tim obrien

Lens boards from Midwest Camera. About 20-30 bucks. There is a Toyo lensboard that fits, but they are the same price these days so that's almost irrelavent.

Optar is probably coated, still use a lens shade on it.

tim in san jose

Scott,

You got the right one for backs. You will be able to use the standard 4x5 Holders as well as any roll film, graphmatics,etc. The other one has a really nice lens on it. That's a 127 Ektar. Sharp, sharp, sharp. The one you bought has a Optar, not a great reputation, but nothing you have to replace anytime soon. It will have slightly more movement availble then the Ektar, but you don't have a lot to play with anyway.

Good buy. I think you'll like the flexibility this system gives you.

tim in san jose

Well, Henry is mistaken here. It does not take standard holders that you use in most view cameras. The holders you need are wider than standard and have a slot milled in both sides. The second photo you posted is compatible with standard holders. Except what is really happening is most view cameras are compatable with these holders. Which came first? The Graphics.

Your other questions? The lens/shutter can range from stunning to mediocre, depending on who made them and how they have been taken care of. As far as updating, it's a snap. You just need lens boards drilled for whatever your favorite lens are. My 4x5 Speed has an early 80's Fujinon 150/6.3 on it and it takes beautiful photos. My 3x4 Speed has a Schneider 150 barrel lens on it, very nice also. My 2x3 Speed has a 101 Ektar on it, very sharp, and my 2x3 Crown has a 103 Graftar on it, OK, but not in the same league. I also have some other lens, like an early brass waterstop lens that take dreamy sort of etherial shots.

It's a great platform once you get the kinks worked out.

tim in san jose

Hi,

I just received a couple of used 2509 sheet film reels. I want to turn

one of them into a 2518 holder to process 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 film. The

added benifit looks like I might be able to use the 9x12 setting for 3

1/4 x 4 1/4 film.

It looks like th eeasiest way to modify the reel is to remove the

inner click part of the moving reel, shave down the flange on the hub

of the black part of that reel then glue the two parts back together

again, keeping everything in perfect alignment rotationally. Has

anyone done this type modification before (outside of Jobo) and if so,

am I on the right track?

Second, if I do this, it seems the two parts are already glued

together. Anyone know a way to safely separate the two parts without

disolving the plastic reel part? I would hate to use acetone or

something on it and watch my reel disolve into silly putty.

Thank you.

tim in san jose

Can't disagree with Jim, if he has tried printing his negs. My experience is with mostly APX100 and Classic200. The Classic200 has an overall higher general stain, the APX100 (E.I. 80) has stunning negs that print on #2 as easy as anything I have ever put on photo paper. The Classic200, with it's higher general stain, has wonderful separation not only in the highlights, but in the shadows also. I did a exact exposure comparison with two sheets of Classic200 sheet film (E.I. 160), one developed in Rodinal 1+50, one in W2D2+ 9 1/2 minutes, and the differences were amazing.

I have used this developer with 120 Tri-X400 (Old emulsion), and while not as stunning as the APX100, it has a very good image stain with very slight general stain.

I received a box of Tri-X320 4x5 at the Monterey LF conference but it hasn't made it's way out of the fridge yet. I suspect, by the known characteristics of this film, that everything is going to be just a bit on the flat side unless you reign in every variable you can.

That said, I would start at the times given for Tri-X400 by John Wimberley, shoot at E.I. 320, and work from there.

tim in san jose

4x5 Pacemaker Speed with the 150/6.3 Fujinon.

A box or 12 of APX100.

tim in san jose

The answer happens to be in "Beyond the Zone System", Appendix A. I just went through it all last night, but the book isn't here right now so I can't give you the exact formulas you need.

tim in san jose

Denis,

Don't feel bad, most of us have done it once on the Graflex 22 or 23.

Of course some of us are over achievers and have done it more than once. Usually if I haven't used the back for awhile.

tim in san jose

I'm with Dan on this one. Get one of each!

I have my Speed set up with it's Standard 101 4.5 Ektar, a Graphics22 back, and the correct viewfinder mask. The kalart still works, though it's a bit dim. Other times I will put various barrel lens on it, some old brass lens with water stops, a beautiful Wollensak 80mm that dagor77 sold me or a fun, little focus challenged Osilli-raptor 90mm 1.9. When I use those, I go to a ground glass back and standard film holders.

I have my Crown set up with it's 103 Graftar (not as sharp as the Ektar) and a Graphmatic that I bought NIB a couple of months ago. Focus on that is generally by zone (ala Weegee) and I have a gas going out and shooting like I worked for Life. I have beeen shooting Classic200 in film holders, HP5 in the graphmatic, and almost anything with the 6x6 roll film holder. PanF or Velvia look great using 50 YO lens.

I am in the process of hoarding press type flash bulbs. This is gonna be an interesting project.

tim in san jose

It's hard to get scale from a photo, but it looks like a 9x12. There is probably a small catch at the top of the camera in the back. Slide it to one side and see if the ground glass slides up and off the back of the camera. If so, you have a fairly standard (if there is such a thing) German 9x12 platten Camera with Zeiss, ICA, Voightlander, Agfa, compatable backs. The film holders for these are slide in and hold only one piece of film. You will need to get some of these holders on EBay or at the local photo junk show. You might get lucky and find a slide in spring back for it, these were made in the 40's and 50's for converting 9x12s to 3x4. If you do go that route, you'll need standard Graphex 3x4 film holders. The upside to that is the groundglass no longer needs to be removed between shots.

Good luck, write P-Mail if you need more information.

tim in san jose

Daniel,

I hate to tell you, but it isn't gonna make much difference where you take it. Kodak Gold is OK film, designed for the unwashed masses. You shot it through a new to you camera, hopefully not at your Sister's Wedding. They are just photos. Take them down to Krogers or Walgreens or any other el-cheepo place, get a set of 4x6 glossies and pay your 7 or 8 bucks a roll. Take them home and look at them under a loupe. You'll see where you need to improve.

A R4 eh? Nice camera. Go get yerself some FP-4 and learn how to shoot/develop B&W. You might like it.

tim in san jose

'Solution' seems pretty simple to me. 'Borrow a tankful of D76 and develop a batch at home. While lots of things cause grain, the over riding one is developer. The method for isolation is to change one thing at a time. I would try your 1:1 setup at home with all the same chemicals you normally use in the kitchen.

BYW - I have always found D76 1:1 to be relatively fine grained on Tri-X.

tim in san jose

As always, a good laugh when someone chimes in with their left foot firmly enscounced in their mouth.

I have only noticed decreased contrast while using temps under 70F. I use the recommended agitation always and don't sweat the temps when using Diafine in the prescribed temp range.

I would look at perhaps your metering. Perhaps something happened to the meter on your camera or the batteries in your handheld light meter.

It seems like maybe you are a stop or two over exposed.

tim in san jose

Plato, Quiche, et all...

I use stand for other reasons, I like the look of PanF developed in 1+250 for 2 hours because of the edge effects, the graphic 'look', the ability to control blownout highlights on this sensitive film. It's just one tool in my developers toolbox for getting a vision on paper. As far as I know, there is no primer on stand development, I heard of it from some weird guy on photo.net and explored on my own.

best of luck,

tim in san jose

Ya know, I hear all the time about how big a 4x5 enlarger is...

Well I measured my Omega DII and then I measured my Omega B22 XL...

Guess which one is taller? Guess which one is wider?

B22 is taller, the two have the same size base boards.

The DII is heavier. A lot heavier. I put my 4x5 system together over a year or so. I have maybe 400 buck in it, but it includes 35mm,4x4,6x6,3x4,4x5 negative carriers, 50mm Nikor, 75mm Schneider, and a 150 Schneider, three lens boards/cones, three condensor sets and a cold light head.

EBay is a wonderful thing. Good luck.

tim in san jose

Nah, ya gotta understand. I look at your images and wish you'ld have used a Ikonta or something with a great piece of glass on the front end. I like your vision. Heck, I like your fish.

tim in san jose

You have differnt condensors for different formats. I have heard of the mismactched condensors set, but never seen one. I have three sets, a 3 1/2 for 35mm, 4 5/8 or so for 120 (6x6), and 6 1/2 for 4x5.

The sets should be matched with the correct cones, matched with the correct enlarging lens (50mm 80-105, 135-150). Go to aforementioned site and purchase a users manual for this machine. Then get the right components for what you are printing. Or get a cold light head and be done with it. It's a good enlarger.

tim in san jose

Lex,

Your 635 should be about a 1960's or so model. The production cessation date was 1973 so you may or may not have a camera that fits this forum.

I happen to really like mine, even if the speeds slower than 1/4 don't work.

tim in san jose

You can't fool me. I know those were taken with a Dianna. Weren't they?

tim in san jose

Yes, Gene M. is a little confused. 10 exposures means it would be a 6x7 camera, which we know it's not. 8 exposures and they will show up correctly. There are three sets of numbers on 120 film. Your manufacturer has placed the red window in the correct spot for the spacing of the film.

The Novar, as far as I know, was made by Zeiss. It's a triplet and in this case, not a terribly great lens, but it is a fun camera. keep the aperture down around f11 and you should be OK. Don't let the film sit in the camera too long, the 6x9 will aquire a set where the film goes over the edge of the image gate and won't sit quite flat.

tim in san jose

It has nothing to do with age. I am 47 and I could be hit by a big truck driving home today. Life is temporary. Then you're dead.

List out what each thing is worth. Have your offspring have a chance at keeping what they want. They can sell the rest for what they can get for it. And if someone gets the Leica M for 15 bucks, I am sure they will appreciate it. My kids/SO have the chance to find out what anything I have is worth and if they don't avail themselves of the opportunity, their loss. My SO see the things I have, knows they bring me joy, but hasn't the interest in them to find out what's what. Not a lot I can do.

As far as picking up old equipment and dry firing it? It usually has film in it and is wet fired several times a month.

tim in san jose (who's collection is moderate and not worth a hill of beans, dead or alive)

I 'spect this is a 9x12 format but I could be wrong. If it is 9x12, I have just the thing for you. A springback with ground glass in it. Uses standard graphics 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 dual film holders. And B&W film is now available in two different emulsions from J&C. If you measure the exact distance between the rails that hold the existing back in, I will measure the spring back I have at home and we'll see what we can do.

Your lens is certainly a 1:4.5 150mm tessar, a four element design. I can't show anyone what a tessar shot looks like on a 4x5, but I can show what they look like on 3 1/4 x 4 1/4. Sharp. Very sharp. I have a Zeiss (ICA) Trona 9x12 and it takes wonderful photos.

Let me know, good luck.

tim in san jose

And if you find it out of focus? What says it wasn't you pulling the film holder from the camera that caused it.

I suspect if you neede the shot, any amount of duplication can be justified. If I am shooting a +- exposure sequence, yes I check the focus between shots.

tim in san jose

Assuming you mean 4x5 Crown, I would suggest a 127 Ektar, fairly common on press type cameras, especially 3x4. While not having a lot of movement area, it is one tack sharp lens and should be found in good shutter for about 125 bucks from many dealers.

tim in san jose

Just understand, APX100 is likely not to be around for much longer. Agfa has their film division on the selling block and they have shown no support the last couple of years for film products. I LIKE APX100, especially in 4x5 size. I bought 500 sheets before it went away. That's about 3 years of shooting for me, at least.

I won't trust my 120 and 35mm to them, too many other good films. If I were just starting, FP4Plus would be where I would place my film development tests.

tim in san jose