Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera

I am an artist....

Honey, we're all artists. Do you mean that you're a PAINTER?

"Dave Wallis" wrote

I am thinking of buying a restored 10x8 Deardorff with 4x5 reducing
back. I am currently using a Sinar F2 10x8 camera with 4x5 reducing
back. I am an artist and use the camera only for transparencies of
large paintings in the studio. [I am making the change to get some
$$$ out of the Sinar as I don't think I need all of the Sinar's
features]

Realizing cash is the only rational motivation for making such a change.
Sinars are terribly pricey. But Deardorfs are even worse when it
comes to inflated pricing: they have 'cachet'; are not made
anymore; and have become collectors items.

On this side of the pond a well restored Deardorf, w/o a reducing
back, sells for $1500 - $2500: no different from a dual format
F2. I can't imagine the situation is much different on your side.

Are there any problems I will have in using a Deardorff for this
kind of work? Precise focusing and framing are an important factor.

Yes.

You have one of the better cameras for precise focusing and framing.
Anything you do (with the exception of moving to a P2 Sinar) will
only make things worse. Unfortunately, a field camera is one of the
worst choices for this work: no detents, no scales, lightweight
construction ... it really does not matter much which part
of a pine tree or rock is in perfect focus (I can hear the screams
now).

It is true that movements are not used for copy work: a camera built
for this purpose is made on a steel girder; the lensboard, copyboard
and vacuum film back are bolted to the girder; aligned with a laser;
and locked down with tamper-proof 1cm bolts. The camera has no movements
outside of magnification.

Since you are most likely using a tripod and a wall you will never,
outside of luck, get everything lined up square. The last trim, if
you would be as accurate as you can be, is done with camera movements:
you can't place the tripod within a 1/10", nor can you aim the camera
within .05 degree without micrometer movements (at the least you will
need very smooth, zero-backlash, and well locked movements, as on the F2).

However, if an inch or so is precise enough, then you may get away
with a field camera and a lot of higgly-piggly.

a restored 10x8 Deardorff with ... a 1/2" wobble on the rear
standard...

This must be a new meaning for the word "restored" -- you wouldn't
happened to have found this thing on ebay, would you?

If it were me, I would run from both the camera and its seller.
"Wobble" does not happen on a legitimately restored camera.
And Deardorfs are known for their solidity - if it wobbles
something is broken.

This camera is either not restored or the seller is talking
through his hat, probably both.

If you want a cheaper 8x10 with adjustments a better choice would
be a Cambo - used Cambos can be had in excellent condition for
$300-$500.

I am also not clear why 8x10 is required. If 4x5 is what you
generally use then a much better choice in a field camera
would be a late model MPP.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.

"Willhelm" wrote
David Wallis wrote:
I am an artist....
Honey, we're all artists. Do you mean that you're a PAINTER?

But painters aren't really artists, are they? Not like
photography is it? The modern ones don't paint any better
than my 3-year old, and the old masters were just trying to
imitate a view camera loaded with Velvia.

And that awful one in the shopping mall just makes pictures
of houses built on a flood plain that's 6 inches above a river
that flows down from snow laden mountains. Wait till that
snow melts ... I would like to see a painting of it then.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.