questions about metal 8x10 field cameras

[steve barry]

Hello. I am considering going to 8x10. I have only shot about 100 frames of 4x5. I am in love though, and i figure, why not go 8x10. seems about the limit for my utility, and everything else I care about seems comparable (sans the cost of shooting/developing. i develope/print myself - all BW if it matters). In order to get the gear, I would likely have to sell all my other cameras. Ill keep a few, but most of the small and medium formats would have to go: hasselblad, leica, rollei etc. I am done trying to cobble things together on the cheap.

I was wondering if anyone had gone this route and regretted getting rid of all the smaller gear? I have just graduated and need to start working on portfolio of prints.

I use a sinar norma and just recently a cambo wide 650 for LF. I like both and will keep both. I think my 8x10 sould be a folding field camera of some sort. I would really prefer a metal camera i think. Wide angle to normal lenses. I only use two or three lenses. extreme wide, wide, and normal.

I would like the camera to be steady, rugged, full movements and the movements feel good, zero dentents, tight locking, quick(est) set up / break down. I don't care about weight, or cost really. I mean, of course i do, but that is what i am willing to compromise. I looked at the toyo 810 but read that the knobs and little piddly stuff sticks out when folded shut? I may have to live with this but i would prefer a box when folded. I looked at the canham and the phillips and the toyo. my understanding is the metal canham is not built as well as the wood one? i looked at another one that starts with an M i think, holes drilled all over it for the "light weight" version. Is the Lotus worth the effort and cost? It is really hard for me to judge from the little i am able to find online. i have no chance of renting or borrowing this gear.

I also have great tripods. for MF. they get a little funky with the 5x7 norma on them. So I will need a new tripod. any suggestions? same compromises apply for tripod as camera. rugged, feels good to move/use. overkill.

I will be looking for a 810 durst too i guess, and rebuilding my darkroom.

I really appreciate it. I have been reading every post i can on here, i just don't post much.

here is mostly the types of stuff i shoot.

[Paul Greeves]

Hi Steve,

I have been going through the same turmoil. I have been shooting large format for a couple of year on 5x4 and thought the same as you, should I try 10x8? I got my hands on a Sinar Norma 10x8 which allowed me to try the format and see if I could cope with the added camera size.

The results over 5x4 are amazing. My Sinar F1 has not been used since I have had the Norma. I have considered selling it to buy more 10x8 kit but decided that the camera has its own uses and decided to keep it. I scan my negatives on an Epson V750 which has a 10x8 by light box and print out on an Epson 7800 inkjet printer. The prints can be 24" by any length. This may be an alternative to a huge enlarger?

I recently sold the Norma and I am awaiting the delivery of a Canham JMC810 which is half the weight of the Norma and folds to a compact size. The only other camera that I considered was a Walker Titan 10x8. The only down side to the Walker was that it has a fixed back but all the normal movements are available on the front standard.

Regards

Paul

[AJ Edmondson]

I recently went down this path "in reverse" having downsized from 8x10 to 4x5 and I don't regret the move. Your experience may differ of course but I find that I don't do well trying to manage multiple formats because the manner of "seeing" or previsualizing seems to suffer. I loved 8x10 - still do - but with retirement and the change in photographic direction it seemed the right choice. In terms of image quality (in my opinion only) I don't think you will see much change but the actual process of composing and managing the image (again, just my opinion) is considerably different and in my experience much more satisfying with 8x10. Good luck!

[Walter Calahan]

I'd look at the Canham before the Lotus.

[Paul Greeves]

I will agree that there is little difference in actual image quality between 5x4 and 10x8. I have put same size prints next to one another and it is difficult to see a noticeable difference. I have had 5x4 printed up 5'x4' on canvas and they do look stunning. I haven't done the same with 10x8, yet! I did ask myself, only yesterday, whether 10x8 wasn't just overkill. The problem is, once you have seem the image on a 10x8 ground glass it is difficult to go back to 5x4. It is the same as going back to 35mm after using roll film. There is a learning curve to 10x8. I found it far more difficult to use the camera movements to find the plane if focus, somethings that is very easy on the F1 Sinar.

One word of caution. If you are on doing photography on a restricted budget then you should consider that 10x8 film is at least x4 the price of 5x4.

I did consider selling the Sinar F1 and Norma 10x8 and going in the middle and buying a Canham 7x5. The only thing that stopped me was the lack of choice when it comes to film stock.

[Gem Singer]

The Canham MQ57, that begins with "M" is a 5X7 camera.

I have owned the all-metal DLC45 and the JMC810 Canham cameras. I agree that the
Traditional (wood) Canham cameras are more stable and seem to lock down tighter than the all-metal versions.

Traded my all-metal versions for a 4X5/5X7 Traditional and an 8X10 Traditional, which i still have.

These are beautiful cameras that have black anodized aircraft grade aluminum rails and fold into American Walnut wooden boxes. Easy to stow and carry.

Keith Canham is easy to reach on the phone, and is very generous with his time and advice. That's an advantage that few other camera manufacturers can claim.

[Ron Marshall]

The Wehman is pretty solidly built and lightweight.

I opted for a 5x7, the groundglass is plenty big. Color neg and pos are available as well as slow and fast b/w.

[Dan Schmidt]

I find the Wehman to be great. I often use it with a 5x7 reducing back. I probably shot less 4x5 negs than you before going to 8x10. Two factors for going to 8x10: contact printing and ease of composition on bigger ground glass.

[Gene McCluney]

I just acquired an 8x10 Kodak Master View, and it is a metal (aluminum) fold up camera that folds up very similar to a Toyo 4x5 Metal field camera, when folded it is completely covered like a compact box with a nice handle on top. I got the 8x10, 5x7, and a 4x5 back, and this camera has a very generous bellows extension, and it also allows you to bring the back forward almost to the front so you can use wide-angle lenses without the danger of showing the bed of the camera in the shot. In my opinion, almost a perfect field camera. If you get multiple backs for your camera, you can shoot whatever size film you want. The only disadvantage of the Kodak, is that they are hard to find. This camera has full movements-except for rear rise-and is quick to set up, and the rear has geared focusing.

[Mark Woods]

I have my Sinar P with all the backs. Only the 4x5 goes out. I recently sold my 2D 8x10 and was able to pick up a Deardorff 8x10 for $720. Cosmetically is it has issues, but it's solid and light tight and I like it very much. I have 2 5x7 wood cameras my father built when he had a portrait studio. I take them out on occasion with their old uncoated lenses. I still shoot in all three formats. My landscapes are mostly 8x10, my still lifes are 4x5. 5x7 fits in when I'm nostalgic and want to connect with my dad's cameras.