Century Graphic or Medalist II?

[motosacto]

Anyone out there shoot much with a Century Graphic and rollfilm back in the rangefinder style? Care to share your experiences?

How about with a Medalist or Medalist II?

I'm curious to read about experiences and see results if possible.

Thanks,

 

[Michael I.]

I am sure there a smaller rollfilm rf for the price of a SG with rollfilm back.

 

[furcafe]

I have no experience w/the Century Graphic, but do regularly shoot a Medalist II (not regularly enough, though) that I had modified for 120 (by Ken Ruth of Photography on Bald Mountain). It's a big beast, but surprisingly (to me) the ergonomics are very good & the lens is as good as its reputation suggests.

Some examples here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/kodakmedalistiic1946/

 

[FPjohn]

Modest View/Range Finder Camera

Modest View/Range Finder Camera

Hello:

A Century is a usable rf camera but remember it comes from the flash photography/ "f8 and be there" era. The kalhart rf is very accurate. I regard it as a fast setup view camera for roll film. A wide range of lenses can be fitted including modern ones such as the Nikkor W or classics such as Tessars, Xenotar and Planars. Also, it is inexpensive.

I cannot speak to a Medalist.

yours
Frank

 

[motosacto]

Hello:

A Century is a usable rf camera but remember it comes from the flash photography/ "f8 and be there" era. The kalhart rf is very accurate. I regard it as a fast setup view camera for roll film. A wide range of lenses can be fitted including modern ones such as the Nikkor W or classics such as Tessars, Xenotar and Planars. Also, it is inexpensive.

I cannot speak to a Medalist.

yours
Frank

Thanks for the info. I have a Century Graphic with mounted up with an Ektar 105 F3.7 (great 5-element lens with a formula similar to a Heliar). I've used it as a view camera, but haven't really done any "walk around" picture-taking with it. The side grip makes it pretty comfortable to hand-hold. The biggest issue for me is that the viewfinder is hard to see through with a rollfilm back installed. I was curious to see if anyone out there had experience shooting candids with one.

 

[motosacto]

I have no experience w/the Century Graphic, but do regularly shoot a Medalist II (not regularly enough, though) that I had modified for 120 (by Ken Ruth of Photography on Bald Mountain). It's a big beast, but surprisingly (to me) the ergonomics are very good & the lens is as good as its reputation suggests.

Some examples here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/kodakmedalistiic1946/

Thanks for the link to the gallery! I had a medalist for a while and was thinking about getting another one. Seeing pictures helps for sure, but I'm still on the fence regarding a purchase....

 

[FPjohn]

Slide in back

Slide in back

Hello:

A slide in back like the Rapid-Rollex or I believe the Calumet (were they made for 6x9 backs?) allows one to put a Century to the face. The Rollex appears occasionally on the auction site and is still available from Linhof (not cheap).

yours
Frank

 

[harry01562]

I occasionally shoot a Crown with the 105/3.7, and agree completely about the lens quality. Sold my Century long time ago, but I remember the molded back was somewhat different than the others, because it was not removeable. With a bit of an angled view, I can get close to the VF on mine, with the holder attached.
I like the fact that I can have a choice of negative sizes, by just changing inserts, and use either 120 or 220 film, as well. Great versatility with the Graphics, and not a lot of money needed.
Has anyone put frame marks on the glass of the VF?? I can change inserts, of course, but that might be a quick, simple way of doing things. After all, it's just the vertical lines, and they need not be completely drawn, just top and bottom.
I find I seldom use the full 2x3, and I like the slight tele view of the 105.
Someday, I'll find a good price on a decent wide angle, and be a very happy camper :angel: If anyone has one for a decent trade.....
Street shooting is a bit of a problem, because the camera can attract attention. People do seem to just shake their heads and grin, however. Noone has asked if it's digital, which is nice.
Harry

 

[motosacto]

I occasionally shoot a Crown with the 105/3.7, and agree completely about the lens quality. Sold my Century long time ago, but I remember the molded back was somewhat different than the others, because it was not removeable. With a bit of an angled view, I can get close to the VF on mine, with the holder attached.
I like the fact that I can have a choice of negative sizes, by just changing inserts, and use either 120 or 220 film, as well. Great versatility with the Graphics, and not a lot of money needed.
Has anyone put frame marks on the glass of the VF?? I can change inserts, of course, but that might be a quick, simple way of doing things. After all, it's just the vertical lines, and they need not be completely drawn, just top and bottom.
I find I seldom use the full 2x3, and I like the slight tele view of the 105.
Someday, I'll find a good price on a decent wide angle, and be a very happy camper :angel: If anyone has one for a decent trade.....
Street shooting is a bit of a problem, because the camera can attract attention. People do seem to just shake their heads and grin, however. Noone has asked if it's digital, which is nice.
Harry

I picked up a Schneider 65mm f6.8 Angulon (a little tiny lens) and have used it on my Century Graphic. It is currently mounted on a recessed lensboard for my Galvin 2x3 view camera. It worked pretty well on my Century, but I had to place the front standard right at the minimum extension to get infinity focus on my Century. A good intermediate compromise might be a Kodak Wide Field Ektar 80mm. They do exist, I believe, but I think they're rare....