| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pierreg
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2
Location: France
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:23 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Is is possible to use a new lens on a Graflex or do you have to stick to old ones ?
I am new to view cameras, I just have an old 5*7 Cambo that I have not used yet... But I am thinking af using a Graflex for landscape while travelling...
Thanks
Pierre
_________________
http://www.pierre-grimaud.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rangemaster
Joined: 06 Jul 2001
Posts: 412
Location: Montana, Glacier National Park
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You can use virtually any lens that will mount to the lens board on your graphic...
Dave
_________________
Focus on the Picture, Not on the Glass.
Satin Snow(TM) Ground Glass |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2146
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2006-09-22 08:23, pierreg wrote:
Is is possible to use a new lens on a Graflex or do you have to stick to old ones ?
I am new to view cameras, I just have an old 5*7 Cambo that I have not used yet... But I am thinking af using a Graflex for landscape while travelling...
Thanks
Pierre
|
Graflex reflex, Speed Graphic, or Crown Graphic?
The lenses that can be used on your camera are limited by the lens' flange-to-film distance at infinity, the camera's maximum extension, the lens' barrel's diameter at the rear (has to pass through the front standard), and, for the Crown, whether the lens is in shutter.
The barrel's diameter isn't quite as limiting as one would think, since it is often possible to mount a lens whose rear cell won't pass through the camera's lens throat. Unscrew rear cell from shutter, mount lens board on front standard, remove focusing panel, screw rear cell into the shutter from behind. I go through this routine to use a 58 Grandagon on my 2x3 Speed Graphic.
Tell us more about your camera and the lenses you're thinking about putting on it.
Bonne chance,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pierreg
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2
Location: France
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For the moment I haven't any Graflex, I have just read on a French forum that they were not expansive and very good cameras. Then I read an article in the National Geagraphic where one of there photographers used a Graflex to photograph New Orleans. I was a bit astonished buy this photographer that used such a camera and wanted to learn more.
Now I have learnt a lot threw Graflex.org but wanted to know if it was possible to use new lenses on this old good camera.
Today I know it is possible, many thanks to both of you.
I am plannig to use a Graflex for landscape and portrait photography during travells in Russia, my 5*7 is far too big to take with me over there on plane. Mainly for black and white with Foma films and a little color.
I haven't figured out what model to buy. The new lenses I was thinking of are the Schneider Apo Symmar 150 f5.6 and perhaps a wide angle. I do not know how the old lenses make it... As said I am new to view cameras.
But I need to go deaper on this site before taking a decision.
Thanks again
Pierre
_________________
http://www.pierre-grimaud.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
troublemaker
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Posts: 715
Location: So Cal
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| There is nothing wrong with the period lenses that were used on the Graflex cameras, esspecially if they are found in good condition and the shutters on the cameras opperate well. Someone might suggest that an older lens may actually produce a more pleasing image than that representing a modern multicoated super-duper and very expensive lens, which would also have to be mounted. Some of the standard lenses like the 135 and 162 Optars, and similar Ektars I have used have produced impressive results. The German Xenars can also be very good if not better. Thus if one looked for a Graphic in very good condition with good glass and ready to take to the field, it might be found to be pretty darn good just the way it is, or with some minor service and or cleaning... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2146
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2006-09-23 12:42, troublemaker wrote:
There is nothing wrong with the period lenses that were used on the Graflex cameras, esspecially if they are found in good condition and the shutters on the cameras opperate well. Someone might suggest that an older lens may actually produce a more pleasing image than that representing a modern multicoated super-duper and very expensive lens, which would also have to be mounted. Some of the standard lenses like the 135 and 162 Optars, and similar Ektars I have used have produced impressive results. The German Xenars can also be very good if not better. Thus if one looked for a Graphic in very good condition with good glass and ready to take to the field, it might be found to be pretty darn good just the way it is, or with some minor service and or cleaning...
|
Not to quarrel with you or anything, but I think you underrate at least some period lenses. I've shot a couple of 1912 CZJ f/6.3 Tessars against modern coated lenses including a convertible Symmar, a modern f/4.7 Tessar, ... and the old crocks are every bit as good. But remember that all of the lenses in question are long for the format I shoot, 2x3.
That said, the lenses most commonly sold with 4x5 Graphics are 127 and 135 Tessar types that are a little short for 4x5. Philippe might be better off with a 152 Ektar than with one of them. But the first thing for him to do is get a camera and find out, as you suggest, what it can do as received.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Henry
Joined: 09 May 2001
Posts: 1648
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan, check your P. M. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2146
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2006-09-23 17:38, Henry wrote:
Dan, check your P. M.
|
I've checked and replied.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2146
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2006-09-23 17:38, Henry wrote:
Dan, check your P. M.
|
Henry, I've had some afterthoughts, sent you a second message.
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
troublemaker
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Posts: 715
Location: So Cal
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dan I was saying the opposite, that a vintage lens can be quite good rather than underating them.
And have acquired a couple more uncoated optics myself, and have mentioned in other posts that I currently favor an early 1900's Cooke 7" (nice and light in barrel) I have set up with the RF on a Speed 45. I also have boards for a Mini-Speed and Speed 23. It is a very nice piece of glass, and performs much better than my 7-1/2" Kodak Anistigmat or Ilex (both of which are about equally hard to like). That said, I still believe, and more so as time goes by, that the end product, the finished image, is the bar by which the value of any lens can be fixed. I acquired a couple later model lenses to mount on my backpacker Century this summer, and after one trip went back to the Trioptar 103. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
