sg_adams

<p>Yup, Century Graphic, I have a few like that. I even have one with the same lens. Nice lens by the way. A Rodenstock triplet of very good quality, and a good coating providing nice contrasty images. <br>

This is a nice camera you have. </p>

 

<p>Interesting, I've never seen one of these top mounted rangefinders on a 23 Series Crown or Speed Graphic. You say they started this in '55?</p>

<p>P.S. Dont try and pop your rails out however loose they seem. If your shorter rear rails, what I think you are calling the storage rails, wont run out all the way onto the front guides, there is a severe alignment issue as the rear and front are supposed to be perfectly in line for running the rials out for close focussing and such. If this is so, you might try to lift the rear rails or otherwise help with a finger as you try to run the rails out. If it gets too tight I'd hold off. There are other better ways to get at it. If you have problems let me know and I'll try and offer some suggestions. I hope I helped a little less than confusing you...</p>

 

<p>There aren't any brass anything regarding the focussing rails on the Crown Graphic series of cameras (read Pacemaker). I'm assuming by "Baby" you mean a Pacemaker Crown Graphic 23. Not jumping on you, just clarifying for the next time you need some help it will be more clear what you have there. It's pretty common for confusion to arise between the later PAcemaker series 23 cameras and the Miniature Speed Graphic which is an earlier stand alone design produced from the 1930's until the full line of Pacemaker cameras were introduced (or nearly so). the Miniature, or Mini-Speed being older, does have brass guides, painted black, and the rails are satin chrome brass. It's a heavy little camera. The Pacemakers have magnesium (like a VW engine case) guides, and lightly silver anodized aluminum focus rails. Go easy on those infinity stop set screws or you'll have some big indents in the rail.<br>

Though I usually tear a camera down as completely as possible, I believe you can get the rails out easy enough by simply running the rear set out onto the front guides, and then just remove the guides. I clean mine with WD-40 and a tooth brush, and or Simple Green depending on the gunk. Then I use a light grease for reassembly. You may have to fool around with the guides a bit to get them straight and with not too much tension, and not too much play. Do this by using the fwd and rear screws and squeezing the guides in on the rails on this side or that until you get a nice allignment. Sometimes you just put in the screws and all is well, other times a lot of tinkering.<br>

Find a screwdriver that fits the heads well so as not to bugger up the screws. <br>

Don't know the condition of your bellows, but I don't like to stress them pulling the front standard off the front of the camera. If you don't want to detach the front standard from the bellows, can be ornery to get back together, you can run the rails all the way back in the camera,, place the front standard back there like closing the camera, drop the front bed into its full down position, run the focus rails as far fwd as they will go in this drop bed posture, and then the standard should slide right off from the short rear rails. Can be put back on that way also. With some cameras, a little help might be needed to coax the rear rails back while turning the focus knob. and be darn sure to get them back in there before you put the dropped bed back straight in its normal position. <br>

And above all, have a good time with it. <br>

SG Adams </p>

<p>John, oh you know it ! this fall in the mountains I still had the summer 20wt50 oil Valvoline Race I run in it and you can actually hear the oil flutter my extra cooler if you try and rev it before it gets warm enough. It can take quite awhile. They recomended tranny fluid in extreme conditions, but have to drive slow. </p>

<p>Great comments...<br>

Yeah, you can't use the heater with the windows all up. Mine cranks, but even with new heater boxes in the rear there it's still pretty deadly. I use it sparingly. I added some carpet over the wheel wells in the front that the seats mount to, and carpeted the floor in form and back and that helps with all the metal around your feet and legs. Worked pretty good this fall, and right now as it's unusually cold in San Pedro these last few days. <br>

As for the engine, I have a few extra horespower with a speed feeder for the squirels. I'm currently trying a small stroker engine which has been working out rather well. We built a moderate performance engine using the 1641,, piston size, but with the longer stroke it came to 1866 or thereabouts. Mild cam,dual 40 carbs, complete head work-over, and combined with stock compression seems to have turned out a great traveling motor. It seems a big improvement going up or down steep windy mountain roads. It has good slow down and mid range power due to the longer stroke. Top end passing power fell off some compared to my big bore 1914cc engine, but that one is thin walled and gets pretty hot in the summer. The bus starts to get pretty floaty at high speeds anyways.<br>

I also run a suplimental oil filter, cooler and pan sump, which brings my oil up from a little over 3 qts to 6. That makes a huge difference making the long drives in the summer. When I added the extra sump the engine ran noticeably better when things heated up. <br>

Spare parts? You can't carry everything, but I travel with a set of new cables, belt, one complete rear drive axle with cv joints, fuel pump, and a few other odds and ends in the tool box. Last time up in N.Cal I put a gal's exhaust back together on her Vanagon and even had a set of gaskets. Which reminds me I should send a pretend invoice...just for fun. So yeah it's a fun vehicle once you get out of big city traffic. If you look up "love-hate" relationship in the dictionary there is a picture of my bus. It can be a pain in the ass sometimes, especially if it gets windy. Sometimes it's best to just go to ground. </p>

<p>Mine is a '71. And, did you get out and do the hike up Lassen Peak? </p>

<p>I now haul my classic landscape photography kit with an old style frame pack. Complete with my boyscout patches from the 70's.<br>

Only the top photo is 4x5. The middle is my Nikon 35mm with Velvia 100, but I really like this shot. Aren't the White Mtns cool !</p>

<p>And the backpack shot is my Crown 23 with Reala 100 roll film. </p>

<p>And if that aint enough to get you thinking retro adventure...</p><div></div>

<p>And if just getting there is half the fun, and I'm thinking retro, I thought I'd show you all another photo of the classic camera image pursuit vehicle....and it's been to Lassen quite a few times including last July. </p><div></div>

<p>I've been getting the scanning down better, and while I don't shoot much 4x5, or as much as a I probably should, I dug a couple films out to sample and thought I'd share this one as it is one of my favorite places. <br>

The camera is a 1964 Crown Graphic late model with a nice top RF and working RF light for focussing in the dark. It is the first Graphic I ever got, and this photo is from the first trip I made packing big camera gear. <br>

I've been to Lassen National Park numerous times. As a child traveling the country with my folks, as a 12 year old on my first ten night backpack adventure, and almost every year for the last twelve years, sometimes stopping thru for a night on my way round the state coming or going form the north coast or eastern Sierra. <br>

I try and take the evening sunset walk around this beautiful lake whenever I am there. My folks chanced upon this lake while out for a drive before I was born, as my Mom says she had a bad headache, so my Dad just drove on up into the hills to get out of the Redding valley heat (it was 115 degrees around July 4th when I was up that way this last summer), Mom was napping in the car, and my Dad says he woke her up so she could look out and see where they were. This is very close to the spot where you enter the Park and the lake comes into view. This is a short walk from the entrance station, which as far as I know has not changed in all these years (about fifty). <br>

Not I understand folks suggest when shooting large format that there isn't any scenery beyond 100 yards form the car, but I stretched it here and it's probably closer to an eight of a mile, and a walk around the lake may be two. It is a fairly large lake, and excellent fishing for sportsmen. It is also usually very peaceful and one can here folks talking across the lake. It gets quite beautiful in the Fall, and this image was shot in the first week of Oct I believe. <br>

The film is Provia 100, and the lens is a junky old 90mm 6.8 Angulon in a bad shutter. It was an inexpensive lens, so I tried it. I still use it as I haven't found it necessary to replace it. Not that junky after all. <br>

So, for me, to go back to this place always has some nostalgia, and brings me back to those days traveling in 1970's vehicles, frame backpacks, campfires, and just being there... </p><div></div>

<p>Shoot it and see. I have an old 127mm Wollensak Velostigmat, pre-coating so guessing early 1940's lens, that I got on a beat up old wood Spped Graphic lens board that looked like someone was using it as a dart board. Seriously; it had what look very much like dart point hits. And looks like one hit the lens. Bullseye ! I bought the lens for the shutter parts (Supermatic #2) . But I got the shutter working so good I tried the lens and it is a real nice shooter and I've posted images made with it here as I keep it mounted on a Miniature Speed Graphic of a similar vintage. Absolutely no problem with mine, but I do use a lens shade with these old lenses as a rule whenever possible to avoid flaring. </p>

<p>I just order the regular Kodak fixer from B&H. I didn't really want to start getting the powder, but like yourself, my local supplier of the liquid I liked (which was non-hardening) doesn't carry it anymore. So I had to go back to mixing the powder up in gallon batches. The problem, I found out quickly when shopping fixers, is the rapids can't be shipped, but the Kodak standard hardening fixer powder can. That settled that. So now my fixing times are a bit too long for my impatience, but it has been working very good on both film, excellent, and paper, OK. The reason I say just OK for paper is that I prefer non-hardening for paper for toning purposes. Hardened prints don't take to toning the way an unhardened on will. I'd liken it to trying to tone resin coated paper or some such plastic thing like that. <br>

As for the film, I find my extended wash times after using a slightly longish fix in the Kodak gives good clean negs with all the magenta layer cleaning off really well. </p>

<p>Yeah, great you got a chance to talk and listen to the WWII vets. Not a whole lot walking around now. I was getting a burger one evening and a B-24 bomber crew happened to be sitting next to me and wanted to talk. I listened. Whatever seemed so important to do that night that I was getting fast food dinner was forgotten. </p>

<p>Add your location. I had to go to your gallery to figure out about where you are at.<br>

Support your local labs whatever it costs. $4 isn't that high anymore.. <br>

Start developing your own film. I get cleaner results when I take the time and effort to do it, and feel like I am controlling the whole process, which is true. <br>

Try posting this in the film forum... </p>

<p>Probably ought to sell it and get the 7" Aero-Ektar as that is the popular fast lens forthe speed Graphic and the rangefinder will even work with it reasonably well after some careful calibrating. The Speed Graphic is a pretty solid camera but they do get unstable with big heavy lenses way out on the rails. I made an aluminum plate to support the drop bed better when using big lenses like my 15"Tele Raptar, which you might look into one of those, but they are only 5.6 lenses. Can be a nice lens for some things, but yeah, heavy. </p>

<p>Yup, Vinny is right. Two completely different forms of media and too many variables to make any realistic comparison. This has been done to death. If you like using film, use film, or do digital.</p>

<p>Oh well, does Ed support that scanner? There is a list on the site. Mine didn't seem to work right either. So I cleared anything scanner related I could find in my computer, and then re-started it. Then went and and reloaded Vuescan with my scanner hooked up and on. Then I shut everything down, unplugged the scanner completely, and fired that back up. After the scanner did it's thing I changed USB ports and started the computer back up. Haven't had a problem since. </p>

<p>Boy will you have a great surprise on Christmas ! </p>

<p>The front and rear elements unscrew fairly easy making cleaning the inside surfaces no problem. You can also unscrew the retaining rings on the inside of the front group and clean between the elements there. And sometimes the rear gorup will dissassemble, but I don't think so with the Ektar tessar 127 lens, and the Graflar 101 is a Rodenstock triplet so just the inside surface there. This usually does the trick. The Graflar is a pretty nice shooter covering 6x9 nicely with a good single coating and mine is quite sharp even with a big ding in the face of it. To get the inner retaining rings out I have a variety of rubber furniture tips cut at various lengths so as to press against the ring but not the lens. Occasionally I find one that requires quite a bit of pressure to get it out, but with care I haven't messed up any glass after doing an awful lot of them Only a couple over the years have I not been able to get apart, one had a dinged lens ring. I believe the rear elements of the Ektar 127 are cemented, so if there's fungus between these not much you can do. Keep the lens shaded well from direct light. It's pretty amazing what these old lenses can shoot thru and still produce excellent negs. </p>

<p>Eee Gads, that's worse than I remembered. Yes, a huge improvement. Have also been studying anything I can find to read up on scanning. Looks like some multi-pass process may even make some of my lesser slide films work also, so that's my next project to study. Then I'll work on my web presentation skills. </p>

<p>Great to see some more of your nice work. Especially like the hose bib. That is a nice lens, and you do get the most out of them with your early morning town compositions. </p>

<p>I think I have something like twenty or more assorted 127 and 135mm lenses. Most are very good, a couple excellent. And 135 makes what I consider a fine 6x9 lens, and I actually consider it normal in the visual sense. Perhaps you all can talk me into using them more. </p>

<p>Down below in the middle ground you can see the same lake I shot over in the last image. I've taken a liking the last couple years of staying up on the high passes when the weather allows. You can see the reason why yes? There are some great slabs and blocks of granite with sand flats to camp on on this pass, and just about every pass has at least a nice bivy flat. I bring extra water up but here, and on Mather pass the next week was melting snow by dinner time and for coffee. This is also Ektar film. I couldn't get anything out of this frame or a couple like it with the old system. Now I find I have a whole collection of stuff like this that are really fun to work with. Not a great composition, but a great place if you catch my feeling for it. This is the 65mm Angulon lens again. But figure to give you an idea of the scale and proximity I'd have to use a 135mm lens. The problem with that is you wouldn't see much. So I carry the 103 and 65mm lenses. I keep saying I'm going to bring a 135 but don't want to carry it. </p>

<p>Love this place. I try to hike up in this area every year. This is from this last July on a very buggy rainy four day outing. The route up into this basin is an old unmaintained foot path and is quite fun. Here in the upper basin there is some trail and cairns, but it is just as easy to hike wherever you want to go. This roll of Ektar and another roll I shot during these couple days I thought were pretty much useless as they were scanning with such a blue cast. But as you can see here, I got a handle on it all right. I'm not done working with these images as I don't have it quite right yet, but what a difference. The foreground and all the rock was very bluish no matter what I tried before. There was no way I could get these more realistic earthy colors. The Sierra granite is interesting in that in different light it can have this iron filled rusty brown look in many places, but in different light can look light gray almost white with that salt and pepper grain. <br>

The camera is the backpacker Crown Graphic, and the lens is the formidable 65mm 6.8 Angulon. Tiny, light weight, and easy to focus. Much sharper than the Wollensak 65mm Raptar or Optar 6.8 which I used for a while. </p>

<div></div>