Cameras to Avoid

Frank Petronio · Nov 4, 2005

Posted as a service to newbies and old-timers alike ....

1. De Golden Busch 8x10s. At least the earlier models.

2. Anything made East of Dresden or West of Chiba.

3. Expensive Polaroid to 4x5 Conversions.

and ?

Andy K · Nov 4, 2005

Anything that won't operate without batteries.

Dave Parker · Nov 4, 2005

Frank Petronio said:
Posted as a service to newbies and old-timers alike ....

1. De Golden Busch 8x10s. At least the earlier models.

2. Anything made East of Dresden or West of Chiba.

3. Expensive Polaroid to 4x5 Conversions.

and ?

Frank,

I would say that covers a broad range of cameras, any particular reason you are making these recommendations, I have had quite a few Russian cameras that did quite well......

Dave

Soeren · Nov 4, 2005

Those that don't suit your demands or way of working
Søren

df cardwell · Nov 4, 2005

Andy K said:
Anything that won't operate without batteries.

Not to mention anything mechanical that can't be repaired.

.

Phillip P. Dimor · Nov 4, 2005

Mr. Frank, what's wrong with the De Golden Busch's ? They seem lovely.

Lee L · Nov 4, 2005

Couple of specific cases that fit Soeren's advice:

Some 35mm SLR cameras, such as some early '80s Nikons, require the film advance lever to be pulled out pretty far in order for the light meter to work. This pokes left-eyed photogs in the right eye, so before selling those models I would hand a camera to a customer and tell them to look through it so I could tell which eye they used. For the lefties, I'd tell them they needed to spend $250 or so for a motor drive that allowed them to keep the lever folded in while shooting.

Going for a Bessa R3A rangefinder with a 1:1 finder is also kind of a moot point for left-eyed folks, as the body blocks the right eye and you lose the advantage of having both eyes open while shooting. (I'm right eyed, and I love mine.)

Lee

modafoto · Nov 4, 2005

Soeren said:
Those that don't suit your demands or way of working
Søren

Totally agree!

laz · Nov 4, 2005

As a newbie to LF I've formed no strong opinions about LF cameras (LF is what this thread want's to talk about isn't it?) I think the less complex the camera the easier it is for me to consider it perfectly okay. So in 8x10 and up it, outside of the desired movements, it comes down to:
1) durability - will it hold up reasonable well.
2) fixability - I'm quite handy and there's not to much to go wrong with on a wooden view camera that I don't think I can't fix.
3) Cost and inter-changabilty of accessories. I may be wrong but something like a Sinar seems to me has nothing but expensive lens boards, film holders etc. while most view cameras can use a standard film holder and many have the same size lens boards.

It doesn't matter much to me at all, (well not as much as it does to gr82bart ) but I think we all have at least a tiny desire that our cameras "look good" All other things being equal I will always favor a natural wood view camera over a painted one, just as I perfer black in all other formats.

-Bob

Andy K · Nov 4, 2005

laz said:
... just as I perfer black in all other formats.

-Bob

Including your OM-1(n) MD?

bobfowler · Nov 4, 2005

Frank Petronio said:
Posted as a service to newbies and old-timers alike ....

1. De Golden Busch 8x10s. At least the earlier models.

2. Anything made East of Dresden or West of Chiba.

3. Expensive Polaroid to 4x5 Conversions.

and ?

Ones that use silicone instead of silver to record the image...

Andy K · Nov 4, 2005

Canonet QL17 GIII... a terrible camera, you really wouldn't want one.

David H. Bebbington · Nov 4, 2005

laz said:
I may be wrong but something like a Sinar seems to me has nothing but expensive lens boards, film holders etc. while most view cameras can use a standard film holder and many have the same size lens boards.

Not quite sure why you think this! Sinar has the same Graflok back as any other modern camera and takes the same double filmholders, rollfilm holders, etc. Sinar lensboards are hard for DIYers to make because of their light baffling, are the same type as Horseman (and Inka), third-party boards are available for around $30, which is not too much. Sinar Norma and F1 are very reasonably priced and offer great precision and stability, which I think is the most important quality with an LF camera (sharpness is imposible if cameras wobble, slip or vibrate). If you have a lot of smaller lens boards, you can find a Sinar to 4" square or Linhof adapter without too much trouble and save money.

jovo · Nov 4, 2005

Any Arca Swiss camera. If you have one, send it to me and I'll generously give you ten percent of what you paid so you won't feel that all is lost. Yes...they're terrible and I'm a saint for helping you dispose of yours....yes....a saint!

laz · Nov 4, 2005

Andy K said:
Including your OM-1(n) MD?

haha, there's just one more thing wrong with it! (I will not tip off the competition, but I gots my eye on something!)

laz · Nov 4, 2005

David H. Bebbington said:
Not quite sure why you think this! Sinar has the....

Thanks David for dis-abusing me of what was clearly a mis-perception on my part! I stand corrected!
-Bob

laz · Nov 4, 2005

jovo said:
Any Arca Swiss camera. If you have one, send it to me and I'll generously give you ten percent of what you paid so you won't feel that all is lost. Yes...they're terrible and I'm a saint for helping you dispose of yours....yes....a saint!

jovo, your generosity of spirit continues to amaze me! You have inspired me to make the same offer for those ugly Deardorffs that are good for nothing but fire wood!
-Bob

Keith Tapscott. · Nov 4, 2005

jovo said:
Any Arca Swiss camera. If you have one, send it to me and I'll generously give you ten percent of what you paid so you won't feel that all is lost. Yes...they're terrible and I'm a saint for helping you dispose of yours....yes....a saint!

Leica`s are horrid too, if anyone has a M6 that they would like me to dispose for them, I am willing to oblige, just send it to me and forget all about it.

Keith Tapscott. · Nov 4, 2005

Frank Petronio said:
Posted as a service to newbies and old-timers alike ....

1. De Golden Busch 8x10s. At least the earlier models.

2. Anything made East of Dresden or West of Chiba.

3. Expensive Polaroid to 4x5 Conversions.

and ?

Tachihara`s are good cameras, beware of Tacky Horrors.

BradS · Nov 4, 2005

Frank Petronio said:
3. Expensive Polaroid to 4x5 Conversions.

and ?

not this again.....

Tom Hoskinson · Nov 4, 2005

bobfowler said:
Ones that use silicone instead of silver to record the image...

Silicone won't work for image recording in digigizmos. Silicon will (if it's in the right form).

scootermm · Nov 4, 2005

Frank Petronio said:
Posted as a service to newbies and old-timers alike ....

1. De Golden Busch 8x10s. At least the earlier models.

2. Anything made East of Dresden or West of Chiba.

3. Expensive Polaroid to 4x5 Conversions.

and ?

is your intent to cause trouble? or is it just a negative side effect to the drugs?

Andy K · Nov 4, 2005

Tom Hoskinson said:
Silicone won't work for image recording in digigizmos. Silicon will (if it's in the right form).

Silicon or silicone... both are used in the creation of the false...

Nick Zentena · Nov 4, 2005

Tom Hoskinson said:
Silicone won't work for image recording in digigizmos. Silicon will (if it's in the right form).

But if taken internally it can pump up the model.

Aggie · Nov 4, 2005

Frank Petronio said:
Posted as a service to newbies and old-timers alike ....

1. De Golden Busch 8x10s. At least the earlier models.

2. Anything made East of Dresden or West of Chiba.

3. Expensive Polaroid to 4x5 Conversions.

and ?

You have stated on Photo.Net you want to destroy Littman. As a person who has had the cheap conversion done by your friend in Austrailia, and a owner of a Littman, I totally disagree. This is nothing more than a veiled attempt to get the same tired discussion going again. It has been locked in the past. While I have no problems with the discussion on the surface, it is the undertones of what you are doing that I find reprehensible. Time for you Frank to get a life and get past your obsession of trying at any way possible to discredit Littman.

As to the claim I got a free Littman, No I didn't. I paid for that damn non functional camera from Austrailia, and it was used in exchange for an older model first run Littman. So Yes I did pay.

Yes Brad this again. I do not go around at every opportunity to try and tout Littman, or dump on Dean Jones. I let it stay buried until the two on apug who have an axe to grind against Littman start up again.

That said I have had a ball with my Littman. It is light fast to use, and only has one draw back as I see it. It doesn't have interchangeable lenses. I can live with that. I am an old fat lady who when faced with hiking any distance doesn't want to lug a big 4x5 with me. Sven the Sherpa lives to far away to be there for me when I would need him. My son now works for the police department (badge toting) so he doesn't want to carry MOM's stuff. For me the Littman works for what I want it to do. I plan on getting a pack mule to carry my gear once I have the 11x14.

As to cameras I wouldn't get, put a wisner up there for me. I have one, but the darn thing has so many little quirks that do not work, that it frustrates me. Like using a long lens, and when ratcheting it out, the bellows fall off the rails. Whyu not just put in some little things to stop that? One of the turn knobs is fine, the other one is not it is almost stripped and it was a new camera when it came like that. The screw just doesn't fit the opening. To me that is poor workmanship, or a blatant oversight that should have been caught.

Cameras to Avoid

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency