7x11 Cameras

[photomc]

Good Day All,
Have searched here anf over on LF forum to see if there are very many shooting with 7x11 format and there seem to be a few. I have been considering 'moving up' in format, but not sure how much. Currently shoot both 5x7 and 8x10.

My first impression was to go with 11x14, and had the chance yesterday to look at Jeremy's 11x14 Korona. A nice set up, but just a bit larger than I wanted, and not sure how well I would see with the format. Now I love 5x7 and find the 8x10 OK, but it is not my first choice (other than I do like the size for contact prints).

So, what kind of cameras are out there and how hard are they to find? Have notice Kerry T. has mentioned in a few post he has had 7x11 cameras so hoping he and other that shoot the format will respond. Would love to see some work any of you have posted to get an idea of 'how' the format looks. It would seem that a camera would be pretty much the same size my 8x10 just a different format.

If you have any advice as other things to consider please let me know - such as lens, holders, support, etc. as well as processing - currently use old paper drums and a motor to process the 5x7/8x10 and figure that I could use an 11x14 drum to process 7x17.

Thanks in advance for your input.

 

[Oren Grad]

As was posted in the other thread, the two 7x11 cameras that I've seen are the Eastman and the Korona. The Eastman seems to be more common, but is still quite scarce even compared to the whole plate size, let alone standard sizes like 5x7 or 8x10.

I don't know about the Korona, but you should know that compared to the other Eastman cameras, the 7x11 is disproportionately heavy and bulky for the format. My 6.5x8.5 Eastman No. 2 weighs around 8 or 9 pounds, and I gather that the 8x10 weighs around 11 or 12, but my 7x11 Eastman No. 2 weighs around 15 pounds. Fortunately, the old wooden holders are very lightweight, which helps with the weight of the kit as a whole.

You can see a 7x11 Eastman 2D, with its unusual sliding lensboard design, here.

I develop my negatives four at a time in a Jobo 3004 Expert drum. Haven't done too many yet, but I have a bunch of HP5 Plus on order as part of this year's Ilford special cut, and am hoping to use the camera more.

 

[photomc]

Thanks for the input Oren. Do you contact print the negs, if so how would you say they compare visually to 8x10? Good info on the Jobo Expert drum too!!

 

[wfwhitaker]

...Jeremy's 11x14 Korona. A nice set up, but just a bit larger than I wanted...

It's a funny thing how formats larger than 8x10 quickly become, as Oren put it, "disproportionately heavy and bulky". It's precisely because of this that I keep returning to 8x10. Everything about 8x10 is much more accessible. Move to 7x11 and film, holders, negative sleeves, paper... -everything- (well, except for lenses) becomes a challenge. This for a format whose diagonal is a mere 6mm more than for 8x10. And it doesn't get any better if you go larger.

But 7x11 is a beautiful format.

If you think you want to go in that direction, tape your groundglass to 6.5 x 10 and crop your prints accordingly. If you can work in that rectangle, it might be worth the effort to move to 7x11.

 

[Oren Grad]

You bet - 7x11 is for contact printing.

For my taste 8x10 is too square for most things, which is one reason I like whole plate as a general-purpose format. 7x11 is a wonderful semi-panoramic complement - it's like a mini-12x20, and is quite comfortable if one grew up with 35mm. (Comparing it to 12x20 is also a nice way to make the weight of the camera seem a little less daunting. )

The 3004 drum is ideal for 7x11 - the wells are designed to hold film up to 9.5x12". Unfortunately, it's long discontinued, but they do turn up on eBay now and then. Depending on the exact dimensions of the film you may be able to get away with a 3005, but you'd have to run some tests to make sure that development is even out to the far ends of the negatives. If you've had good results developing other sizes in print drums, no doubt you can make 7x11 work that way too.

 

[Oren Grad]

Will's comment reminds me - there is a more logistically tractable alternative. There's an adapter back for the Musashino Rittreck View that accepts holders in a semi-panoramic format that's roughly 6x10; it's not hard to cut film down from 8x10 to fit, and of course the 3005 drum is fine for developing. If you keep an eagle-eye on eBay, you may be able to snare a camera/adapter back/holder set - because of a handful of newly active Asian sellers, the flow of Rittreck gear on eBay has increased over the past year or so. The camera plus adapter back is maybe 4-5 pounds lighter than the 7x11 Eastman, and quite a bit smaller.

There's also a small handful of Wisner 6x10's floating around.

 

[photomc]

Great stuff guys, spent the afternoon - overcast and gloomy here in North Texas (after Snow!! yesterday) and gave this more thought - the camera not the gloom. Wondered if it were possible to have someone adapt the 8x10 I have (Korona) to take a 7x11 by making an adapter back of some type. Something like the 5x7 back that either Shen Hao or Tacharia makes for their 4x5. But now thinking I should just make a mask of sorts for the 8x10 so that I am shooting 6.5x10 and go from there.

Oh, and Oren the reason I started to think about this was becuase I don't want to lug a 12x20 around, but 7x11 does seem to be a mini-12x20 format as it is.

 

[Oren Grad]

Wondered if it were possible to have someone adapt the 8x10 I have (Korona) to take a 7x11 by making an adapter back of some type.

I expect that it would be possible. You would likely need some extension, like the 4x5-5x7 expander backs that are built as truncated pyramids. There's some restriction on focal lengths and movements, but it would probably work better going from 8x10 to 7x11 than it does going from 4x5 to 5x7. Not only that, there's a fair chance you'd end up with a camera that was lighter than the Eastman.

 

[Steve_7x]

pros & cons

Let me try to adress some of the comparison to the 7x11 format. My measurements are with my 7x11 Korona and compared to a 8x10 Canham

- the 7x11 is larger (13x13 rear standard on the 7x11 vs the ~11x11 on an 8x10 Canham)
- Holders are more expensive
- Holder weight - when comparing wood 7x11 to wood 8x10 is probably a wash - the wood ones are lighter then the new Lisco/Fidelity's
- Film - Thank good for Ilford (thank you Simon) - but you need to plan ahead
- Weight of my 7x11 is 11lbs (on my bathroom scale) - including the extension rail - the same as my 8x10 Canham
- Perspective ratio that is more in my (and sounds like your) sweet speot - slight panoramic

I think the mini 12x20 comment is spot on.

My ideal would be to get Keith to make a 7x11 rear assembly so I could swap between 8x10 and 7x11 using teh same chassis.

There were extension backs... I sold one several years ago that took an 8x10 rear frame then step up up (by adding about 2-3 inches of draw) to a 7x11. It was made by Ansco and looked original throughout.

Steve

 

[photomc]

My ideal would be to get Keith to make a 7x11 rear assembly so I could swap between 8x10 and 7x11 using teh same chassis.

There were extension backs... I sold one several years ago that took an 8x10 rear frame then step up up (by adding about 2-3 inches of draw) to a 7x11. It was made by Ansco and looked original throughout.

Steve

My ideal as well Steve, a 7x11 assembly from Keith would be perfect. If not will keep looking for the extension back (or what it would take to have one made). Thanks for the input.

 

[jimgalli]

IN my (there was a url link here which no longer exists) here at apug on page 2 there are 3 photos made with my Eastman Improved #2 711. The problem with trying to adapt a 711 back with an 8X10 camera is the width. That 11" width is only 1/2" smaller than most 8X10 dimensions which are 11 1/2" square. The Deardorff is 12X12 and I did manage to adapt a 7X11 back onto a 'dorff once upon a time. The Eastman camera falls between an 8X10 and 11X14 for size. I have 2 of them, one is like new original and one is really pretty but it's waiting for me to make a new bellows. Both of them have both 711 and 810 backs possible on the same camera, kind of a nice feature. What would REALLY be nice would be to make a 10X12 back for the 711 to take advantage of the extra bulk. I may try that at some point. I do think the 7X11 format is very fetching printed. The big Eastman will accept an 18" Verito with no complaining.

 

[outwest]

This thread brings back memories of my first "large" large format camera, an Eastman 2D in 7x11. I believe that this camera was really intended for portraits as it had the horizontally sliding lens board that permitted the lens to be centered over either side of the back which also had the capability of a sliding panel for two 5+x7 vertical exposures on each sheet of film. I used 8x10 holders with it by the expedient of inserting a wood block at the far end and slicing 1/4 inch off each side of wooden 8x10 holders. The result was an a 10 by slightly less than 8 image. Wish I had that camera again (and the B&L Triple Protar I used on it!)

 

[Jim Chinn]

You might want to drop Kerry Thallman an Email. If anyone has worked with converting or making an adaptor back from 8x10 to 7x11 it would probably be him.

 

[ReallyBigCameras]

You might want to drop Kerry Thallman an Email. If anyone has worked with converting or making an adaptor back from 8x10 to 7x11 it would probably be him.

At this point, I haven't actually owned a 7x11 camera, or shot any 7x11 film. I have a keen interest in this format and like the slightly panoramic aspect ratio for landscape shooting.

What I do have is a couple 7x11 Eastman holders, with a couple more on the way that I purchased last week on the British eBay. Once they arrive, I'll probably send them all off to Alan Brubaker to get them rebuilt, light tight and ready to use.

When shooting non-standard formats, I have learned from experience to always make sure I have functional, light tight holders before I even start looking for/assembling a camera. Good holders are the key to successful and enjoyable shooting. I learned this many years ago in my first foray into the 4x10 format. At the time, it was impossible to get light tight holders to for my Wisner camera. The second time around in 4x10, I was fortunate to acquire several very nice Lotus 4x10 holders at a very agreeable price. They are light tight, beautifully made and a joy to use. I'm enjoying 4x10 much more this time around.

For a 7x11 camera, I'll probably have Richard Ritter make me a camera back and adapt it to the same chassis I use for my 7x17 Franken-ARCA. Since the 7x17 version is already 2 lbs. lighter than the 7x11 Eastman, a 7x11 version of the Franken-ARCA would probably tip the scales at about 10 - 11 lbs. - assuming the same 28" max extension. Not an ultralight, but for a portable 7x11 monorail with geared front movements, not too bad.

BTW, a 7x11 Eastman, complete with adjustable iris lens mounting flange, went for just over $250 on the British eBay last week. I passed on the camera (at that price, I probably should have bid on it for the back alone), but purchased the holders mentioned above from the same seller.

Kerry

 

[photomc]

Thanks to everyone for your thoughts, hope more 7x11 shooters will add more to this thread - it has been most helpfull for me.

Jim, Thanks for the link to the gallery shots..just what I wanted to see (btw - that road grader looks like some kind of mechanical bug, loved it).

Kerry, Thank you for the input about the holders...good advice.

Options seem to be to either see about having an extension back made for the 8x10, finding a 7x11 camera, maybe find a 10x12 camera and have 7x11 and 8x10 backs made for it (nice tirple format). Guess I could always find some holders, and make a pinhole to get a 'feel' for the format.

Thanks everyone...seems like I recall another member, Annie, shooting 7x11 maybe she will drop by and give us her thoughts.

 

[ReallyBigCameras]

Options seem to be to either see about having an extension back made for the 8x10, finding a 7x11 camera, maybe find a 10x12 camera and have 7x11 and 8x10 backs made for it (nice tirple format)./QUOTE]

Mike,

Another option is to adapt a modern monorail camera to the format of your desire. As I mentoned, I did this for my 7x17 Franken-ARCA. Prior to that, I adapted a Louts 4x10 back and bellows to my ARCA-SWISS chassis.

I personally like the modular nature of the ARCA-SWISS system for these types of projects. However, other modern monorails can also be adapted - and may be more common/affordable on the used market. About the same time I was assembling my Franken-ARCA, Richard Wasserman was pulling together a 7x17 on a Sinar chassis. If you do a search for 7x17 Sinar you should be able to find photos of the results. I saw Richard's camera in person and it turned out VERY nice. Like my Franken-ARCA, Richard Ritter made the back for Richard's 7x17 Sinar conversion.

Sinar cameras are very plentiful and quite affordable on eBay these days. Likewise for Cambo and Toyo cameras.

The advantages of this approach are many. You get a modern monorail with extensive movements, good rigidity and smooth operation - not some rickety old 80 - 100 year old camera that's seen it's better days. You also get access to a full range of affordable accesories. This include everything from lens boards and extension rails to, in the case of the Sinar, a great behind-the-lens shutter for using barrel lenses.

Kerry

 

[ReallyBigCameras]

For anyone whose interested in making a 7x11 (or other non-standard format) camera on a modern monorail chassis, here's some links to the projects I mentioned above:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

My 4x10 Swiss Lotus

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Kerry

 

[wfwhitaker]

...Options seem to be to either see about having an extension back made for the 8x10, finding a 7x11 camera, maybe find a 10x12 camera and have 7x11 and 8x10 backs made for it (nice tirple format)...

I'm concerned that an extension back would run the risk of being bulky and awkward. Of course, it would depend on how much actual extension is involved and it should be proportionately less than that required for a 5x7 extension on a 4x5. I've just always thought those Tachihara extensions looked clunky.

My own solution (which like everything else it seems, is "in the works"...) you touched on. I have a 10x12 English plate camera (Hare) which has been converted to take S&S 10x12 film holders. It's a perfect vehicle for 7x11 and a I'm working on a reducing back. Unlike the Eastman and the Korona, this camera folds into a compact box which isn't much larger than an 8x10 Deardorff. Movements are limited; but then, I don't use a lot of movements typically. And the 10x12 format is nice, too. And quite a contrast shape-wise from 7x11.

Otherwise, I really like the idea of a Canham conversion - 'though not the most economical.

The biggest problem will be finding film holders.

 

[Harrigan]

The beauty of a monorail is the backs can be easily removed and swapped with another format. Also you can utilize the front standard from a precision made arca or sinar or whatever. You can find front standards very inexpensive fairly easily. Monorails also remove alot of the weight of the pretty folding field cameras.

I would do as Kerry suggests and find some FH's first becasue these are the most important part of the camera. Making a back is relatively easy for most competant wood workers as long as you have the fh's onhand. I did not say it was easy for the home woodworker you do need precision tools.

 

[wfwhitaker]

There are six 7x11 film holders currently in the classifieds.

 

[jimgalli]

There are six 7x11 film holders currently in the classifieds.

Will's too modest to (there was a url link here which no longer exists), but I will Good deal.

 

[removed account4]

hi mike

i am not the typical 7x11 user, and i don't really have a typical 7x11
camera+holders. i picked up a 11x14 studio camera ( the big ones on the
rolling iron+wood stand ) in the fall, and i have been shooting a little bit
with that. i made a 7x11 reducer (piece of paper inside the camera). i
don't have the $$ for film, just a lot of expired paper, so i have been
shooting paper negatives. the holder is a home made one (eventually i will
have more than just one). it was made with foamcore and 2ply matboard,
and the back of the camera is made of the same thing together with a piece
of waxed paper instead of ground glass.

while i would love to take the camera on the road, and away from the
studio i shoot it in, i am enjoying myself just the same. i really like the
vertical shape of the format. it isn't as wide + boxy as a full 11x14 sheet
( or 8x10 ) and the long and narrowness is great for shooting portraits,
kind of like a 5x7 but better .

i can only imagine a non-studio camera dedicated to shooting 7x11,
it would be the perfect panoramic/portrait/ulf,sort of - but not- format.

good luck!

john

 

[photomc]

Really GREAT!! info guys, I really appreciate the input - now to digest it all. Had not considered the rail camera option - Kerry a couple of really nice looking cameras.

One of the best attributes of online communities like this is the giving of thoughts that come from so many people.

Thanks!!

 

[photomc]

OK, a bit embarrassed to say I know very little of what I need to look for in a rail camera if I were to attempt to build a 7x11. Would a 4x5 rail and front standard work for this - any hints on what to look for or where to gather more info (plan to study Kerry's Swiss Lotus)?

 

[ReallyBigCameras]

What I do have is a couple 7x11 Eastman holders, with a couple more on the way that I purchased last week on the British eBay. Once they arrive, I'll probably send them all off to Alan Brubaker to get them rebuilt, light tight and ready to use.

My three "new to me" 7x11 Eastman holder arrived today. They are defintely not usable as is, but all are complete. So, hopefully they can be rebuilt by someone like Alan Brubaker. They all need reglued, refinished, new hinge tape and the light traps rebuilt. One has a cracked darkslide.

I got out my other two holders to compare dimensions and condition and had a little surprise. My two previous 7x11 holder are clearly labeled Ansco, not Eastman as I had thought. They've been stored away in a cabinet since I bought them and this is the first time I've had them out since they were purchased. The good news is that all the dimensions seem to be compatible between my Ansco and Eastman holders. The Ansco holders are in much better shape and can probably be used as is - although one does have a slightly warped darkslide that I'll probably replace.

So, does this mean Agfa/Ansco also made a 7x11 camera, or did they just make holders for the Eastman and Korona cameras?

Has anyone ever had any holders rebuilt/refurbished by Alan Brubaker? I think I remember Oren mentioning it at one point. Of course, I'll contact Alan to discuss his current prices and schedule, but if anyone has had similar work done, I'd love to know if you were pleased with the work and if it was worth the expense/wait. In other words, were the holders smooth operating and light tight afterwards and would you do it again or just save you're money for some new holders?

Thanks,
Kerry