Thinking about trading my 11x14 for 8x10...

[Bob Carnie]

Ryan

I will consider trading a 8x10 enlarger for your 11x14 Camera, I have 3 8x10s and 1 11x14 enlarger and would consider dropping one 8x10 for a workable 11x14 camera.
Shipping would be a problem but if you are interested give me a pm.

Bob

[Ole]

I haven't used 11x14", but I've decided 12x16" (30x40cm) is definitely too big to be useful. So I've settled for 9.5x12" (24x30cm) as my ULF-size. Most of what I do will continue to be 5x7".

[Dave Wooten]

Ryan,

1. What is the weight of the 11 x 14?

2. It seems like everything involved with the format is what is concerning you, i.e. size and weight, the set up and management, and the care and feeding of the beast....you are correct in your observations, 11 x 14 is more than a little larger then 8 x 10! Accordingly, the approach and set up with the camera is different than with the 8 x 10 ( which to me I like more that 4 x 5 because I can see better with 8 x 10!) often on the larger cameras I compose my photograph, looking out of the camera,

a. Identify my composition looking over the camera and then

b. identify my boundary corners on the ground glass, check center focus and corner focus lock down and fire.....don t spend a lot of time ooing and ahing on the ground glass...

3. The Ries tripod is a classic, however, for me, an apprentice geezer beyond my prime, a tripod with geared center post rise and geared forward tilt is a needed blessing. Using a majestic, I give the legs an exaggerated spread to hold the weight and prevent tipping at extensions, then the camera, which is in the car with the tripod head already attached, is lowered onto the post, in this low position. locked and then raised to my comfortable eye level...

4. I have seen your 8 x 10 work up close and personal, it is lovely, probably you have been in your comfort zone for a while. Your studio shots and nudes are excellent....would love to see some of that work in 11 x 14!

Keep the camera and continue studio nudes and still lifes with it and get a nice 8 x 10 for your field work....

just a suggestion Ryan....in any case keep up your good work!

Dave in Vegas

[Scott Peters]

Ryan, I am really enjoying my 7 x 17 - while not 'small' , I do think it is manageable and it is a different visual with the panoramic. Have you thought of the panoramic format as a 'change'? I did pick up an 8 x 10 Wehman and find it VERY nice in the field, light and steady too. I am enjoying it, but I must admit that I am finding I take the 7 x 17 out more often. Scott

[User Removed]

Ryan, I am really enjoying my 7 x 17 - while not 'small' , I do think it is manageable and it is a different visual with the panoramic. Have you thought of the panoramic format as a 'change'? I did pick up an 8 x 10 Wehman and find it VERY nice in the field, light and steady too. I am enjoying it, but I must admit that I am finding I take the 7 x 17 out more often. Scott

Scott,

Yes, I remember seeing your 7x17 camera while working with Michael and Paula in Sedona. It was VERY light and quick to use, more then other ULF cameras I've seen. Latly, I find myself shooting in the panoramic format more, and been shooting 5x14's on my 11x14 camera.

I think if I had a ULF camera that was lighter and more simple to use, I might not be wanting to move back down to 8x10. However, with the cost of lightweight ULF cameras...no way I could afford anything!

The Wehman cameras are very nice and its probably first on my list for an 8x10 camera. I believe your 7x17 is a custom made Wehman, right?

[Dave Wooten]

Ryan,

My 7 x 17 Wisner tech...weighs less than my Wista double extension 8 x 10 (Wista a little less than 12 lbs)....also a 5 x 7 back is sweet on a 7 x 17, also 7 x 11 film works and is a nice format and easier on the pocketbook....I have seen the Wehman and am very impressed with it, I did not know he built 7 x 17 cameras, Richard Ritter has a nice one that looks good...haven t seen it in person but on his website the photo shows a very practical and well thought out camera.

just checked his web site...the 7 x 17 camera is 10 lbs, has 34 inches of bellows and all movements...

[jimgalli]

Hi Ryan. Just some random thoughts. No matter the size, I have to like the camera. To some that may sound really foolish. I get teased a lot, and rightly so. I've had mountains of equipment moving in and out of Tonopah Nevada since I discovered EBAY 5 or 6 years ago. (I'm personally keeping the USPS & UPS solvent in Tonopah NV.) Oddly, my list of cameras I DON'T like is pretty short. I don't like Cambo 8X10's, I don't like Agfa 8X10's although I tried twice, and I'm afraid the venerable Burke & James is on the short list. They're just too clunky I guess. Unwieldly? It's not a class issue with me. Honest. I'm having a love affair with the homeliest of Kodak 2D 8X10's. It's light, balanced, well engineered, and frankly because of the Packard inside, it doubles as THE field camera for most of the "portable" portrait lenses. Nobody's impressed when they see it, but a few folks have been impressed with what it does.

So thinking out loud, I'm wondering if the problem is the camera more than the format. A couple of evenings ago I bought a lovely Seneca 11X14. It's lighter than my Deardorff 8X10 and it's elegant both to look at and in use.

I just figure with EBAY it's fairly easy to have lots of things coming and then going again if they don't seem to hit my 'like' button. The worst you can do is lose a couple of bucks. Usually with a bath and a proper ad, I end up with a small profit instead of a loss. So keep those holders and buy something pretty.

[User Removed]

Jim,

You are totally correct. The Burke and James 11x14 is VERY large and clunky and it's very slow to use. I'm sure if I could afford a lightweight, compact ULF camera, I would be loving it alot more!

After seeing this B&J's camera, I've determined that the camera was not built or designed by a working photographer. There is many things on the camera that WORK, and work PERFECTLY WELL, but they are a pain in the butt to use! Things such as the rear movements on the camera, where you need to remove the whole back to move it into a different grove to use tilt, or how you need to remove 4 screws and 3 knobs to use the rear swings or shift.

Don't get me wrong, It's a VERY well made camera and is built like a tank, however its not very user friendly when working in the field.

Its funny you mention you dislike CAMBO 8x10 cameras, since my 8x10 is a Cambo/calumet monorail camera! Yes, its a pain to use and is made for the studio, but I find it simple to use and is built very strong. However, I know there is several better 8x10 cameras to be using.

[roteague]

Oddly, my list of cameras I DON'T like is pretty short. I don't like Cambo 8X10's, I don't like Agfa 8X10's although I tried twice, and I'm afraid the venerable Burke & James is on the short list. They're just too clunky I guess. Unwieldly? It's not a class issue with me.

I don't like any camera that I can't get Fuji Velvia for.

[Scott Peters]

Ryan, the 7 x 17 is actually a Phillips and it is a fantastic camera. It is lightweight and 'manageable' in the field. Really fun to use.

[Harrigan]

There is a reason they were called Burke and Jerks.

[Mike A]

Ryan, the 7 x 17 is actually a Phillips and it is a fantastic camera. It is lightweight and 'manageable' in the field. Really fun to use.


Ryan, Scott speakuth's the truth in regard to Dicks camera design. I've had one of his 11x14 models for about two years now and as I read about your frustration like many others that purchase older vintages, I'm glad I bit the bullet and bought a modern designed camera in this size.

I talked with a couple of people from the VC conference that shoot a Phillips 7x17 and they share the same affection that scott does for the design Dick uses.

Dick does help buyers looking for used cameras find sellers, you should phone him if your interested hes very helpful and accessible.

good luck,
Mike

Good luck,
Mike

[Mark Sawyer]

Ryan~ I just ran across this thread. If you're still in Tucson, give me a call or drop me an e-mail. marksawyer@earthlink.net

~ Mark

[John Kasaian]

I had an 11x14 B&J, but my reason for giving it up was the cost of the film holders. Since you have 8 of those ever-lovin' darlings it sounds like you're sitting pretty. The one other thing I didn't like about the B&J was the knobs that stuck waaaay out there, fowling up on branches and everything else in the woods. Don't get me wrong---its a great camera for indoor or out of the trunk shooting, but for hiking it is, as you've observed, awkward.

If I ever win the lottery, I've got this fantasy about getting an 11x14 Deardorff field camera--clamshell design just like my 8x10---now that would be a peach of an 11x14!

[uraniumnitrate]

I only want to say that I always called those ULF people to a highway photographer and of course got some angry people on me! The heavy equipment does slow things down and the only way to get it around it’s a car! Your problem begins when your motive is behind that hill where no roads lead to! Should I walk or should I not? Of course you don’t do that because you are not mobile with those heavy equipment so the next step is taking photographs from the roads and that is nothing else but the tourist pictures or outside of your studio of walls and plant’s growing on walls, bottles, and so on! Of course they are images which suck so than again you beginning to produce Platinum, Gums to make that image more interesting! But are they good? Interesting? No!

I like Weston but pepper Nr 121 and all that others between I find it not very interesting, stimulating. And definitely not showing lot creativity!

You may consider this too! When you step up you loose a lot’s of other thing too like those lenses with different characters as if you are a bloody photographer you probably know it now that they are differences which you can use on your way to artistic expressions! If you know how of course!

And there is a little other thing too! The happiest I where when I had a 35 mm camera took it everywhere with me all the time! Than I went up to 4x5 and than a tripod move into my life so as a bigger enlarger! Now I’m on 8x10 and it’s more complicated as ever! Bigger tripod, bigger camera, bigger holders, bigger lenses. So, that means shorter walk and lower climbing!
I almost forgot to mention my bigger enlarger as contact printing is okay folks but I do vanna have my fingers between. Sorry about this but I’m an old fashioned man! Otherwise I can by a digital camera and printer!

Now I finally settle down with two 8x10,s and let me tell you the truth! I use the one which is a lightest the old Seneca that wooden thing because my Tachi is heavy like stone!

Also one more little thing before I close this down! I’m a little bit tired of this camera discussion as it leads nowhere! I hate digital because it’s an easy way in or out for those whom didn’t have any knowledge of photography and the traditional photographic art.
And also you must understand somewhere that camera doesn’t make any photographer It’s your image what is make you who you are! I have shut image with my 35 mm which beet any of my 8x10 but not the one which made with my 4x5!!!!! How about that?

I DIDN*T MEANT THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF IT! I MEANT WHAT I WANT TO SAY WITH MY IMAGE! AND IF THE IMAGE CAPTURE PEOPLES ATTENTION THAT DOESN'T MATTER WHICH CAMERA YOU I USED TO GET THERE!!! DO'NT GET ME WRONG!

So I just decided that I shut anything with everything or everything with anything!

Uraniumnitrate- this is a pure poison is isn’t it?

[Donsta]

What have you been smoking?....

[Jorge]

What have you been smoking?....

Hope he will share....... :p

[Claire Senft]

Ryan go back to using your previous camera. Even with the small negatives, you should ,if your are careful, be able to produce a good quality 8x10.

[uraniumnitrate]

What have you been smoking?....

I thought you would like to know that:-) but I meant what the image is saying! I didn't meant the qality!!!!
But it's possible to achive technicly good quality with smaller size too! Nowdays I only care what I wanna say and pass over to others with my image and that is not grain and take the camera what ever is closest to my FINGERS at the time!

[uraniumnitrate]

Hope he will share....... :p

Sure why not? can you handle it? :-)