A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » Large Format Photography Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 25th 04, 11:32 AM
Dave Wallis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera

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 don't need to get that close so
bellows length is not a restriction. Are there any problems I will
have in using a Deardorff for this kind of wor? Precise focusing and
framing are an important factor. Apparently, there is a Wobble on
rear standard is approx. 1/2" front to rear at the top. Is this cause
for concern? I will not be using the camera in the field. And can
the wobble be tightened up?
  #2  
Old February 25th 04, 01:48 PM
Jean-David Beyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera

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 don't need to get that close so
bellows length is not a restriction. Are there any problems I will
have in using a Deardorff for this kind of wor? Precise focusing and
framing are an important factor. Apparently, there is a Wobble on
rear standard is approx. 1/2" front to rear at the top. Is this cause
for concern? I will not be using the camera in the field. And can
the wobble be tightened up?


I never had an 8x10. I had a 4x5 Special I bought new and there was no
wobble. I suppose it should be worked on, but perhaps an expert here
could tell you.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 7:45am up 49 days, 19:06, 2 users, load average: 2.25, 2.11, 2.08

  #3  
Old February 25th 04, 02:36 PM
Raoul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera

[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]

In article , 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.


What are your reasons for even wanting to do this? The 8x10 Sinar is a
pretty big camera to deal with if you are using it with a 4x5 bacl (as
opposed to a straight 4x5 camera) but I can't imagine why you would
consider replacing it when you intend to only use your camera in the
studio. The Sinar is strong, precise and easy to use.

Generally speaking, when it comes to actually adjusting the camera, a
quality studio monorails (like the Sinar F2) are going to be more rigid
and easier to use than a field camera- even a quality one like a
Deardorff in good condition.

So, again, I ask: why?

Jeff


I am an artist and use the camera only for transparencies of
large paintings in the studio. I don't need to get that close so
bellows length is not a restriction. Are there any problems I will
have in using a Deardorff for this kind of wor? Precise focusing and
framing are an important factor. Apparently, there is a Wobble on
rear standard is approx. 1/2" front to rear at the top. Is this cause
for concern? I will not be using the camera in the field. And can
the wobble be tightened up?

  #4  
Old February 25th 04, 07:01 PM
jjs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera


"Dave Wallis" wrote in message
m...
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.


If you are using it as a 4x5, why get another 8x10? Chances are, if you set
up your art properly and it's not very large, you don't even need movements
and could get by with a _very_ basic 4x5 with an outstanding lens.

And what artist can afford an 8x10 Deardorff or Sinar anyway?


  #5  
Old February 25th 04, 07:26 PM
Argon3
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera

Yeah, other than have a very classy looking wooden camera around your studio,
seems to me that you wouldn't really be gaining anything.
Deardorffs are great studio cameras but their design is one that allows them to
be more easily transported into the field...out on location, so to speak. If
all it's going to do is "stay home", there wouldn't be much of a net gain.

argon
  #6  
Old February 26th 04, 07:49 AM
Stefan Patric
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera

On Wednesday 25 February 2004 02:32 am, 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 don't need to get that close so
bellows length is not a restriction. Are there any problems I will
have in using a Deardorff for this kind of wor? Precise focusing and
framing are an important factor. Apparently, there is a Wobble on
rear standard is approx. 1/2" front to rear at the top. Is this cause
for concern? I will not be using the camera in the field. And can
the wobble be tightened up?


You already own one of the best, if not the best, view camera made. Why
would you want to replace it with something that is considerably less
versatile and probably more than 40 years older, refurbished or not?
Since you're not going to be doing 8x10 field photography, stick with
the Sinar.


--
Stefan Patric

  #7  
Old February 26th 04, 01:30 PM
Dave Wallis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera

Thanks. The main reason is financial. If I sell the Sinar and by a
Deardorff. I will have some money to spare. My main concerns are
whether I could do the same job with the Deardorff without wasting
film and adding much extra time to the photographic process. For
instance how practical is it to switch from 8x10 to 4x5 backs/lenses
quickly. Is the wobble going to be a problem? And is framing the
straight lines of the paintings on the groundglass going to be a
nightmare because of the lack of zero indents etc.?
  #8  
Old February 26th 04, 04:23 PM
Argon3
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera

Okay...I see your reasoning...don't know how much "wobble" there is in the
camera back but you should be able to tighten the spring clips to reduce it.
In my experience, the only time anything moves is when you place or remove the
film holder or the dark slide...if you're careful, this should present no
problem.
As far as "zero-ing up"...with a 'dorf you use a spirit level (do they call
them torpedo levels where you are?) to check all of your planes to see if
they're level....then you make any camera moves that are necessary. Copying
artwork calls for a camera back parallel to the plane of the artwork...check
both with the level and shoot away.
I live in Chicago...the home of Deardorff and worked at a catalog studio where
they were used exclusively. Not even dozens of underpaid professional
photographers could hurt a 'dorf...built like tanks.

argon
  #9  
Old February 26th 04, 04:27 PM
Dave Wallis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Using a Deardorff Field Camera vs Sinar Studio Camera

I have just discovered that the Deardorff I was going to buy has a
minimum bellows extension of 7 inches, according to the owner this
because of the design which has the front and rear standards running
in to each other. I have see photos of Deadorffs with the standards
closed right up to a distance of much less than 7 inches, and I
thought that they all have a similar design. The tachihara 8x10 has
minimum bellows 0f 70mm. Is the benefit of a modern design or are
there some 8x10 Deardorffs with a similar minimum extension?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
recommendations for a 4X5 studio camera michael Large Format Photography Equipment 8 February 17th 04 02:21 AM
Mounting a 4x5 Field Camera sideways... Robert S. Dean Large Format Photography Equipment 14 January 22nd 04 03:38 PM
Starter Field Camera Msherck Large Format Photography Equipment 0 January 13th 04 04:54 AM
VIEW vs FIELD Cameras HAIRY ASSHOLE Film & Labs 10 November 7th 03 04:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.