Toyo field camera I bought as a kit with some desirable lenses, but I just can't - the flexibility and stability of the monorail, particularly with my favoured longer lenses, makes the Sinar worth the minor bulk increase.

[Scott Davis]

I'll limit this discussion to LF since this is the LF forum. The path to today began with my very first exposure to a 4x5 in the form of the Calumet CC400/Kodak Masterview they had in the studio at Maryland Institute College of Art. Liking the image quality, but not the ergonomics, I asked around the shop where I was working at the time and was told "get a Sinar or get nothing". So I ended up with a Sinar A-1 (aka Alpina). It was a lovely camera but the fixed 18" focusing rail was a real hassle when shooting wide-angle - trying to see the ground glass meant getting poked in the chest by the rail. I went on hiatus from LF for a while, then got back into it with a 4x5/5x7 Agfa/Ansco "battleship gray" tailboard style "field" camera. It too had an extreme limitation with wide-angles (I couldn't shoot anything wider than about a 135 without a recessed lensboard). That went away and was replaced with a Shen-Hao. The Shen-Hao was an awesome little camera, and I'd still have it if I was shooting smaller formats. I got into alt-process printing, and wanted bigger negatives, so I got a Calumet "Green Monster" 8x10. That was way too heavy and clunky to use in the field, so it got sold off and I acquired a Zone VI 8x10. Much lighter and more portable, it saw use, but I still wasn't really grooving on the format. A vacation came along and I wanted to travel with LF, so I acquired what is now my favorite camera - a Canham 5x7. Are the controls as simple as some other cameras? No. But I've learned where they all are and how they work and now it's pretty much second nature. I've added a 5x12 back for it, and I also have a Canham 14x17. Aside from the Canhams, I still have a Seneca "Black Beauty" 6.5 x 8.5 field camera which I use and love, but the movements are quite limited which is becoming a frustration, and a Century Master studio portrait camera which has a very specific purpose, and when I want to shoot the kinds of images it is made for, it's the only one I want for that - that is a great example of smart design - only the controls you need, in the right places, and so easy to use they're transparent. You just USE that camera instead of learning it or fighting with it.

[Frank Petronio]

I asked around the shop where I was working at the time and was told "get a Sinar or get nothing". So I ended up with a Sinar A-1 (aka Alpina). It was a lovely camera but the fixed 18" focusing rail was a real hassle when shooting wide-angle - trying to see the ground glass meant getting poked in the chest by the rail.

How come you didn't try a real Sinar somewhere along the way? I think you missed out.

[Ari]

With all due respect, Ken, my cameras have been tools, and nothing more.
When I needed more out of my tools, I upgraded or moved to something else.
Some may find that they work better with different formats, panoramic, 35mm, etc., but if the tool isn't up to the task, it's gotta go.



Ok, serious moment has passed.
They're a lot of fun, and many of them deserve outright admiration for the clever features and build quality.
Boys and their toys, but I'm glad I get to work with such toys.

[LF4Fun]

mine is giving me a silent treatment ... come on Bessy, say something :o

[TheDeardorffGuy]

With all due respect, Ken, my cameras have been tools, and nothing more.
When I needed more out of my tools, I upgraded or moved to something else.
Some may find that they work better with different formats, panoramic, 35mm, etc., but if the tool isn't up to the task, it's gotta go.



Ok, serious moment has passed.
They're a lot of fun, and many of them deserve outright admiration for the clever features and build quality.
Boys and their toys, but I'm glad I get to work with such toys.

Don't get me wrong, I always tell people my camera is just a tool. But it is a tool that is easy to use and "alot of fun". I was at a Tourist Steam railroad this summer sans any LF camera. (it was in the car) There was a guy set up with a Tachihara and he was having a hell of a time lining up his shot. I watched him for 15 minutes and walked over. I was in bib overalls and had just ran the steam engine. I was sooty. I asked him if he would like some help and he gave me a look like "are you nuts? You know how this works?". I told him to null everything and view. Make one adjustment that is needed. In this case getting the full length of the engine in focus. A bit of front swing. He had a hard time moving the swing. Most everything on this camera was hard to move. I got him straightened out. I'm a member of the museum and am allowed to drive inside. I went to my car and pulled my V8 out. Set it up and showed him a smooth working camera. He focused with it and said he wished he had heard of this brand (A Deardorff !!) I asked him why he picked a Tach. It looked pretty was his answer. He's had it 5 years. He could not figure it out it was crappy? I gave him my card and he sent it to me. I loosened it up and now it a smooth camera. People buy these for many different and pretty reasons.

[goamules]

My LF path actually started with wetplate. First I altered a holder to use a Speed Graphic , but without movements I didn't use it more than half a year. My next camera is the one that is my favorite, a 5x7 Kodak 2d with an iris lensmount.

Later, I got a couple 8x10 field cameras and studio cameras, but the smaller 2D is always the right size for me, and for most of the lenses I try out. If you get an ancient brass Petzval that will cover 8x10, the field camera probably won't hold it. Not so with the 5x7 size. I also like the size of the ground glass, not too big to see the big picture, not too small to see the focus or get under the hood.

The 2D is more robust than Senecas and other early 20th century field cameras, and is not expensive. There seem to be enough movements for me.

My setup is portable, it fits in a bookbag size backpack. The iris mount allows me to clamp and use most of my medium sized lenses, which again are the most affordable. The film is a decent price, and makes a good contact print. It's versatile, I have shot paper negatives, lots of wetplate half plates and quarter plates, and film. No color yet though. It's just a perfect, versatile setup for me.

[Scott Davis]

How come you didn't try a real Sinar somewhere along the way? I think you missed out.

At the time, it was a budget constraint. I was hitting the plastic fantastic to buy the A-1, which was already way too much money for my income level but I did it anyway. And back then, F-2s and P-2s were totally out of my range even used. I've had the chance to play with them since, and while they're lovely cameras, they don't fit my shooting style. Why use a hammer when I need a screwdriver? Not that hammers aren't perfectly good tools, they're just not the right thing for driving screws.

[Vaughn]

I have just gotten a camera (sometimes unseen until I get it in my hands) and then I grow into it.

My intro was with some rail cameras (Graphic View II, Linhof and Calumets) that the university owned and checked out to us students.

Out of school, I bought my own:

The Rajah 4x5 was at a camera shop - new, an exact Deardorf Special copy (except for quality). Too heavy for backpacking/bicycle touring so I got a Gowland Pocketview (4x5) out of the Calumet catalog. Then got a Deardorf 5x7 back for the Rajah. That got ripped off and with the insurance money to help, I moved up to an 8x10 Zone VI, used from Midwest Photo (never even saw a photo of one before I bought it), then an 11x14 unseen but for a couple photos from someone on the forum.

Still growing into the 11x14.

Vaughn

[Michael E]

He's had it 5 years. He could not figure it out it was crappy?

That's probably he has used it only eight times in those five years. It's a circle: You are not comfortable with the camera, so you don't use it, so you don't get used to it. It takes a lot of initial practice to master a LF camera. Once you got it, it's like riding a bicycle: You never lose it completely.

Tachihara actually makes pretty sweet cameras. I really love mine. I know I should trade it for a camera with an optional bag bellows. Or at least fix the totally warped rear standard (wind tipped over the tripod 14 years ago). But why? This camera does everything I need it to do and has grown so much to my heart, I don't want to part with it.

Michael

[Ken Lee]

As with musical instruments (and people) there are functional issues - size, weight, controls, ease of setup, ease of use - and then there are issues of "Chemistry" which can't be measured in the same way. Call it affinity if you like.

I recently re-acquired a 4x5 Tachihara - a camera from which I "moved up" several years ago, and several cameras ago. Looking back, I realized that I made many more good images using it than I did with other cameras possessing superior features and greater ease of use. As soon as I started using a Tachihara again, photos started flowing out.

Several times, I have bought and then quickly sold equipment for the same reason: no affinity, no good photos.

[E. von Hoegh]

When I got my Linhof STIV, I was learning LF as well as the camera. Two years later, I bought a Deardorff V8 having never seen one. I did have some time on a 4x5 Special. The V8 was intuitive from day one, the Linhof became so. Both are "transparent" in that I can use them almost unconsciously.

[Peter Gomena]

I've made a solid connection with my modified R.O.C Standard whole-plate camera. I've owned 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 cameras, and this one fits. Kind of a Goldilocks thing.

Peter Gomena

[TheDeardorffGuy]

When I got my Linhof STIV, I was learning LF as well as the camera. Two years later, I bought a Deardorff V8 having never seen one. I did have some time on a 4x5 Special. The V8 was intuitive from day one, the Linhof became so. Both are "transparent" in that I can use them almost unconsciously.

" Both are "transparent" in that I can use them almost unconsciously"
PERFECT RESPONSE!! That is the sign of good camera design. It does not matter what brand camera you have. What matters is making it work without thinking. It so becomes part of you, you just look at the glass and compose letting your hands "play" the camera. The sign of a good tool.

[Ash]

I like cameras. They all feel different and it's rare a camera feels 'bad'.

[John Jarosz]

Started at the Institute of Design (IIT) in 1968. First year students were handed Calumet monorail 4x5 and sent out into the world. That monorail design was tough to lug around the city. Later years we used 6x6 TLR or supplied our own 35mm cameras. Except for my Winogrand experience, ID was about fine prints no matter what the camera was. Out of school a couple of years I buy my own Hasselblad 500CM. It was a compromise choice so travel would be easier and still not surrender quality prints. About 10 years later I added a Superwide. I took those cameras everywhere and they did become an extension of me. I could load film into the magazines while walking backwards. About 1980 I became intrigued with historical processes (started with an article in the Swiss magazine "Camera"). So I bought a Wista 4x5 field camera. THAT camera traveled quite a bit (it was easier on planes in those days). In '97 or so by chance I found an 8x10 Kodak 2D in a remote camera store that I got for a song. REAL contact printing in alt process begins (instead of enlarged negatives). By this time the Hasselblads are history and I have a Fuji 6x9 as my miniature camera. Around 2007 I fall deeper into ULF by buying (2) 8x10 Kodak 2D basketcases and turn them into my 8x20. As of today all of my photography is the 8x10 and 8x20 contact printed in silver or carbon transfer. In spite of the effort required I can not go back to something smaller, I love the contact printed image.