budget 5x7/8x10 cameras with front tilt

[puketronic]

if they exist that is...

I was thinking of the Kodak 2D but I believe that they do not have front tilt, unless modified. I'd prefer a folder and it doesn't have to be Deardorff pretty. Budget is relative...but maybe I'm better off getting a monorail at the expense of portability so what are some options and relative prices?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

If you need the movements and you're on a budget, then you're looking at a monorail. You MIGHT be able to find a 5x7 field camera with front tilt for under $1000, but that will be a challenge. Some of the Ansco tailboard models had front tilt on the lensboard (axis tilt not base tilt) and rise/fall but no shifts, and you might be able to find one of those for under $500 - they're generally pretty plain-looking (they came battleship gray from the factory), and because they have very limited movements, they're not highly sought after. You used to be able to find the 8x10 version thereof with the front tilts (and I think the 8x10 also had shifts and rise, but I could be wrong) for under $1K, but they've gone up in price. The 5x7 version had both 4x5 and 5x7 backs for it and is much more commonly found with the 4x5 back on it.

for a 5x7 monorail, a Sinar Norma is a nice option, and they surface with reasonable regularity. Cambo had a very nice 8x10 monorail that still goes pretty cheap (under $1000 very easy, sometimes can be found under $600) but they weigh a ton. Any 8x10 monorail is going to be a big heavy pig.

I take it back somewhat about what I said about the Agfa- they did have front standard movements (shifts and tilts).

Here's one on Ebay right now-

http://www.ebay.com/itm/AGFA-5x7-FI...m_Cameras&hash=item3cc515148d#ht_29877wt_1399

 

[Kevin Kehler]

My Agfa Ansco 5x7 (similar to a B&J tail camera) has front tilt, rise and shift (no swing). It folds up and would be considered a field camera. However, it is 12 lbs with a lens. I have the exact camera listed in the ebay ad with 5x7 and 4x5 backs, except mine is in nicer condition since I restored it.

 

[puketronic]

I was reading more and it seems that age matters too.

I believe some didn't have front movements until after WWII? I'm referring to Agfa, Deardorff, and I believe B&J (those are the ones I looked into). I'm not sure about Kodak but I believe they have the Kodak Master 8x10 with movements.

I'm not sure on the prices of these cameras with movements but that is my impression: pre WWII = no front movements ; post WWII = front movements.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I was reading more and it seems that age matters too.

I believe some didn't have front movements until after WWII? I'm referring to Agfa, Deardorff, and I believe B&J (those are the ones I looked into). I'm not sure about Kodak but I believe they have the Kodak Master 8x10 with movements.

I'm not sure on the prices of these cameras with movements but that is my impression: pre WWII = no front movements ; post WWII = front movements.

The Century Universal has front movements, made in the 30s. I've handled one, and if I had no other 8x10 would be pretty happy with one. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/century/century_universal_8x10.html I don't know what they go for these days, less than a Deardorff for sure.

Pre 1950 Deardorffs had 'no' front swings, but you could use rear swings to get the job done.

I'd say front tilt and rise is much more useful than front swing.

 

[Alan Gales]

I sympathize with you since I went through the same deal you are going through before I bought my 8x10. I found everything inexpensive was too big a compromise for me in one way or another. I ended up buying a used Wehman for $1,500.00. To pay for the 8x10 camera, lenses, film holders, etc. I had to sell my 2 Contax 35mm cameras with 5 Zeiss lenses which I had owned since the 1980's plus my Mamiya RZ67 and 3 lens kit.

What do they say, no pain no gain?

 

[puketronic]

I sympathize with you since I went through the same deal you are going through before I bought my 8x10. I found everything inexpensive was too big a compromise for me in one way or another. I ended up buying a used Wehman for $1,500.00. To pay for the 8x10 camera, lenses, film holders, etc. I had to sell my 2 Contax 35mm cameras with 5 Zeiss lenses which I had owned since the 1980's plus my Mamiya RZ67 and 3 lens kit.

What do they say, no pain no gain?

I see...I'm thinking of doing something somewhat similar anyways. I have too many cameras that I don't use: Leica/Nikon/Rollei.

 

[David Grenet]

If weight isn't an issue you could always get a C1...

 

[xya]

a rittreck view 5x7. it has all front movements and weighs 7 lbs. without lens. there is even an 8x10 back (extender, limited movements then) which is a bit hard to find.

 

[k_jupiter]

If you need the movements and you're on a budget, then you're looking at a monorail. You MIGHT be able to find a 5x7 field camera with front tilt for under $1000, but that will be a challenge.
I take it back somewhat about what I said about the Agfa- they did have front standard movements (shifts and tilts).

Here's one on Ebay right now-

http://www.ebay.com/itm/AGFA-5x7-FI...m_Cameras&hash=item3cc515148d#ht_29877wt_1399

The 5x7 B&J Watson Commercial has all movements on the front standard, center axis tilt. Give me a 1000 bucks and you can have it.

Sorry Scott, feeling a bit snarky this evening.

 

[Jim Jones]

I've used a 5x7 B&J flatbed (usually with a 4x5 back) for decades. It has full movements front and back, with center tilts and swings. Weight is less than 7 lbs without lens. Bellows extension is 15 inches, and the extender rails add 10 more inches. My B&J monorail is more rigid, but less convenient for much outdoors work. Lens boards for both cameras are easy to fabricate from plywood or hardboard. B&J cameras might not be elegant, but are plentiful and usually inexpensive.

 

[puketronic]

OK so from the looks of it..

I think I will plan on an Agfa/Ansco or B&J to start. If I'm happy, I will stay with those but if not then it seem that the "better" camera is a Deardorff. I'm only interested in 5x7 at the moment.

What exactly does everyone mean by "rigid" as in X camera has many movements but is not that "rigid". If I get a camera that isn't so rigid, then does that mean that it is a bit wobbly and hence not that precise in terms of holding movements, focus, and etc.

 

[tessar]

"Rigid" means what you think it means. I have an Ansco 8x10 (post-WW2 model with front tilt) that's as rigid as you could want. A lot depends on the tripod. Deardorffs are lighter but more expensive. The weight and folded size of the Ansco -- a tailboard design vs. the Deardorff clamshell design -- are its main disadvantages. I don't know how heavy the Burke & James models are. Ansco cameras are not inferior to Deardorffs; Ansel Adams is known to have used them.
5x7 offers a smaller choice of film emulsions. Figure in the cost of a suitable tripod and of course a lens (or lenses) and possibly lens boards as well as film holders etc.
Also -- what kind of photography are you planning to do? If the camera doesn't have a long enough bellows draw, tailboard extensions (for close-ups and long, i.e. not telephoto, lenses) for a specific camera are not easy to track down. My Ansco came without the extension, which limits the bellows draw is to about 26 in., adequate for a 300mm lens (normal for 8x10) or a 250mm moderate wide-angle. The minimum focus distance is around 24 in. if I remember right. I do mostly landscape for which my outfit is just fine. There is an excellent large-format website with members who are happy to answer questions from beginners:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/
Agfa Ansco and Ansco are just different trade names for the same cameras. Ansco separated itself from the German Agfa company during WW2, so the Agfa Ansco models are older.

 

[puketronic]

My application is portraits and I just want to use a normal lens. I like the look of shallow DOF (but not too shallow) combined with a slight tilt. It is hard for me to judge which format is best for my application.

4x5 would be the cheapest way to go but most normal lenses are f5.6 and I believe there are some f4.5's out there...the faster lenses are generally more rare with the exception of the Aero Ektar. This format might be suiteable but it is hard to judge because I base my decisions from flickr and most people, in my opinion, tilt too much if they were to use it.

8x10 would be the most expensive way to go and I know that it is capable in providing the "look" that I want but the cameras are larger and the running cost is great.

5x7 seems like a good compromise and as a bonus I can make contact prints (well I can with 8x10 but not with 4x5 for my liking). From flickr I see the look that I want more often with 5x7 than I do with 4x5.

Lenses
4x5: 150mm-180mm
5x7: 210mm-240mm
8x10: 300mm-360mm

I generally prefer wider and I was thinking of mostly Tessars and Plasmats. I'm not too interested in the Aero Ektar because it seems too soft and too low in contrast wide-open but that lens is a seperate discussion. I would also prefer 150mm over 180mm in this format.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

There are still plenty of good emulsions available in 5x7. I wouldn't shy away from the format for that reason. Do bear in mind that an f5.6 lens for 5x7 will have very shallow DoF when focused at portrait range - you'll not be losing out on what you're used to with say an f1.4 or f2 lens on 35mm. Modern plasmats probably offer the best combination of price, availability and quality. There are other lenses out there that may be "better" in certain regards, but they're not going to hit that sweet spot of being affordable and highly functional (some may not be available in a shutter at all, or may have an ancient Betax or Compound shutter that will have very limited shutter speeds, most not fast enough to allow use of the wider apertures with today's films, and/or lack a PC connector for flash synchronization). I have a 240mm Heliar f4.5. Fantastic lens, beautiful portrait rendering, but it's in a Compound #5 shutter which has a top speed of 1/50th. Even if I down-rate FP4+ to EI 64, in daylight conditions I can't shoot it much more open than f11 (frankly there's nothing wrong with shooting at f11 for portraits - if anything, the f4.5 is almost too shallow). And while it has a PC connector, the flash sync is unreliable. It may not be able to be made reliable either - I had the shutter overhauled by SK Grimes, and the flash sync still works intermittently.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

My application is portraits and I just want to use a normal lens. I like the look of shallow DOF (but not too shallow) combined with a slight tilt. It is hard for me to judge which format is best for my application.

4x5 would be the cheapest way to go but most normal lenses are f5.6 and I believe there are some f4.5's out there...the faster lenses are generally more rare with the exception of the Aero Ektar. This format might be suiteable but it is hard to judge because I base my decisions from flickr and most people, in my opinion, tilt too much if they were to use it.

8x10 would be the most expensive way to go and I know that it is capable in providing the "look" that I want but the cameras are larger and the running cost is great.

5x7 seems like a good compromise and as a bonus I can make contact prints (well I can with 8x10 but not with 4x5 for my liking). From flickr I see the look that I want more often with 5x7 than I do with 4x5.

Lenses
4x5: 150mm-180mm
5x7: 210mm-240mm
8x10: 300mm-360mm

I generally prefer wider and I was thinking of mostly Tessars and Plasmats. I'm not too interested in the Aero Ektar because it seems too soft and too low in contrast wide-open but that lens is a seperate discussion. I would also prefer 150mm over 180mm in this format.

Here's something to think about. With an 8x10 camera, you can use: Wholeplate (6 1/2"x 8 1/2"), 5x7, and 4x5. On many cameras you can use divider boards, for instance to make 2x 4"x10" or 2x 5"x8" per sheet with an 8x10.

The 4x5 Deardorff Special is actually a 5x7 camera with a 4x5 back, and virtually any other 5x7 can be fitted with a 4x5 back.

Don't waste too much time and energy analysing which camera to buy as your first LF camera, there's a very high likelyhood that as you get off the toe of the learning curve, you'll want something different from your first choice.

 

[Alan Gales]

Don't waste too much time and energy analysing which camera to buy as your first LF camera, there's a very high likelyhood that as you get off the toe of the learning curve, you'll want something different from your first choice.

This statement is so true.

I didn't keep my first 35mm camera.

I didn't keep my first medium format camera.

I didn't keep my first large format camera.

 

[JohnRichard]

Edit: Answered my own question, didn't search hard enough.

But for those in my same boat, it seems just about any old field camera will do most work except architecture.
I guess I'll be looking for another D2 (or 2D... or whatever).