dan_fromm2

It is back.

Ben, the 38/4.5 Biogon won't work on a 2x3 Speed Graphic. The body's too deep. Century Graphics have integral Graflok backs. Your 2x3 Crown with spring back is not limited to sheet film. I use 2x3 Adapt-A-Roll 620 roll holders with my 2x3 Graphics. These are insertion type roll holders that will feed from a 120 spool but must take up on a 620 spool. An AAR 620 goes in like a sheet film holder. 2x3 is not 6x8. There are no real standards for roll film formats but nominal 6x9 is usually 56 mm x 82 mm, that is, 2.25" x 3.25". Nominal 6x8, as in the Fuji GX 680, is 56 x 76.

Ben, if you're patient you'll be able to find a 38/4.5 Biogon in or in a mount for an aerial camera. Now that I think of it, there's one, not badged Zeiss or Biogon, in this Fairchild Aerial Camera - Aerial Cameras - Various Cameras camera. I may have seen and touched the camera, I believe that my late friend Charlie Barringer had one. His cameras went to Westlicht = Leicashop. If you get one, www.skgrimes.com will put it on a Copal #0 for you. I had them do this with one I extracted from an AGI F.135 camera. I use it on my Century Graphic. The lens covers around 84 mm, no more. On 2x3 that means a 24 mm x 82 mm strip with the last couple of mm of the corners totally dark. On 6x6, well, it means a lovely full frame. The Century Graphic (or the equivalent 2x3 Crown Graphic) is a much cruder camera than an Alpa 12 but is much more capable. For not much more money, you could get a 35/4.5 Apo-Grandagon. This is the shortest lens that covers nominal 6x9 (= 2.25" x 3.25"). It can be used on a Century or 2x3 Crown Graphic. If I haven't been clear, there are 2.25 x 2.25 (nominal 6x6), 2.25 x 2.75 (nominal 6x7) and 2.25 x 3.25 (nominal 6x9) roll holders for 2x3 Graphics.

Press camera lensboards are usually camera specific. A B&J Watson board shouldn't fit a Pressman. Lens boards aren't made with screw holes. Before a lens in shutter or barrel can be mounted on a board a hole the shutter or barrel will fit in has to be drilled in the board. Lenses, especially small ones, are usually held to a board by a retaining ring. The lens, in shutter or barrel, sits in front of the board, the retaining ring sits behind the board. Screwing the retaining ring down clamps the board between the shutter or barrel and the retaining ring. Lenses, especially heavy ones, are mounted to boards with flanges. The flanges a large central hole into which the shutter/barrel screws and holes into which screws (screw into a wooden lens board) or bolts (pass through the board, accept bolts to hold everything together). That's what you have. Bob, I don't want to insult you, offend you, discourage you or drive you away. But you're asking absolute beginner questions and show no signs of trying to help yourself. I suggest strongly that you go to www.largeformatphotography.info and read the FAQs. Also buy a book or two on LF photography so that you can teach yourself the language, the technology and, finally, how to use the equipment. The two books most often recommended on Large Format Photography Forum are Steve Simmons' Understanding the View Camera and Leslie Strobel's View Camera Technique. You might also want to look at Ansel Adams' The Camera. All of these are available used at low prices from sellers who can be found via abebooks.com, alibris.com, amazon.com, bn,com, ... Remember that we were all born ignorant. The condition isn't permanent.

Bob, B&J didn't make Busch cameras. Busch made Busch cameras. B&J made B&J cameras. The B&J camera most like the 2x3 Pressman is the 2x3 Watson. Lens cells often unscrew easily from the shutters or barrels they're in. In the world of press, technical and view cameras manufacturers sometimes sell cameras complete with a lens (this is more common with press cameras than with technical and view cameras) but press cameras were offered with no lens. Whatever the customer wanted, the customer could get. Whether y'r 90/6.8 Carl Meyer lens was original to the camera -- it almost certainly wasn't -- is of no importance whatsoever. It can be used on any press, technical or view camera that can focus it to infinity. To get an idea of lenses that can be used on 2x3 press cameras, please read http://www.galerie-photo.com/telechargement/dan-fromm-6x9-lenses-v2-2011-03-29.pdf. I haven't owned or tried all possible lenses.

Bob, cameras and lenses have been sold bundled and unbundled since time began. The Pressman Model D is a 4x5 camera, is much larger than a Model C and doesn't use the same boards. Busch manuals here: Bush model C, Busch Pressman, instruction manual, user manual, free instruction manual, pdf manuals 11 mm focal length? Look more closely at the engraving. 11 cm is very likely. All thumbs and then some, there's more than one make, and model of 90/6.8 lens. The OP hasn't told us enough about his lens. It could be an Angulon, an Angulon clone, any of several 4/4 double Gauss types, a real Dagor or a Dagor clone (I have a 90/6.8 Beryl) or even (unlikely) a 90/6.8 Grandagon or Super Angulon.

Bob, Carl Meyer is a Burke & James house brand. B&J didn't make lenses, they bought lenses, some scrap or rejects, badged them and sold them. Some are fine, others aren't. The only way to know whether yours is a treasure or a clinker is to ask it. Compur Rapid shutters were made from 1934 to 1951. Asking whether your lens is good or bad is silly. You have it, no one else does. Asking whether a used lens has a good reputation is nearly as silly. Quality control isn't always stringent so lenses of the same make and model weren't always equally good when they left the factory. Used lenses have sometimes suffered abuse, some worse than others. And no two people work to the same standards. What's not good enough for me might be better than good enough for you. Or vice versa. The only way to find out whether a lens will suit you is to ask it. The normal focal length for 2x3 is 100 mm. A 90 mm lens is a short normal lens for 2x3. I'm glad you were able to get it for free, but if y'r Pressman already as a 100 mm +/-- lens a 90 won't expand what you can do very much.

Put the feed spool in the holder, using one finger to keep the film from unwinding. Pull out enough backing paper to reach the end of the holder plus a little. Completely withdraw the dark slide. Push the end of the paper around the roller and slide it across the front of the holder. There's no pressure plate, the backing paper goes in the grooves at the top and bottom of the gate. You'll have to inch it. Close the holder. If you prefer, you can close the holder before you start inching the paper through the gate. Attach the backing paper to the take-up spool. This can be fiddly. Re-insert the dark slide, leaving a small opening at the insertion end of the holder. Advance the film until the tape holding the front end of the film strip to the backing paper is just visible. Insert the dark slide completely. Advance the film five (5) clicks of the film counter. Set the film counter to "1". Ready to go. After taking an exposure, insert the dark slide completely and advance the film four (4) clicks of the frame counter. Ready for next shot. Using this loading procedure will give nine shots per roll.

I have one of each. They're the same.

Go to www.graflex.org, read the Speed Graphic FAQ. I wrote the AAR 620 section. If the cam and rod and ratchet mechanism doesn't move freely or the roller at the insertion end of the holder doesn't turn freely, lubricate with powdered graphite. Don't use oil. I have a small pile of AAR 620s and use them in my 2x3 cameras. I put 120 film on a 120 spool in the feed position, take up on a 620 spool, rewind exposed film to the 120 spool before sending it to the lab. I use dead rolls of film for testing the devices, rewind them for more testing. After a number of unwind-rewind cycles the film won't stay tight on the spool. New film shouldn't be a problem.

press shutters are self-cocking. Pressing the shutter release first cocks and then fires the shutter. cock-and-shoot shutters have cocking levers and release levers. Cock the shutter with the cocking lever, fire it with the release lever. Undesireable lenses are lenses that are in low demand. For example, most tessar types. 2x3 is generally considered medium format, not large format. But 2x3 press cameras are small versions of 4x5 press cameras and 4x5 is seen as large format. It you want to learn about LF photography, go to www.largeformatphotography,info and read the FAQs, Ask questions in the forum. photo.net is a poor source of information about LF photography. There are also books, IMO more can be learned more rapidly from a good book than from short often half-assed answers on forums. Two books that are often recommended on LFPF are Leslie Strobel's View Camera Technique and Steve Simmons' Understanding the View Camera

I've never had a lens in shutter that had fungus. The lens, that is. As far as I know fungus in a lens shouldn't affect the shutter. Undesireable/damaged lenses in shutter are a fine source of shutters. But and however used shutters usually need overhauls. If you're thinking of reshuttering a 58/5.6 or 60/5.6 KH be aware that although a 58's cells will go into a #0 Press shutter, a 60's cells won't. For them a cock-and-shoot #0 is needed.

Andrew, w/a lenses contemporary with your camera include the 65/6.8 Angulon and the 65/6.8 Optar/Raptar. The Angulon and Optar have different designs but perform very similarly; both are marginal on 2.25" x 3.25". The 80/6.3 Wide Field Ektar more than covers but is closer to normal. Modern w/a lenses? There are many fine ones but which can be used on the 2x3 Pressman is limited by the camera's small lens throat. If the lens' rear cell can't pass through the front standard, it can't be used on the camera. Here's a link to a collection of links to lens makers' catalogs: Where to look for information on lenses.docx Measure your camera's lens throat, then look for lenses that can be fitted. A previous post mentioned the 58/5.6 Konica Hexanon as fitted to Koni Omega/Rapid Omega cameras. I have one, also the earlier 60/5.6 KH. Fine lenses that cover 2x3. Poisoned gifts because they're unusable in their native #0 shutters, which are tailored to work on the KO camera. To use them on any other camera te cells have to be extracted from the KO shutter -- easy, just unscrew them -- and remounted in a regular #0 shutter. The regular shutter's aperture will have to be scaled for them. The lenses aren't free, #0 shutters aren't free and neither is rescaling. Before you go overboard on y'r Pressman C, consider whether you might be better off with a 2x3 Crown Graphic. I make the suggestion because Crown Graphics are much better supported -- boards are easy to find -- and are much friendlier to w/a lenses.

Ray S wrote: Landscapes don't move rapidly. Nature subjects, whatever that means, don't. OP, if you're going to shoot moving subjects and/or want to use long as well as short lenses a 6x6 or 6x7 SLR is probably the best choice. But if you're going to shoot static subjects then a press/technical/view camera might do well for you. In comparison with the people who've responded to your question, I'm either excessively old-fashioned or a contrarian. I shoot 2x3 (same size as 6x9, typical frame size is 57 x 82 mm but some roll holders have shorter gates, others longer) with 2x3 Graphics. The focal lengths I use on my Graphics without resorting to heroic measures range from 35 mm (f/4.5 Apo Grandagon) to 12" (f/4 TTH Telephoto). I like my 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon, adore my 47/5.6 Super Angulon and am passionately in love with my 38/4.5 Biogon (not ex-SWC and it doesn't cover 2x3). None of these lenses is safe to use with scenics. Shoot a broad vista with a short lens and all you'll get is foreground. These are specialized tools and aren't generally useful. Think hard about whether lenses shorter than 2/3 normal will give you what you want.

Not a new question. See: https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/35mm-on-the-view-camera.67335/

Oh dear, slight arithmetic error. A 65 mm on 4x5 (120 mm wide) sees about the same horizontal angle of view as 20 mm on 35 mm still (36 mm wide). 84.5 degrees. Rarely what one wants for a broad vista.

Landscapes? Wide open spaces? Broad vistas? Ultra-wide angle lens, like a 65 on 4x5? Shots that are all foreground with tiny objects in the distance. Don't often turn out well. 65 mm on 4x5 sees the same horizontal angle of view as a 23 mm lens on 24x36. In addition, a lens wider than ~ 90 mm used on 4x5 requires a center filter unless the image's edges don't matter. With a 65 centered on 4x5, the corners will be ~ 2.4 stops darker than the center. With shift or rise, darker still. More $$. There's a law of nature to the effect that a new user's first LF camera is always the wrong camera for the user. Cheap out, get a Crown Graphic with a normal lens (150 mm), learn the process of shooting sheet film with a completely manual camera, and find out what you do and don't like about the Crown. If you don't like it much, sell it and buy something that you can be reasonably confident will please you better.

Exakta register, 44.7 mm. Leica R register, 47.0 mm. Exakta lens on Leica R body, no. Leica R lens on Exakta body, perhaps. Off-the-shelf adapters, probably not. Few people want them. Standardize on one system, sell off the other. Or carry bodies and lenses for both systems. Or sell off both and start over with The One True System®. Understand that although many people agree that there is just One True System®, there's no agreement about which it is.

Joe, are you joking? I've had a PB-4 since 1970. I'm sorry but its so-called movements are a cruel joke. The front standard will pivot around its vertical axis. That's swing. It will slide from side to side. That's shift. If you want tilt or rise/fall, put the thing on its side. It is no substitute for a view camera. There are bellows for 35 mm cameras that offer full movements. More cruel jokes. Like the PB-4 they're useless with short lenses at reasonable distances.

Interesting report, Mike. I bought a C-90 in 1978. It was the worst lens I've ever owned. Textbook case of severe astigmatism. Celestron replaced it under warranty with another that was just as bad. As I understand it, they went through a spell of no quality control at all. Interestingly, the 1250/10 Celestron that MP reported on in the 2/77 issue and the 750/6 Honeywell Lumetar (rebadged Celestron) reported on 7/75 tested nearly as well as the Questar 700.

Johan Niels, your arithmetic is mistaken. A 62 mm lens on nominal 6x9 (actual size 56 x, depending on manufacturer, 78 to 84, 82 is typical) sees the same view as a 27 mm lens on 24x36. A question about the roll holders. Do early Horseman roll holders like yours attach properly to Graflok/International backs?

<p>If the rangefinder is cammed/calibrated for the lens in use it will be very accurate. Framing may not be as precise as you'd like and you'll have to give up movements.</p>

<p>John, are you sure that the lens' elements aren't mounted in cells that can be unscrewed from the barrel?</p> <p>FWIW, a couple of years ago I got a 270 Rotelar in Copal 1 as part of a bundle. Lip of front cell to cell's flange, ~ 66 mm. Lip of rear cell to cell's flange, ~ 55 mm.</p> <p>I fear y'r project is an example of the corrupting power of found money, sorry, lenses.</p>

<p>Thread pitch, Martin? Remember, change in extension per degree of rotation depends on it.</p>

<p>CC-401? Perfectly fine camera with ample movements.</p> <p>But, old school. It is a 4x5 Kodak Master View made by Calumet. It is not modular. The bellows are permanently attached to the standards. It is not very friendly to short lenses. Since you have a CC-400 you should know this already.</p> <p>My first 4x5 camera was a CC-401. Its maximum extension was 22". Fine for lenses up to ~ 500 mm but if you want to use a lens longer than that it won't do.</p> <p>Given today's prices, if you're in the US or EU you might be better off buying a more modern modular 4x5 camera. A variety of 4x5 Sinars are available at very reasonable prices and so are a variety of 4x5 Cambos. Both are very well supported, can be used with short lenses and can be extended quite a distance.</p> <p>You say you have a 360/5.6 Convertible lens. I take it you have a 360/5.6 Symmar, whose rear cell's focal length is 620 mm. Schneider's documentation says that the rear cell alone needs 760 mm of extension to focus to infinity. Impossible on a CC-401. The complete lens needs 356 mm to focus to infinity. A CC-401 will do this easily.</p>