dan_fromm2

The problem with using a variety of lenses with a Graphic of the vintage of mine is that the lens board is tiny. The later versions give considerably more room for mounting different options. I've used all manner of lenses on my 4x5 Speed Graphic, though!

Hmm. Y'r Miniature Speed Graphic takes boards 2 1/2" x 2 1/2". So do my 2x3 Pacemaker Graphics. Larger Graphics have larger boards.

I never found my 2x3 Graphics' boards limiting, or even their tiny 48 mm square lens throat. See http://www.galerie-photo.com/telechargement/dan-fromm-6x9-lenses-v2-2011-03-29.pdf

Few of my lenses have rear cells too large to pass through the front standard's lens throat. I put them on the camera by removing the focusing panel (easy to do with a Graflok back), unscrewing the lens' rear cell from its shutter, mounting shutter and front cell, and then reattaching the rear cell. The last step can be a little fiddly.

Graflex introduced the Graflok back in 1949, three years after the last Mini was made. They offered Graflok backs to be retrofitted to Minis. These have the flash terminal in the right position. Graflok backs for 2x3 Pacemakers will fit Minis. I scavenged my 2x3 Pacemaker Speed's Graflok (correct one for that camera) from a Mini.

OP, here is an AAR 620 for 2x3 cameras on ebay.com: ADAPT-A-ROLL 620 2 1/4X3 1/4 ROLLFILM ADAPTER | eBay

They're not particularly rare, if you're patient you should be able to find one at a price you like. They have one advantage over clip-on roll holders like Graflex' own. When loaded carefully they'll give nine exposures/roll. But note that while they'll happily feed film from a 120 spool they must take up on a 620 spool.

Be careful when shopping. AARs were sold in sizes to fit 2x3, 3x4 and 4x5 spring backs. Take care to get the right size.

About heresy. Graphics are multipurpose cameras but as far as I can tell most were used only with the lens sold with them. I've used many lenses on my 2x3 Graphics (35 to 300 mm on a single camera, up to 480 mm on a tandem rig) but I'm an extreme outlier.

Interesting fix, but to my taste entirely wrong headed. Two reasons:

The ancient standard solution to using roll film with a press camera (2x3, 3x4, 4x5) that has a spring back is an insertion type roll holder. The Adapt-A-Roll 620 is one such, I have a small pile of them. To learn more about them, go to graflex.org and read the FAQ. I wrote the AAR 620 section.

You took off the focusing panel. This makes it impossible to focus any lens but the one the rangefinder is calibrated for. If the RF isn't calibrated for the lens now mounted on the camera, tough luck.

Orsetto, Graflex roll holders' film carriages interchange freely between old style shells (no pin rollers at the ends of the gate) and new style shells (one pin roller at each end of the gate). The OP's roll holder has a new style (lever wind) film carriage whose blue lever indicates that it is from an RH-10 (10 nominal 6x7 exposures/roll). It has an old style shell which may or may not have the pin rollers and which may or may not have a 6x7 gate.

I wrote "may or may not have pin rollers" because late old-style roll holders (knob wind film carriage) were delivered with shells that have pin rollers. The OP's roll holder's shell is old style (not badged RH-x) and therefore probably has a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 (nominal 6x9) gate, but I could be mistaken.

OP, which is it?

Orsetto, so you'll know, the color code is: red lever, 2 1/4 x 3 1/4; blue lever, 2 1/4 x 2 3/4; green lever, 2 1/4 x 2 1/4. The color has nothing to do with design.

I have a 50ft pneumatic bulb release lying around somewhere. It works without batteries.

Sheesh! The solenoid synchronizes flash with the shutter. Solenoids were used with flash bulbs, which are fired by battery.

For 6x9, you would likely be happier with a field camera designed around that format, like a Crown or Century Graphic. These will offer some limited movements and handholdability, at half the weight of a Fuji 680. OTOH, the modern Fuji lenses and film backs are arguably much better designed than much of what you'll find for old field cameras: this alone may make the size, weight and 6x8 compromise worthwhile.

There's no reason to use only original issue lenses on old press or field cameras and there are modern lenses, including some from Fuji, that cover 2x3 and are quite good. In addition, lenses for 4x5 and larger formats can be used on these cameras.

If movements are needed, Horseman field cameras are a better bet. 2x3 Graphics' only generally useful movement is front rise. 19 mm is available. Front fall, shift and tilt are usable for a limited range of focal lengths and focused distances. I like my little Graphics but they're not view cameras.

Um, er, ah, not to be a complete idiot or anything, but why are you worrying about highly accurate exposures when you'll be shooting a negative film with high latitude?

If you must have accuracy, consider using ordinary PX 675 hearing aid batteries. They're much less expensive than Wein Cells, which seem to be the same battery with fewer air holes. For options and cell sizes, see the battery section in horseman-4x5-exposure-meter

I must not have been clear. I was interested in using a 50/6.3 on a 2x3 (6x9 in metric) Graphic, not on a larger format. And I have no interest in the 65.

People often say that the 50/6.3 is a Biogon clone. It is in that family, ain't retrofocus. I take it that you don't know how well it does on 6x9. Using it on 6x12 would be a stretch. My 38/4.5 Biogon covers ~ 120% of its focal length. If the 50/6.3 Mamiya does the same it won't cover 6x12 ...

The 75 is in the same family as Super Angulons, but with 7 elements in 4 groups, not 6 or 8 elements.

Others here have mentioned they used the Mamiya Press 150mm f/5.6 successfully on 4x5 cameras like Graflex, so adaptations are definitely possible. The Mamiya Press flange distance is appreciably less than any medium format reflex system like Hasselblad, RB67 or Pentax: you would not reach infinity focus on any MF reflex host body (it would need to be a thinner rangefinder or bellows type of body).

Interesting. You must mean Graphic, not Graflex, 'cos Graflex SLRs all have flange-to-film distances much greater than 53 mm.

Might be possible on a 4x5 Crown Graphic (minimum extension 52.1 mm) with the right adapter, but the adapter won't be easy 'cos there are no recessed boards for these cameras. Certainly possible on 2x3 Century/Crown Graphics, also on 3x4 Crowns, impossible on all Speed Graphics.

I've always been fascinated by the idea of using a 50/6.3 Press lens on a 2x3 Century/Crown Graphic. Not in its own mount, but with the cells reshuttered in a Compur or Copal #0. Never did it, the focal length is close to 47 mm and I have a 47/5.6 SA with center filter.

Thank you, Daniel, for your interest and for the valuable information of your guide.

 

(Sorry for my English: all the mistakes, inconsistencies and incomprehensible words will be due to Google's automatic translator)

No hay de que.

Leo Espanol, entonces puede comunicar conmigo en su idioma propia.

Luis, there's nothing wrong with reopening an old thread.

I read the discussion on formatomedio.eu. I've tested the 75/4.5 Tominon, ex-MP-4, at distance on my Graphics. Not a good lens at infinity and it doesn't cover 2x3 (6x9 in metric) at infinity. I've never had a 105/4.5 Tominon, your 105/4.7 Ektar should be much better. Not the best normal lens for 2x3, but better than the Tominon. In my opinion -- three examples -- the 135/4.5 Tominon is mediocre at all distances. The only Tominon so-called macro lens that's worth using for general photography is, in my opinion, the 127/4.7 for Polaroid Gel Cams. The MP-4 Copal Press #1 shutter is very useful for front-mounting lenses in barrel but a regular cock-and-shoot #1 is better.

Tomioka was an independent lens-maker, was absorbed by Yashica. As far as I know no other maker -- Osawa was a marketer, not a manufacturer -- made lenses badged Tomioka or Tominon.

You may want to read my lens diary at http://www.galerie-photo.com/telechargement/dan-fromm-6x9-lenses-v2-2011-03-29.pdf

If you're interested in extreme wide angle lenses for your Century, please see short lenses for 2x3.xlsx

photo.net isn't the best place to learn about press, technical and view cameras. THE site for information about Graflex cameras is graflex.org. The best anglophone site for large format cameras is Large Format Photography Forum It regards 2x3 as medium format but people there know quite a lot about Graphics, all sizes. If you read French, you might enjoy galerie-photo.info, but posters there don't know that much about equipment made in the US.

Finally, the first post in this Where to look for information on LF (mainly) lenses discussion has a link to an annotated list of links on LF and other equipment. You might find it useful.

The "RH" info is very useful though, I've only learned about that in recent weeks, they have pin rollers. What does the "RH" stand for, "Roller Holder" perhaps ?

 

In the past, I've cursed sellers for not showing a photo of inside the outer case to see if there was pin rollers or not. Now I know to look for the "RH"

Roll Holder. Graflex Inc's nomenclature is usually more confusing than that.

I've cursed sellers for that reason too. Thing is, and don't forget it, some old-style shells have pin rollers. I have at least one such.

Thanks for reminding me what you're trying to accomplish.

You'll be as well off with a knob wind insert in a shell with pin rollers as with a lever wind insert in a shell with pin rollers.

Here Graflex 23 Graphic 120 Roll Film Back Holder | eBay is a lever wind insert in an old-style shell with pin rollers.

Here Graflex 6 x 8 cm Roll Film Back RH8, for 120 film, 8 exposures is a knob wind insert in an old-style shell with pin rollers.

Here Graphic RH8 120 8 Exp 6x9 Roll Film Back For 2 1/4x3 1/4 Cameras w/ Graflok Back | eBay is a knob wind insert in an RH-8 a shell. Inside of shell not shown but RH-8 shells have pin rollers. You have to know what to look for.

kmac, I gave you directions for finding a Toyo roll holder user manual. Follow the directions, download the manual and read it. It will tell you how to recognize one made to fit 2x3 (6x9 in metric) Graflok backs. You don't want the 69/45, you want the plain 69.

Not to be a complete idiot (that's what I am, please be polite and don't tell me) or anything, but why are you so attached to your Mamiya's G-frame? It can be replaced with an M-frame, which will accept Mamiya's own roll holders.

Here's the link: http://www.galerie-photo.com/telechargement/dan-fromm-6x9-lenses-v2-2011-03-29.pdf

Super Rollex (Horseman holders can be seen as lighter copies of Super Rollexes) and Toyo roll holders are completely incompatible with Graflex roll holders. But and however I believe they can be used on 2x3 Graphics that have Graflok backs. If the OP is fixated on using a Graflex roll holder, I think he/she/it has a severe problem. What matters is the images captured on film, not the device that held the film.

I don't know why the Mercury list doesn't mention Super Rollexes or Toyo roll holders.

One buys a Graflex today to use as a portable or inexpensive 4x5 or roll film view camera, and to hack around with lenses that can't be deployed easily on any other camera

Speak for yourself.

In Graflex-speak, "Graflex" means SLR. These beasts are effectively one lens cameras. Graphics (press camera, not view cameras) have only one generally usable movement, front rise.

I bought a 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic to be able to shoot 2x3. That camera is a bit hostile to wide angle lenses. The shortest relatively easily found lens that will focus to infinity on it is the 80/6.3 Wide Field Ektar. I wanted wider, so got a Century Graphic, functionally equivalent to the 2x3 Crown Graphic. The shortest lens that can be used on it is the 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon. I have one. also other w/a lenses that can't be used on my Speed.

About barrel lenses on Speed Graphics. On the one hand, a Speed's focal plane shutter makes using a barrel lens easy. On the other, for most applications -- I ignore just screwing around with barrel lenses and lenses in dead shutters even though I've done that -- lenses in shutter are just as good. I have a number of barrel lenses with adapters to fit #1 shutters. Adapters aren't cheap, make sense only if several lenses can share one. A lens in shutter is usually less expensive than the equivalent lens in barrel and an adapter.

I have only three lenses in barrel that work on a 2x3 Speed and can't be replaced by lenses in shutter. 1.75"/2.8 Elcan, which doesn't cover 2x3. 4"/2 TTH, which covers, is very heavy and is not better than a much lighter plasmat at the apertures I normally use. 12"/4 TTH telephoto, the longest lens that's comfortable on a 2x3 Speed. The TTH lenses are very uncommon, usually quite expensive.

This is the back I'd like to buy (below), the one with pin rollers for film flatness, but I haven't seen one listed on eBay in the 18 months I've been searching. The one in my OP photo is the only red handle 6x9 I've seen, I bought it, but it lacks pin rollers and was defective from the get go. I'm facing the fact there's no more available for sale and I'm now looking at trying to repair the one I have

 

It seems they are rare. That Mercury link explains "They are definitely less common than the "23" Graphic 6×9 backs as well as all of the Graflex 6×7 backs"

Y'know, its a real shame that camera shows have dried up and blown away.

One of the problems with buying used Graflex roll holders is that inserts have often been swapped between backs. At shows, I used to find knob wind inserts in RH (so marked, and with pin rollers) backs, lever wind inserts in old style backs without pin rollers and, yes, know wind inserts in late old-style backs with pin rollers.

What you really want is a shell with pin rollers. The type of insert is much less important.

If it still works (should) this https://1drv.ms/b/s!AggQfcczvHGNkGG_P2z8Qiyc8Qo- link will take you to a set of links to all sorts of LF related pages. The roll holders sections has links to Linhof and Toyo roll holder user guides. A 6x9 Toyo holder should fit a 2x3 Graphic with Graflok back, and they're around.

Rare? Hardly. Keep on looking. I just took a look on ebay. com, found > 60 Graflex roll holders on offer, some for 2x3 cameras, others for 4x5. Some lever wind, some knob wind.

The later Graflex Rapid-Vance roll holders all have lever advance. They are color coded. Red lever, RH-8, 2 1/4 x3 1/4. Blue lever, RH-10, 2 1/4 x 2 3/4. Green lever, RH-12, 2 1/4 x 2 1/4.

The levers are part of the insert. RH shells have pin rollers at each end of the gate. These are supposed to improve film flatness. RH-8 shells, not the others, have slightly shortened gates to make room for the rollers.

Inserts and shells of all vintages of Graflex roll holders interchange. I've seen lever wind inserts in older shells without pin rollers, knob wind inserts in RH shells with pin rollers. An early shell with lever wind insert is now on eBay. To add to the fun, late shells with old-style designations on the back have pin rollers.

I have a 2x3 Linhof Super Rolex roll holder to fit 4x5 Graflok backs. The OP can't use this, but the manual lists 6x7 and 6x9 Super Rollex backs to fit 2x3 Graflok backs. I don't have a Toyo roll holder, do have the manual. Toyo made 6x7 and 6x9 roll holders that fit 2x3 Graflok backs.

Mercury Camera published a long discussion of film holders for 2x3 cameras. Name notwithstanding, it is incomplete. See Complete Guide to Graflok 23 Backs – Mercury Camera

Orsetto, don't agree with your comment about a collectible frenzy for everything Graflex incomprehensible. There's no frenzy visible on ebay.com

Years ago, when I was trying to work out which lenses to use on my 2x3 Graphics, I tested, with a USAF 1951 target, 101/4.5 Ektar, 103/4.5 Trioptar and 105/3.7 Ektar. The Trioptar was the best. Largest coverage, sharpest. The legendary 105/3.7 Ektar was the worst. Didn't quite cover 2x3 and was the least sharp.

That was my second 105/3.7. I sold the first one on because I didn't find it sharp enough (different test, actual shots), bought the second one because of all the noise about how wonderful that legendary lens is.

Tilt? Crown Graphic? Wash your mind out with soap. The only usable movement on Pacemaker Graphics (Crown, Speed, 2x3 Century) is front rise. Before you blow up at me, be aware that I have several Pacemaker Graphics. Yes, combining rear tilt with dropping the bed will get forward tilt. It is usable only for a narrow range of focal lengths and focused distances. Shift on these cameras is a sick joke.

The smallest image circle that will cover 4x5 is approximately 150 mm, considerably less than the 165 mm you calculated. Somewhat more is preferable to get better image quality in the corners when shooting with the lens centered. The gate is actually 90mm x 120 mm.

Now, about using the rise. My little Graphics are all 2x3ers. They have 19mm front rise. Measure your 4x5er's front rise in mm. By Pythagoras' theorem, the diameter of a circle that will cover the gate with full rise is 2* sqrt(3600 + (95 + rise)^2).

Chuck, Graphex and Optar are both Graflex trade names. Graphex shutters are rebadged Wollensak Rapax shutters. Optar lenses are mostly rebadged Wollensak Raptars, a few are rebadged Rodenstock lenses. The 90/6.8 is a four element in four groups double Gauss type. If we go by diagonals -- remember, the formats have different aspect ratios -- a 90 mm lens on 4x5 (150 mm diagonal) is equivalent to a 25 mm lens on 24x36 (43 mm diagonal).

AJG, there were actually two f/8 wide angle Tessars. The 28 you mentioned and a 55 for the VP Exakta. That's it for w/a Tessars. It can be done but there are better solutions to the problem.

8-48/1.8 Yashinon on a Yashica Super-60 Electronic Super 8. Zoom lenses were widely used on cine cameras long before they were spread to 35 mm still. And don't tell me about the Voigtlaender-Zoomar.

The Su60E shot lovely footage that I wasn't able to use and is the reason I took up still photography. It taught me that film wasn't the way to accomplish what I then wanted to do. When a cousin admired the Su60E I gave it to him.

Years later I returned to shooting movies. By that time most S8 cameras had fixed zoom lenses. The exceptions included the Fujica Z1000 (single 8, can be intercut with super 8 using tape splices) and a number of Beaulieus, all C-mount. I ended up with a couple of Beaulieus, on which I sometimes used prime lenses, and a Fujica bought for its lens, a lovely 7.5-75/1.8. I intended to get a 4008 for the Fuji's lens, ended up with one that had a 6-66/1.8 Varigon, decided I liked the Schneider lens better so sold the Fuji, lens and all. I also had a heap of old Bauers and Canons, of which the best, but most uncomfortable to use, were Canon 310XL. The Canon 8.5-25.5/1.0 is a marvel, shot better footage than anything else I've ever used. Within its limits, preferable to the Beaulieus.

The 90/6.8 Optar/Raptar is a four elements in four groups double Gauss type. A wide angle lens for 4x5, but with marginal coverage.

There's no guarantee that the 90/3.5 Raptar is a tessar type. It could well be a triplet. To find out which it is, count reflections. A tessar's rear cell will have two strong and one weak reflection (possibly hard to see), a triplet's two strong. Either way, as has already been mentioned, not a lens for 4x5.