So I'm going to buy an 8x10

[John Bartley]

I have a 4x5 Calumet 400 series "cheapy" monorail. I mostly use a 165mm Ilex Paragon in an Ilex #3 shutter. I wish the Ilex shutter would work faster than 1/200'th sec. I sometimes use a 210/370 Schneider Symmar. I have yet to do a "close-up" shot closer than about 6'. I have yet to do a "long distance" shot longer than about 100'. I have used all of the movements on my Calumet monorail at least once (probably several times). and would miss them. I take 95% of my pictures out of doors, and very often have to walk (not far 'cause I'm lazy) a mile or so to get a picture. I have a Majestic tripod that would carry an Abrams tank.

I think I would like to buy a field camera as opposed to a monorail, but I'm not sure. I have $1000.00CDN ($800.00US) to spend.

What suggestions, based on your experience, would you have for me in the way of a field camera (or monorail if you think it's appropriate), with one "standard" lens if there's such a thing, for a starting point.

Any opinions would be a help, and pointers to field cameras with full movements would also help.

thank you

 

[Nick Zentena]

$1000 for both the camera and lens? Easy enough. Watch Ebay for Ansco or Agfa 8x10s. You can find some older cameras that sell for less but not much less. The other choice I guess is the Calumet C-1. It's metal and if you get the lighter model about the same weight that the Agfa-Ansco is.

The Agfa-Ansco lacks front swing and rear rise/fall. The oldest models lack front tilt. The one I have somebody in the last 50 years added front swing. I think the last bunch have all sold for under $300 US. OTOH a few months ago they seemed closer to $500.

Remember you'll need new film holders. But I think you shouldn't have too much trouble getting a lens some holders and a camera for your budget. Just be patient.

Of course I'd suggest 5x7 the perfect format but not everybody is ready for perfection-)

 

[bobfowler]

I agree with Nick that 5X7 IS the perfect format, but 8X10 negatives are a beautiful sight to behold.

I would go for a Calumet C-1. They show up on ebay all the time and many sell for very little $$$. Keep in mind, that very little $$$ is a relative term and cheaper cameras MIGHT have problems. As for a lens, you should be able to find something fairly good for a few hundred. 12" Commercial Ektars and Ilex Paragons show up all the time in the 200 to 300 dollar range.

Film holders are another matter. Prepare to pay a lot for new (about $75.00US each), but good deals CAN be found on good, used holders. I picked up 2 more 8X10 holders this morning on ebay for $25.00 "buy it now". They are older style Kodak holders (wood and metal), but look to be in very good shape. I have 6 new type Fidelity holders that I also got for cheap on a buy it now ($75.00) and 3 Agfa holders that ran about $40.00. I got lucky, VERY lucky. I just saw 5 Fidelity holders sell for over $250.00 today. You REALLY have to watch ebay for the deals...

 

[mark]

look for a kodak 2D 8x10. They seem to go for decent prices. I have the 5x7 format and really like it. Was tempted by the 8x10 version.

 

[mikewhi]

On occasion, you will see a Kodak Masterview 8x10 folding camera on eBay. I have seen one go for $800 without lens. Keep your eye out for Red Dot Artars. When I first got into 8x10, I got 1 Copal #3 shutter and a 240mm Dagor and a 14" Red Dot Artar and they both screwed into the fron of the shutter. Concerns about vignetting were overstated. I worked that way for quite a few years before buying a new modern 8x10. Even then, I used those lenses and shutter for years and years.

Redo Dot Artars show up on eBay in barrel and in shutter. Barrels lens go real cheap and a 14" one will easily cover 11x14.

-Mike

 

[jimgalli]

Another vote for the venerable 2D. I guess luck has something to do with it but I bought my "Improved #2" fresh out of a time warp in near new condition complete with 7X11 back for $395. It's so pretty it can draw a crowd just being set up. It came with a Bausch & Lomb 12" tessar in Compound that I've used just once. (stuck piston) I'm continually amazed at the parade of fabulous old cameras on Ebay that go begging. I've always felt the Ansco, though a nice machine, the bellows are kind of fragile. Kodak was building awesome quality cameras 100 years ago. Sleeper lens: The Schneider Convertible 300 / 500 Symmar. No one seems to want them and they were a high end item when new. Or, if you like the 165, a 330 Convertible Wolly would feel right at home on the 810.

 

[raucousimages]

How about a used bender or build the kit if you are up to it. Nothing fancy but a good price.

 

[John Bartley]

Not a bad idea but....

How about a used bender or build the kit if you are up to it. Nothing fancy but a good price.

....I know myself well enough to know that I would never finish the project. I've looked many times at the Bender webpage, and they look pretty nice. For someone with more "sticktoitiveness" then I have it would be an ideal solution.

cheers and thanks

 

[John Bartley]

I did a quick...

look for a kodak 2D 8x10. They seem to go for decent prices. I have the 5x7 format and really like it. Was tempted by the 8x10 version.

.... search on eBay to see what a 2D looks like. They are indeed a very attractive and compact outfit, although (and please correct me if I'm wrong), they seem to be a bit shy on movements? I couldn't find a really good picture to look at. One thing that worries me is that they are wood construction,which might require more care and maintenance?

I did see a Calumet C-2 - green magnesium unit, and "that" looks like the outfit for me. It appears to have "all" the movements except rear rise/fall. Weight is not really an issue for me yet. I'm in good shape (for 47).

A question though.....I see photos where the centre of the bellows "sags" when not extended far enough. That doesn't happen on my 400 Calumet. Does the sagging bellows not interfere with the line of sight from the lens to film? Does a situation ever arise where you have to support the centre of the bellows?

What other things should I be worried about or asking questions about if I knew what to ask?

 

[Campy]

Sagging of the bellows with long extensions can occur if the bellows material isn't heavy but it's more of a minor aggravation than a real problem. To deal with the sagging bellows on the second Deardorff I owned I carried around an emply box of 4x5 film and at long extensions I just propped the bottom of the bellows up by putting the box under it. There are many other solutions, some cameras have eye holes on the standards and on the bellows through which a metal piece can be run to prop up the bollows, etc. The only problem I had at first was remembering to use the film box but after a while I got used to it and it wasn't a problem. My first Deardorff used a heavy material, maybe naugehyde, for the bellows and it never sagged. Wish I hadn't sold that camera for that and other reasons.

 

[Dave Parker]

I have just recently aquired a 2D from a fellow member in the 8x10 size, which is one of several models of 2D I have owned over the years and if your worred about durability of this great old camera, Don't, these hold up like the tanks that they are, it is quite a testimant to the old camera makers that we are still using cameras that were made over 70 years ago, and for the most part, unless a one off restoration with new bellows has been done, they are very reasonable, they are shorter on movements than many of the cameras on the market, limited to front rise and fall, and a small amount of rear swing and tilt, but never the less, they are indeed great cameras that allow you to enter the larger world of photography for a very reasonable price, and can be packed in smaller pack to carry, than many of the higher movement monorails..

Dave

 

[Mongo]

A question though.....I see photos where the centre of the bellows "sags" when not extended far enough. That doesn't happen on my 400 Calumet. Does the sagging bellows not interfere with the line of sight from the lens to film? Does a situation ever arise where you have to support the centre of the bellows?

On my Green Monster, the bellows only sag if I extend them all of the way out for a while and then move the standards closer together afterwards, or if I leave the standards more than half way apart for more than an hour or so. But closing the camera back up overnight gets rid of the sag the next day.

The more important thing is that the bellows should have a small ring on the top. If you pull this ring forward and hook it over the small piece that sticks up out of the top of the front standard (it looks for all the world like the top of a nail), the bellows will be compressed at the front and extended at the back, and they won't sag. This is a standard feature on every view camera I've ever seen with long bellows (although sometimes the rings are on the sides of the bellows rather than the top). It's a simple and elegant solution to a problem that all bellows will eventually develop.

If you have a camera whose bellows don't have this feature (sometimes the ring gets lost over time), placing a film box or a film holder under the bellows will do the trick.

 

[Ian Grant]

The Agfa-Ansco lacks front swing and rear rise/fall. The oldest models lack front tilt. The one I have somebody in the last 50 years added front swing. I think the last bunch have all sold for under $300 US. OTOH a few months ago they seemed closer to $500.

Not all models Nick.

I bought an Agfa-Ansco off Ebay last November and it has had front swing from new, but then it's unusual as it also has Triple extension bellows. They are remarkably well made.

Ian

 

[Ole]

If you have a camera whose bellows don't have this feature (sometimes the ring gets lost over time), placing a film box or a film holder under the bellows will do the trick.

This may be one of the last advantages of smoking - a cigarette pack fits perfectly under the bellows on my 18x24cm plate camera. It is only necessary when I use about 240mm extension - like a 240 Symmar at infinity focus. There is no bellows interference with shorter (165mm and shorter) or longer (360mm and longer) lenses!

 

[philldresser]

John

For some better pics of a 2D have a look here
Phill

 

[John Bartley]

John
For some better pics of a 2D have a look here
Phill

Hi Phil,

Thanks for the link. It answers most of my questions about the 2D. The example that you linked me to has an interesting method of front shift. Mounting the lens on a mortise and tenoned board and mount is pretty nifty. Someone was thinking.

 

[jimgalli]

John, Most of the 2D's do not have that nifty sliding front. The link photos are actually of a 7X11 version of the camera that almost always did have it. It's a mixed blessing. The normal 6X6" 2D lensboard is common as dirt, but the sliding one will have to be fabricated in every case. Most of the old drop bed cameras are limited to front rise and fall and rear tilt and swing. You can accomplish just about everything you want with different juxtapositions of these basics....but....a Deardorff is EVER so much nicer to use. Thus the added $1000 bucks to the entry fee. The later Gundlach Korona cameras had front tilt which certainly is a nice addition. That one extra movement really helps a lot.

 

[Nick Zentena]

Not all models Nick.

I bought an Agfa-Ansco off Ebay last November and it has had front swing from new, but then it's unusual as it also has Triple extension bellows. They are remarkably well made.

Ian

That's the commerical if it's got tripple extension. I didn't think it had swing.

 

[Nick Zentena]

What other things should I be worried about or asking questions about if I knew what to ask?

If you want pictures

http://slalom.20megsfree.com/custom2.html

That's a middle Agfa-Ansco universal in wood finish. By middle I mean not the earliest not the latest.

http://slalom.20megsfree.com/contact.html

That's a grey Ansco 8x10. The last (?) model. Note the different rear tilt.

Make sure the bellows are in good shape. If it's a camera with a removable extension make sure it hasn't been removed. Might want to check what shape the ground glass is in.

 

[John Bartley]

If you want pictures

Thank you Nick - I "need" pictures

Having seen those three, I have to say that I "would" prefer the Agfa in THIS photo. I like the idea of the film plane rotating around its axis rather than tilting on its base. Maybe that's just because I'm used to that.

I'm still however leaning towards a C2 Calumet. I like the all metal construction, but.....we'll see.

This is the "wrong" forum, but seeing as we're getting close to the end of this thread, I guess I'll put the word out here (and post also in classifieds) that I'm in the market now. I'm open to suggestions and offers from APUG members who have an 8x10 field camera (not a monorail), with lens(es) and film holder(s) for sale, preferably with a case.

cheers

 

[Ian Grant]

No surprisingly it's not the Commercial, seems to be a next model up the scale, although it is basically similar. I've had a good look on the site:
http://www.fiberq.com/cam/scovill/agfacomm.htm

Mine has another rear rail extension under the rear standard and also an additional front rail which can be quickly attached. Also the bellows are also much more substantial than any I've seen on any camera. I'll get round to photographing it soon. The original owner was involved with the Clarence White School of Photography, in the 1930's, when he bought it in New York.

However what is also extremely interesting is if you look elsewhere in this thread at the Kodak 2D camera - look very closely many of the parts are of Antony & Scoville (Ansco) origin, and it looks remarkably like a variantion of our cameras.
http://www.fiberq.com/cam/ekc/2d.htm

Food for thought

Meanwhile my 10x8 camera (Agfa-Ansco) had a pleasant little journey this evening, to shoot 3 loco's being taken out of steam for the night, the shutter on the Dagor purred in appreciation.

Ian

That's the commerical if it's got tripple extension. I didn't think it had swing.

 

[JLMoore3]

Have you considered the Burke & James?

Burke & James made 2 models that you might want to consider:

The field camera- usually found with the ugliest battleship-gray paint you've ever seen... so most people refinish them first (Here's an example ). I've never used the 8x10 version, but I did have the 4x5 for a while. The only reason I got rid of it was because my Crown Graflex was a bit more convenient.

Here's a refinished 8x10 Field on THAT auction site...

I know you said you weren't looking for a monorail- but, you might want to consider looking at the B&J "Grover" monorail. I have one and it is quite usable & easy to pack. The one that I have has a short wooden monorail that keeps the camera together & makes it easy to pack. When I arrive on location I just swap out the wooden rail for the metal rail & set it up. Lots of movements on the Grover!

Here's a Grover on THAT auction site...

 

[Nick Zentena]

However what is also extremely interesting is if you look elsewhere in this thread at the Kodak 2D camera - look very closely many of the parts are of Antony & Scoville (Ansco) origin, and it looks remarkably like a variantion of our cameras.
http://www.fiberq.com/cam/ekc/2d.htm

Ansco held some patents on basic camera design. My guess is when they expired alot of cameras pickedup Ansco genes.

 

[Nick Zentena]

I like the idea of the film plane rotating around its axis rather than tilting on its base. Maybe that's just because I'm used to that.

I'm still however leaning towards a C2 Calumet. I like the all metal construction, but.....we'll see.

I've actually got both types of tilt. My Ansco 5x7 is the older type. My 8x10 the newer. Other then the 8x10 needing a bit more force to move things [The right knob is way too tight] I don't find the difference an issue. The cameras had design changes over the years. The front had tilt added. Then the front standard was changed I think at least twice to deal with the tilt. The camera that sold the past week looked like an older non-tilt camera with a tilting lensboard.

You want the Calumet C1. The C2 I think was a rollfilm holder.

 

[John Bartley]

You want the Calumet C1. The C2 I think was a rollfilm holder.

Yup - you're right. I mistakenly assumed that the C1 was aluminum and the C2 was magnesium, but have since learned differently. I took my mistake from HERE

I wondered why they would have two different items with the same model # - DOH! :rolleyes: