Deardorf --vs-- Kodak 2D

[BradS]

In another thread, I was asked why I prefer the (8x10) Kodak 2d to the Deardorff...

Brad,

Just wondering, on your flickr you say "much nicer than a Deardorf". Why is that? I kinda thought Deardorf trumped all. I don't know anything though.

There are a few reasons:

1) the Kodak is lighter by a few pounds (my Deardorff weighed in at just over 15 pounds and the Kodak 2d weigh a little over ten).

2) the Kodak seems stronger, more sturdy than the Deardorff. The Deardorff always felt a little flimsy to me - especially the front standard and front extension. That and I was always worried about it getting "hurt".

3) damned lensboards for Deardorff cost a small fortune....and everybody selling Deardorff board seems to really have 2-D boards with the corners rounded...which don't really fit Deardorffs to well. Of course, original Kodak lensboards are basically unobtainable these days but they are easier to make. Ok...these are minor nits.

However, the Deardorff did have more movements capability...and of course, the Deardorff is much better looking than the ugly old, un-refined Kodak 2D.


uhm, so....anybody else have any reasons they prefer one or the other?

[Michael Roberts]

Oh boy, you've done it now!

btw, I have to add that, yes, my 2D is about 10lbs--w/o the base rail. With the base rail, it's 12lbs. From what I read, most V8 'dorffs are about 13lbs.

But I'm sure the loyal Deardorff users will be weighing in (so to speak).....

[BradS]

is this kinda like the large format version Nikon-Canon SLR wars?

[Len Middleton]

I thought even in the Lounge area, religious discussions are not allowed and eventually deleted by the moderators...

As any true believer would tell you there is no comparison really, and how you could even raise such a heritical comparison is beyond my comprehension...

Oh, did I mention I have a Deardorff V8? But having never really compared it side to side with the Kodak, I really cannot provide a realistic analysis.

I do however expect this to be an interesting thread, if this doesn't get moderated off for being too controversal like Littleguy cameras, religion, gun control, etc.

Let the flame wars commence...

[Mark Woods]

I sold my complete 2D for a V8 and never looked back. I really like it.

[Jay DeFehr]

My Deardorff is the only 8x10 camera I've ever really used, with a few limited exceptions, so I can' comment on any comparisons. I had a bunch of lens boards made for my 'dorff, by a local woodsmith, and they are beautiful, and fit perfectly. He didn't want to charge me anything, because he said they were too easy to make, and he just used scrap wood he had lying around. The one made of mahogany is a dead ringer for the original, but the others are obviously not mahogany, or original, but beautiful in their own ways. So, now I have more lens boards than lenses, which is nice. He also made beautiful 5x7, 4x5, and 3x4 reducing backs.

I don't really pack my V8 very far, so the weight isn't really an issue, especially considering the weight of my Verito. The extensions do seem a little flimsy at full extension with the monster Verito hanging off the standard, but this perceived flimsiness has never caused any problems for me, other than the slight uneasiness I feel when I rack the extension out.

Most of the movements on my camera go unused.

For some of the reasons noted above, I've toyed with the idea of building a compact, lightweight, 8x10 portrait camera to take into the field, but along with a million other ideas I've toyed with, nothing of substance has come of it. Maybe all of this recent Petzval madness will inspire someone to build a good location portrait camera.

[Andrew Plume]

I've never owned a 'Dorff (although I've had a play with one) but I have spent plenty of time with a 2D

for me the 2D as beautiful as mine is, just doesn't have anywhere enough movements for my liking and for that reason I'd have to plump for a Dorff, whether it has a soft front standard or not

andrew

[neil poulsen]

I miss the front tilt on a 2D. There are way around that though. But, the lack of a front tilt limits the amount of front rise.

I have a 2D. Perhaps it has an improper bellows, but the bellows on mine cuts off a top portion of the negative with any significant rise. It can be as much as 3/4". I don't know if others have this same problem, though.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Lack of front tilt/swing is a deal breaker for me. While I don't mind the extra weight of a Deardorff, I am just too lazy to work out front movements using rear ones. Lensboard issues are real, but can be resolved with an adapter board, so with all but my largest lenses I use Canham/Toyo boards. All that said, I do wish my Deardorff had shift...

[John Kasaian]

1)A clam-shell like a 'dorff is much easier to pack than a flat bed camera like the 2D.
2)The woodgrain on 'dorffs are generally prettier to look at---an important consideration when the lights not right or the wind kicks up and you're sitting on a stump or rock in the middle of nowhere.
3)A V-8 will appreciate in value quicker than a D-2

Of course if your main interest is in making photographs, your film isn't going to care which camera it was exposed in and I dare say, niether should you be over concerned about it either