PDA

View Full Version : I need advice on purchasing an LF 8x10 camera



davebrenner
19-May-2012, 04:14
Being relatively new to LF photography, I want to purchase an 8x10 camera but want wise decision. Here are a few question I need help with.

Below the $2K range, what would you suggest as your favorite camera body?
I'm extremely interested in doing wet plate photography. Are any cameras better for this than others and what type of back will I need?
Lens - I want to do portraits and landscapes. What are your favorite lenses for each?
My friend has a Fujinon 240 mm F/9 at a good price. Would you recommend this lens?


Thanks for any help and guidance you can provide.

Best,
Dave

E. von Hoegh
19-May-2012, 07:13
1) Deardorff V8
2) You will need a special plateholder, not a special back.
3) 16 1/2" Goerz Artar for portraits and landscape, 30cm Goerz Dagor and 9 1/2" Goerz Dagor for landscape.
4) Depeds on what you will be doing. 240 is a nice gentle wide for landscapes. I don't know anything about that particular lens; it may be a bit dim for focussing.

IanG
19-May-2012, 07:25
Another camera to look out for is an Agfa Ansco but check what movements it has, some have full front tilt as well as rise and fall.

The Fuji f9 240mm lens should be quite easy to focus, I use a 165mm f8 Super Angulon and also a 141mm f16 Ross WA (a Protar) - probably the most important thing is a decent focus screen.

Ian

E. von Hoegh
19-May-2012, 07:31
Another camera to look out for is an Agfa Ansco but check what movements it has, some have full front tilt as well as rise and fall.

The Fuji f9 240mm lens should be quite easy to focus, I use a 165mm f8 Super Angulon and also a 141mm f16 Ross WA (a Protar) - probably the most important thing is a decent focus screen.
Ian

To which I would add a decent darkcloth and a bit of patience while one's eyeballs adapt.

danno@cnwl.igs
19-May-2012, 07:33
While my experience with camera bodies is limited to my own, I can recommend that you look at the Cambo Legend series of cameras.

Reasonably precise and durable, an 8X10 should be available for about $800 to $1K, leaving you with enough for a 14" Commercial Ektar for portraits, and perhaps a 215mm (8 1/2") Caltar-S for landscapes. More economy can be found if you want to use the Caltar as a portrait lens, as it is convertible to 14" as well.

As well, the modular design of the Legend series allows you, for a modest additional expense, to convert the camera to 4X5.

John Kasaian
19-May-2012, 07:56
Deardorff V8
Agfa Ansco Universal
Kodak 2d
Century Universal
Kodak Master View (the lens boards hard to come by for this one)
Tachihara triple extension
Calumet metal monster
all should be well under $2000 on the used market (the Agfa Ansco, 2d & Calumet considerably less than $1000.)
If the 240 f/9 Fuji performs like the 240 f/9 G Claron it should be a fine, very useful lens for your landscapes.
Other lenses to consider---a 14" Commercial Ektar is a good all purpose lens. The 12" Wollensak Velostigmat and Goerz Dagor are good picks as well as the 15"/375mm Ilex. The Wollensak 1a or Turner Reich triple convertible or Schneider Symmar double convertible will give you a lot of focal length bang for your buck. For a long lens, the 19" Artar is my fav.
All you really need is one lens to start with and maybe one lens is all you'll ever need. Time and 8x10 experience will tell you.

Old-N-Feeble
19-May-2012, 08:07
My choice would be a used Canham Traditional... Darned Nice 8x10 IMHO (http://www.canhamcameras.com/8x10standard.htm)

If you're patient and persistent you should be able to find a really nice used one for $2K.

Jon Shiu
19-May-2012, 08:22
If one used the standard spring back on a wooden camera, would the wood get stained/damaged from wet plate chemicals?

Jon

MIke Sherck
19-May-2012, 08:59
If one used the standard spring back on a wooden camera, would the wood get stained/damaged from wet plate chemicals?

Jon

Quite stained.

Brian Ellis
19-May-2012, 10:03
1. Deardorff
2. Don't know
3. 240 and 300mm for landscapes, don't do portraits
4. Yes, assuming the lens and shutter are in good shape.

E. von Hoegh
19-May-2012, 10:04
Quite stained.

Not neccesarily.

goamules
19-May-2012, 10:29
Quite stained.

Baloney, I've never stained any of my backs, and my wooden holders even look fine. But I've only done hundreds and hundreds of plates so far in a dozen cameras for about 5 years...maybe after a few more years a back will get stained.

Leigh
19-May-2012, 12:27
The Fujinon 240/9 is a very nice lens, but its 336mm image circle is only slightly larger than an 8x10 negative,
meaning that you would have virtually no movements available.

For comparison, the Rodenstock 240/5.6 Apo-Sironar-S, which I have, has a 372mm IC,
which permits movements in the range of 30-35mm.

- Leigh

Mark Sawyer
19-May-2012, 14:10
I've never had stains on any parts of my cameras after hundreds of wet plates either. I convert standard film holders to plate holders, but the largest one could get in an 8x10 would be about whole plate (6.5x8.5). You could also build a dedicated wet plate back, either is perfectly workable.

For the camera, just look at price, condition, and how sturdy it is. If you'll be hiking much, of course look at weight. If doing architecture, you'll want front movements. Other than that, it's pretty much personal preference. If you're doing strictly studio work, old studio cameras are impressive to look at and wonderful to use, but too big and heavy to take out of the studio very often.

For wet plate, I'd suggest a lens of f/4.5 or faster. Modern coated lenses work just as well as the old ones, and have a little more contrast (which may help in the early stages), but a lot of people like using older period lenses. Again, personal preference.

TheDeardorffGuy
19-May-2012, 16:49
See E. von Hoegh first reply

Frank Petronio
19-May-2012, 17:05
Try not to be myopic. After people made tools out of wood, a few thousand years ago they moved to metal. Metal is really a great material for cameras.

1. 8x10 metal monorail in order of weight: Sinar F2; Toyo G; Cambo. The more it weighs, the less it costs. $800 to $400 on eBay. Be patient and wait for a Sinar Norma if you can.

2. Being metal and easy to disassemble, they are very easy to clean up.

3. A modern 300mm/5.6 Schneider Symmar-S or Rodenstock Sironar-N lens in a modern black Copal 3 shutter will be sharper than anything else and the shutter will reliably allow you to shoot at higher speeds. No worries other than they are larger than the slower alternatives. About $600 will get you a perfect one, or be patient and get a fine one for $400.

Sure you can get an older lens but the shutter might only go to 1/40th of second, or it will have haze, or something will be funky. Why not save that adventure for your second lens and start with something that you know will work well right from the get-go?

Get a really good, large and heavy tripod like a Majestic or Gitzo #5. Accept the fact that you aren't taking the beast backpacking so what does a few extra pounds matter? Is it really worth saving a couple bucks or getting all gushy about a 60-year-old wobbly wooden camera with limited movements when for the same or less money you can use a precision instrument that won't shudder in the wind or require incantations to work properly?

What do you think professional photographers - the working ones - used? Vintage Kodaks and Anscos or metal monorails with unlimited, full movements, precise and secure locks, and systematic designs that allow expansion or replacement of reasonably priced parts and accessories?

People offer nearly indestructible Cambo 8x10 for peanuts but people will futz around with some ancient pre-WW2 contraption with dried out wood, a decaying bellows, missing gear teeth, etc. - all that does is prevent photography from actually happening. Seriously if you can watch eBay for a month you should be able to do everything with excellent, modern 1980s-1990s professional gear for less than a grand.

Whenever I see some group of large format hobbyists, they spend most of their time dicking around with little toy toothpick cameras instead of shooting. Get on with it!

In terms of priority of where to spend your money, spend the most on the tripod, the second on the lens. The camera, if you are prudent, should be the third most expensive thing. Most people do the opposite and get an Ebony, hang a $200 lens on it, and try to make it work with a Chinese tripod made for DSLRs. Smart!

36cm2
19-May-2012, 19:22
Petronio cracks me up like no other. Get on with it, already! :D

I have one of those fiddly toothpick cameras and i love it. I also dick around a lot though!

Corran
19-May-2012, 19:47
I bought an 8x10 Kodak Century Universal in a package deal that cost me roughly $500. It's wood. I get on with it quite well - it's very rigid and can use any of my lenses from 120mm to 700mm. Highly recommended.

neil poulsen
19-May-2012, 20:36
There's a Calumet metal 8x10 that's green and is constructed of light weight magnesium. Make sure it has a good bellows.

Also make sure it's the magnesium one. Some of the heavier, aluminum ones were painted green. A magnesium one should weigh around 15 lbs.

Nana Sousa Dias
20-May-2012, 08:56
Shen Hao FCL 810 A

I think it's the best (brand new) camera you can buy for that money. It's a bit over 2k...

Lightweight, sturdy, lenses from 90 to 680mm, sinar and linhof Lensboards, lots of movements...

https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=925

A little cheaper, lighter, non foldable, also accepting Sinar and Linhof lensboards, alowing lenses from 90 to 450mm, the Shen Hao TFC 810 A it's a great camera, too. I saw a video of Clyde Butcher using one of those.

https://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=3146

I have a SHen Hao HZX 45 IIA for about 5 years, I shoot a lot during winter, at the beach. The weather conditions are very hard, with a lot of salt water in the atmosphere, although, 5 years passed and my SH is still in great condition.
The only camera I would trade for my SH would be a Ebony or another SH. I had a Wista 45 DXII and a Linhof Technika IV, I sold both when I bought the SH. Some guys told me I was crazy, at that time but, now, some of them purchased Shen Hao cameras for themselves.

Ken Lee
20-May-2012, 09:40
I had an 8x10 Shen Hao and liked it very much.

Another vote against the 240A, because it barely covers 8x10 at infinity. It's a superb lens, but it wasn't designed for 8x10: you'd be using the extremes of coverage where quality diminishes. I have a 240A and also a 300A, and the 300A allows a lot of movements: it was designed for 8x10.

(If you plan to use the 240A at close distances, then note that coverage increases as we extend the bellows. By the time we get to 1:1, the diameter of the image circle has doubled, and a 240A will cover 16x20.)

People use a variety of lengths for portraits and landscapes: some make "environmental" portraits with a wide lens, and "detail" landscapes with a long lens. Others like the extreme wide near-far look for landscapes and make tight head-shots for portraits. Some people shoot a "normal" length for both, and only use 1 lens.

It's best if you tell us how you shoot. Otherwise, any recommendations are of little use.

One thing to keep in mind is that depth of field can become an issue when long lenses are used. A "portrait" length lens on 8x10 is around 450mm, but the depth of field we get with such a lens can be rather shallow, unless we stop-down considerably. If there is plenty of light, then long exposures aren't required, but keep in mind that your portrait subjects will often need to keep rather still during your long exposures.

In terms of today's "full-frame" digital sensors, (35mm film) a 450mm lens on 8x10 is like a 225mm lens on 4x5, which is like a 75mm lens on 35mm. If we shoot a 75mm lens at f/5.6, we can get the same depth of field with a 225mm lens at f/16, and a 450mm lens at f/32.

tim o'brien
20-May-2012, 20:59
As many have recommended.... Deardorf V8. Many field cameras were based upon this trend setting design. You should be able to get a V8 with single lens, a couple of backs (4x5, 5x7) for 2k in great shape. I put together a complete system with three backs, a 191 Ektar, a 12in Ektar, a 450mm Nikor, and a Bogen tripod for less than 1800 dollars about four years ago. Just be careful.

Wet plate, I have no idea about.

tim in san jose

E. von Hoegh
21-May-2012, 06:56
Try not to be myopic. After people made tools out of wood, a few thousand years ago they moved to metal. Metal is really a great material for cameras.

1. 8x10 metal monorail in order of weight: Sinar F2; Toyo G; Cambo. The more it weighs, the less it costs. $800 to $400 on eBay. Be patient and wait for a Sinar Norma if you can.

2. Being metal and easy to disassemble, they are very easy to clean up.

3. A modern 300mm/5.6 Schneider Symmar-S or Rodenstock Sironar-N lens in a modern black Copal 3 shutter will be sharper than anything else and the shutter will reliably allow you to shoot at higher speeds. No worries other than they are larger than the slower alternatives. About $600 will get you a perfect one, or be patient and get a fine one for $400.

Sure you can get an older lens but the shutter might only go to 1/40th of second, or it will have haze, or something will be funky. Why not save that adventure for your second lens and start with something that you know will work well right from the get-go?

Get a really good, large and heavy tripod like a Majestic or Gitzo #5. Accept the fact that you aren't taking the beast backpacking so what does a few extra pounds matter? Is it really worth saving a couple bucks or getting all gushy about a 60-year-old wobbly wooden camera with limited movements when for the same or less money you can use a precision instrument that won't shudder in the wind or require incantations to work properly?

What do you think professional photographers - the working ones - used? Vintage Kodaks and Anscos or metal monorails with unlimited, full movements, precise and secure locks, and systematic designs that allow expansion or replacement of reasonably priced parts and accessories?

People offer nearly indestructible Cambo 8x10 for peanuts but people will futz around with some ancient pre-WW2 contraption with dried out wood, a decaying bellows, missing gear teeth, etc. - all that does is prevent photography from actually happening. Seriously if you can watch eBay for a month you should be able to do everything with excellent, modern 1980s-1990s professional gear for less than a grand.

Whenever I see some group of large format hobbyists, they spend most of their time dicking around with little toy toothpick cameras instead of shooting. Get on with it!

In terms of priority of where to spend your money, spend the most on the tripod, the second on the lens. The camera, if you are prudent, should be the third most expensive thing. Most people do the opposite and get an Ebony, hang a $200 lens on it, and try to make it work with a Chinese tripod made for DSLRs. Smart!

Pound for pound wood is stronger than steel. And that's just one of it's virtues.

Ari
21-May-2012, 11:13
Pound for pound wood is stronger than steel. And that's just one of it's virtues.

Bah! :)
Or, to put it differently, one man's Mede is another man's Persian!

E. von Hoegh
21-May-2012, 11:54
Bah! :)
Or, to put it differently, one man's Mede is another man's Persian!

Yes, but that distinction is based upon which map one uses. (winking smiley)

Leigh
21-May-2012, 11:55
What the heck is a Mede???


- Leigh

E. von Hoegh
21-May-2012, 11:58
What the heck is a Mede???


- Leigh

Mede - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mede


It's an old pun on "One man's meat is another man's poison"

Ari
21-May-2012, 12:00
A Mede is a Persian :)

Old-N-Feeble
21-May-2012, 12:08
No, a Persian is a Mede.

Leigh
21-May-2012, 12:26
OK. I thought mede was an obscure breed of cat.

- Leigh

E. von Hoegh
21-May-2012, 12:29
OK. I thought mede was an obscure breed of cat.

- Leigh

It probably was, back before they called them Persians.