Super Graphic Lens Compatability

[edward_kimball]

I am thinking about making the leap from medium format to large format photography. I am currently using a Yashica Matand have been thinking about going to a larger negative and better optics for a long time. I like to take landscape pictures and require a camera suitable for hiking with. I have been following ebay auctions and the Super Graphic appears to fit my needs and budget ($500 - $1000 for a complete system). My questions are: 1)what is the lens quality like on the 127mm ektar lenses that most of these cameras come with and 2)are the new lenses in the Caltar line compatible with this camera? I would be looking at the 150 mm f/6.3 and the 90 mm f/5.6.

[kcrisp]

I would think a lightweight camera would be the way to go, like a

used Tachihara. The Super Graphic isn't all that light and it

doesn't have the movements of the Tachihara. If you must go with a

press camera/metal box, the Busch Pressman is well made and has front

rise and front tilt. They are cheaper than the Super Graphic. The

Ektar is a sharp lens but wasn't made to cover a 4X5 negative. It

barely does so. If you're goin that route get a crown graphic since

you wwon't be using the movements of the super anyway. A Used

Tachihara with an older Schneider 135 or 150 lens (even back into the

50's they're very good lenses) would be well within your budget.

[wilhelm]

I disagree almost completely with Keven. The Super Graphic may be

the ideal field camera. They're light weight, rugged as hell, and

have all the lens movement you'll ever need. They don't seem to age

as well as earlier Crown/Speed Graphics, so be sure you get one with

return privileges (I've bought two on eBay, and they have both been

misrepresented junkers). Midwest Photo seems to usually have them on

hand, at competative prices.

I do agree that the 127mm lens is not suitable. Get the Rodenstock

135mm f:4.5 that was standard with these cameras (not the

f:4.7/135mm).

[kcrisp]

Well, I agree 100% with Edward about super graphics on ebay. Mine

came missing the levers and springs which hold the graflock back on

the camera. Kind of hard to use that way.

[roger___3]

Ed,

I have owned a Super Graphic, a Busch Pressman, and currently a

Tachihara.

 

<p>

 

The Pressman is of older vintage and may be prone to bellows light

leaks not only because of its age but because of the cardboard like

material they are constructed of. The bellows taper may not be wide

enough to handle a 90mm f5.6 lens rear element or other larger rear

elements - worth checking on but I'm not sure. The lensboards are

availible, but a little scarce. An extra lensboard may run you

around $50. I sold it because of light leaks from the bellows.

 

<p>

 

The Super served me well. The more I used front tilts, the more I

realized that the mechanism used for this was awkward for me to use

with any precision. There is alot of "junk" on the Super that most

LF shooters would not find much value in. With little mechanical

ability you could strip off the rangefinder, the shutter release

stuff, and the focus hood, and with a little cosmetic touch up, save

about a pound. I sold it to get easier control of the camera

movements. For a while I thought about getting a bargain priced

Super and making a weekend project of it.

 

<p>

 

The Tachihara is a quantum leap up in ease of camera movements. I've

really enjoyed using it and consider it a better value for the dollar

than the Super. The price difference used is probably about $150. or

so. If you're really value shopping, some cameras similar to the

Tachihara would be the Ikeda or the Nagaoka. These show up on eBay

occationally and may be cheaper than the Tachihara by a hundred or so

dollars. These are lighter but said to be a little less sturdy.

Still a possible improvement over the Super. Though the Super is not

all that bad, I wish I would have started out with one of these

wooden fields instead.

 

<p>

 

The press lenses that came on the Pressman (127mm Ektar) and the

Super (135mm Optar)were ok in sharpness. With these older lenses the

shutter speeds may be unreliable and little sticky at slower speeds.

Their coverage allows practically no movements. I found movements to

be invaluable and are really one of the main reasons for using LF.

 

<p>

 

If you are looking for some savings in lenses, the single coated 90mm

f8 Super Angulon in a Compur shutter may be found for around $350.

I'm not sure how this would compare with the Caltar, but haven't

found the f8 to be a hinder to focus (yet).

 

<p>

 

There are probably a lot of folks who buy a LF and find that it just

isn't their cup of tea. If you can afford to get a wood field it may

reduce some of the learning frustrations make it a more fun thing to

do. The older press cameras are certainly adequiet, but have their

quirks that you will have to deal with. I bought one thinking it

would be a cheap way to find out if I would like the format. I

did.

[david_grandy1]

To me there are three different "areas" that have to concern you when

you're buying a LF camera for the first time. They are camera body,

lens, and infrastructure.

 

<p>

 

The body just needs to be light tight, rigid and something that will

accept most lenses that you'd buy. The Busch Pressman has a small lens

board and the opening into the camera is not large enough to accept

modern 210 mm lenses for example. At this stage who cares if this

camera has all the movements you'll need. At least you are into LF and

can start to climb the learning curve.

 

<p>

 

But the lenses are much more important. Once the "new" has worn

off your camera and whatever lens you managed to get with it, and

you've decided that you like LF and want to go on; then I would

suggest that you put as much money into a good lens as you can. A

great lens on a so so body is much better than the other way around.

The long term idea is to upgrade your camera at some point, but to

keep your good lens.

 

<p>

 

That 127 Ektar is not a good lens. It's a press lens and would have a

very small image circle (that means very limited movements) and you

wouldn't be happy with it in the long run. But it will be a good lens

to sell the camera with a couple of years from now, so get it if you

can. The Caltar is probably a Schneider made for Calumet. I belive

the Caltar II lenses are Rodenstock and either are good lenses.

 

<p>

 

The final area is infrastructure, and this is the least glamourous of

all. It will also suck up money like you wouldn't believe. In this

area is all the little things you'll need: focusing cloth, light

meter, film holders, magnifying loupe. And if you want to process

your own film all the tanks, film hangers and such that you'll need.

The cool thing is that once you have these they stay wih you (like a

good lens) if you upgrade to a better camera.

 

<p>

 

So short term the Graflex is a good idea. If you like it and want to

stay in LF then you move on with good lenses and your infrastucture.

If it turns out you don't like it then you don't have a lot of money

invested in it and you should get it all back when you sell.

[edward_kimball]

Thankyou everyone,

 

<p>

 

Kevin, I appreciated the info on the Ektar 127mm but am a little

confused about why you recommended a Crown after saying the the Super

didn't have enough movements. If the Super is enough camera for me

and the lens that comes with it has inadequate coverage, I am willing

to get a more appropriate lens. What is an appropriate lens? The

Calter II-E and N 150 mm lenses

[edward_kimball]

Sorry about that I posted prematurely.

 

<p>

 

Thankyou everyone,

 

<p>

 

Kevin, I appreciated the info on the Ektar 127mm but am a little

confused about why you recommended a Crown after saying the the Super

didn't have enough movements. If the Super is enough camera for me

and the lens that comes with it has inadequate coverage, I am willing

to get a more appropriate lens. What is an appropriate lens? The

Calter II-E and N 150 mm lenses are resonable prices. Do they offer

adequate coverage on the Super? Is there any problem fitting them to

lens bords for the Super?

[steve_wiley1]

Edward, I've used a Super Graphic with a 150mm Xenar for years and

it's served me very well. Movements are obviously limited and not

very elegant, but if your looking for a light-weight and robust field

camera, you won't be disappointed. I've used it for both personal

projects and advertising campaigns and its never failed me. That said,

if the funds were available, I would prefer a Linhoff or a Wista.

BTW, check Stu's Midwest Photo Exchange. Great prices and helpful

sales people.

[gary_frost1]

I have a Super Graphic and a Tachihara. I think the Super is a great

choice. To answer your specific question on lenses, all the modern

lenses will fit (except for longest and shortest bellows limits).

Max bellow looks just a bit over 12 inches or 300mm on mine.

You can get lens boards for it in standard copal shutter sizes.

The other possible limitation is the faster wide angle lenses that

have too large a rear element to fit in the front standard.

Here's a site with info on the Super Graphic:

http://cameraquest.com/supergrp.htm

 

<p>

 

The 127mm ektar is a good lens that barely covers 4X5. (It was

remarkably better than the 127 Optar that was on my super)

You may eventually want a more modern lens but also consider

complementing the 127 ektar by adding a 203 f/7.7 ektar. A clean

one of these is a superb lens.

 

<p>

 

Contrasting the Super Graphic and Tachihara cameras, I will say that

the Tachihara is my primary camera, but the Super has some nice

advantages also. It is much faster to setup. With a lens folded

inside and infinity stops set (and rangefinder cam is nice) it can be

ready and focused in seconds instead of minutes.

I don't know the full list of modern lenses that will or will not

fold in the Super, but I have a 150 5.6 sironar s, Fuji 240 f/9 that

will. A Nikkor 90mm f/8 will fit but not fold up into the Super.

Sometimes when space and time is limited and I still want a 4X5,

the Super and one lens (er maybe 2) is what I will take. In busy

places, there is no bag of lenses to worry about. Just some

holders, a meter, tripod. Many times a dark cloth and loupe

can stay in the pack. You can be gone before a crowd develops.

 

<p>

 

The back is much better suited to a roll film back than the

Tachihara. The big limitation on the Super is no rear movements and

the front movements, though considerably better than most of the

graphics (at least having forward tilt...) are still somewhat

course in use. (this would be the front shift and swing) front tilt

and rise are just fine. The Super is a super press camera.

Another big advantage to the Super over other Graphics is the

revolving back. Something I could not live without.

The Super weighs around 5lb, The Tach just under 4. But the Graphic

is contained in a rugged case while the Tach needs protection in a

case.

It is a speed vs. flexibility choice: they are both great cameras

at a great price. Good luck with yours.

[bruce_wehman]

Edward,

 

<p>

 

If you strip out all the garbage, as a previous post alluded to, you

will have the lightest revolving back field camera on the market.

There is a section devoted to this very thing on my website:

http://www.members.home.net/brucewehman Go to the technical

information section and find a link called "cheap" at the bottom of

the page.

 

<p>

 

Suffice to say it's not all that hard and has served me well.

 

<p>

 

bw

[wilhelm]

What a great thread this is. An honest question by a an intelligent

and truly interested poster. Honest answers from experienced users,

sometimes conflicting, but never abusive nor abrasive. This is the

way the forums should always work. If there were a "Thread of the

year," this should be it.

[john_hicks]

I think many wannabe LF landscape photographers cripple themselves by starting out with Graphics.

 

<p>

 

As press cameras they're great, but the lack of and difficulty of using many movements easily leads to frustration.

 

<p>

 

I think you can find a clean Tachihara/Calumet Woodfield and a modern lens or two within your budget; it'll be much easier to work with.