Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
One of the great things about these cameras is being able to fiddle with them and maintain them yourself.
I've stripped and cleaned the Compur shutter and dismantled and cleaned the Xenar lens on mine and recalibrated the rangefinder a couple of times. I pulled the top of recently and cleaned the mirrors in the rangefinder ... incredibly simple setup!
I truly love my Crown and for the three hundred or so dollars I paid for it it's given me an immense amount of pleasure and provided me with some amazing photographs!
Very, very real photography!
I've stripped and cleaned the Compur shutter and dismantled and cleaned the Xenar lens on mine and recalibrated the rangefinder a couple of times. I pulled the top of recently and cleaned the mirrors in the rangefinder ... incredibly simple setup!
I truly love my Crown and for the three hundred or so dollars I paid for it it's given me an immense amount of pleasure and provided me with some amazing photographs!
Very, very real photography!
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
This summer, I'm gonna get my picture taken by some street photographer in Nurnberg
Meet me at Fotokina and I'll take it!!
Linhof is on my list, but I'm waiting to get rich first
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I've never quite been able to see the point in the roll film backs for these cameras ... a little like taking the V8 out of your Mustang and dropping in a Corolla engine. More economical yes but you're left with a big camera with a smaller camera's capability!
I guess it added versatility but I see few other advantages.
I guess it added versatility but I see few other advantages.
oftheherd
Veteran
Keith - I remember you lusting after one a year or two ago. Did you get one and not like it after all?
I have a couple, and understand what you are saying (4x5 is nice). But the film is less expensive, and you get the movements not normally possible in MF.
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
I have a Wista 6x7 roll film back for a 4x5. I could see using it with a standard view camera, but not with one of these Press cameras that I'm building. It would go a lot faster and you could get many more pics, but there would have to be modifications to the viewfinders for a good mask so you know what you're shooting. The fact that you'd be getting the middle of the lens, and therefore, no distortion or vignetting would be a plus, but I guess it would really depend on what you wanted to shoot.
graywolf
Well-known
I agree, 4x5 is the reason for shooting a Speed Graphic (Although mine is a Pacemaker Crown Graphic 45 circa 1952). I love flashbulbs too.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
90mm Angulon, 6x9 roll-film back, Tewe finder in the accessory shoe (on many 4x5s, the rear peep-sight for the frame finder is mounted in a standard accessory shoe).
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
graywolf
Well-known
Just to comment on the camera the guy in the photo is using, he probably had a Polaroid back on it. "Take your picture folks? Only $10."
'The camera was most likely a top rangefinder (Post 1955) PaceMaker Crown Graphic 45. It could have been a Speed with the focal plane shutter, but there was no need with that setup. It could also have been a Crown Graphic Special with the Schneider lens, that was a later slightly cheaper version. The grip was probably the one designed for the Graphic XL camera, they sold a mount plate for it to use on the Pacemaker Graphics.
'The camera was most likely a top rangefinder (Post 1955) PaceMaker Crown Graphic 45. It could have been a Speed with the focal plane shutter, but there was no need with that setup. It could also have been a Crown Graphic Special with the Schneider lens, that was a later slightly cheaper version. The grip was probably the one designed for the Graphic XL camera, they sold a mount plate for it to use on the Pacemaker Graphics.
Last edited:
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
My Crown has a threaded hole under the leather hand strap. I'm wondering if that hole is for a grip mount. I still want a grip mount with the cable release.
kuzano
Veteran
Darkrooms nice but not necessary
Darkrooms nice but not necessary
For loading film in holders, there are changing bags or tents. Put the box of film in the bag with your holders, zip the bag closed (lighttight), reach in through the armholes, open the film box, orient the film by notch identification, load the holder... Viola'....
OK, sounds easy, but cleanliness is key, practicing outside the bag, etc. is necessary.
In addition to that, processing film can be done with daylight tanks, where the only dark step is taking the exposed film from the holder into a tank requires something like a dark bathroom. Once the film is in the tank, all other steps are done in daylight. Darkrooms are no longer necessary, although they are nice. I venture that someone who is proficient with daylight processing can keep up with most darkroom users, except for having the dedicated space at $xxx per square foot.
There are tons of videos on Youtube for large format shooting, film processing, various methods, etc. Get all your questions by entering Large Format on Youtube.com
Darkrooms nice but not necessary
For loading film in holders, there are changing bags or tents. Put the box of film in the bag with your holders, zip the bag closed (lighttight), reach in through the armholes, open the film box, orient the film by notch identification, load the holder... Viola'....
OK, sounds easy, but cleanliness is key, practicing outside the bag, etc. is necessary.
In addition to that, processing film can be done with daylight tanks, where the only dark step is taking the exposed film from the holder into a tank requires something like a dark bathroom. Once the film is in the tank, all other steps are done in daylight. Darkrooms are no longer necessary, although they are nice. I venture that someone who is proficient with daylight processing can keep up with most darkroom users, except for having the dedicated space at $xxx per square foot.
There are tons of videos on Youtube for large format shooting, film processing, various methods, etc. Get all your questions by entering Large Format on Youtube.com
Last edited:
venchka
Veteran
There may be a grip for that hole. I use it as a tripod socket. Actually, for a tripod quick release plate.
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
I didn't think about that, but it probably is a tripod socket for portrait style pics. Thanks.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Did I mention the other great fun with a Crown is getting a heap of film holders and progressively discovering which ones have light leaks ... then forgetting and putting them back in with the others so you can do it all over again!
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
LOL!! The joys of Photography.
tbeaman
Newbie
Hi, longtime reader. I thought I might fill in some information:
The camera in the original picture is indeed a Crown Graphic, post-1955 top rangefinder model. You can tell by looking at the nameplate. The "SPEED GRAPHIC" nameplate is all capitalized; The crown in "Crown GRAPHIC" is lowercase script.
The guy reminds me of Louis Mendes, who has a rig like this. He goes around to large events, all across the east coast, taking Polaroid prints and selling them. Nice guy, stylish as hell.
Speaking of which, using Polaroid is a little complicated, so I'll try and break it down simply.
There are two choices of format: 3.25"x4.25" or 4"x5".
Both are "packfilms", which means they come in packs containing 10 prints each.
There are three common types of film available in each size, all made by Fuji.
In 4x5, there is:
FP100C45 - 100 iso color
FP100B45 - 100 iso black and white
FP3000B45 - 3000 iso black and white
The 4x5 only fits in the Polaroid 550 or Fuji PA-45 holder.
In 3.25x4.25, there is:
FP100C - 100 iso color
FP100B - 100 iso black and white
FP3000B - 3000 iso black and white
The 3.25 x 4.25 only fits in the Polaroid 405 or Fuji PA-145 holder.
Both types of holder will only fit in a camera equipped with a Graflok back (generally speaking, without modification).
The camera in the original picture is indeed a Crown Graphic, post-1955 top rangefinder model. You can tell by looking at the nameplate. The "SPEED GRAPHIC" nameplate is all capitalized; The crown in "Crown GRAPHIC" is lowercase script.
The guy reminds me of Louis Mendes, who has a rig like this. He goes around to large events, all across the east coast, taking Polaroid prints and selling them. Nice guy, stylish as hell.
Speaking of which, using Polaroid is a little complicated, so I'll try and break it down simply.
There are two choices of format: 3.25"x4.25" or 4"x5".
Both are "packfilms", which means they come in packs containing 10 prints each.
There are three common types of film available in each size, all made by Fuji.
In 4x5, there is:
FP100C45 - 100 iso color
FP100B45 - 100 iso black and white
FP3000B45 - 3000 iso black and white
The 4x5 only fits in the Polaroid 550 or Fuji PA-45 holder.
In 3.25x4.25, there is:
FP100C - 100 iso color
FP100B - 100 iso black and white
FP3000B - 3000 iso black and white
The 3.25 x 4.25 only fits in the Polaroid 405 or Fuji PA-145 holder.
Both types of holder will only fit in a camera equipped with a Graflok back (generally speaking, without modification).
Last edited:
graywolf
Well-known
Correct! That is what it is.
Pirate
Guitar playing Fotografer
Thanks tbeaman, great info!
graywolf, I'll bet I could adapt a grip to it....
graywolf, I'll bet I could adapt a grip to it....
graywolf
Well-known
Look for a Graflex XL Grip with mount, it should work perfectly (although I am writing from hearsay).
cyberjunkie
Newbie
I came to this forum for something totally different... then i found this thread, browsed three pages of posts, and now i feel compelled to post my opinion.
I recognize that Graflex rangefinder cameras are very nice, i know their value and i recognize that they have been undervalued (and snobbed by some people) for quite some time.
Now there is a resurgence, and many dedicated photographers, most of them not even bon when those cameraswere in their heydays, are looking with interest at them, either as large format RF cameras (with the added benefit of the availability at fair prices of graflock 120 magazines for 6x7 and 6x9), and as a cheap starting to step into large format photography.
Expecially the Speed Graphics, with their focal plane shutter, can be very appealing for the serious photographer on a tight budget. The big advantage of the Speed is that it allows to use cheap barrel lenses, and test those vintage glasses, with that nice retro look.
Everything 's perfect? Not quite. As you get involved in old barrel lenses, you'll soon discover that the most interesting ones (soft focus, process, and long Petzval lenses) would need a longer bellows extension. Some can't be focused on close subjects, and some others won't focus even at infinity!
The Graflex cameras were not meant for extreme lenses, too short focals need a recessed board, and the longer (but not so much..) focals were covered by lenses with telephoto design, which needed a much shorter back-focus than their focal lenght. For a 4x5" the wide angle was a 90mm, the normal a 135mm, and the longest one, as far as i remember, was a 270mm telephoto. You can't go much further. Even the weight of the lens is a concern, the front standard wasn't made for heavy lenses.
That is to say... the Graflex can be a wonderful camera. It was made with a purpose in mind: photojournalism. At that time the emulsions were not as good as today's, so that the bigger... the better!.
Even today it could be a very useful camera, but i'd prefer to use them with 120 backs or with smaller Fuji or Polaroid instant films for 405 back ( Fuji's are still there, and some Polaroid packs can still be found on Ebay every now and then). But when you use 4x5" sheet films, the shortcomings of the camera become more apparent.
It's not just for the limited movements (if you do portrait and lanscape photography it won't matter that much), the limits with the choice of lenses COULD be a problem.
For those willing to be able to shoot handheld, and still taste the full potentiality of large format, a Linhof Technika is the perfect toy
Maybe i am partial, i own one, but i am not a Linhof fanboy!
BTW, i think i am going to sell my Technika III... just to make it clear that is not the camera i love the most.
Nevertheless, it has triple extension, tilt/swing back, ample movements on the front standard, and since at least the mid fifties it comes with a standard graflock back.
The cost for a nice Technika is not so high anymore. I expect to get no more than 350 euros when i decide to put my camera on Ebay. It's a Technika III, fifth and last model before the IV, with graflock back, dedicated shutter cable, leather handle, and original Linhof lensboard. The back and base are almost identical to the Technika IV, the only design flaw was the front standard, that's not as robust as the IV's (but probably a little better than the Graflex's): this small flaw limits the use of very heavy lenses... but you can't mount most of them anyway, cause the lensboard is too small (albeit a little bigger than Graflex boards).
For handheld rangefinder photography, there is the added benefit of easily available cams. Original Linhof-selected lenses, sold with the Technika, had a matching cam with the same serial, but you can trust a non-matching cam if you don't use very long focals. The rangefinder is very good, and most of the times it's perfectly working, with no need for adjustments.
Of course a Technika IV or V, or a Master Technika, are still quite expensive, but not as much as they used to be.
The older Technikas are best avoided, unless they were refitted with a graflock back, and unless you're so lucky to find one in very, very good conditions (not very likely, most of them were professional workhorses).
The best option, price vs. performance, would be the Technika III. They are quite cheap, for what they offer. Just remember to choose the latest version, that is the evolving step towards the IV. It can be easily recognized by the graflock back and by the shape of the base/front cover: it's tapered instead of flat.
I have just found a nice set of cams for the Technika III 13x18, on sale on Ebay. Those cams would be a perfect mach for my 5x7" lenses! Ah, the Technika 13x18, that's a HUGE rangefinder! But i am always too broke to afford one, when i have a chance. That is to remind me, once again, that photography could be a VERY expensive hobby!
have fun
CJ
I recognize that Graflex rangefinder cameras are very nice, i know their value and i recognize that they have been undervalued (and snobbed by some people) for quite some time.
Now there is a resurgence, and many dedicated photographers, most of them not even bon when those cameraswere in their heydays, are looking with interest at them, either as large format RF cameras (with the added benefit of the availability at fair prices of graflock 120 magazines for 6x7 and 6x9), and as a cheap starting to step into large format photography.
Expecially the Speed Graphics, with their focal plane shutter, can be very appealing for the serious photographer on a tight budget. The big advantage of the Speed is that it allows to use cheap barrel lenses, and test those vintage glasses, with that nice retro look.
Everything 's perfect? Not quite. As you get involved in old barrel lenses, you'll soon discover that the most interesting ones (soft focus, process, and long Petzval lenses) would need a longer bellows extension. Some can't be focused on close subjects, and some others won't focus even at infinity!
The Graflex cameras were not meant for extreme lenses, too short focals need a recessed board, and the longer (but not so much..) focals were covered by lenses with telephoto design, which needed a much shorter back-focus than their focal lenght. For a 4x5" the wide angle was a 90mm, the normal a 135mm, and the longest one, as far as i remember, was a 270mm telephoto. You can't go much further. Even the weight of the lens is a concern, the front standard wasn't made for heavy lenses.
That is to say... the Graflex can be a wonderful camera. It was made with a purpose in mind: photojournalism. At that time the emulsions were not as good as today's, so that the bigger... the better!.
Even today it could be a very useful camera, but i'd prefer to use them with 120 backs or with smaller Fuji or Polaroid instant films for 405 back ( Fuji's are still there, and some Polaroid packs can still be found on Ebay every now and then). But when you use 4x5" sheet films, the shortcomings of the camera become more apparent.
It's not just for the limited movements (if you do portrait and lanscape photography it won't matter that much), the limits with the choice of lenses COULD be a problem.
For those willing to be able to shoot handheld, and still taste the full potentiality of large format, a Linhof Technika is the perfect toy
Maybe i am partial, i own one, but i am not a Linhof fanboy!
BTW, i think i am going to sell my Technika III... just to make it clear that is not the camera i love the most.
Nevertheless, it has triple extension, tilt/swing back, ample movements on the front standard, and since at least the mid fifties it comes with a standard graflock back.
The cost for a nice Technika is not so high anymore. I expect to get no more than 350 euros when i decide to put my camera on Ebay. It's a Technika III, fifth and last model before the IV, with graflock back, dedicated shutter cable, leather handle, and original Linhof lensboard. The back and base are almost identical to the Technika IV, the only design flaw was the front standard, that's not as robust as the IV's (but probably a little better than the Graflex's): this small flaw limits the use of very heavy lenses... but you can't mount most of them anyway, cause the lensboard is too small (albeit a little bigger than Graflex boards).
For handheld rangefinder photography, there is the added benefit of easily available cams. Original Linhof-selected lenses, sold with the Technika, had a matching cam with the same serial, but you can trust a non-matching cam if you don't use very long focals. The rangefinder is very good, and most of the times it's perfectly working, with no need for adjustments.
Of course a Technika IV or V, or a Master Technika, are still quite expensive, but not as much as they used to be.
The older Technikas are best avoided, unless they were refitted with a graflock back, and unless you're so lucky to find one in very, very good conditions (not very likely, most of them were professional workhorses).
The best option, price vs. performance, would be the Technika III. They are quite cheap, for what they offer. Just remember to choose the latest version, that is the evolving step towards the IV. It can be easily recognized by the graflock back and by the shape of the base/front cover: it's tapered instead of flat.
I have just found a nice set of cams for the Technika III 13x18, on sale on Ebay. Those cams would be a perfect mach for my 5x7" lenses! Ah, the Technika 13x18, that's a HUGE rangefinder!
But i am always too broke to afford one, when i have a chance. That is to remind me, once again, that photography could be a VERY expensive hobby!have fun
CJ
Last edited:
David Hughes
David Hughes
Thanks, ages ago I resisted the temptation to point out that the camera was not a large one but a small portable version of a proper camera for press use...