O/T I think I want a weegee-esque camera

[cp_ste.croix]

They are the speed Graphic, no? Without home development abilities, can I even shoot with one of these badboys? I mostly want one so people can ooohhh and ahhh when they see it on my shelf, what am i looking at for costs?

Man, sometimes GAS can be so random.

 

[bmattock]

They are the speed Graphic, no? Without home development abilities, can I even shoot with one of these badboys? I mostly want one so people can ooohhh and ahhh when they see it on my shelf, what am i looking at for costs?

Man, sometimes GAS can be so random.

Speeds run about $100 for a working copy on eBoy - I've seen them for more and for less, depending on condition. If all you want is a shelf-queen, then I'd bide my time and snipe in a bid at something less than $100 - you'll eventually get one for around that, I'd guess.

You can shoot 120mm roll-film with a 4x5 or smaller Speed if you have a Graflok back and an adapter. There were other adapters for non-Grafloks, but if you just want a shelf-queen, then no need to go further.

Also, the Speed came in a variety of sizes (2-1/4x3-1/4", 3-1/4x4-1/4", 3-1/2x5-1/2" and 5x7", and 4x5"). I'd suggest avoiding 4x5 as those are the most desired by shooters.

If you want to shoot it and NOT do your own dev, you can aim for a Speed Graphic in 4x5 with a Graflok back, a 120 adapter (6x9 or 6x7), or perhaps a Polaroid 545 adapter (with any back) and shoot polaroid pack film.

I don't know how much longer Polaroid pack film will be available (Polaroid went bankrupt and was purchased by a licensing/marketing company), but they have a really nice 4x5 packfilm b&w that you can either just take the print, or take the print, wash the negative, and then contact print, scan, etc, the neg - supposedly works really well.

All kinds of choices!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

PS - Beware the flash bulb attachment - much desired by Light Saber fans of Star Wars, who run the prices up so they can cannibalize the camera for the flash attachment to make their own Light Saber (that's what the original movie prop was made from).

 

[Kin Lau]

www.graflex.org is your friend.

For a shelf-queen, a 3x4 is likely the cheapest. A 4x5 can run around US$100-, but the polaroid 545 holder will likely cost about $40-50, and a box of Polaroid PN55 (Positive & Negative) will run CDN $80- for 20 exposures.

A Polaroid 550 holder can use Polaroid packfilm, which is discontinued, but Fuji makes a replacement called "fp-100c45"... note the "45" at the end, since it's twice as expensive as the regular packfilm. If you get a Polaroid 405 holder, you can use any of the 3x4 packfilms by either Polaroid or Fuji, but that holder is not centered, so you get a slightly off-to-a-side crop.

 

[FrankS]

I've got a Speed Graphic, a 4x5. That's the one I'd recommend because of the relative difficulty of finding backs, film, and roll film holders for the smaller versions.

With no home developing possibility, you can find a 4x5 polaroid back for the Graphic. Make sure to find a Speed Graphic camera with a GRAFLOK back, not a spring back or a Graphic back. A wider variety of backs is available in Graflok version.

The Speed Graphic camera has a built in focal plane shutter, allowing use to use interesting older lenses which often come "in barrel" that is, without a shutter of their own.

Check out graflex.org site.

 

[kbg32]

I have one for sale, including Polaroid back, flash, new flash bulbs, etc., and case. Quite alot of extras. Let me know if you are interested and I'll talk to my wife and see what she wants for it.

 

[celluloidprop]

I have a 1962 top-rangefinder Crown Graphic - I couldn't think of any reason I'd use the rear focal plane shutter of a Speed, it was just one more thing that might need TLC/CLA/etc.. With the original Schneider lens, working rangefinder and such, I paid $180, I think.

4x5 Polaroid film is obscenely expensive (but nice). I would use the Polaroid 405 back, allowing you to use 3.25"x4.25" instant films - I like the 3200 ISO B&W myself. $.50-$1 per shot with the packfilm rather than Polaroid sheet.

You can also use traditional 4x5 film and send it out for development. When I priced B&W development, it was ~$1-1.50 per sheet, which isn't too bad if you buy an economical brand (Arista.edu Ultra, aka Fomapan 100 for $30). Cheaper than Type 55 at any rate.

 

[cp_ste.croix]

Thanks everyone.

I'm thinking that she will mostly become a shelf queen, unless the polaroid film is that stuff you peel apart after development. I remember an artist that used to peel them apart before development and roll one side onto watercolour paper with really interesting results. I've always wanted to try it.

 

[cp_ste.croix]

Beware the flash bulb attachment - much desired by Light Saber fans of Star Wars, who run the prices up so they can cannibalize the camera for the flash attachment to make their own Light Saber (that's what the original movie prop was made from).

You know, this made me think of Triumph the Insult Comic Dog's on the street interview with Star Wars fans. Though I usually don't like him that much, it was hilarious.

 

[celluloidprop]

That's the stuff. 4x5 and 3.25x4.25 Polaroid films can be used for transfers. Type 55 and Type 665 produce a printable/scannable negative.

 

[ch1]

They are the speed Graphic, no? Without home development abilities, can I even shoot with one of these badboys? I mostly want one so people can ooohhh and ahhh when they see it on my shelf, what am i looking at for costs?

Man, sometimes GAS can be so random.

Well, seems like you've been watching those CSI shows again; haven't you?

Go for it!

But like folks above said - don't pay too much. Likely it will be a brief "fling kind of thing".

Although, those can be kind of fun. 😀

 

[Trius]

I really like Polaroid b&w material. I mostly have used type 55, which gives you a print and a negative. The required exposure for a good neg is different than for a good print. Basically, IIRC, you need a heavier exposure (about 1/2 stop, I think) for a good negative.

But the tonal scale possible is really, really nice for the print or neg.

I predict you'll get some mileage out of it before it becomes a total shelf queen.

Earl

 

[djon]

for context, I've shot 2X3 versions on and off for 30 years. I love them, especially the Century type that I now use. 2 lenses, 80 2.8 Rodenstock Heligon (equals anything on a Hassleblad), 135 5.6 Xenar (fast enough for the small ground glass, modern), and 250 Tele Optar 5.6 (also fast and because it's a tele it can be used on the short rails of the Century...like 135 on 35.

I've got sheet film backs and sheet film (Efke 100) and roll backs..2 6X9, 1 6X7, and 1 6X6.

This is a RANGEFINDER camera, highly accurate to 4' with the one coupled lens, the 80 2.8.
WAY sharper than anything on 35 from anybody. HUGE piece of film. Interchangable backs, optional ground glass viewing, very light, bullet proof boxy foldup design, easily hand holdable, excellent non-parallax corrected bright viewfinder.

I 've let cameras like this sit ignored for years at a time, then get enthusiastic again. Scans wonderfully on a modest Epson 3200 flatbed, would be spectacular if I wet mounted the film.

This is the only medium format camera that dares stand up to Leica and the latest Canon rfdrs. Mamiya 7s ain't doodly squat.

 

[cp_ste.croix]

for context, I've shot 2X3 versions on and off for 30 years. I love them, especially the Century type that I now use. 2 lenses, 80 2.8 Rodenstock Heligon (equals anything on a Hassleblad), 135 5.6 Xenar (fast enough for the small ground glass, modern), and 250 Tele Optar 5.6 (also fast and because it's a tele it can be used on the short rails of the Century...like 135 on 35.

ack, you're killing me! Can you get the camera and these sweet lenses for a reasonable price, or are you talking of something above the cameras mentioned above?

 

[wlewisiii]

ack, you're killing me! Can you get the camera and these sweet lenses for a reasonable price, or are you talking of something above the cameras mentioned above?

Well, it depends upon what you're interested in doing. For example, I have a 5x8 Bausch & Laumb - Zeiss Tessar Series IIB lens in barrel mount (ie no shutter) with f6.3 to f45. It dates from 1904 to 1914 as they started production in 1904 and took the Zeiss name off at the start of WW I. Depending upon the reference & it's conversion chart that works out to roughly a 213mm lens on a 4x5 (say 65mm-ish on a 35mm camera. Just enough longer than Normal to notice). It cost ~$15.00 with shipping. Very sweet piece of glass that makes you understand at a really deep level why the Tessar design and it's derivatives have so dominated photographic optics for the past century. Put good film behind it and you'll get just as good a result as you could get from the latest and greatest as long as you shoot it appropriately.

There is nothing else quite like a Tessar, as big a neg as you can shoot and the right light. When you hit it, you'll know and you'll spend the rest of your life smiling about it. Handheld is icing on the cake 😉

If you don't want to develope at home (and it's really simple if you get some Diafine 😀 ) there really are good labs out there doing C-41/E-6/B&W for $2.25 a sheet. All things considered, that's really fairly inexpensive as most folks don't burn through the equivalent of a roll of 135 in a day or two. 4x5 makes you fussy. Even if you have _never_ been fussy about anything ever before in your entier life, 4x5 makes you fussy :angel:

Get one but if you get one that's functional, at least give it a shot (sorry, couldn't resist) before relegating it to that shelf. You might find yourself hooked as hard as I did.

William

 

[djon]

A Century (2X3 ie 6X9) runs between $300-400 in great condition, typically with a good 101 or 103 lens. Pay a little more, get one with a better lens (my Rodenstock 80 2.8). Other useful lenses cost around $50-200 ea...they're press lenses, fast, they're not view camera lenses..ie they don't have tremendous coverage allowing lots of camera movements. But they do allow SOME useful camera movements for depth of field and building verticallity etc.

The 4X5 versions (Crown Graphics. Speed Graphics etc) are wonderful too... they allow 4X5 film (much easier format to focus through a ground glass). Also very light, also possess accurate rangefinders (better than Bessa, for example). Readily hand held...they were designed especially for hand holding.

Speed Graphics have a huge focal plane shutter...I don't like that because it makes the camera larger and it adds complexity, but in truth it's very reliable ...that's exactly why Wee Gee used Speeds rather than Crowns or Centuries etc.

 

[DougK]

I'm with you, Chris. Even as I move back towards digital for the majority of my shooting, I hear the call of large format. Somehow, I just feel like I'll be less of a photographer if I don't take a crack at it at some point.

The last time I looked at Freestyle's web site, they had a daylight tank for 4x5 film for a very reasonable price. Considering I wouldn't shoot that much film, I'm sure I could convince myself to jury-rig someplace to load the film into the tank....

Damnit, now I found another excuse to buy a new camera... thanks a lot, Chris, my significant other is really gonna love this one....

 

[cp_ste.croix]

Damnit, now I found another excuse to buy a new camera... thanks a lot, Chris, my significant other is really gonna love this one....

heh... i just broke the news to my S.O...she was less than impressed. 🙂 the argument, "but it's $1300 less than the other camera(s) I want" doesn't seem as reasonable to her as it does to me 😀

 

[wlewisiii]

Heh. Guess I was too much help... <lol>

William

 

[ch1]

heh... i just broke the news to my S.O...she was less than impressed. 🙂 the argument, "but it's $1300 less than the other camera(s) I want" doesn't seem as reasonable to her as it does to me 😀

You told her?!

My goodness, man, you violated the GAS "Prime Directive":

"Never tell the S.O. what you want to buy!

Always tell the S.O. what you just bought!"

How many times do we have to keep beating this :bang:

😀

 

[RJBender]

Thanks everyone.

I'm thinking that she will mostly become a shelf queen, unless the polaroid film is that stuff you peel apart after development. I remember an artist that used to peel them apart before development and roll one side onto watercolour paper with really interesting results. I've always wanted to try it.

You might be able to rig a T mount adapter to a board and use your SLR with the camera. There was a how to article in the 'bug several years ago.

R.J.