5x7 Recommendations

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Alan,

Well, half the pound sterling, anyway; a bit over 70 euro-cents, whereas when Clinton left office you could buy a euro for about 90 US cents.

I'll second all the good things everyone has said about Canham, including that Keith is an extraordinarily nice guy, and add that Eddie at Gandolfi has a very high opinion of Canhams too; I've heard him say that if for some reason you don't want a Gandolfi, a Canham is the obvious next choice. They also have a very long bellows draw; I'd think the 19 inch Artar should be OK, but I can't remember the figures.

Interesting to 'meet' a fellow Toho owner!

Cheers,

R.

 

[wfwhitaker]

...If I could stand 'smileys' or emoticons I'd strew this post with them,...

Hey, no offense taken here! Times change. My comment was what I perceived the climate (in the U.S.) to be based on reading these forums for several years. It's moot anyway. The thread author doesn't seem too impressed with them and he's the guy who asked. Oh well, I like mine and I'm keeping it. Good thing, too, cause after this exchange they've probably devalued just like the dollar!

It's too bad the Gandolfi's aren't better represented over here. They do seem to have a following (or maybe that's just Ole talking all the time...). I've only seen one and it didn't strike me really one way or the other. Maybe it wasn't a good representation, though.

Oh, and

-Will

 

[Alan9940]

One more question for you Canham owners...the 5x7 in particular...

Do you use the standard GG or the Fresnel screen?

Thanks, again.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

The Fresnel, absolutely. It is at least 2 stops brighter, so it makes focusing in low light a reasonable experience, and not a torture that it can be with a standard GG. That said, even the standard GG from Keith is quite good- very fine texture, fairly bright in all but night/indoor shooting or when stopped down past f22.

 

[brianpatrick]

i'm thinking of buying used 5x7 deardorff. it's the earlier one w/o front swing. condition seemed pretty good but obviously it's old. the bellows while supposedly "light tight" were covered w/ tape. coming w/ a and symmar 135, some holders and 4x5 back price is coming at 650$ what do you think? i saw it tonight and sort of fell in love, but i want to be smart. what will it cost me to replace the bellows? or a full resto?
i'm not rich so i want to make the right decision and get a camera i can use for a while - i may someday step up to ULF...i realise that 5x7 film is more limited and thats all fine as i will contact print b&w and use 4x5 for my color work.

what could be possible pitfalls i should look out for?

thanks in advance -

 

[brianpatrick]

deardorff 5x7 HELP! cost price

i'm thinking of buying used 5x7 deardorff. it's the earlier one w/o front swing. condition seemed pretty good but obviously it's old. the bellows while supposedly "light tight" were covered w/ tape. coming w/ a and symmar 135, some holders and 4x5 back price is coming at 650$ what do you think? i saw it tonight and sort of fell in love, but i want to be smart. what will it cost me to replace the bellows? or a full resto?
i'm not rich so i want to make the right decision and get a camera i can use for a while - i may someday step up to ULF...i realise that 5x7 film is more limited and thats all fine as i will contact print b&w and use 4x5 for my color work.

what could be possible pitfalls i should look out for?

thanks in advance -

 

[keithwms]

I recently had new 5x7 bellows made up at camerabellows for $150, as I recall.

 

[Clyde Rogers]

Sorry, one additional question to all who recommended the Canham 5x7: are we talking the wooden or metal version?

Thanks, again.

I've had a wood Canham 5x7 for around 12 years, and would recommend it without reservation. Strong, light, supremely versatile, very well made, and well supported. FWIW, I much prefer the wood camera to the metal Canham 4x5 I used for several months earlier this year.

Until later,

Clyde

 

[Curt]

I bought 100 sheets of Kodak Tri-X just before it went up in price and have a lot of the JandC 5x7. Although I only have the Kodak 2D finished with original extension rail and an extra model similar and two Seneca 5x7's I would like to have and have the materials to make a wood field camera like the Canham 5x7. I bought a Canham 5x7 bellows, have a Satin Snow gg, all of the hardware, rack and pinion, and two very old and seasoned planks of Honduras Mahogany. If I had the money I would have bought a Canham a long time ago, so there is another vote for the Canham. I agree that the Kodak 2D is a camera I can "use" and not worry about getting dinged. It's very well built and solid as a rock. Really not that heavy and has the features that make sense for me.

Curt

Hey, I wasn't finished or accidently hit the enter,

I like the format so much that I looked and waited for a Durst 5x7 enlarger. Now I am very happy.

 

[Curt]

One other thing about the Canham bellows, it folds to about, less than an inch, really really thin and way out to more than I would need. It's a five star compared to the Shen Hao which is 2 and a half star. It has nice metal attachments at both ends and is very durable.

 

[Falkenberg]

You could also consider a Sinar Norma or P2. They are dirt cheap and are awailable in 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10. The Sinar system makes it easy to configure it anyway You like.

 

[2F/2F]

My first recommendation is to look into the whole package before you take the plunge. You will be spending far more on everything else than you will spend on the camera itself, unless of course all you want is contact prints and/or you are happy with drum scans and digital prints. 5x7 holders are a bit more tricky to find and more expensive. Same with a 5x7 enlarger. Whatever camera you get can be jury rigged as an enlarger, I suppose. Not trying to discourage you, just trying to bring up all the peripheral stuff that is sometimes overlooked. If you want to do daylight developing, a Jobo tank and manual roller will run you a few hundred as well.

After that, nothing beats a Sinar for all around versatility and quality (a Linhof is perhaps equal for quality). They are about 1/10 of their original prices nowadays too.

There is a Linhof 5x7 in Samy's Camera in Los Angeles. They are asking WAY too much for it, as they do with everything used, but it has been there so long, perhaps if you act serious, they will come down.

If you need a field camera, I have no recommendations. There is a fair variety, I'm sure, but none with which I am personally familiar.

 

[Clyde Rogers]

i'm thinking of buying used 5x7 deardorff. it's the earlier one w/o front swing. condition seemed pretty good but obviously it's old. the bellows while supposedly "light tight" were covered w/ tape. coming w/ a and symmar 135, some holders and 4x5 back price is coming at 650$ what do you think? i saw it tonight and sort of fell in love, but i want to be smart. what will it cost me to replace the bellows? or a full resto?
i'm not rich so i want to make the right decision and get a camera i can use for a while - i may someday step up to ULF...i realise that 5x7 film is more limited and thats all fine as i will contact print b&w and use 4x5 for my color work.

what could be possible pitfalls i should look out for?

thanks in advance -

I think that's a good price for a no-front-swing Deardorff that needs a bellows and nothing else, especially considering the extras.

First make sure the obvious things are okay (the wood seems sound, no big chips in it, no hardware missing, etc.). The only pitfall I can think of is that the back can be floppy on these---they are held up by a rather thin piece of metal running in a groove, and wear at that point can make them move at the slightest touch. Some looseness in the extensions themselves is typical and no big deal, but a floppy wiggly rear standard can be a bother.

Replacement parts may be available, or can certainly be made. Or you can do a cheater fix by putting a series of tiny bends in the edge of the part that runs in the channel, slightly "thickening" it.

Oh, and old wood 5x7 holders often have light leaks, especially in the slot where the dark slide pulls out. If the part of the holder that forms the outside of the slot (the two pieces of wood or metal on the 5" side with the ridge sticking out) is wood, it may very well be bulging out a bit. On the other hand, my favorite 5x7 holders are old wood ones with that part made of metal. They are fine holders, and are smaller, lighter and cheaper than modern ones.

Later,

Clyde

 

[Tom Perkins]

I agree it's a fair price, but you will have to factor in a lens or lenses; the Symmar 135 will not cover 5x7. I picked up one like it last fall and it is good to work with. No new bellows but the metal parts on the front standard were worn and I had to send it for repairs. A full restoration including refinishing the wood is expensive and may not be practical, but making sure the camera locks down is important, as Clyde says, and if you can, you should check this out before you make your purchase.

 

[brianpatrick]

first let me say thanks to those that have given advice - i fully appreciate it. SO -the 135 won't cover 5x7? the guy selling -who seems pretty straight -assured me that it would -is he really mistaken? what would be a wide-angle in 5x7? he also has a 210 and i believe a 300 that i could get instead...the camera seemed to lock down just fine and there were no major chips or gouges -the wood seemed in good shape, just faded. i guess i'll need to look closer at the rear standard...he is including 3 modern plastic holders in 5x7 and i have a lot of 4x5s already -these should work OK right? I guess i have some thinking to do..i'd rather have a canham - obviously, but i'm on a budget here. there's a nice linhof 5x7 in the classifieds here on apug but it's 800$, w/ no lens and the seller is not really budging on price.

any further advice is welcome and appreciated...

 

[Ole]

The 135mm Symmar won't cover 5x7" - at least mine doesn't. The 150mm Symmar almost/barely covers, and is quite useable if you're not too fussy about fuzzy corners - or if you stop down to f:22 or so.

Most 135mm lenses were made as normal lenses for 9x12cm, and not as wide-angle lenses for 5x7". So with very few exceptions, they won't cover. Look for 120mm lenses instead - that focal length is dominated by WA lenses for 5x7"!

 

[herb]

5x7

Deardorffs are nice, gandolfi's are prettier and probably better made, canham has the best service anywhere, and the only thing I would say with 5x7 or 8x10, try to get a bail for opening the back-they are really great, keeps one from moving the camera when inserting a holder.

good luck!

 

[Don Dudenbostel]

I've been a Deardorff user since the early 70's when I bought a beautiful red bellows 5x7 w/o front swings. It came with a nice 210mm Tessar in a compund shutter. I used that camera for many years and finally sold it to get the 5x7 interchange components for my Sinar Norma. I've always regretted selling the Deardorff. Since then I've owned my vintage 8x10 for over thirty years and had a beauty of a Baby Deardorff for quite a few years until I sold it six years ago. Another sale I am sorry I made. Should have kept both the 5x7 and the Baby 4x5. Roger may feel the Deardorff is an ordinary lack luster camera but for those that have made our living using LF and particularly Deardorf cameras then I think we have a better appreciation of the design and the solid construction and compact size of the Deardorff. I now have a Canham wood 5x7 with both 5x7 and 4x5 backs. Certainly Keith Canham is the current king of customer service but in the days of the Deardorff company they were equal in service. My 8x10 is one of 5 made in a transition period. It came with no front swings and I wanted to update it to the current FS model. I contacted Deardorff and Jack Deardorff answered the phone. He explained that most likely my camera could not be modified but he would give me the dimensions of the bed so I could check. The later FS cameras had a slightly different dimension to the bed apparently. Jack explained that he knew the owners of three of the five cameras so my camera was not likely to be one of the other two. To our surprise it was the #4 camera. I then ordered the new components and sent a check (in 1974). I waited for a while and the parts never came. I called Jack and he explained that the parts had arrived but the plating on the metal didn't meet their standards for quality. A week or so after my conversation the parts arrived. I installed them and they fit perfectly. About a month later I received a call from Jack D. to see if they were to my liking. I said they were and they fit perfectly. Jack then replied that he would deposit my check now having satisfied his customer and the product was to my liking. Now that's customer service. Keith Canham runs this kind of business too. His camera is very strong, light weight and easy to use. The wood camera is much more advanced than the Deardorff having interchangeable bellows and format backs. Lever locks are a dream once you break old habits of screw down locks. Lens boards are large and can take large shutters. Also my camera is a newer one and I have an adapter for my Linhof boards. I also have an Ebony 4x5 that I absolutely love but the cost of the 5x7 is a little over the top. Over all I love the Canham as much as I do the Ebony. They're different cameras and designed different but they're both superb and easy to use.

 

[pandino]

I'm thinking about getting a 5x7...which one (new) would you recommend that falls into the "affordable" category; for example, my wallett tells me to skip the Ebony!

Thank you for any thoughts and recommendations.

Alan,
If you're serious about wanting an Ebony, take a look at the Shen Hao HZX57. It appears to be cloned directly from the SV57 and can be had for under $1500 used.

It's probably not made to the same precision, but is a very nice camera. I'm not sure they're available new anymore. I bought one as a lightweight (compared to my Ansco) 5x7 for hiking, but unfortunately my aging knees have a different idea of what is lightweight. After hiking with it yesterday, I'm seriously thinking of dropping it for a 4x5.

Here's what they look like:

Dead Link Removed

 

[k_jupiter]

At the risk of being accused of anti-Americanism by the usual suspects, I'd say this is only true in the USA. Elsewhere in the world, those who have actually seen or handled them (as distinct from reading Americans' opinions of them) cannot see what the fuss is about. I had read a lot about them before I ever saw one, so perhaps my expectations were unreasonably high, but I was surprised at how very ordinary they are.

If I could stand 'smileys' or emoticons I'd strew this post with them, but please take it as read that there is no personal attack, anti-US attach or even Deardorff attack intended: I just can't see why they're so well regarded.

Cheers,

R.

Roger,
If you have read any of my posts since I got my V-8 Deardorff, you would understand my view as both an engineer and a photographer. Everything is in the correct place. This camera folds down to almost nothing, it folds out to a beautiful camera and all the controls are exactly where they should be. What more can you ask from a LF camera? OK, weight. But that is the only drawback from a Deardorff. I am surprised that you didn't find it an amazing piece of engineering considering its age.

tim in san jose

 

[Nick Zentena]

Alan,
If you're serious about wanting an Ebony, take a look at the Shen Hao HZX57. It appears to be cloned directly from the SV57 and can be had for under $1500 used.

I'm not sure they're available new anymore. I bought one as a lightweight (compared to my Ansco) 5x7 for hiking, but unfortunately my aging knees have a different idea of what is lightweight. After hiking with it yesterday, I'm seriously thinking of dropping it for a 4x5.

Last year they were still selling the HZX 5x7 but had dropped the 8x10 version. The FCLs are lighter and go wider at the expense of the long end. I guess that's why they dropped the HZX 8x10. FWIW my FCL 810 is only slightly heavier then my HZX57. I bet the FCL57 is even lighter.

The FCL with both the 5x7 and 4x5 backs is likely a good combinations for most people. Not that heavy. Handles fairly wide lenses. Not for people looking to hang a big very long lens off the front but it's a field camera so that shouldn't be too much to give up.

 

[John Kasaian]

Just be grateful for whichever usable 5x7 that you can find & afford,
and go out and make beautiful photographs with it

 

[brianpatrick]

well john,

that's the ultimate goal.

 

[timbo10ca]

Alan,
If you're serious about wanting an Ebony, take a look at the Shen Hao HZX57. It appears to be cloned directly from the SV57 and can be had for under $1500 used.

It's probably not made to the same precision, but is a very nice camera. I'm not sure they're available new anymore. I bought one as a lightweight (compared to my Ansco) 5x7 for hiking, but unfortunately my aging knees have a different idea of what is lightweight. After hiking with it yesterday, I'm seriously thinking of dropping it for a 4x5.

Here's what they look like:

Dead Link Removed

This is the camera I got into LF with. I love it. It's light for backpacking, has all the movements (including axis *and* base tilts front and back), and sturdy. I chose it over the FCL for the bellows draw and movements. I've had people mistake it for a much more expensive brand.

Tim