monochromejrnl
Well-known
recently picked one up and now learning how to use it....
the aero ektar 178/2.5 is capable of producing stunning results
the aero ektar 178/2.5 is capable of producing stunning results
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Nice portrait.
I've considered one, more than once. But I think that if I had the money to buy an Aero & get it mounted & the RF adjusted, I'd personally probably be better off with a 90/6.8 Angulon & a 203/7.7 Ektar to go with my Zeiss 135/4.5 Tessar.
OTOH, it's nice to see what it's capable of again. What film did you use?
William
I've considered one, more than once. But I think that if I had the money to buy an Aero & get it mounted & the RF adjusted, I'd personally probably be better off with a 90/6.8 Angulon & a 203/7.7 Ektar to go with my Zeiss 135/4.5 Tessar.
OTOH, it's nice to see what it's capable of again. What film did you use?
William
monochromejrnl
Well-known
William - thanks.
This was taken on Fuji FP100C instant peel apart film. Shot is as a proof before shooting Velvia 100F (yet to be processed).
I find that the camera is barely rigid enough to support the weight of the aero ektar. It's a handful and since all the movements are friction it's not the easiest camera to control precisely.
I'm considering looking for a longer portrait barrel lens to use with the speed graphic. Any suggestions?
This was taken on Fuji FP100C instant peel apart film. Shot is as a proof before shooting Velvia 100F (yet to be processed).
I find that the camera is barely rigid enough to support the weight of the aero ektar. It's a handful and since all the movements are friction it's not the easiest camera to control precisely.
I'm considering looking for a longer portrait barrel lens to use with the speed graphic. Any suggestions?
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Barrel? Things get wide open, as it were, then. Are you at http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/ ? The lens forum is very interesting.
I'd look for a turn of the century Petzval or Tessar.
I have a beautiful 5x8 (bit more than 9" focal lenth) B&L Zeiss Tessar. It's a Series IIB f6.3 lens and is quite nice. It's from about 1912 and I got silly lucky on ebay about 5 years ago. I don't use it much these days as I prefer my much lighter Crown Graphic.
William
I'd look for a turn of the century Petzval or Tessar.
I have a beautiful 5x8 (bit more than 9" focal lenth) B&L Zeiss Tessar. It's a Series IIB f6.3 lens and is quite nice. It's from about 1912 and I got silly lucky on ebay about 5 years ago. I don't use it much these days as I prefer my much lighter Crown Graphic.
William
vha
Isn't it coffee time ?
Got one, but have not had time for using it this summer yet, hope the autumn gives time to spend. Gives a really unique style, recommend to look at Flickr in the Aero Ektar group, think i have one or two photos there myself too. Nice setup but heavy to carry around 
But you got to love a biotar . . .
But you got to love a biotar . . .
ChrisN
Striving
Lovely results! Very different from the SWC!
monochromejrnl
Well-known
Chris - yes, very different from the SWC but both are wonderful tools suited for very different purposes... I love them both and suspect, that like the SWC, my 'burnett combo' will be a keeper...
here are a few more I've taken recently...
and one of me, taken by my wife (she's a fast learner - never used a 4x5 camera before)
here are a few more I've taken recently...
and one of me, taken by my wife (she's a fast learner - never used a 4x5 camera before)
Neare
Well-known
This has been a combo I've lusted after for quite a while, but always stop myself from going down that track at the moment. =D
Also make sure to add a JoJo hood for extra awesomeness
If you're going for a longer portrait, keeping in line with the aero-ektar a petzval would be most appropriate. But if the speed graphic is already struggling with the weight, don't know how you are going to support one.
Also make sure to add a JoJo hood for extra awesomeness
If you're going for a longer portrait, keeping in line with the aero-ektar a petzval would be most appropriate. But if the speed graphic is already struggling with the weight, don't know how you are going to support one.
lambis
Member
Here one portrait of my Aero / graflex combo.
Fuji FP-100C film expired
Fuji FP-100C film expired
Frank Petronio
Well-known
SK Grimes can put an Aero into an Acme. But you'll only get a top speed of 1/50th (maybe) and it would cost well over a grand.
I've been there, done it, and caution you about Aeros and Speeds. It's a shame Burnett doesn't make any money from all the copycats he inspired.... If you go on the sports photo forum there is always some yahoo from the Midwest selling his Speed/Aero because they thought it would jazz up their sports photography until they realized how hard it was to make a decent picture with the rig.
It's a cool look until you realize that so many other people are doing it too, and then you realize that you can't "buy" creativity.
Same deal with all the guys who chase old brass portrait lenses on the LF forum... or Notctiluxes here ;-)
From a practical photo point of view, the depth of field is so short and the portrait distances so close, that using the Speed Graphic rangefinder or hoping people are still enough to hold your ground glass focus is a total crapshoot. You can get lucky and maybe the focus hits their lips instead of their eyelashes and you can call it an arty shot, but in the end you waste a lot of expensive film going down this path.
And yeah, unless you build a support, the lens is too big for the front standard. And it is radioactive. And it flares more than others. And your arms will fail you unless you use a monopod.
Not to rain on the parade but why not get a simple basic Speed or Crown and a normal f/5.6 lens and really shoot a lot and learn how to make portraits instead of going for an effect? The bokeh of even the sharp modern lenses is excellent wide open and you actually have an entire inch of depth of field, which is so much more forgiving... if you want to re-create some of Burnett's weirdly focused pictures, use odd camera movements to have some control over what you're doing.
I like the messed up Aero bokeh too, when it works, but I fear it is a one-trick pony.
Finally, the best rig for experimenting with old barrel lenses is a heavy-duty Sinar with a Sinar shutter and a lens iris chuck (like a drill chuck) so that you can insert any old lens onto the camera and see exactly what it can do within seconds.
I've been there, done it, and caution you about Aeros and Speeds. It's a shame Burnett doesn't make any money from all the copycats he inspired.... If you go on the sports photo forum there is always some yahoo from the Midwest selling his Speed/Aero because they thought it would jazz up their sports photography until they realized how hard it was to make a decent picture with the rig.
It's a cool look until you realize that so many other people are doing it too, and then you realize that you can't "buy" creativity.
Same deal with all the guys who chase old brass portrait lenses on the LF forum... or Notctiluxes here ;-)
From a practical photo point of view, the depth of field is so short and the portrait distances so close, that using the Speed Graphic rangefinder or hoping people are still enough to hold your ground glass focus is a total crapshoot. You can get lucky and maybe the focus hits their lips instead of their eyelashes and you can call it an arty shot, but in the end you waste a lot of expensive film going down this path.
And yeah, unless you build a support, the lens is too big for the front standard. And it is radioactive. And it flares more than others. And your arms will fail you unless you use a monopod.
Not to rain on the parade but why not get a simple basic Speed or Crown and a normal f/5.6 lens and really shoot a lot and learn how to make portraits instead of going for an effect? The bokeh of even the sharp modern lenses is excellent wide open and you actually have an entire inch of depth of field, which is so much more forgiving... if you want to re-create some of Burnett's weirdly focused pictures, use odd camera movements to have some control over what you're doing.
I like the messed up Aero bokeh too, when it works, but I fear it is a one-trick pony.
Finally, the best rig for experimenting with old barrel lenses is a heavy-duty Sinar with a Sinar shutter and a lens iris chuck (like a drill chuck) so that you can insert any old lens onto the camera and see exactly what it can do within seconds.
oftheherd
Veteran
Now why didn't I ever think of that? Or 5 to 6 screws in small angle brackets with rubber tips or inntertube strips around the lens barrel.
Thank you sir!
monochromejrnl
Well-known
Frank - you're right. I certainly wouldn't want to try to make a living using this rig given it's lack of versatility and precision. I managed to pick this up for a song and happily use it to entertain visitors who want their picture taken with a clumsy old camera. It's a novelty set up for sure, but one that can be enjoyed despite it's shortcomings.
lambis
Member
Frank is absolut right about the issue with Aeros and alikes. That was a reason that i after one year playing arount, i sold my rig in Ebay for very good money as it was a hell to shoot people and portraits. That with looks... is the same as today photographers use a Canon 5D with a 85mm 1.2 lens. On the end, if they are really creative and inovative, all photos look alike.
The bokeh of those lenses is beautifull but sometimes, depence of the background its can be anoying and distract from the main subject in the photo, on the end you get just a photo with a WOW look the bokeh factor. Photography is more than that.
The bokeh of those lenses is beautifull but sometimes, depence of the background its can be anoying and distract from the main subject in the photo, on the end you get just a photo with a WOW look the bokeh factor. Photography is more than that.