Graflex.org

ngonping · Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Posts: 19 Location: London

when shopping for lenses for a crown, what is the shortest focal length before the camera is visible in frame? I considered the schneider super angulon 72mm or 58mm.

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2146 Location: New Jersey

I don't have a good answer off the top of my head. What I do know is that the bed drops 15 degrees and that that is enough to keep it out of the picture when I mount a 44/2.8 Elcan on my 2x3 Speed and when other folks mount a 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon on a Century.

If I were you, I'd draw a crude sketch of the camera and ask what the angle between the camera's optical axis and a ray projected from the optical axis' intersection with the front standard (set the front standard at the lens' flange focal distance) that just hits the end of the dropped bed is. If the lens' vertical angle of view is less than twice that angle, it will work for you.

Good luck, have fun,

Dan

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

My 90mm Angulon catches the bed every time I forget to drop it. On the other hand I've successfully used a 58mm Grandagon with the bed dropped without any sight of the bed.

I hope this helps.

Les
_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison

C. Henry · Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:15 pm Post subject:

N.

If we knew if your crown is a 2 x 3 or a 4 x 5 it might help us to give you a valid answer. Actually the size of the frame on the film is the critical factor!
I see that Dan Fromm gave you an answer based on his 2 x 3 Speed, while Les did not specify the size of the camera I would assume from earlier posts by him that he is referring to a 4 x 5 camera in his answer.
I have no sign of the bed in the frame when I use a 65mm f:6.8 Leitmeyr on my 2 x 3 Speed Graphic even without dropping the bed.

C. Henry

ngonping · Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Posts: 19 Location: London

it's a 4 x 5. also i'm wondering about the shutter linkage for alot of lenses. i would rather do without the cable release, or use a short one. therefore i can stabilise the camera using my right hand too. is this possible using a 20cm cable release?

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

One of the many design problems of the body release is the paddles (the chrome metal finger that trips the shutter release. Different shutters took different length paddles and unless you adjust the lens in the lens board juuust right these paddles would have to be adjust in slightly different positions along the post. They also make taking the lens board on and a bit more difficult.

Graflex made an accessory that was in effect a cable release holder. It was attached just above the handle mount on the left side the cable was attached to the lens and then snapped into the mount. This allowed you to bare most of the weight of the camera in the left hand with the right hand stabilizing and focusing and your left thumb tripped the shutter.

If I can find mine I'll take a photo of it. The trouble with these are cable releases that fit them are becoming hard to find now.

On several occasions I've tied a cable release to the top handle mount with wire or string. It ain't pretty but it's darned effective and works on any cable release though I prefer the small ones with fabric cover and no collar lock for this application.
_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison

ngonping · Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Posts: 19 Location: London

is the crown easier than the speed graphic, and also the linhof to use handheld. i imagine it is, becuase of the wooden body. i will find out anyway. per your advice i'm going to get a 20cm fabric covered release. i can always get a long one with a lock, for self portraits etc on a tripod.