Opinions on Tachihara and Wehman 8x10

[Roger Richards]

Jeff, Eric, Tony and Tom, thanks for your help.

Tom and CXC, how does the Wehman 'feel'? I mean, does it give that sense of having been put together with careful thought, in choice of materials and setup/breakdown? You guys have been really good with your descriptions, but there are always the intangibles that make one choose a camera over another. The Wehman strikes me as a serious photographer's camera, well-made but without any flash. Hope I don't sound too anal about this, just trying to make the right choice.

[Brian Ellis]

At that size I assume your ffilm will be scanned and your photographs will be printed digitally on an ink jet or Lightjet et al digital printer. I scan and print photographs from both 4x5 and 8x10 negatives on an ink jet printer. I see no difference in quality of the photographs as between the two sizes, though the photographs I print aren't as large as 40x50. My guess is that the equipment and skill of the people doing the scanning and printing will have a greater effect on the quality of the photographs than the difference between 4x5 and 8x10 film. Why don't you talk to whatever lab will be doing the work and see what they say? Obviously I'm assuming that you'll be using a lab for this since most people don't have access to a personal drum scanner and an ink net or other digital printer capable of printing photographs in the 40x50 range.

I've played around with a double extension 8x10 Tachihara and thoroughly investigated the Wehman before buying an 8x10 camera. As between the two it would be a simple choice for me. The double extension Tachihara weighs something like 12 or more pounds, the triple extension weighs 15 or more. The Wehman weighs around 8 IIRC and again subject to recollection from a couple years ago, has a bellows extension comparable to the triple extension Tachi. You can double check me on the specs but as between two otherwise comparable cameras, a difference of even 4 pounds would be the deciding factor. Of course there is the aesthetic/"feel" issue. The Tachihara is a gorgeious camera, the Wehman is . . . . well it isn't gorgeous but if it feels o.k. who cares?

[Roger Richards]

Brian, you are correct, the photos will be drum scanned and printed at large size by a specialist, I do my own for print sizes up to 12x15 with an Epson 4870/ 2200 combo. Thanks for your impression of the Wehman and Tachihara cameras. Not having seen the Tachihara in person I wonder if it is gaudy, as the photos I have seen are saturated and it looks a bit loud. Is this really so? The Wehman looks very utilitarian, on the other hand, not very attractive although the features are quite impressive.

[CXC]

The Wehman is made of quite a few different materials, each selected for its task, none selected for appearance. Compared to what Ralph mentions about his Tachihara, the Wehman has plenty of rear swing, and in fact it is geared and asymmetrical; if rear swing is more important to you than it is to me, that might matter. Also, it has the traditional geared rear focus on the right and lock on the left, definitely a plus. The front standard is a minus, insofar as the focus, shift, and swing are all controlled by one knob, and it is not too difficult accidentally to unhook the standard from its rails. Practice should conquer this shortcoming, but I assume the Tachi's arrangement is superior (which is part of why it weighs more).

The Tachi will also win any beauty contest.

The big difference to remember about 4x5 vs. 8x10 is the latter's reduced depth of field.