Is Reduced Weight Worth An Extra $1500+ for 8x10?

[Ralph Barker]

"Do you find the double extension limiting? The triple extension puts the camera out of my price range . . ."

Edward (Halifax, NS) - Yes, and no. The double extension Tachihara racks out to about 550mm, so it is a little limiting for use of longer lenses in close proximity. Most of what I use that camera for, however, is landscape work with wide lenses (150mm, 240mm), so it hasn't been a practical problem. It's still long enough to use the 450mm to pull in distant subjects. For studio work where I need more extension, I also have a Toyo monorail that will stretch out to around 750mm or so with an extension rail, or 1200mm with a long bellows. Simple close-up lenses on the 450mm lens are also an option for close work with the Tachihara.

[Brian Ellis]

Just to keep the record straight, the Deardorff factory literature I have says the 8x10 with front swings weighs 12 pounds, not 14. I weighed mine and it came in just a shade above 12 pounds. Maybe the 14 pound number is with lens board and film holder in place but bare bones I'm pretty sure the camera weighs 12 pounds give or take a couple ounces.

[Ed Burlew]

There is alot of comment on the Wisner, I have one, Bought it used and I know other people who are on the forum who have them, they are good cameras. Do not be dissuaded by those people who have a personal dispute with Ron Wisner. I have never met him and I do not need to, I use the camera, the Traditional 8x10 is 8.5 lbs and it has knobs that are big and easy to use. I like the interchangeable bellows and the reducing backs. I was able to buy it used so I had no waiting and it works fine. these cameras also seem to hold their value adn many people treat them very well so you can get a mint condition Wisner used. The wait to get a new one keeps the used market high. Do not regect a camera that you can use.

[Ron Bose]

Robert,

I was in the same position as you a couple of months ago. I was eager to fax in my order to Dick Phillips.

Then I happened upon a 8x10 Ansco, paid around 600 bucks for it. I figure that this way I can see if I like the big, big neg enough to splash out on a Phillips, Canham or a Wisner (I already have a 4x5 Wisner Trad).

It's a real beauty, heavy yes, but I won't be trekking with it.

Many posts have mentioned this, but remember to consider your glass, this can cost and weight a lot too. And assuming that a Dorf' or an Ansco or a B&J is light-leak free, the lens is gonna give you the image. The camera is there to hold the film and move it around a bit :-D

Also, the beauty of this route is that if you love 8x10 enought to order a new one, when the new one is delivered you can probably sell the old one with no loss in value.

[Lars Åke Vinberg]

I can vouch for the Gandolfi Variant. At about 4 kgs it is well-built and more rigid than any other wood 8x10 that I have seen, and a breeze to use. It is double-extension, so the longest lens practical to use is a 480 - but for wide-angle work it shines (can focus my 47XL, but of course it won't cover 8x10).

As for weight-saving, you need to think about the whole system. My camera weighs four kgs, but my packed backpack with the whole system weighs in at no less than 20 kgs. So the camera is probably not the cheapest item to save weight on.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Ed,

Does your 8x10 Wisner Traditional L really weigh 8.5 lbs? The weight for the 8x10 Traditional L is listed twice on the Wisner web site. Once at 10.5 lbs. and once at 10.9 lbs.

Kerry

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

There ae other light cameras out there, like the old Kodak magnesium, at 7 lbs

I assume you are referring to the Eastman Commercial View (All Metal). I have one of these, and while it is a very usable camera and a good value for the money, it weighs quite a bit more than 7 lbs. My camera in it's lightest configuration with no rear extension rail, no sliding tripod mounting bracket and no front tilt/swing add-on weighs 9.9 lbs. I don't have the exact total in front of me, but if you include all the mentioned items (that are really needed to get the most out of the camera), it's in the same 12.5 lb. range as the Deardorff.

The good news is that it costs about 1/2 as much (or less) than Deardorff or Master View in comparable condition. And, being made from metal, it's quite durable. I'm not implying that it's a better camera than a Deardorff or Master View. It's not. It is a usable camera and a good value (but not an ultralight).

Kerry

P.S. If you're interested in an 8x10 Toho, Badger Graphic has a used on listed on their web site for $1595.

[e]

Sounds like you will use the camera more if it comes in at a lighter weight. Probably the nicest and highest valued one in this regard is the Phillips. He has been taking orders recently for his 6lb model. Not a ton of bellows though.If money is an issue then buy a recent wooden camera (e**y) used in mint and let the original owner take the depreciation hit. I wouldn't spend too much money though until you are really sure about this format. More money spent is not going to make much dif in the contacts you create. You will really be amazed at what you can do with an older camera in good cond. and an older lens..... but a lot of passion and creativity. Good luck!

[John Kasaian]

Robert,

Getting back to your original question about maintenance, in my experience there is really very little involved---check out Ken Hough's Deardorff Historical Website for maintenance info that would apply to nearly any wood field camera and probably many metal cameras too. Unless you're a skilled mechanic, you'll probably send your shutter out for a cla when needed, but depending on how fast it gunks up, could be years.

All things being equal, any of the cameras mentioned here are capable of taking fine photos if you do your part. Remember too, you'll need to buy a lens, loupe, holders and a sturdy tripod with a head and that could add up to a lot of $$$ ---BTW, your Negative isn't likely to know the difference if Its been exposed in a used camera and one that smells new, so why not save your $$$ for all that additional stuff you'll need to buy?----Cheers!

[jonathan smith]

I would also have to chime in for the Wehman, I have the previous model which is 12 pounds, and I think that gives extra stability. I use a big Manfrotti tripod with no head and it's quite stable. I do a lot of long exposures and have had none spoiled by the wind.

I have a bicycle set up which can take everything, or if I walk I can carry what I need in shoulder bags. As others have said, the weight of the camera is the least of it. I just got a second, smaller tripod which works but has to be babied. I try to plan my shots so I know which lens to take, and usually just take one holder. I like my camera to be solid; if I didn't have the Wehman I would probably get a Toyo Field.