ciofalo

An afterthought: also the Graflex XL used a helicoid for focusing. However, this last example contradicts, rather than supporting, your surmise that a tube-mount system will be more durable and rigid; in fact, the XL helicoid was an example of bad design and yielded stiff movements and easy breakdowns.

All Koni Omega cameras used a sliding retractable tube, and all Mamiya Press cameras used a helicoid. They are all high quality cameras, although somewhat underrated. On an even higher level, the Linhof Press used a helicoid and required lenses fitted with a special mount.

I stumbled on this old thread by sheer chance and I couldn't believe my eyes. The amount of bullshit profused here is really amazing. In some answers Italy and Europe in general are described as though they were semi-barbarous countries, and Sicily is even defined "the pretty wild island of Sicily". The funny thing is that most of the concern comes from people travelling to Europe from the United States. May I just remind them that the rates of crime in the USA are by far and large higher than in Europe (including my "wild" Sicily)?

In the discussion on the current (Nov 13 2003) �Photo of the week�, I

tried twice to insert a comment along the following lines (sorry, I

did not keep a separate record and quote by hearth): �THE �ELVES� MADE

A MISTAKE IN CHOOSING THIS PARTICULAR PHOTO AS POTW, AND WOULD BE WISE

TO SHOW UP AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE DISCUSSION IT ELICITED WENT ALONG

QUITE DIFFERENT LINES THAN THOSE IT WAS SUPPOSED TO PROVOKE (I.E.

LIGHT AS A PHOTOGRAPHIC SUBJECT, ETC.)�. Both times this rather

harmless sentence was �edited� (i.e., censored). I think this was

overdone: expressing civilly one�s opinion on the appropriateness of

the elves� choices seems to me a quite legitimate topic for

discussion, and can hardly be separated from the rest of the debate.

Managing a large web site creates responsibilities of the same kind

as those typical of a newspaper�s director, which include avoiding all

forms of censorship short of those on really nasty, offending, or

obscene matter. Even a bartender can throw away customers who break

bottles and make a riot, but cannot throw away customers who express

their disagreement on the quality of the cocktails being served.

Frankly, I find this kind of self-protective censorship (directed

against those who criticize the curators themselves, while leaving

common users free to tear each other to pieces) unacceptable in a free

site.

Thank you very much for your responses. I was particularly puzzled about the rear end of the bellows, and I had no idea that the same screws which hold the Graflock sliders also hold the bellows back.

Now I have followed your suggestions and I have successfully managed to switch the two bellows between the camera bodies as I wished.

Just one word of warning for hypothetical owners who might wish to follow this route: while taking the bellows off is quite simple, putting them back in place is not that easy! It took several hours of attempts because you don't have much room for your fingers inside the camera body ... Going into details is about impossible without a sketch, but suffice it to say that I wouldn't recommend this unless you are a very patient individual.

I have a Century Graphic with excellent bellows but a lousy body, and

another with poor bellows but a mint body.

Of course I would like to switch the bellows between the two cameras.

Having some tools and some experience, I thought it wouldn't be too

difficult.

However, hard as I looked, I could not figure out how the damned

things can be removed without breaking the whole camera frame.

Can anybody out there be of help? Of course, there is always the

repair shop - but then, where is the fun?

Thank you for any suggestion.

I, and surely many other MFDF users, will appreciate if you will refrain from using this site to advertise your sales.

Regards,

Hello,

I recently sold (to Korea) a 2x3 Linhof rotating ground glass back

which originally came with a Technika 70 I had purchased. I did this

because I have a Linhof Technika III whose ground glass back fits the

70 nicely when necessary (I generally use a roll film back).

Now the buyer says that the ground glass back he bought from me does

not fit his Technika 70. He has also made a sketch of the

problem, suggesting that the back i sold has a thicker circular rail

which does not fit the groove in the rear of his camera.

What is going on? Did 2x3 Linhof Technika cameras and backs come in

different and incompatible versions? Of course I am aware of some

differences, for example the different (single lever versus four

sliding tongs) release mechanism in Technika III - IV, but did not

know of differences in rail profile and thickness.

I am sure that somebody out there (Bob Salomon if nobody else) knows

the answer. Please advice! Of course, if my Korean buyer has good

reasons to complain, I will take the back back (oops) and refund him.

Thank you.

Hello,

I really need to know the minimum focusing distances for the Linhof

Technorama 617 or 612 with the various available lenses. I am

particularly interested in the combination Technorama 617 / 90mm lens,

but if you have the info it would be nice to know about other

combinations as well. This is to verify the applicability of this

camera to scientific photography which would imply a minimum distance

of some 0.3-0.4 m. Any chance? Any suggestions? The point is that

processing 4x5" or larger color film is a slow business here in

Southern Italy, and I hoped a rollfilm back would help (my subjects

are slender, i.e. they would fit nicely a 6x17 cm frame).

Thank you.

And, unless I am much mistaken, any Rolleiflex with the Rolleikin

accessory becomes a 35mm TLR.

Hello,

does anybody know whether dark slides for Mamiya Press backs can be

used on a Mamiya RB67 back?

Thank you.

Hello,

I recently bought a lens (Schneider Super Angulon f:8/90mm) originally

mounted on a 4x5 Linhof. The lens came with its matching (numbered)

focusing cam and lens board. Now, would the same cam work also on a

2x3 Linhof Technika?

Thank you for any reply

Hello,

I bought a Schneider Super Angulon 1:8/90 (serial # 4590778 if this

may help) mounted on a Synchro-Compur shutter (don't know which

number, is it supposed to be written somewhere on the shutter?), with

f: stops from 8 to 64 and times from 1/500 to 1 s (+B). The shutter

does not work at speeds of 1/15 or slower (I knew this, it was a

bargain).

Now, I would like to fix the problem. Before trying to have the

shutter repaired, I would like to look for a replacement. My problem

is, I do not know what exactly the shutter # is and what alternative

brands are available for this lens. I can add that the front

and rear element thread diameter is roughly 21.5mm and the external

assembly diameter is about 45mm (yes, this is a microscopic shutter

indeed).

Anyone out there knows what the exact denomination of the shutter is,

and what alternative models - Compur or other brands - can be used for

this lens? The lens is optically flawless and it would be a pity to

keep it on a faulty shutter. Thank you for any help!

I have been using a cheap Epson Perfection 1200 Photo scanner for scanning and digitizing scientific images recorded on 2x3 colour transparencies. Resolution has never been an issue, therefore I do not understand Pete's comment. I always resolved all the details that were on the film, as seen through a powerful magnifying glass. Colour depth and repeatability can be an issue, but not resolution. Suspicion: is Pete using the scanner correctly? I put the film flat on the scanner glass, emulsion side down, and hold it flat by a second glass.

Hello,

I have heard for a long time that a known problem of Graflex XL is

wear of the "focusing tabs", which are fixed to the focusing collar

and slide along the grooves in the lens barrel. However, I have not

yet understood what new (intact) focusing tabs should look like;

therefore, in the presence of a used XL I cannot tell what their

condition is. I have one, it focuses (more or less), but I suspect

that the "tabs" are actually worn, and cannot be sure.

Can anyone provide pictures (or at least an accurate verbal

description) of the appearance of these mysterious "tabs"? Thanks!

Although this is an oldish thread, I will add this follow up since I have don a bit of (cautious) experimenting.

First, disassembling an XL lens from the barrel turned out to be quite easy. You unscrew the rear section of the lens and loosen the retaining grip which holds together lens and barrel. This can be useful to mount an XL lens on another camera, for example. However, after I did this I was disappointed to find out that the lens actually rests against the front surface of the barrel, so that my hope of moving it 1 mm back to obtain exact focusing was frustrated.

At this point, the only ways to adjust the focusing seem to be those suggested by some contributors, i.e. :

1. Moving the cam which is mounted on the inside surface of the barrel;

2. Moving something in the mirror-rotation mechanism of the rangefinder.

As to (1), the cam is fixed to the barrel by two screws and it is not possible to move it at all. I considered cutting a new cam, and even managed to design it so that (hopefully) focusing should be exact, but this is far from being an easy task, since tolerances in the active profile of the cam should be of the order of 0.1 mm.

As to (2), moving the mirror sounds bad. The mirror only rotates by an infinitesimal angle as the focusing ring is turned, and it seems very likely that tampering with its movement would result in a tragedy.

In the end, I am back with a misadjusted XL rangefinder and no obvious way to fix the problem. I have often adjusted Kalart rangefinders for Century and Crown Grapics, but this XL business looks much more difficult. Any new suggestions? Any RF adjustment manual?

Thank you for any addition to this thread.

Michele Ciofalo

Thanks John for your suggestion. However, the problem is that these lenses are not all that common on Ebay or elsewhere. I have followed Ebay for the last two years or so almost every day, and never came across a Heligon, a Xenotar or a Planar loose lens for the 2x3 format. What you find in abundance are the more common Tessar, Xenar, Skopar or Ektar lenses or the cheap ones (Wollensack etc.). I still wonder whether there is somebody, possibly in Europe, who can try the repair (I sort of love this lens). Thank you, Michele.

Hello, I came across a Rodenstock Heligon f:2.8/80 lens in Prontor

shutter with times from 1 to 1/500 s. The lens is mounted on a

Graflex board and equipped a 2x3 Century Graphics. The glass is clean

and the shutter responds well, but there is a 15-20% separation in the

front element, which shows as a rainbow area near the edge of the

lens. My question is, is the quality of the lens such that it is worth

repairing? and, can this sort of repair be done efficiently? It is

not a matter of picture quality, I cannot see any perceptible effect

of the separation in 8x10" prints, but I am sort of a perfectionist

and would like to have this lens in good conditions. Thank you.

Hello, I came across a box-type camera marked "Gevaert Gevabox". It

has a f:11 10.5 cm lens, a shutter with 1/100, 1/50 and B settings and

a choice (!) of diaphragms between 11 and 16. It accepts 120 rollfilm

and covers a format of 6x9 cm. It probably dates back to the late

1940's. I had never seen this camera before and I wonder whether

anybody out there knows anything about it. Thank you!

Hello,

I wonder if there are rollfilm backs available for Busch Pressman 2x3

cameras. Will graflock backs fit?

I have a Graflex XL with a nice 2.8/80 Planar, but the rangefinder is

not properly calibrated. After many tests, I determined that

everything would work fine if only the lens could be moved backward by

about 1 mm. Now, XL lense are fitted to a huge cylindrical barrel

which bears helicoidal grooves and moves back and forth as you focus.

Is there a simple way - accessible to an amateur with no special tools

- to disassemble the lens proper from this barrel and re-mount it

slightly shifted backward (i.e., toward the camera body)? I am sure

that this would fix my focusing/rangefinder coupling problem. Thank

you for any useful answer.

Hello, I wonder whether Linhof anatomic left-hand grips can

be indifferently mounted on Technikas 2x3 and 4x5, or they

are different. In this case, does anybody know whether adapters

exist which avoid buying a second expensive full grip assembly? Thank

you!

Hello, I came across a used Linhof Technika with a 6x7 Super Rollex

back, but I have no experience on this equipment and I cannot judge if

everything is working properly. In particulare:

1. Rewind lever: is it supposed to have a spring return, or has it to

be brought back manually after each frame (like the one I saw)?

2. Large rubber-lined roll: should it rotate freely around its shaft?

the one I saw is quite sticky and would not rotate when the film

advances, so that the paper back of the film has to slide on it.

Thank you for any bit of information,

Michele Ciofalo

Thanks for the above responses. Yes, there is a lever on the lens that commutes between "T" and "A" settings, and there is a screw to

loosen in order to release it. Your answers have been of great help.

What I cannot figure out is, why Bronica did not just put usual "B"

and "T" settings along with the other exposure times. The available

device is better than nothing, but it is quite awkward as you inevitably move the camera in order to close the shutter.

Thanks again

Michele Ciofalo

I am posting this message again because the last version was probably

unclear and contained a mistake. The problem is, I bought a used Zenza

Bronica SQ-A and was disappointed to find out that the shutter speed

selector does not include "B" and "T" settings, the longest time

available being 8 seconds. I cannot believe that a professional camera

does not allow for long exposures, so there must be a way of obtaining

them! Can anyone help me?