leonard_robertson

John - Congratulations on landing a Speed. Here is a link to the i.b. for a side RF Pacemaker Speed, if that is the model you have:

http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/pacemakerearly/pacemakerearly.html

The lensboard for 4X5 Pacemakers are smaller than 4X4 and has rounded corners. You can look at the front of your camera and see if it takes square or rounded boards. If it takes 4X4 square corner boards, it is an Anniversary (or earlier) model. The 2X3 and 3X4 Pacemakers use a round corner board, but it is smaller than the one for a 4X5.

 

The most common lens that came on a 4X5 Pacemaker was a 135mm Optar mounted in a leaf shutter. You can watch eBay and find these. Be careful not to get one in the 1/1000 sec shutter, as these shutters are prone to mechanical problems. Often the Optars on eBay come already mounted on a Pacemaker lensboard, which will save you time and trouble finding a board. The odds are the rangefinder on your camera is adjusted for a 135mm, although there is no guarantee of this. The reason I mention a 135mm Optar is it is easy to find, affordable, and likely your rangefinder is adjusted for it. There are more modern lenses which will work very well on a Speed, if multicoating seems important to you. You probably want a lens small enough to fit inside the camera when it is closed.

 

Here is another good Graphic link: http://members.lycos.co.uk/jolommencam/

 

When you close your camera, always be certain the focusing track is run all the way to the rear. If you try to fold the bed up with the track run part way out, it can damage the track.

My favorite Graphic website is this one from Jo Lommen, in the Netherlands: http://members.lycos.co.uk/jolommencam/

He may have a German version of this site available. You might email him and ask. I emailed him once, and he seems to be a very nice fellow. Or he may know a German speaking Graphic user who can help you.

 

"But I love my Graflex and I wanna be like WeeGee! I have never want to be somebody else except I learned about WeeGee." This is a wonderful comment of yours. You have the most important thing to learn to use your Speed Graphic - love of the camera. You will learn everything you need to know. It just may take some time.

David - Assuming you have a Graflock back on your Crown, here is an example of what will fit your camera: eBay 300079446956 . Note how big the overall frame is compared to the "insert" part that holds the film. The roll holders for the 2X3 Graphics have a frame just slightly larger than the insert, like this one 300079229156. Three formats were available 2 1/4" square (RH12 - 12 exposure), 2 1/4 X 2 3/4" (RH10 - 10 exposure), and 2 1/4 X 3 1/4" (RH8 - 8 exposure) for 120 film. There was also a RH20 for 2 1/4 X 2 3/4" on 220 film. Earlier versions used a round knob for film advance. Later versions, at least in the RH10 and RH20, were available with a lever for film advance. The film inserts can be interchanged between the outer frame/shell part, so it is possible to find, for instance, a 10 exposure insert in a RH8 shell. This won't work. This information all refers to Graphic backs made by Graflex Corp.

 

I have heard of adapter frames to fit the smaller frame holders to a 4X5 back, but I suspect they are either expensive or difficult to find. I just don't know anything about them. There may be roll holders from makers other than Graflex with 4X5 frames, but again, I know nothing about them. Calumet made a 10 exposure roll holder which slides into either a spring back or a Graflock just like a sheet film holder.

 

Many Graphic roll holders have seen heavy use by pros, so it is possible to get frame spacing problems, but as with anything on eBay, you have to check for return policy. I recall something about the later inserts having extra film rollers for better film flatness, but someone else may be able to give details on that.

 

What I've done for masking on the groundglass is use a thin (maybe 1/16" wide) stick-on tape available from drafting suppliers. The advantage of this is it can be easily removed if needed. You might be able to make a mask from thin plastic with a cutout for your roll film format that you can stick on your groundglass when you shoot roll film.

Here is a link giving Packard shutter sizes:

http://www.packardshutter.com/

I believe you need a 5X5" Packard in order to fit it through the front standard of a 2D. With a rear mount Packard, you also need room for a tube to fit through the lensboard to connect the air piston to the squeeze bulb.

Here is an excellent page on mounting Packard shutters:

http://www.electricedge.com/greymatter/archives/00006060.htm

Note his "in front of the lens" page. One thing I like about front mounting is you can actually watch the shutter fire. It is possible for a Packard to hang up while opening, usually due to not squeezing the bulb hard enough. If the shutter is rear mounted, you may not be aware this has happened.

Try over on Graflex.org: http://www.graflex.org/ There is so much information there it takes awhile to find anything. Posting your question on one of the forums there may get you an answer: http://www.graflex.org/helpboard/

 

I have a feeling there isn't a 3X4 Polaroid back that takes current films, but someone on Graflex.org may have modified something to work.

Dan - That is a nice clean looking #10. I see it didn't meet the reserve, so maybe it is time for you to go talk to the owner. Fate may have decided that is the Cirkut for you.

 

If you haven't seen it yet, a panoramic forum started over on APUG: http://www.apug.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=186 You may as well learn all you can about Cirkuts, so when the right one comes along you can swoop down on it.

Ben - My wife is uncertain about the flowers at McCroskey. Probably after April though. One area she had gone into is in central Idaho above Clarkia: http://www.fs.fed.us/ipnf/rec/activities/trails/szmarblecr.html

She mentioned old growth and deep woods in this area.

 

I don't know how you feel about Scablands, but we had a discussion over on Nelson Foto on Palouse Falls: http://www.nelsonfoto.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2425

 

And Dry Falls: http://www.bentler.us/eastern-washington/recreation/sun-lakes-dry-falls.aspx

 

This site has cool virtual pans of Dry Falls: http://virtualguidebooks.com/Washington/EasternWashington/DryFalls/DryFalls_TOC.html

Ben - I'll ask my wife when she gets home tonight. She probably will recall when the wild flowers bloom there. You might try emailing Idaho Parks and see if they can give you a contact for a Parks employee who visits McCroskey on a regular basis and can let you know when the flowers are blooming.

I don't know how it is where you all are located in Eastern Washington, but here in Lincoln County this morning it is snowing like mad. However, when I went out to fetch the newspaper, the robins were singing away, so they must not think the snow is serious. Likely you already know of McCroskey Park: http://www.idahoparks.org/parks/maryminervamccroskey.aspx

I thought I would mention, since it doesn't show up on some state maps and many people don't know about it. You can enter the park from the Washington side north of Farmington. The park may not have any "grand landscapes", but the wildflowers are plentiful and it is a daytrip from most of E. WA.

Ron - What time and temp did you use for Folgernol? Have you ever seen any calculations on the cost compared with D76 or HC110 or the like? The formulas I've seen for coffee developers use instant, which has to be much more costly, but if brewed works, it must be a lot cheaper. I usually brew 8 cups in Mr. Coffee every morning. Can I do 10 cups instead and develop with the extra, or does it need to be too strong to drink to be usable for film?

Carsten - I'm a fan of English wooden field cameras, so I did a Google search just to see what your camera looks like. There are some nice pictures of the Instantograph on various websites, but as you know, not much information. I did see instructions for operating the shutter, just in case you missed that in your search. I've always thought there must be one or more UK forums for antique cameras, but I've never really found one. If you know of one, I'd appreciate the site address. I bought a Sanderson view (not hand & stand) a few years ago and it was frustrating not finding much information.

John Stamets did a nice book using a Widelux, I assume largely handheld - "Portrait of a Market: Photographs of Seattle's Pike Place Market". I did a quick Google and it looks like used copies are inexpensive. It is worth finding if you like Widelux or street photography.

My head is spinning from all the Cirkut talk - on this forum, over on APUG, plus Jim and I have exchanged a couple of emails, where we were discussing sharpness in Cirkut prints. Today I looked at a 1922 Cirkut print of my town here (Harrington, Washington). I'll admit my eyes aren't what they once were, but to me, the print appeared decently sharp. I used a 90mm enlarging lens as a loupe, and the sharpness was less, but at that magnification the lens quality may be noticable. Many Cirkuts used Turner-Reich triple convertibles, some of which are alleged to be so-so lenses. I can't imagine a Cirkut print can be quite as sharp as a print from a sheet film camera, but to me this 1922 print looked quite good. It didn't show any light-dark banding (and there was sky across the entire top of the 5 1/2" X 39" print), although way at one end, there were 3 or 4 "smeared" bands of blur, noticable mostly under magnification. So I'm thinking a Cirkut can take a sharp-enough picture, but my few attempts haven't been as sharp as they should be. So once I solve that, and banding, and learn to spool my own film, everything should be smooth sailing. Until my spring breaks.

Dan - Excellent news that aerial film is alive and well. I see B&H lists Kodak 9.5", both color and B&W. If you find out about the scratch problem with J&C film, please let me know. I wonder if it is scratch prone when dry, or only when wet? There are various schemes for developing Cirkut film. I roll the film from hand to hand in a plastic dishpan of developer (gloves of course). It sounds crude, but is simple and works well. With care, it may not be as "scratchy" as it sounds.

I looked at my #8 Cirkut. The marked speed range is 1/2 second to 1/12 second, although mine doesn't even do up to 1/12. Fiddling with the governor adjustment might get it there. The very first Rochester Panoramic and early Century Cirkuts had adjustable width slits. This feature was dropped in later models; whether because it didn't work or wasn't considered needed, I don't know. As I remember Cirkut theory, a narrower slit makes "banding" (vertical bands of uneven exposure as the camera speeds up and slows down slightly) more noticable. I won't say a narrower slit won't work, but don't count on it being workable. There were two types of governors in Cirkuts - the later cameras used an internal flyball governor giving the speed range I mentioned above. The earlier Century versions used interchangable "fans" the attached to the outside of the camera. Different size fans gave different air resistance and hence different speed. A small enough fan may give a faster speed than a governor camera, although a recall a dire warning about never running these cameras with no fan. Making fans larger than "stock" ones is supposed to give slower speeds. Fans sounds primitive, but I've been told fan cameras can actually run smoother than governor ones.

If you buy a Cirkut, get a more or less complete one. The body and Cirkut back tend to get seperated from the gearhead and tripod legs. The gearheads are very difficult to find. It can be a long, frustrating time getting an incomplete Cirkut together. Missing gears isn't a major problem since they can be made. You probably already know "modern" lenses can be used on a Cirkut, although you need to find the nodal point and calculate the correct gear.

A couple of links:

http://largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/500533.html

http://www.pauck.de/archive/mailinglist/panorama/mhonarc/idx_thread1.html

Note there are many pages on the Panorama Mailinglist archive. Click the arrow at the bottom of the page. I don't know if this list still exists. It tended toward digital/stitching and I lost interest. Let me know if you find an active list the includes Cirkuts.

Dan - I've used Cirkuts enough to know how, but never have become proficient, so a more experienced Cirkut shooter may disagree with some of my ideas. Film is the first thing to check on, and I don't have up-to-date information. Kodak dropped spooled B&W a couple of years ago. Spooled color negative film was still available at considerable cost per roll. I think enough guys still shoot color to support it in the market, but with Kodak, who knows? I don't know if the J&C film is one of the easily scratched ones or not. Cirkuts pull the film across a felt pad, so a soft film might be a problem. Until recently, an eBay seller had rolls of aerial film for sale, but I don't see them now. Maybe he ran out. There may be other sources of surplus aerial film. I don't know if there is a current market for aerial film or if digital is taking over there. A Kodak or Ilford rep might give you an idea on the future availability of aerial film. Both J&C and aerial come in bulk rolls. You will have to respool it onto Cirkut spools. The effective shutter speed range of a Cirkut is approx. 1/2 sec to about 1/20 second, so action shooting is limited. The most desirable Cirkuts are the #8 Outfit (8" max film width, seem to sell for $1200-$1500 on eBay) and the #10 Camera (10" max film width, eBay price maybe $2000 or more. Some sellers try to get up to $4000 for a #10, but I doubt they ever sell at that price). As I recall, both #8 and #10 weigh around 45 pounds, including tripod, although that may include weight of carrying cases. There have been a lot of posts on the large-format groups regarding wheeled carriers for view cameras, so the weight problem can be dealt with. The rational way to do panoramic photography is a "modern" 120/220 camera or some type of digital/stitching thing. However, in your last post you mentioned the reason you may need a Cirkut - contact printing. If you are addicted to B&W contact printing, enlarged prints from smaller negs may not satisfy you. If Michael and Paula are able to get the "new Azo" deal going, they may have it available in roll paper, so you could use it for Cirkut. I believe 20X24 was the largest size Kodak made available. My favorite site for Cirkuts is Clayton Tume's: http://www.bigshotz.co.nz/panorama_cameras.html I don't know how current all his info is as far as film availablity. I know I haven't answered all your questions, so feel free to ask about anything else. If I haven't discouraged you completely, you will need to learn much more about buying and care and feeding of a Cirkut.

Anyone who decides to try Unicolor print drums should Bookmark or print out and save this page on fixing leaky lids:

http://largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/496748.html

I've used it on three drums so far and it works great. I used silicone aquarium sealer since I could get it in a small quantity.

Here is another option to consider: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/unicolor/

An 8X10 Unicolor drum, which holds four 4X5 sheets, can probably be found on eBay for $10 or so including shipping. You can hand roll the drum on a counter for agitation. The motor base is nice, but you can get by without it for awhile.

Andre - Have you had a chance to use the flash bracket/grip you mentioned buying in your post of a few days ago? What is your opinion of it?

Jeff - This Miranda page: http://www.mirandacamera.com/_modelid/modelid.htm has detailed information on the different models. Also, this page:

http://www.geocities.com/bill14210/ has several Miranda links at the bottom.

Andre - I dug out my "parts" Mamiyaflex C (which, except for a missing wind knob, is actually in better shape than my "good" C) and removed the top frame. You need to unscrew the top five screws you have circled in your picture. On my camera (and maybe yours), the rear two screws seem to be slightly longer than the front three, so note the lengths when you remove them. Under the front of the top frame are a couple of fiber spacer strips which the front three screws pass through. The rear two screws get rather tricky - under the frame on each side are three thin flat washers. That is, each of the two rear screws passes through the frame, then through three flat washers (and the number may be different for your camera). I suspect the front fiber shims and rear washer stack are adjustments for the ground glass registration. When the frame is removed and turned over, there are four screws holding the ground glass to the top frame. I didn't take this apart, although it appears to be a two piece screen. You may have to take the two pieces apart to get to where you need to clean. Finally, the camera I'm working on is an original Mamiyaflex C like yours. I can see in your picture the "hook" at the top rear of the body that holds the finder on. The C2 and later used a knurled knob which tightened to trap the rear of the finder. Please do let us know how your cleaning job goes.

All the recent Rollei posts, especially Mike Kovacs wonderful Ontario

photos, sent me looking in my Bookmarks for this link:

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/fourcameras.html I'm going to

continue using my beloved Mamiyaflex C and C2, but I will admit I dug

out my Rolliecord with f3.5 Xenar. No doubt I'll have to run a roll

through it. Maybe that will keep me happy until a $50 garage sale

Rolleiflex turns up. "60 Minutes" Sunday night did an segment on Bob

Dylan (or tried to; he isn't a very chatty person). There was a very

brief clip of a press photographer using a TLR (probably a Rollei, but

no way to be sure). It looked to me like he was bringing the camera up

to his eye to use the sportfinder. He was in a crowd, so that was

probably the natural way to shoot. I was using my C2 yesterday in a

junkyard and found myself using the sportfinder every shot.

Andre - I originally had a black 105mm and a chrome 65mm. For things like car shows and places with people walking around getting in the way, I tended to use the 65mm since I could get closer to the subject. I then made an eBay impulse purchase of a black shutter 65mm largely because "they" say the black lenses are "better". I have yet to compare the two versions, although I'll get around to it one of these days. Even if the newer lens turns out to be sharper or have more contrast, I may prefer the chrome one, especially after seeing your picture of your kids. I only recently got an 80mm (black as it happened), with a C2 and a "chimney" viewfinder. I suspect if I had started with an 80mm as my only lens, I would have gotten along quite well. If you are getting what you want with your 80mm, stick with it.

Bill - I've seen pictures of the dual frame sportsfinder, but I guess it came on newer M'flexs. My C, C2, and even C220 all have just a single frame. The dual frame would be really handy. Looking at the negatives I shot Saturday using the 80mm sportfinder frame with a 65mm lens, it seems to have worked pretty well. I remember seeing things too tight in the 80mm frame, but thinking the 65mm lens would catch more. For the most part that was the way it happened.

Andre - It makes my day to see Mamiyaflex in the subject line. I shot two rolls of B&W yesterday at a small town parade with my C. If I had seen your great color results before I left, I'm sure I would have shot a roll of color too. What lens and f-stop did you use for the shot of your kids? Was it the 80mm your C was originally sold with? I'm curious if the very early Mamiyaflex interchangable lenses have a different "look" compared with the later black shutter versions.

Many of the parade pictures I did yesterday were shot using the sports finder built into the the waist level finder. I think that is the frame for the 80mm lens and I was using a 65mm, so it will be interesting to see what actually shows up on the negatives. I also used the focus lock on the C so I could prefocus and not worry about the focus changing.

Andre - That is interesting there may be some single focusing knob C2s. This may have been sort of a transition from the C to C2. The other difference I've noticed between my Cs and C2 is the lock for the viewfinder. The C has a button you push to the left to release the rear of the viewfinder. The button moves a sheet metal "hook" at the top of the body. This hook catches a stud inside of the rear of the viewfinder. My C2 has a knurled knob which is loosened to release pressure on the rear of the finder. I think this is the system used by all later Mamiyas. Somewhere I've read all Mamiya twin viewfinders work on all models. This may be true except for the C. Later finders seem to fit on my Cs, just the latch doesn't work. A little gaffer's tape should work to hold a later finder onto a C. Also, the magnifier on my C waist-level finder folds down on the outside rear of the finder, rather than hinging inside the front like later finders. Finally, the bottom of the C body isn't flat; the curved portion of the body for the lower film chamber is below the flat area where the tripod socket is, hence doesn't work on tripods with large platforms. I believe Mamiya made an adapter that screws to the bottom of the C to give a flat bottom.The C2 body is made with a flat bottom.

Andre - From the photo you posted of your M'flex, I'm guessing it is the original C, not a C2. The C uses a knurled knob on the RH side for "lock-unlock". The C2 has a short "arm" for the same function. The C has a single focus knob on the RH side and a small focus lock knob on the LH side. C2s have focus knobs on both sides. Regardless of which model you have, you are doing really nice work with it. I went to a "hot rod" car show this morning and shot a roll of B&W with my Mamiyaflex C. Your pictures make me wish I'd done a second roll in color.