Intrepid 8x10 Gen 3 Camera - My Final Thoughts - Large Format Friday

[@IntrepidCameraCo]

Hi Mat, Firstly thank you so much for taking the time to do such an in depth review and I am so sorry that you received one of the 12 faulty cameras. We were very excited to get a camera out to you (everyone here is a big fan and it was very cool to have my picture taken by you many years ago in NYC!) I'm gutted you didn't love the camera but I completely understand why, a camera that wastes your time and money is not acceptable at all. The focus issue you experienced was caused by a faulty depth sensor on our CNC wood cutting machine, not an excuse, it's something we should have caught before any cameras left the workshop, but I thought some people might like to know the context behind the error. This problem has now of course been fixed and thankfully we have many happy users of our 8x10 that haven't had this problem at all. The other change we have made is to increase the base thickness to 5mm, you were correct in thinking this would make a big difference to stability! We have been shipping the cameras with thicker bases for a while now and received some great feedback. once again I'm really sorry you received a camera with such a massive fault, we were all quite excited to get a camera in your hands and maybe were a bit hasty in shipping it before it was 100%. I think the least we can do is replace the film you lost so I will drop you a quick email about that. Thanks again for taking the time to test out our camera and for presenting such a fair an honest review, we genuinely appreciate it and what you do for LF! And if there is anything else we can do to help make up for the time you lost the please do let me know All the best, Max

[@MatMarrash]

Max thank you so much for taking the time to watch this review and to respond in such a detailed and transparent manner! I respect what you and the rest of the Intrepid team are doing and don't wish for this to do anything other than inform. The world of film photography and large format are so small and we are so interdependent on one another that there's no room for beef/animosity/drama. It's great to hear that 8x10's with a thicker base are already shipping out to customers, and that the frame issue was limited to a very small number of cameras. Thanks again for your message and let's keep the lines of conversation open, because when you succeed so does the entire hobby!

[@ZeLoShady]

Someone needs to put this comment into a powerpoint about how to properly respond to critiques of a product and how to handle manufacturing errors. 10/10.

[@jaykey6307]

NGL, this was hard to watch. Mistakes happen, be it with an Intrepid camera, a Leica, or a sports car. They came back to you, they sent a replacement part, they are a small company. I understand your frustration Mat, I value an honest review (which you gave and which I value), but it's not that the faulty camera ruined some masterful pieces of art or caused bodily harm. I think you are being a bit too dramatic in the video. Hope you don't take this the wrong way; just some feedback as you are otherwise so positive and enthusiastic about new gear. Again, not about the review, just the tone.

[@andrewbroekhuijsen6770]

@@ZeLoShady Yeah. I've owned 2 Intrepid 4x5s and love them both (the Mk IV is my primary 4x5). If I ever did decide to get into 8x10, I wouldn't hesitate to buy from Intrepid. Knowing that they can own up to issues with their product and make things right really increases my comfort level buying from them. Besides that I've just never had anything but good experiences with their products, personally.

[@chopinho65]

Wow can’t fault the integrity of this reply - it’s a best practice example of how to address reviews that were perhaps not anticipated and raised some significant concerns. All credit to intrepid for this and their continued improvement. That said, I have a 1st version which for various reasons I haven’t used - access to lens etc - and perhaps now a little more nervous. But then again…it’s all an adventure.

[@willysheepskin]

Shame Mat, such a bummer that you had to go through all that. The way you laid it out in the video was awesome though, really enjoyed the way you talked us through everything. Also to be honest you're a saint for being so mellow with your qualms, I'd have lost my mind if I found out that much work was a waste and that it was 100% the cameras fault. Hope you get back on track with your practice and a reliable camera soon!

[@MatMarrash]

Willie thanks so much for the comment! After a few months of distancing myself from the noise and urge to push out content constantly, it was time to talk about it. Not mentioning what happened would be a massive lie of omission, and y'all deserve better than that! Oh, and I had some other wild stuff to keep me distracted while taking time away from LF. ;)

[@flyingo]

This is exactly the type of information we need. Honest, detailed critiques, with unbiased “the good AND the bad” thoughts about equipment like this. With the advent of 3D printing popularity and more small company entries into new film photography gear, this kind of review will be extremely important for everyone. Thank you!

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks for your comment! :) My opinion on 3D printing has made a complete 180 in the last decade. I used to think of all of it as cheap, needless waste. There's still a lot of that out there, but there are some great startups utilizing the technology and making strides into industries they otherwise wouldn't have been able to join.

[@erichstocker8358]

It is nice to see you back. I have an Intrepid 4x5 (second gen that I turned into a 3rd gen). I am very happy with the 4x5 and its construction. I haven't noticed any issues in the multiple years that I have used it. I suspect that the smaller size is easier to manufacture than the 8x10. I will say the Intrepid customer service is really great. They respond quickly and go beyond just platitude responses to help users. I am quite happy with my Intrepid.

[@Filmmaker1982]

I love mine. Had it for over 4 months. All good here. So nice the light weight and I can take it up a mountain with 1/3 the weight. Can't beat the price and customer service.

[@trope584]

good to see you back.

[@caryconover]

This is a very useful video. I’ve had my 1st gen 8x10 since 2018 and I’ll just say….I’ve had some issues with it. But, I’ve also gotten a ton of use out of it and am very pleased with the results. The biggest learning curve BY FAR is troubleshooting development and scanning issues. After seeing this, and Intrepid’s response, I would not hesitate one bit to get the Mark III. Thanks for all that you do. Cary Conover. Wichita, Kansas

[@andrewthompson5609]

While it sucks that you had those issues, I've had my Gen 2 Intrepid 8x10 and Gen 3 Intrepid 4x5 for years and I absolutely love them. They have given me zero issues, and their customer support is amazing. I know if I have an issue and email them there is an almost instant solution on the other end. Sure there are better made cameras out there but for me I think its hard to beat the cost to performance ratio that they deliver.

[@lumenetumbra4223]

Hello Matt, I bought an Intrepid 8x10 gen.3 in September 2022. Like you, I too have found that my original sinar board do not fit well into the standard due to tight tolerances. Luckily I have other boards that do well. I also received a new back with the correct registration distance from intrepid. The new back had another problem (light leak) which drove me crazy and caused me to burned several sheets of film before realizing where was the issue. Having reached the verge of despair, I contacted Intrepid who finally sent me another back with all the problems solved (at least I hope). I think there were major quality issues with the first batches of this camera, however the important thing is that Intrepid put their face on it and the will to solve them all. Kudos to them. Also on the good side: I find that this camera is invaluable for all those activities where you want to stay light or simply don't want to ruin more expensive cameras (i.e. working with wet plate and potential silver nitrate drops). In addition to being light, it is also relatively small. I find that it still has many merits and its very precise location, as you rightly have indicated in the video. In short, in the end, despite so much suffering, I'm happy with my purchase and I feel good with my Intrepid 8x10 gen 3.

[@larsbunch]

I've probably mentioned my experience with the Intrepid 8x10 before on your channel, but I think it is worth mentioning it again if it helps someone make a decision on what camera to buy. I ordered an 8x10 in mid-2019 and it took a while to arrive, finally showing up near the end of the year (much longer than the anticipated ship date). I had a lot of trouble with the back not being attached properly and causing light leaks. When I asked for help on it, they were quick to let me know they would replace the back, but then it felt like I was put back to the end of the line when it came to sending the thing to me. In the end, it took about 10 months for me to get a working camera. By then I had lost any enthusiasm I had for the product and bought a Chamonix 8x10 which is a very well made camera that I have never had troubles with.

[@MatMarrash]

It is absolutely worth mentioning again and again, especially when current experiences are mirroring those of the past! Large format is a pretty niche hobby, and one that many photographers participating in are doing so for quality and aesthetic reasons. If Intrepid were to put more time into camera quality (construction and materials) and aesthetics, I think they'd find they still have a large chunk of the lower priced market but with customers coming to them for more accessories and cameras instead of service requests.

[@jaytayag810]

I definitely have a love/hate relationship with the Intrepid 8x10. I've had the mk II and now the mk III. The mk III is definitely a step up from the mk II. I only had the mk II for a year before things started to wear down on it. I was using it quite a bit. To me, both cameras needed some modifications before I got out to shoot. I found this out the hard way when I got the mk II and put that knowledge to use with the mk III. I was so excited to see the mk III come out that I ended up putting an order for it because the mk II was showing signs of wear. My mk III had all kinds of light leak issues. I had to do a lot of testing and DIYing before I got it to work. Intrepid was kind enough to send me a box of film to help with the amount of film I used to test for light leaks. Now that everything is working on the mk III, I feel that it's a great camera for the type of photography that I do. (Landscapes) And I am greatful for Intrepid for coming out with an affordable and light 8x10 camera. If this camera wasn't around, I wouldn't be shooting 8x10.

[@ChristopherMay]

Thank you for the very honest thoughts, Mat. It's a shame that so many shots were affected by your early production issue and I totally get being down about it all after that. Also, I'm kind of disappointed that some of the small things have not been ironed out by the third gen of the Intrepid. That the rear standard thumb screws are so easy to lose is kind of shocking in a third generation product. I've often pondered adding an Intrepid for lightweight outings but your thoughts combined with other similar reviews have always caused me to pass on the opportunity. Meanwhile, as always, it was a true treat to see stuff with Tariq. I hope he has a few more appearances coming in the coming LFF season. It's always great fun to see what the two of you do when you get together with your big cameras. Likewise, it was fun to see the 16mm stuff in here, too. Really looking forward to hearing more about that adventure!

[@MatMarrash]

Chris I'm going to make sure Tariq knows how much he's being requested by viewers of this channel! I can guarantee he'll be in a least one more this season, possibly two. 16mm adventures along with all other programming were delayed, but updates to come soon!

[@lensman5762]

Hi Mat. First, I recently finished 3D printing a 5X7 camera for myself. I did not put a sheet of film through it until I had accurately measured the distance from the back of the lensboard to the ground glass having made sure that it corresponded to the distance to the film plane in the film holder. There was a difference of less than 0.1mm which was acceptable. Secondly, I made sure that the film holder was sitting absolutely flush against the back of the camera to prevent light leaks. So, I recommend to anyone buying new or used large format cameras to make an accurate measurement of the dustances mentioned. It is critical. The sort of problems you mentioned, unfortunately happen from time to time even in the most advanced manufacturing. I can assure you of this from persoanl experience. The positive is that Intrepid found out the problem and send the replacement part. Also, very good shout on the tripod. I go crazy seeing photographers, mounting high density digital sensors ( cameras) onto flimsy Carbon Fiber tripods just to save a Kg or so of weight in their luggage.

[@kirkleadbetter1093]

My LF journey started with an Intrepid Mark I 4x5. Ive struggled with focus with it but after a few years of not using it I decided to get back in the saddle. I took it with me to Prince Edward Island this summer and an attempting to learn the zone system. I'm excited to get back and get into the darkroom and see what I get.

[@kirkleadbetter1093]

I blame me for the focus by the way, not the camera. I'm still as green as a #11 filter at this point.

[@oudviola]

Thanks for thethoughtful review. For what it's worth, I take some test shots of a line chart with new MF camera and lenses at several apertures. That gets expensive with LF though!

[@johngelnaw1243]

The paradox of the Intrepid is that it's an inexpensive camera, and therefore appealing to novices. The problem is that the reason it's inexpensive is that they cut corners (or not, in the case of your original back), which makes it unsuitable for novices. When I dove into the world of 4x5, after a great deal of consideration, I went with the cheapest Chamonix available (45N-1), which at the time was nearly twice the cost of the Intrepid 4x5-- but the fit / finish, and user friendliness more than justified the higher cost. I'm a fan of minimalist engineering-- and the Chamonix puts a smile on my face every time I take it out and put it on a tripod. ... and welcome back. 😀

[@MatMarrash]

John that's a great way of phrasing it, paradoxical indeed! When I fell into my Eastman Commercial B the conventional wisdom was spending < $2000 would get you a "cheap" camera and all the ones worth having were > $4000. My only hope is that the new cheap while affordable doesn't scare newcomers away from the hobby.

[@davidottman9501]

Thanks Mat! This dovetails perfectly with an earlier video you did where you answered someone's question about whether it's better to buy a new LF camera, or search out a used one. You made an excellent case that most used ones were originally built as pro-level quality gear, and the less-expensive new ones are built to a light consumer-grade level. Conclusion: Just be aware of the trade-offs for each choice. To repeat one big point in many of your videos including this one, the cost of the camera itself is only part of what it costs to use it. Lenses, accessories, supporting gear, film, etc. cost the same no matter what camera we use. I still laugh whenever someone asks, "How much does film cost?" Until you shoot a lot, even expensive film costs very little compared to what it takes to use said film. (Except for using a DIY pinhole... lol)

[@MatMarrash]

"Film is Cheap" is a phrase I heard many years ago and at the time it didn't make much sense. With each passing year and even with film price increases, I understand that phrase more and more!

[@kirkleadbetter1093]

And thanks for a professional, fair review. Very well done.

[@AnniE_1000]

I am using the 4x5intrepid camera with led as an enlarger and I am quiet happy about it, because it is very simple und ultra compact for a small darkroom 🙂

[@RubenRobles]

Matt, thank you so much for the thorough review and your persistence in trying to find the root of the problems. I started my large format journey with the Intrepid 4x5 Mk4. It was a great camera to start me off. Unfortunately the back became very loose after attaching the Lomograflok back to the camera. I’d already had other issues with stripped screws while adding the fresnel lens. I’d emailed Intrepid, wanting to purchase a replacement back. No reply from Intrepid. At that point, I was able to buy a new Chamonix 45N2. I really, really like the Chamonix. The build quality differences are night and day when compared to the Intrepid. I believe in what Intrepid is doing. I believe you have to go into the Intrepid experience with realistic expectations. It’s a great lightweight starter view camera. It’s not going to be very durable and you’re most likely going to have to replace/repair it pretty soon. It’s a great gateway to a sturdier large format camera from another manufacturer in the future. Please keep the great content coming. We all appreciate your videos and the info you share with all of us film geeks! 👍🏽📷 🎞️

[@ilichcastillo]

Thanks Matt. Here´s a pretty useful/honest review. Regards from Ecuador.

[@JasonRenoux]

What a distinguished gentleman you are Mat 😊 I've had the 3D printed 4x5 for a year now and i keep thinking about shooting this old method that is large format on a such a moderna piece of equipment, the paradox is loud to say the least. On a sad note, the bellows came unglued from the front standard and Intrepid has offered to send me adequate double sided tape to fix this. It's part of the game I'm tempted to say. Hats off to the older, much older LF cameras who to this day, still give amazing results. The engineering of time past was really something 😊 Appreciate your comeback 🎉

[@SenpaiSkyy]

I ordered mine in early December. 12 weeks later I received it. I was so happy to have a camera with more movments than my 120-year-old Century View 8x10. I love my Century View, I hand-made replacement Bellows, lens boards, and ground glass hold-down tabs out of brass. I started LF using a Cambo SC 4x5. I was very much in need of a 8x10 camera with more movements. My Gen 3 looked like I was good to go. My issues with the camera are with the leaf springs for the ground glass film holder on the rear. Even when I put a death grip on all of my screws knobs and whatnot I move something when inserting the film holder. The Leaf springs are very strong. I need to open the back before inserting the film to work around this. Even removing the film holder will move something. Other then that I have been Very happy with my lightweight 8x10. I do miss the rack and pinon focusing but I'll get over it. Thank You for your hard work and time on this video.

[@bradvisser7671]

Thanks a lot for making this video Matt and sorry to hear that the issues got you down on large format in general. I have a gen 2 and I (and everyone else that used the camera) have been experiencing the same front focusing issue. I was about to buy myself a new loupe, but I think I'll get in touch with Intrepid first now... For what it's worth, I still think the Intrepid 8x10 is still fantastic value for the money for the right person. For someone like me with a monorail kit for studio work and who already had spent the money on all the extra gear needed to work with an 8x10, it makes a very welcome and lightweight companion for the times I go hiking through forests and up mountains. For someone new to 8x10 the value proposition is definitely reduced, but I could imagine that it would be difficult to find anything else at a reasonable price. My biggest issue with the camera other than the front focusing has been the tightness of the springs on the back. With the lightweight nature of the camera, I've sometimes accidentally significantly changed the facing of the camera simply by trying to push the film holder in. Otherwise, I personally have received good customer service from Intrepid and have managed to make some photographs that I really like with it that I never would have gotten with the Sinar P. So for me, I am still happy with my purchase of the gen 2.

[@positivecontacts]

You can take off the magnetic back when putting the film holder in so that you don't put any pressure on the tripod.

[@GeirBakkenVestfold]

Interesting review. I have always wanted an 8x10, and almost buyed an old 8x10 Kodak, but I at same time I experienced some back problems, and that made me worry beause I like to bring the camera out in the field while walking. Later I got a nice offer for a 1. gen Intrepid 8x10. I had seen the review from Ben Horne wich is very good at telling the good and bad with the camera. When I got the camera, I was never disappointed because I was prepared. I found that the wooden bottom plate got a lot more sturdy after I got a PU200 quick release. It gives a strong support for the plate. It is annoying to experience trouble with focus. But I also think that buyers in the future won't experience it since Intrepid now have fixed it. I am a happy Intrepid user, oh and a happy DIY'er. I made my Linhof color in to using Leitz EPIS 400 f4 on Linhof color making 5x7 negatives. I wont' hesitate to recommend the Intrepid camera, but I would advice people to look at several reviews so they know what they get.

[@Snoflo1998]

Thank you so much for making this video. I have an Intrepid 8x10 Mk II and the focusing mechanism broke after 8 month's use. The ground glass also seemed very fragile in my opinion. In the end, I decided to use my monorail for landscape work.

[@Foxglove963]

Rattling pieces of screwed triplex, uh, what a depressing piece of cheap wood they call Intrepid.

[@ImperiousImages]

Mat, you handled this professionally. I’ve had a number of disappointing experiences with my intrepid 8x10 as well and have since put it away for good.

[@samgriffin5797]

First of all good to have you back! when I saw the intrepid 8x10, I couldn’t believe how close to was to the Phillips 8x10 explorer, a very little known, extremely expensive and rare camera. Basically what intrepid is going for, but made much better. The focus wheel was tilted down which helped, and it was overall much sturdier. Second, I have the camera you are reviewing (because of its resemblance to the Phillips) and, even though I’ve owned it 2 months, it’s starting to show wear and tear, especially in the composite arms that hold the back down. These are starting the bend. So, if you are just getting into it, great jumping off point. Even if you are just an every now and then shooter, go for it. But if you plan on using it heavily, you will have problems. It’s going to happen.

[@MatMarrash]

Hey Sam thanks for the comment! Having started when I did in large format, my first experiences with this style focusing mechanism were the 8x10 and 7x17 R.H. Phillips and Sons cameras. The closest successor to the Phillips IMO is the current generation of Chamonix cameras, especially the 8x10 Alpinist.

[@EdGately]

good seeing your video pop up in my feed again!

[@johnbrewer318]

A good honest review. I’ve played with a friends Intrepid and I hated it. I think the positive things are that it’s light weight and cheap. Photographers on a budget might be better off buying an old 8x10 such as a Burke and James, heavier but tried a tested. My first 8x10 was a B and J monorail which cost me £200 shipped from the USA to the U.K. years ago. Really bulky but very lightweight. I recommend my students look at the used market, with some patience a good used camera can be found at a reasonable price.

[@wbhaable]

Matt, mad respect on your professionalism. I think you presented the review both objectively and subjectively, which is extremely hard to do. This is easiest the best camera review I've seen online. Period. Although I no longer shoot much large format now, I do enjoy watching your show. Really wanna spread my word of support from Hong Kong. Best, Wing

[@MatMarrash]

Wing thanks for the checking out the review and I appreciate the kind words. Funny enough this year hasn't felt like a large format one for me so far, but that's okay. Any photography and creativity is a good thing!

[@michaelraso]

The good, the bad and final thoughts. Well documented report!

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks Mike! :)

[@marike1100]

I was considering getting an Intrepid 4x5 because it reminds me (a bit) of my previous LF camera, a Chamonix 45N (I purchased it around 10 years ago new when they were much less expensive). Now, idk. I might reevaluate, maybe a Toyo, Tachihara, Wista / Zone VI field camera. (Currently only have a Burke & James Press, a bit of a beater but built like a tank). Excellent review, really enjoying the channel.

[@MatMarrash]

Hi Markus thanks for the comment! The Intrepid design does have some of the trappings of the Chamonix, albeit at a more budget-minded feature and price. Intrepid 4x5's have generally been a bit better value IMO than the 8x10, so if you're looking in that arena the other options you've listed occupy a wide range of mostly used camera options.

[@rockymountainmike3133]

Thanks Mat. Based on the last Intrepid video you made, I purchased the 8x10 M3 with the discount code. Sorry about the back with the wrong specs. My other 8x10 is also a Tachihara, which I purchased new in 2004. The weight and size were my motivations to the Intrepid. In 6 weeks, I’m taking it to Iceland, something I never would have considered with the Tachihara. I also purchased a 150mm lens (never shot that wide 8x10 before), and results have been great, and with no need for a recessed board. I’m aware of all the reported quality issues, so time will tell how well the Intrepid stands up to my abuse. In the meantime, the lighter weight and smaller size are going to make for some unprecedented versatility in my travel landscape work. Thanks for your channel! I really appreciate it! - Michael Hardeman

[@MatMarrash]

Hey Mike thanks for the comment! I think your travel setup is the optimal use of an Intrepid. Those 10 extra pounds go a long way each mile you hike!

[@user-cp2vh2kh2w]

I have the Gen 3 Intrepid and I'm very happy with it. I did have to do some modifications to it in order to make it work well, but it does work well in situations where I am not able to haul around my Century Universal due to the weight. On my Intrepid I took the back apart and sanded the slots in the back to make inserting and removing film holders more smooth and easy, and I added a fresnel to the back as well. I've not been bothered by the slow focus and have been happy with the camera. I had the first generation Intrepid and only used it a couple of times. It worked well, but not very well and the focus gear slipped a lot. I think the camera is worth the money I paid for it but I've not expected it to compare with a more robust professional 8x10 from the 20th Century. Thanks for sharing your life in large format photography. I've very much enjoyed your videos.

[@rudolfwidmer3447]

Thanks for this informative video. I can't say nothing about the 8x10 Camera. I have a 4x5 Intrepid, the newest model. It is well made. Some litlle things I changed. The screws holding the frontstandard on the sides are to long and so I cut them a bit shorter and replaced the normal nuts with hut nuts. Some areas on the plywood are now paintet in matt black. The recess where the lensboard sits and at the rear where the filmholder is touching the wood. These were only small changes to achive a Swiss finish.It is clear that it would need some time in the production to do such minor improvements. This time costs money. I think it is the right aproach from Intrepid to offer an interesting price to enter in the large photography . The succses of Intrepid shows that they are on the right way. The quality of my camera was much more than I expectet. It worked well from the beginning. Your experience was frustrating. It was such a stupid error in the manufacturing. I am shure that Intrepid will never ever make this mistake again. That is learning by doing! I suspected such an issue before I shot the first test pictures on outdatet X Ray film that I got for free. The result was good. To be shure I also measured with a caliper that the groundglass and the film in the holder have the same distance from the frontplane of the holders. It was all ok. Drawbacks are part of everything that humans are doing.. Learning from mistakes is a normal experience. Thanks again for your fine videos. Greetings from Switzerland!

[@hosepdeyrmenjian8556]

Excellent and honest review, thank you for your time and dedication.

[@donyee8970]

I have the 2nd generation of the 8x10. I shot with it a month ago in Yosemite. Overall, it's a great camera. Some of the 3D printed parts on the camera are not very robust. I accidently broke the clip that holds the back on location, but luckily, there are magnets that hold the back on the the camera. The film back catches the film holder when I insert or remove it. I'm sure, Intrepid is listening to folks that have the camera and trying to improve it with subsequent versions. Thanks for your review Matt!

[@rjs54jr]

Thank you for the honesty. You did well.

[@AlexLuyckxPhoto]

Great overview Mat! I feel for the thumb screws, I found that with my Mk. 1 Intrepid 4x5. Also at least there weren't any Robertson head screws on the camera ;). Despite the troubles, you still got some excellent work on this camera.

[@fepatton]

Really glad to see Intrepid's response here. I made a 5x7 back a few years ago, and absolutely agonized over the offset between the film plane and the frame of the ground glass. I was sure from the moment you showed the model whose nose was in focus while her eyes were out that the camera had a plane offset issue. The different styles of fasteners? 🙄 I've owned a few good view cameras over the years, but not an 8x10, as the cost was always prohibitive. I'm still intrigued by this camera and have a couple of 8x10 lenses, so I will likely order one soon.

[@areallyrealisticguyd4333]

I would love to see a video on stenopeika in the same realm as budget large format cameras. its good to put the information out there so people know where to look

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks for the comment! I've only seen one early model Stenopeika in the flesh, but would love a chance to play around with it in the field.

[@GaryNylander]

Mat, Good video and a good response from Intrepid Camera. Sounds like the 3rd generation 8x10 Intrepid camera is a work in progress, it certainly has potential. Like you I have the Tachihara 8x10 camera, I bought it new in 1991 via mail order (no internet back then) from Adorama Camera and had it shipped to me in Kelowna, B.C., Canada. Although the Tachihara is fairly heavy at around 11 lbs, it's still a very nice camera to use. At the time I bought it, it was one of the more "affordable" 8x10 cameras. All the best for your photography.

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks Gary! I'm hopeful for the future with everyone involved in large format photography, and Intrepid's fast response is good sign. For now my go-to 8x10 is still my well-used Tachihara.

[@GaryNylander]

@@MatMarrash Sometimes there are no shortcuts for 8x10 large-format photography!

[@crocato]

thank you so much for your honesty and and say your story tahnk you so thats for beginners camera and some fun not serious situations ❤❤❤❤

[@hanphan2633]

So much truth. Thank you as always and sorry about all that you went through with it.

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks Han! :) On the bright side, this distance from LF gave me space to experiment with other aspects of film photography.

[@marikapi01]

I feel so sorry for you Matt. Waisting all that time and money. I have owned an Intrepid 8x10, including a 4x5 reducing back, since the first kickstarter. I have come across many of the problems you mention, but for me this was an intro into 8x10. I now own a Sinar p2 8x10, quite a different story, really nice but only in the studio. I wish I could afford buying a good 8x10 field camera as well. I guess just saving a little bit longer, and then go for it. Anyway, thanks again for your story. Glad to see you back

[@MatMarrash]

Mariette thanks for your comment. The reason I wanted to share this experience is so folks getting into 8x10 don't have a similarly hard time. Thanks for sticking with 8x10! The P2 is a wonderful camera, but 100% agree that it's not made for the field (tried it myself 10 years ago). I'm a little biased, but every now and then Tachihara 8x10's from Japan still pop up in the < $2500 range.

[@LRPhotographer]

Since I'm just shooting 4x5 for now while I continue my transition from medium to large format, I figured its smaller size might make for a sturdier camera than an 8x10 made from the same materials, so I went ahead and ordered an Intrepid. The Mat Marrash discount code still works, so it saved me almost $44. Hell yeah. :)

[@wilbertvandenberg3158]

Excellent unbiased review. This is exactly what we need. It is even exactly what Intrepid needs. Eg there is no resaon whatsoever why they wouldn't use longer screws for the back and same-bit screws in different sizes for the whole camera. That's just stupid engineering, or cutting so many corners that you lose clients.

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks for the comment Wilbert! I don't claim to be good at anything close to engineering, but I excel at breaking things before their time. This camera took a load off of my back, but was a huge effort to keep in one piece in the field.

[@JamieMPhoto]

I got a Mk II in 2021 and it arrived broken. The focus plate had come unglued. I messaged them and they very helpfully showed me how to reglue it, and it was pretty simple. It did come loose one more time after several months, but I also did kind of hastily reglue it the first time. The next thing that gave out quickly was the clips on the back. However, despite those parts breaking, I never experienced any repercussions from that. They also very kindly sent newer and I think slightly stronger tabs. I was surprised by the burly lens board, too. I knew to expect sacrifices, especially after learning on a burly Calumet field camera. I appreciate how light it is, and find the bellows to be surprisingly sturdy. I don't put it to heavy work, but have rarely been annoyed consistently except the tabs on the back slide off the ground glass frame a lot ... but at least it's easy to fix without breaking my workflow. For me, the compromises have been mostly worth it since I didn't want to spend lavishly on a workhorse, because I didn't need a workhorse. The weight and size are major pluses and help me want to bring it out more vs. that old Calumet from grad school (which I literally wheeled around in a suitcase). I'd say it's perfectly adequate and maybe even good for a casual large format shooter who knows to expect some compromises, but that a more dedicated 8x10 photographer might want to keep saving a bit longer. If I become more dedicated to 8x10, I will probably investigate moving up the range, but for now my Mk II serves me fine. I've never had the knobs come off on me, but I also approached it knowing that I needed to tread lightly with the hardware. Anyway, sorry you lost so much stuff to the manufacturing error,and that would certainly give me pause, too. I'm glad that they seem to be on top of things when they do miss the mark, and they have been extremely helpful to me when I've needed it. So points to them for that. I hope they can keep refining and fixing things, too. I like them overall as a company, and hope more people can have more good experiences with them as they grow.

[@greggmcneill7407]

Thanks for this, Mat. The Intrepid has always been a great "Gateway Camera" for getting into Large Format. I'm glad they 'made it right' getting the right back to you. I think that this camera will be a fantastic first camera for most new LF photographers. That being said, being let down by gear that you count on is a huge hit and i hard to bounce back from. There are things that we need to count on (light meter, ground glass distance) and if you never use that Intrepid again, no LF Photographer would blame you, but I hope you can give it a second chance.. Love what you do. One more thing, what would you recommend for processing Panatomic X from 1971 (cold stored)?

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks Gregg, and I'm always willing to give things another go. This happens in every industry and every hobby out there, thanks to that green stuff that we're required to keep chasing. I'm certainly adding a boring "ruler test" to every camera test from here on out, though! Panatomic X from '71 I'd recommend fog testing in the ISO 10-12 range. If you have a weak solution of benzotriazole, that could also help (use sparingly, the speed drop-off is immense!).

[@jeremygarretson5482]

A gateway to disappointment. Intrepid has really sloppy tolerance when it comes to tooling. I bought one, and it almost steered me away from shooting large format.

[@robertfrase3846]

Welcome back. Search parties called off. 😊

[@stephaniecirillo9011]

I got this camera and it was in the batch that had focusing issues. Instead of sending a new back, Intrepid sent me a kit where I had to take the back apart and super glue some bits to fix it. For an inexpensive entry-level 8x10 it suits my needs, but I definitely see myself getting an upgrade in another year or so.

[@ikorin]

I am in the same boat. I was so happy to get a cheap 8x10 film camera after a year of using 4x5 Chamonix, spent a lot of money on 8x10 film only to find out all my shots had a front focus. I was blaming my tripod and a heavy 300mm 5.6 lens. A month or so later I got the same email explaining the issue. I did the fix with spacers they sent me but I cannot get rid of feeling that I no longer trust this camera. I do not want to shoot expensive film with it and guess if focus is really spot on. Anyway it did repell me from shooting 8x10 and I switched back to Hasselblad / Leica. I am still thinking to buy Chamonix 8x10 and maybe it will bring the joy back 😅

[@jeremy-t]

We miss you Matt!! Glad you’re back!

[@extremelydave]

Well,, that was interesting....Even if the video was a tad downer...I truly appreciate a honest opinion. I was going to get the intrepid, but now I think I will wait a bit to see if things over there improve. If the grapevine still shows thumbs down in a couple months, well it will be time to pony up some extra ducats and get something with positive results. Thanks again for an honest review Mat.

[@JSB_family]

Thanks for the thorough and honest review Mat! I own the same 3rd generation Intrepid and luckily it worked well for me so far. I own a Deardorff for many years already which is really pretty, but so heavy that I never take it anywhere. I would love to get a more modern and lightweight 8x10 but they are at least 4000+ $/EURO, so the Intrepid was a nice option….. but of course with a number of risks that come with the low price / quality. I hope it will continue to work well for me. Looking forward to more of your videos!

[@MatMarrash]

Jan thank you so much for the comment and glad to hear that you've got a good one! You know, if you wind up missing the Deardorff features and want something a little lighter weight, I know a couple of guys in the French countryside you might want to talk to. ;)

[@liveinaweorg]

Good to see you back, sorry to hear about the experience with the Intrepid. I think they could easily push the price point up a bit (it would still be great value) and make some changes to improve it in the areas you mentioned.

[@MatMarrash]

Morris you hit the nail on the head! When your nearest big competitor is at least 2x the price, there's room to make improvements and then some. Sure a happy customer is one that probably never needs to buy another camera from you, but they'll likely be singing your praises.

[@malcolmrendle6622]

Great video Mat and very fair. When looking for my 4x5 I was tempted by the Intrepid, especially being made not far from me, making delivery easy, and being affordable, however I had read so many reviews that warned about build quality, I opted for a Cambo 4x5 monorail camera, which is built like a tank by comparison ( also £100 cheaper) . Despite the extra weight and size love shooting with it. Maybe one day I shall get results like you do.....lol Keep up the good work!

[@MatMarrash]

Malcolm thanks for the comment and I think you've got a super-solid workhorse in that Cambo! Also to mimic most of the results seen in this video, simply twist the focusing knob forward one half turn. ;)

[@stevewilliams3087]

Thanks Matt. Great to see you back.

[@mapjon]

I had a version 1 as my first 8x10. It was flimsy and frustrating. As a reaction, I went 180 degrees in other direction and bought a Calumet C1 ... from 2.5 pounds to 25 pounds overnight. Super happy with the Calumet. That said, the Intrepid was a great way to start and got me addicted. First time I saw a 8x10 negative I had to jump in with both feet

[@MatMarrash]

Oh man, Calumet C1 - The Beast! Everything is a lightweight pocket camera after schlepping around one of those!

[@MichaelGAubrey]

You're back!

[@daphnepk]

I got an Intrepid 4x5 Mark 5 (i.e. effectively the same revision as your 8x10, but for the smaller size) following your review as my first large format camera. The screw-based focussing has annoyed me as well. I wish they’d switch to a rack-and-pinion system which is no less accurate but much faster. I also had a few soft shots. I think this is *mostly* due to me being a newbie and getting the focus wrong, but I did notice once or twice that no matter how firmly I tried to screw the rear standard, sometimes putting in or removing a film holder or even just unclipping my dark cloth caused it to tilt away from 90°, and there’s no proper lock to keep it perpendicular. When I noticed this happening before taking a shot, I of course re-checked the focus, but I think sometimes it happened without being noticeable. This is a real annoyance because there’s also not even a mark to easily check if it’s fully upright - the only sign that you’ve tilted it backwards is that the back can no longer rotate because it gets stuck on the focussing screw handle (!). If you don’t actually see it being knocked out of place, it’s hard to check afterwards whether that has happened. On the whole I think it’s been a good investment for a first large format camera and has given me a good list of features to look out for if I ever upgrade to a different one. But, like your comment about the thin aluminium base, there are tiny improvements they could make which would significantly improve the shooting experience which just seem to have been ignored. It wouldn’t be hard to print a zeroing guide on the rear standard support like they have for shift on the front standard support. A proper lock at 90° would also be great - again, they have one (albeit not very reliable) on the front standard, but not the rear. And I’m guessing those who actually use rear tilt are annoyed by the issue with rotation, which could be solved either by mounting the screw handle a teensy bit further forward or just switching to a rack-and-pinion system.

[@MatMarrash]

Daphne thanks for sharing your experiences with the Intrepid series of cameras! At very least, I can say Intrepid is aware of these issues now, and these comments are helpful for both them to make improvements and prospective customers to get real-world accounts of using the camera. Thanks again!

[@TomRaneyMaker]

Your content is the best. Thanks for the careful and thorough introduction to large format film photography! I just finished building my own 4x5 camera so this is fresh in my mind... it's a good idea to validate the dimensions of the ground glass plane in the rear film holder vs the Graflok film holder spec. For 4x5 the spec is 5mm (0.197") from holder edge to film plane. I believe 8x10 is 6.6mm (0.260") +/- 0.4mm. Use a digital or dial caliper with a depth probe (most have this on the end). Use a spent piece of film in the holder to offset the difference the film adds. I'd check every film holder you have and then validate that against the actual ground glass. Regarding focusing ... I have a cheap 8x loupe but it doesn't have the diopter adjustment feature. What should I get for 4x5?

[@MatMarrash]

Tom thanks so much for the comment and thanks for adding the dimensions for 4x5 and 8x10! I'm a fan of the Horseman and Toyo longer loupes (6x and 8x). The Horseman is nice for 4x5 since it can even be used with a pop-up hood still in place.

[@AK88Photography]

I feel your pain and want to say. I know how it frustrate. Hope you will continue take pictures on LF and create new videos! thank you!

[@andyvan5692]

Amen mat, had the same with a roll of Fujifilm pro 400H in my hasselblad 500c/m, not focus, but Glare, so wrecked all my first roll, but have since got a pro shade so this should solve this, one piece of advice, since you only expose ONE sheet at a time, for a new camera, shoot one, CHECK it, then go bonkers, once you know for keeps the camera has no leaks, or focus issues. one suggestion for intrepid, you could make is that they add an adjustment to the ground glass mount, to adjust focus, or a way of shimming the film adaptor plate, to allow the adjustment of ground glass to infinity holes on the bed rail; as with a Linhof Technika you can infinately adjust the front standard's infinity stops, to account for any near\far focusing issue.

[@user-jb4of2xj7r]

Mat, I hope. you had a great holiday, though. Speaking of Intrepid, in my humble opinion, the most flimsy parts are front standard's fixing screws, since even movements caused by focusing cloth can cause displacement of focus plane. It is not the best, yet a good for its value lightweight camera.

[@MatMarrash]

It didn't make the cut for this video since there were larger issues at hand, but I had 3 shots with "accidental swing" due to that front screw!

[@Bunnyisms]

This is exactly the problem I had with the Lomograflok back on my large format camera. The insertable plastic mask that was supposed to move the ground glass the right distance to ensure accurate focus was the wrong thickness. Every single photo I took was out of focus by exactly the same amount. I had a new viewing back made that replaces the standard back on my camera and made the distance to the ground glass exact. Now I have sharp focus and framing every single time. The most frustrating thing was that people kept telling me it was "for fun" and not meant to be "precise" so I should not worry about it, but now I have much more fun because I can get the photos I want with it every time and don't need to adjust my focus using the focus scale on my camera every time to get the focus right I quit using the Lomograflok for a while to just shoot regular sheets because everything was working fine when I was using regular sheets, but it was such a letdown. Now I can enjoy the Lomograflok back for real and not get so frustrated and bummed out by all the soft photos that I spent time focusing

[@extremelydave]

Hmmmm, I am now hoping that the 4x5 Intrepid fares a lot better that the 8x10 as I am leaning towards a medium format purchase....

[@rogerharrison4316]

I had a Mk2 5x4 for some years and it was great, very sturdy. Then I bought a Mk2 10x8 and had the same problem mentioned by others, the bellows weren't fitted to the back properly leading to light leaks. Took a while, and a lot of frustration, to figure out where the light leaks were coming from. I understand your pain with wasted shots! I resolved that one myself but then bought a Deardorff which is obviously heavier but much nicer to use. I kept the Intrepid as a light weight option but I haven't used it for a long time, probably more than a year. I would rather put up with the weight of the Deardorff, even on fairly long hikes.

[@andyvan5692]

great video Mat, but, if you want a 'fast racking' focus for a LF camera, shouldn't you go for a linhof Technika, where the triple extension is on a tang style brake, so after infinity is set, the second extension can be used to rack fast, then use the bed knob for accurate focus.

[@jonathanhotopf1823]

Great video Matt, I’ve got the 4x5 started off with the mark 3 version and got the upgrade to the 4 as it seemed more solid, I had one small issue which was sorted out really quickly. I always thought the back to be a possible weak point as it needs to be incredibly accurate to get the focus spot on. Will have to test out mine at full aperture to see if the back needs adjustment. I will probably still stick with them and have my eye on their 5x7 as my current 5x7 is incredibly heavy.

[@richardstollar4291]

Interesting - I have their 8x10 Mk II and see some of the same issues you have seen but I am OK with most of them. However, this front-focus problem you found makes me want to go through my negatives more closely and check. Maybe I'll do a specific test shot at f11 on my 250mm - hoe this problem isn't there in the Mk II. Thanks for sharing :)

[@nohatemedia3786]

Fantastic video Mat and great to see Intrepid making a very professional and honest response to your video and the corrections made! Just to confirm what lens would you suggest to use for landscape/nature on the wide end? I heard people use 150mm but sounds like 180mm might be the widest the camera can handle with its bellow length? Can you weigh in on this?

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks for the comment and questions. The absolute widest I've used with success is 150mm, but you're going to have to play with the front standard to reach infinity focus. 180mm isn't too common a focal length for 8x10" format, so my recommended range is 210mm - 450mm for the Intrepid.

[@NefariousDoings]

Thanks for the honesty mat. I have a lot of respect for intrepid as a company but I’ve never been totally convinced to buy one. I guess cheap and 8x10 really don’t work well together

[@MatMarrash]

I remember when I was told 12+ years ago that a cheap 8x10 was anything < $2000. It's astounding that there are 1/2 dozen options available new below that price in 2023, but that also means that something had to give. Also worth mentioning that the "cheap" cameras of yesteryear were still built to last 20-25 years easily.

[@Birbal2001]

As always, cheap doesn't mean good. From my experience with Intrepid (placed at least 4 orders with them) their customer support is not great either. Glad to see you back.

[@mckinnonjames]

Mat, you forgot to add more information about what happened after you replaced the back glass?

[@rupunzel6299]

There was a time when 4x5 and larger view cameras was the most prevalent image making tool used by commercial AD photographers world wide. The product or deliverables were color transparancies specific to the color printing process from that era (up to the late 1990's). Then digital completely displaced that once most common image making industry. Adding to this mobile phone cameras uploading about 2 Billion images daily. All this has devalued expressive image excellence. Those who once made a very good living at producing high quality color transparencies are gone due to how marketing is done via digital means today. What replaced that group of image makers and the entire infrastructure that supported it (from film manufactures like Agfa, Fuji, Kodak) to highly skilled and excellent E6 color labs, and more are gone. This view camera stuff is much the domain of photography enthusiast and those curious about the experience of making sheet film images with a view camera.. This is why there is a growing market for low cost field folder view cameras like this. In the past, modular monorail cameras like Sinar were dominate in the market due to their capabilities and ability to produce high quality images consistently day after day, year after year.. And this group of view camera image makers were demanding on their gear. They knew what the gear had to do and expected nothing less. The stuff had to deliver and do as expected. Anything less was simply never tolerated given the resources and cost involved with producing high quality color transparencies back then. Have a look at these Kodak color transparency sample images from that era.. relative to image made today.. Keep in mind these are sample images with other image makers from that era being FAR more capable. www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?172666-1990-s-Kodak-Marketing-Material-E6-Image-Examples

[@unityofsaints]

I own a 5x7 Mark 3 and a 8x10 Mark 2. Both work fine, but for every Intrepid fan online there is another person who's had nothing but issues. Either way value is just unbeatable, it boils down into whether you want to deal with little niggles here and there.

[@LM-tv2bo]

Hey Mat, thanks for the honest review. I was wondering if you could look into Stenopeika. They are priced between intrepid and Chamonix. Would be interested to see you review their products.

[@EatsTooMuchJam]

I have the Mark II (I think? I ordered it in 2019 so it must be). It's interesting that the III only supports 180mm / 150mm with recessed - I've used the Nikkor 120mm several times on my Mark II and I actually have to rack out a little bit to get infinity focus (with the lens in the first screw hole). I'd have to double-check to ensure that the bottom standard isn't showing up, but even if it is, there might just be enough front rise to (mostly) remove it. Though I haven't tried any lenses longer than 450mm or so - so maybe they added some length to the bellows at the expense of wide angle (and 120mm on 8x10 is pretty ridiculous). As far as QA, mine showed up with the bellows clearly off-center and Intrepid were pretty annoying to deal with about it so I ended up just dealing with it since it doesn't impact image quality. Also, similar to the Sinar boards, they released an adapter a while ago for Linhof boards. Version 1 didn't find most Linhof boards that I have - including Toyo and one actual Linhof-branded board, but thankfully they admitted the problem and sent me a second which works with the Toyo and Linhof-branded boards, at least, but not all of mine (I think that I have a Horseman that still doesn't fit). Quality control is definitely not their strong suit, but for the price, I am not complaining too much (and I'll probably end up buying their relatively inexpensive split 8x10 board to shoot some 4x10 since I tend to like panoramic format most and the previously-mentioned Nikkor lens should be more fun on the smaller / more panoramic format).

[@Normanskie]

I think that Intrepid should read the book by Mr. Philip Crosby. “Absolutes of Quality Management.” Really informative well put together video.

[@bernardkelly235]

I've always suspected the Intrepid line of cameras would have been better sold in kit form, leaving assembly and quality control to the purchaser. I'm not sure whether that would have helped in this case. (Although one might then be forced to compare how far the GG is from the edge of the rear standard with how far a sheet of film is from the facing edge of the holder. A difference of 1.5 mm would surely not be overlooked.) The company still deserves our goodwill, I think, but it shouldn't be surprised by our growing ambivalence.

[@MatMarrash]

Bernard your comment reminds me of when I'd just learned about Intrepid. I instantly thought about the older Bulldog DIY 4x5 kits and thought these were going to be the 21st century version. I'm always willing to give them another chance, mainly because I don't wish to build my own cameras!

[@Murgoh]

Kit form is a great idea as the camera is mostly made of CNC-milled plywood, laser cut aluminium and 3D-printed plastic so the parts cost very little to make, the assembly must make up a very big chunk of the production cost as, while not requiring great skill, it takes some time so a kit could be sold for a significantly lower price than the completed camera and as it's mechanically a very simple thing assembling it would not be too hard for most, especially the kind of people who would be interested in something as involved and time consuming as large format photography in the first place.

[@kevinalane]

Thanks for the excellently executed review. I do have a potentially dumb question. What is “front focusing?” Perhaps I already know but don’t know ther term. Thanks!

[@MatMarrash]

Hey Kevin thanks for the comment and question! "Front focusing" is often used when discussing the nature of auto-focusing lenses in digital photography when the plane that's in sharp focus is to the front of where the photographer had intended. Due to the improper spacing during manufacture of a small number of the Intrepid 8x10 Gen 3 cameras, where I focused the camera and it looked tack sharp on the ground glass was not in alignment of where the film plane was when inserting the film holder.

[@kevinalane]

Got it. Thanks!

[@Kitsaplorax]

I ordered the Intrepid Enlarger kit for a 4x5 camera. There was absolutely no communication until the thing was shipped. One very, very big problem is that they assure purchasers that the needed Graflok backs are available everywhere. I wish that were the case, but in a year I've been unable to find a Graflok back that the seller can or will assure me is complete and functional.

[@antonstal1417]

Have you tried any fire studio camera and if so what’s ur thought? And if not maby u should try 😉

[@MatMarrash]

Thanks for the comment! I've never seen one of these in the flesh, but I will say the community in general hasn't been shy about sharing their critical thoughts. I'd considered one of their ULF models on price alone, but I fear the phrase, "If it's too good to be true..." might apply here as well.

[@maf421]

Blowing up 20 dollar bills is bad enough, but the time is what really matters. Bummer. Amazing (and sad) what a mere 1.5mm can do.

[@MatMarrash]

"Film is cheap" is a phrase I heard a long time ago starting in photography. Burning film was a bummer, but no where near the feeling of wasting other people's time.

[@jeremygarretson5482]

My intrepid Mk4 was so wacky that I almost gave up on large format. I thought it was me. My new (used) Shen Hao has made all the difference.

[@brycepinson8641]

Great review. Intrepid is good about doing the right thing, but I agree the damage is done. I had their 4x5 mk4 and it broke several times on me in the field, prompting me to purchase a wista DX instead. I've never looked back... but I Intrepid has brought a lot of people into large format, so I have mixed feelings.

[@MatMarrash]

This is pretty much where I stand with Intrepid right now. I appreciate that they're getting cameras into more people's hands, but I'd like to see a better balance between value and quality.

[@brycepinson8641]

@@MatMarrash 100% agree on that opinion.

[@thebikechick]

Thanks for your videos! I was just looking at the Intrepid website for a possible 5x7 camera to semi-replace my old old Korona 5x7 view camera. I am having the issue that you describe with the focus being slightly off and forward. One day, a gust of wind blew the camera over and it really got knocked out of whack and I had to glue and clamp the rails back together. I'm wondering if that messed it up. Seemed fine before. Do you have any videos or information on how I might fix this on my current camera? I shoot with a very shallow depth of field so it is driving me crazy 🤪

[@chilecayenne]

Have you heard of similar problems with the latest 4x5 Intrepid cameras? I was thinking of trying one of those to "dip my toe" into LF photography? I'm wondering if this might be more a problem on the larger 8x10 due to the size of the camera, making it more difficult to build sturdy, etc...and possible they were reusing some 4x5 pieces on the 8x10 platform to save some money, etc? Thoughts, experiences or hearsay on their 4x5's vs the larger 8x10's? Thank you in advance, CC

[@MatMarrash]

Hey CC thanks for the comment! While I've heard of one-of issues with various Intrepid models, I'd wager that the Intrepid 4x5 (now 5th Gen.) is the best camera in their lineup. Despite my experience with this particular 8x10, I'd still recommend a new Intrepid 4x5 for a lightweight, budget field camera. This is me speaking from opinion here, but when scaling from 4x5 to 5x7, 8x10, or ULF, everything gets larger and more costly. And judging from Intrepid's response (pinned above), they have taken notice of this and have already begun offering sturdier 8x10 beds.

[@carpediem673]

After years of dealing with beat up 2nd-hand cameras, I've gotten into the habit of checking the focusing screens with a depth micrometer. They always need some shimming to get them dialed in.

[@MatMarrash]

This was definitely a first for me! The only other time I've run into something like this was troubleshooting a pre-ANSI wooden film holder.

[@EdwardMartinsPhotography]

The Chamonix 8x10 Alpinist X is $5,000.00. The Intrepid 8x10 is $600.00. If all there was was the Chamonix, I wouldn't be able to own an 8x10. So having an ugly girlfriend with a job is better than not being able to get a girlfriend at all... Or something like that. In fairness, every problem I've had with the 3 Intrepid cameras I've bought, they have fixed quickly, the customer service is really good these days.

[@MatMarrash]

Totally get the expectations to value proposition. Before they hit the market, a "cheap" $1500 camera meant the Tachihara that I purchased used when it was already pushing 30 years old. If this is what Intrepid can do at the $600 price point, imagine what they could do for a little more!

[@EdwardMartinsPhotography]

@@MatMarrash Totally agree. I'd love for them to put a little more into it and charge $1200. Like what they did withe the Hardwood 4x5's.

[@josebrivera1716]

This is the first time I even see a Large Format Camera. I don't understand a few things. The lens can be moved down. Doesn't tilting the lens mess up the light going straight through to the film in the back? And what is the purpose of the canvas on the back of the camera in which you duck into while taking the shot? And why did you not use that canvas for every shot?

[@davida5296]

once you changed the back, did it correct the focus issue?

[@TobiasKey]

It sucks that you got a faulty camera, but I hope that the lesson that viewers get from this film is that you need to test your camera before shooting any critical work. It's easy to criticise Intrepid, but every manufacturer makes the occasional faulty product. If you shoot film you are often buying used products from people who may or may not have treated them well. I like to take a shot of some text at a 45 degree angle to test focus and shine a light inside the bellows to check they are light tight at the very minimum. I sucks to waste a couple of sheets of expensive film on test photos, but it is better than the alternative.

[@miguelperezdelgado7994]

Hi, How do you focus hyperfocal with such large focal lengths, for example: With f16 100mm hyperfocal 14 meters 120mm hyperfocal 20 meters 150mm hyperfocal 31 meters That is to say, it would only be focused from the middle of each distance shown, but you are nevertheless focused from the beginning of the photo. In my case, for example, I have an Agfa Record II 6x9 105mm, the focus ring scale only goes up to 10 meters. But with f22 the hyperfocal is at 11.2 meters, meaning that the photo would only be in focus from 5.5 meters, that is if the ring reached a little more than 11 meters. How do you do it? Thank you

[@andyvan5692]

hey mat , at 9:30 what happened to Tariq? as he isn't mummified in that shot, as after all he was shot with 'MUMMY 400' film.

[@peinmilan]

Does it work now with the new ground glass?

[@MatMarrash]

It's in working order now with the replacement glass! Doesn't solve the shakiness of the frame when inserting film holders or the shorter screws used for folding the camera, but it's a start.

[@SomeUnremarkableGuy]

What film camera have you used at 13:20?

[@EricBryan]

I was really considering the 5x7 but think I’ll pass. I am interested in their enlarger setup though. I have heard their enlargers are decent, but now I’m worried about that as well. If anyone reading this has used their enlargers, I would love to hear your thoughts.