Please help with my bass ackwards approach to 8x10 format.

[lee]

Does Kodak D2 have any tilt or swing on front standard?

Jon

no just rise on the Kodak 2D

lee\c

 

[Claire Senft]

I know that this is of no help in the questions asked. Hopeful, am I, that you get some good advice.

I have many times found it advisable to complete a project with the method and logic I used at the start. Should you not stay with practice that you have already started and first get some 8x10 film, contact paper, some BTZS developing tubes and an 8x10 print frame before even thinking of choosing a camera? What could it hurt?

 

[Wayne R. Scott]

I know that this is of no help in the questions asked. Hopefullam I that you get some good advice.

I have many times found it advisable to complete a project with the method and logic I used at the start. Should you not stay with practice that you have already started and first get some 8x10 film, contact paper, some BTZS developing tubes and an 8x10 print frame before even thinking of choosing a camera? What could it hurt?

Cclaire,

Good advice. I did not mention that I had already picked up the developing tubes at the same time as the tripod. Azo and Amidol are on my Christmas list to wife and daughter. My daughter will know what they are, pretty sure my wife won't.

Wayne

 

[Wayne R. Scott]

A 2D/Ansco/Agfa 8x10. Very good. The inherent wobbles can be taken out with a couple carpenters' spring clamps. Don't be too pure to use them, photogs used them when the cameras were new. The Weston trick: clamp a piece of rod or flat steel from the front to back standard.

A Calumet is the great 8x10 wonder ( thank Kodak ! ). Fantastic.

You're using a Big Moose of a lens. The easy trick to support it with a single tripod is to use TWO TRIPODS. A good medium weight tripod to take the weight, a good light tripod under the front standard. The caveat is how tall you are.

This works because the camera wants to rotate on the axis of the single tripod, as well as 'teeter totter' on a single tripod. Even a monopd under the front standard helps a lot.

have fun

.

df,

Very good advice, I had not thought of the 2nd tripod, I have an extra Bogen 3021 set of legs with a 3030 head which should work under the front standard.

I am a "pretty is as pretty does" kind of guy. An extra metal rod connecting front and rear standard would not bother me at all. Most people I photograph can't tell a Nikon F3HP from a Polaroid One Step any way.

I carry a folding 2 step ladder with me for shooting groups at weddings, I could use it to make me taller.

I am not sure that portrait photography would warrant the use of swings and tilts. I can see where tilt might come in handy for landscape photos on occasion.

Wayne

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I'd also suggest the C-1, for studio use. Like Mongo, I have the magnesium one. It's a pain to carry in the field, just because it's a rather unwieldly beast, and not very light. However, it can be done. All magnesium C-1s are green- but not all green C-1s are magnesium. All black C-1s are aluminum, and weigh in at 18 lbs. The magnesium ones weigh 14 lbs. I've done 1:1 or slightly closer using my 14" Commercial Ektar on the C-1, which is very very cool. I picked up my C-1 for $650, including a two lensboards (one recessed), three film holders, and a box of Bergger BPF 200.

I have a set of Bogen 3036 legs (geared center column, cross-braced legs) that weighs 10 lbs without a head. I found that the center column gave me too much wiggle with the C-1 attached. If you get a lighter camera, you may not have this problem, but I'd still be concerned when using that massive portrait lens. Seriously consider a bigger tripod head - I was using one of the bogen heads with the hex-plate quick release, and the camera would start to torque off the plate after each exposure, and sometimes more than once while I was focusing and setting up each shot as well. Any head with a small platform will give you this problem with a heavier camera. I think someone else here already mentioned the Gitzo 1570 or equivalent. I've got one on a set of Gitzo 14xx series legs - now, the only way that camera moves is if I hit it. The Gitzo 14xx legs without column are lighter, more stable, and go taller than the bogen legset. They came pretty cheap too - new in box on ePay for $250 give or take.

 

[Mongo]

On the tripod front, consider a wooden tripod if you won't be straying far from the car. They're a bit heavy, but I've found that they work well and are worth the trouble for me.

I have a Berlebach (4032, I believe) with an integrated leveling ball head (not a full ball head, but a huge one that allows about +/- 30 degrees of movement and has an inegrated level) and no center column. I find that with my C1 fully extended and the tripod fully extended, the entire setup is rock-solid. I've never wanted another head between the tripod and my 8x10. Berlebach's are much less expensive than Reis wooden tripods, and although they don't have the reputation of the Reis', I find that my tripod works wonderfully for all of the heavy cameras that I own.

One thing I'd recommend against is using any center column rise with an 8x10 camera on any tripod...that's just asking for vibration problems. Keep the camera close to the top of the legs, and buy longer legs if you need them.

(By the way, I'm 6'7" and have never wanted for longer tripod legs. With 8x10, the camera is so large that I find I rarely use the full extension of the Berlebach legs.)

Regarding taking the C1 away from the car...I've carried mine for a few hundred yards occasionally, but if you have any plans to really get far from your automobile and you get any metal 8x10, you should probably find a backpack that the camera will fit into. Carrying the C1 with the lens attached is possible, but you'll bang the camera into your legs a lot...and end up with bruises that you'll wonder about. The C1 is easy to move about in the studio, but it's really not made for hand carrying. Very, very few 8x10 cameras are.

 

[smieglitz]

If you want cheap here's what I would do: Buy a Burke & James 8x10 with wooden flatbed. It'll be cheap. Buy a dead Burke and James Rembrandt 5x7 and tear the front standard from it. The bed and gears will match between these two cameras. Use a couple 3/8" carraige bolts and connect the two beds. Take the rear gear platform from the 5x7 and build a sliding support for that monster lens you have out of two pieces of board as wide as the bed -a couple holes spaced about an inch apart vertically in one board and a slot in the center of the other that matches. Use two 1/4-20 bolts and two wingnuts or two thumbscrews and nuts to enable the slide and lock function of the lens support. The bed will already have a tripod mount in it. This addition will cradle and stabilize that lens and prevent it from tearing out of the front board. Otherwise the stress on the board from that lens on anything other than a studio camera or field camera with 9" lensboard will be tremendous. Not only is that lens heavy, it is long and heavy with the center of gravity way out in front of the lensboard.

I've done this with an 11x14 B&J and feel much better now when I mount a Vitax or other portrait lens on that camera. I also know someone with a similar caamera that drilled through the Studio shutter in order to bolt the lens to the lensboard by using the shutter as a lens flange. This helped get the center of gravity back towards the lensboard.

In regard to other comments, I don't know why Frank doesn't like the DeGolden Busch. I would think such a robust overdone beast might be ideal for such an application.

Joe

 

[Wayne R. Scott]

Joe,

I think you are giving very sound advice for real world experience. I am worried about the weight of this lens and its torque on the front standard.

I am not sure I understand exactly how the 5x7 addition will work with this lens. Am I going to be using a second tripod under the lens to support the "new" support? These boards that are the width of the bed, are they mounted vertically with the lens resting on top of the boards?

Would a Kodak 2D have a 5x7 cousin that would allow this addition?
Wayne

 

[smieglitz]

That lens probably weighs more than the 8x10 camera and so when mounted the tripod mount should be more towards the lens. If you connect the extension securely, I don't think you will need two tripods. (f you feel you need further support, you could probably get by with just using a diagonal arm that connects the front of the extension to the camera tripod and counteracts the downward torque.)

I tried the two tripod route and found it to be a pain. I actually popped the screws out of the rear standard of my 11x14 one day when trying to adjust the height of the front tripod under the lens. The extra extension and lens cradle is a much better solution as far as I am concerned. It is not fun trying to adjust a large camera straddling two tripods.

I actually built a separate cradle that allows me to move and balance the entire camera and I've mounted that cradle to a geared Magestic tripod head. The cradle is constructed as a U-shape and is about 8" long. Two brass guides fit inside a slot I've drilled along the outer face of the camera bed and extension. The bed simply slides along the two brass strips and can be locked from beneath by tightening two thumbscrews. It is very similar to the design of the old Agfa cradles for example. (Sort of a quick-release mount for a large camera.)

I'm not familiar with the 2D although I suspect the same thing could be done if you could find a spare extension bed. I just cannabalized a 5x7 since I had a couple parts cameras and the B&J cameras are very modular between different formats. The dimensions and gears were the same between the B&J cameras. A 5x7 Rembrandt can be had for $75 and an 8x10 flatbed camera for under $200 on the right day on eBay.

The boards I used to support the lens are about 5.5" wide IIRC and yes they are mounted vertically off the front of the extension. I used a hole saw to make a semicircular base for the lens to fit into in the upper board.

Joe

 

[phfitz]

Hi there,

The Agfa/Ansco 8X10 without front tilt has 7.5" lens boards and can easily mount a 13.5" or 16.5" Vitax, I have both mounted.

Having the lens mounted thru the shutter makes perfect sense, it changes the balance point. The Vitax is so long and heavy it can pull the screws out of the top slide braket. If 'pretty is as pretty does', than you can mount the lens to a board and screw mount the board to the front of almost any 8X10.

The Ansco has 2 tripod mounts and should be mounted on a 'tilting table' instead of a tripod head. This also stiffens the camera-extension joint.

Have fun with it all.

 

[nworth]

I occassionally use 8X10. Only occassionally because my camera, and old Cambro monorail, is a logistical nightmare. What makes for a good 8X10 camera really depends on what you are shooting. If you are doing mostly close work in a studio, the monorail would be great. If you are working in the field, go for a field camera. In the field, weight counts. One of the lighter, wooden cameras may be the best bet - maybe the Deardorf, if you can find one.

For a tripod, I've been using an instrument tripod adapted for a Bogen 3047 head. These are adequate but far from ideal choices. When looking at tripod heads, look for a release mechanism that will allow you to mount the huge camera with certainty on the first try. If you can, try it out. This may be the most important problem to face, since fumbling with a not quite mounted 8X10 is a very dicey proposition.