How rigid should an older field camera be?

[Steve Mack]

I have a T.O. Warfield field camera, and since this is my first field or LF camera, for that matter, I'm not too familiar with how the camera is supposed to 'feel' when it's being used.

My camera is in good shape, the brass is dulled, but all of the wood parts are in very good shape: no cracks, checks, loose joints, etc. All of the metal parts move smoothly, but there is some play in the various joints, which I think is to be expected. Will this minor looseness have any effect on my using it? I did own a Bender 4X5 years ago, and it seemed to be kind of loose, too. I can lock down the movements without forcing anything. In your opinion, is this camera good to go?

TIA!

With best regards,

Steve Mack

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Almost all of the older field cameras 1935 and earlier, seem to have a little play. I wouldn't worry too much over this, unless the rear standard can't be locked down firmly enough to resist movement as you insert a holder.

 

[JBrunner]

Is it loose when it is all locked down? Thats where you might get into trouble, if stuff moves around while you are putting in the film holder, etc.

My 2D locks down tight, but has allot of flex and wiggle when you are putting in a holder, however it settles back exactly in place after you quit handling it. It is, however, alarming to those not familiar with this camera.

 

[Ian Grant]

Your 2D definitely has a lot of flex and wiggle, it's like a naked woman terrified by your touch in the "Intro to LF Photography" video

My 10x8 Agfa Ansco's aren't quite that flexible, all LF cameras have a little bit of flexing

Ian

 

[JBrunner]

... it's like a naked woman terrified by your touch in the "Intro to LF Photography" video ....


Ian

Not familiar with that analogy....

 

[Ian Grant]

Not familiar with that analogy....

Here's my 10x8, you see Jason it loved it
No wiggle . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .

That's how a camera should live, and the model also works with Kim Weston

Ian