Intrepid 8x10 Mk III - Post your thoughts on design.

[interneg]

if Intrepids were built as solidly as they are marketed then we'd not be having this discussion

Frankly, Intrepid are pretty clear in their marketing as to what you are getting and not getting. Would a slightly heavier and more durable Intrepid (Deluxe version?) with stiffer bellows at 2x the price be a good idea - probably. They're certainly more than capable of good results if you don't overload them or try to stress test the locks (if you want to use a 165 Super Angulon, get a Sinar Norma). Quite a few of the (significantly) more costly competitors have not been any great shakes on the consistent quality front - and/ or make component decisions that are frankly questionable in budget models.

As it is, I've seen enough 'classic' and highly talked-up wood folders that aren't much better (often much worse when worn) in the solidity stakes - apart from a handful that are drastically more expensive, so I think you're being rather disingenuous here. And (not naming names) I've encountered a few monorails from legendary names whose 'centre' detents were off by surprising amounts - maybe wear, maybe the fact that many were made in quite craft-based circumstances initially.

[Oren Grad]

...so I think you're being rather disingenuous here.

Wearing my moderator's hat: Please refrain from turning disagreements about facts or interpretations into personal attacks.

[dave_whatever]

Frankly, Intrepid are pretty clear in their marketing as to what you are getting and not getting.

Aye, well their website copywriter didn't get the memo then!

There are guides on the front to give you complete precision, plus zeroing stops for total accuracy.

Whilst being lightweight the camera is incredibly sturdy and secure when set up and locked down. The aluminium base and linear focus ensure maximum stability no matter how heavy a lens you use.

Taken from https://intrepidcamera.co.uk/collect...id-8x10-camera.

Obviously I wasn't daft enough to have bought the camera having taking that description at face value. But still, when superlatives are wielded with impunity, disappointment beckons.

Although to be fair the focussing extension was decently rigid all the way out, the main source of flex being the front standard uprights and base bar (the entire U-shape that screws in).

[Certain Exposures]

The interesting thing about the Vist 8x10 is that it appears the maker is making incremental changes every time a new batch is released, so that is encouraging.

In this image I caged from the latest batch sold on Ebay, there appears to be leather strap added to the front standard to make unfolding the camera easier.

I am in the same camp as Certain Exposures; weighing the Intrepid against the Vist. While the Intrepid has a 6 week waiting period, the Vist does not have any scheduled restocking date, so it's uncertain how long a wait until the next batch is constructed.

Hopefully soon...

I think it would be better to get a Chamonix based on your signature!

There are not many in-depth reviews of the Vist camera or their communication/service, unfortunately. It could be a bigger risk for all we know. There is a thread here: https://www.largeformatphotography.i...ist-8x10/page2

I have their 4x5 and except for the fresnel issue, I have the same issues. It’s just tough to get things square and locked down. I don’t think this is a QA issue, I think it’s just the design of the product; they made certain choices to make the camera light and less expensive. It got me back into LF but quickly frustrated me to the point that I have more or less moved on from it. For me the issues caused by the design choices were not something I could overlook or work-around.

Thanks for sharing this, Bob.

Interesting to read the ongoing popularity of these cameras, as I was briefly in possession of a 8x10 Intrepid MkIII, and sent it back because of half a dozen glaring faults/issues, even factoring in reasonable expectations due to the low price it seemed really poor, with the low weight being the only attractive factor. I went straight for a beater Deardorff instead and never tried any other el cheapo options, but looking at what's out there now I suspect that if the likes of Vist and Stenopeika had their promo/marketing/website game as tightly finessed as Intrepid then we'd not even be having these discussions where Intrepid are positioned as the defacto "only game in town" for a budget 10x8" buy.

With the one I had obviously the fit and finish was a bit joyless but that was expected. The front standard was quite bendy, more so than expected at the price point, but again, using light lenses, probably tolerable. Rear standard was OK. The big issues were that the MkIII has a zero detent, but this had several degrees of slop and play in it, and the middle point was out of square with the rear, so in effect it was worse than having no detent at all since you couldn't rely on it to get it parallel. Also, the levels on each standard were clearly out with respect to each other (again, worse than no levels and should have been spotted during assembly).

The worst aspect was that neither the front tilt or swing could actually be fully locked down. I'd owned or used half a dozen large format cameras by this point, across the age, size and price range, and never seen anything this bad before. No matter how tightly I did the knobs up, a fairly light single-finger push on the lensboard corner would move it and I fully expected to be accidentally nudging the tilt all the time when adjusting the shutter etc etc. Bearing in mind I'm a climber with, by most people's metric, a very strong grip, so I'm fairly confident I would have broken those 3d printed knobs before they actually locked firmly had I tried to really lock them down really hard. I could maybe have added some grip tape or something to help the swing lock since I don't use a lot of swing anyway (as I am aware other people have done) but I don't know how I would have achieved this with the tilt, which I would be using heavily.

Another annoyance was the fresnel was from a faulty batch, wrong focal length, hence unusable, and it was annoying to discover than the folded camera was about an inch deeper than the quoted spec on the website at the time indicated. Fair play they took the camera back for a full refund (as they are legally obliged to in the UK, I might add), but I found the fact there was none of the usual "that sounds wrong, you must have a bad camera that slipped through QC" perhaps indicative that the one I received was par for the course.

You too, Dave. It is helpful. I have a Graflex Crown Graphic.

Whenever I get a bad shot it's 100% my fault not the camera's. I would prefer to have the same experience if I step up to 8x10. Unfortunately, I may need to rethink what price that becomes a reality at.

[Kino]

I think it would be better to get a Chamonix based on your signature!

My pocketbook disagrees!

[paulbarden]

I think it would be better to get a Chamonix based on your signature!

I don't think there's any question - if you buy a Chamonix, you will get a much better camera. It all comes down to: spend as much as you can afford to. If you are concerned that the Intrepid isn't going to meet your requirements in terms of build quality, reliability, sturdiness, etc., then it probably won't. Some of us find the Intrepid perfectly acceptable - capable of doing the job. But is it a shining example of superior engineering and craftsmanship? Not by a long shot, no.

If you want a pretty camera that is unfailing in it's ability to be manipulated and maneuvered into performing all of the best tricks a large format camera can do, without compromise, then be ready to spend a few grand to get what you want. If those sound like your requirements, then avoid the Intrepid - you'll likely have all the same complaints as dave_whatever had.

Me, I have set my expectations when working with my Intrepid: I don't expect it to be something it's clearly not. Does it get the job done, reasonably painlessly? Yep. Do I opt to take the Intrepid out 9 times out of 10, rather than my Deardorff? Absolutely, yes. Is the 8x10 Intrepid lacking in some ways? (the front standard knobs, for example) Yes, definitely. But I still choose it over the much heavier Deardorff most times, and it gets the job done without getting in the way too much.

Seriously, I recommend you find someone nearby who has the Intrepid 8x10 and spend an hour looking at the camera, and have the user show you around it. Nothing beats getting acquainted with a camera in person.

[Kino]

I agree with you, Paul.

I am not trying to endlessly nit-pick inexpensive cameras because they are not built to professional grade standards, just do some due diligence to get the camera most compatible to my tolerance level.

This is unusual for me, as I tend to leap before I look and in the past that has netted me good, but inappropriate cameras for my budget/age/capabilities.

Witness the Calumet C1; a really great camera for either studio or rugged, muscular mountain-men hikers, but not really good for retirees who get winded walking up 3 flights of stairs empty handed!

I think either camera will suit me fine and perhaps the sale of the C1 will offset my impulsive behavior!

Thanks for your measured input on this subject; I do appreciate your insights.

[Bob Kerner]

I think it would be better to get a Chamonix based on your signature!

There are not many in-depth reviews of the Vist camera or their communication/service, unfortunately. It could be a bigger risk for all we know. There is a thread here: https://www.largeformatphotography.i...ist-8x10/page2




Thanks for sharing this, Bob.





You too, Dave. It is helpful. I have a Graflex Crown Graphic.

Whenever I get a bad shot it's 100% my fault not the camera's. I would prefer to have the same experience if I step up to 8x10. Unfortunately, I may need to rethink what price that becomes a reality at.

I went back a few pages to make sure you’re the most recent OP since these threads can get a little convoluted. By now you’ve realized there are people happy with the Intrepid and others who are not. Maybe….for a moment… skip the “what name is on the camera” and focus on design. AFAICT the “newer” designs are very similar: worm gear focusing, similar front standard controls compared to something “older” like a Deardorf, Wisner, Tachihara. Google and look at pictures to see how the design and construction is different.

I find the Intrepid fiddly and think it’s a design issue. As nice looking as the Chamonix cameras are they are based on the same design, just better materials and, I hope, tolerances. Having come from an “old” design years ago, I don’t think I’d buy another camera with the same design DNA as the Intrepid/Chamonix. Personal preference. But as Paul points out, the only way to know is to get your hands on them. And not just ten minutes; go out for a morning and really work the things.

BTW, I recently sidelined my Intrepid for a Crown Graphic. Two very different cameras. Some would say the only commonality is the size of the film but, unlike the Intrepid, I smile when I use the Crown. When I set it up, it stays where I set it. It’s built like a tank. Yes, it’s very limited in its movements but the key is that I look forward to using it. Can’t say that about the other cameras. At some point I will get another wooden field camera but one with (what I call) the traditional design.

[Jarretthunt4x5]

I only have their 4x5 camera and the only issue I've had was the front standard wasn't machined right(is that the right word for wood work?), so the lens board couldn't fit perfectly into the standard. I sent it back and they replaced it. I probably could've taken sandpaper to it to get it to fit. Other than that no issues. 3 years going strong.

I do wish that there was a way to lock down the rear focus knob.

[Obscura]

Wish it had a bale back…or better design for allowing you to get your fingers under the screen back to allow insertion/removal of film holder.

Intrepid had posted on Instagram, last month, I believe, that they are releasing a bale back for their 8x10 cameras (that can be retrofitted to existing version III cameras). It is suppose to be released or at least an announcement on a release date this month.