Graflex.org

[perrycas]

is there any truth in the notion that the earlier model side mounted RFs are better/more seviceable/better cam availability etc than the later top mounted RFs?

[Dan Fromm]

[troublemaker]

I have a couple of both, and must say that these old RF's depend as much on the quality of the mirrors, and proper set up as much as the aplication you wish to use them for as regards the previous post. They can both be very good or equaly troublesome. Not everyone is going to enjoy changing cams as it requires a little mechanical skill and nimble fingers. Neither one is any more accurate in my judgment if set up properly, but I like the serviceability of the side mount and its linkage is less prone to failure. I have been able to collect a couple cams for my Top RF, but they are not perfect for the lenses I have, and being small parts, easy to loose. On a side mount, you have to loose the entire camera.
All Of my 2x3 cameras have the side mount and they work very good. In fact one was removed and installed on a different body and held its calibration for the matched lens. I think If you are not sure go with the Side Kalart because cams are a pain; the lens must be measured for its true focal length to get the right cam. Some Graphics can be found with the matched cam in them for the lens you get with it, but many have been changed over the years and you never know what you are getting unless you can check, first hand, the accuracy of the RF by comparing the RF focus to that of the image on the ground glass with a loupe at various distances.
Thus there are advantages and disadvantages with either one. The Side mount Kalart can be adjusted for only one lens; furthermore, it is paintaking process to readjust it for a different focal length lens. It is however, adjustable, and even if not changing lenses, it can be fine tuned for complete accuracy for a dedicated lens.
The Top RF is much more easily set for another lens length by changing out the cam. But this cam is not exactly in the easiest place to change it, and must be properly installed. After a couple attempts it gets a littel easier, like looking at things upside down. The problem with the cams is that they are: a. only work with a matched focal length (ex: my 135 Optar uses a cam for 132mm, and my 162 Optar will not work with a 162 cam etc...), b. they are small and easy to loose, c.they are available some places, but expensive, and d. you must know the exact focal length of any lens you intend to use (if you are shopping for a cam) to have the RF set up properly for all distances from 4ft to Infinity. It might be OK, and it might not??? OK, so there's some food for thought for ya. These are just my opinions, and someone else may chime in with something contradictory and or more specific, but this is my experience restoring a few of these cameras over the last year and a half.
Truth, I am finding out, lies somewhere between about Zone II and Zone IX...
Regards,
Stephen

[ This Message was edited by: troublemaker on 2005-04-01 20:38 ]

[ This Message was edited by: troublemaker on 2005-04-01 20:41 ]

[perrycas]

A generous reply Mr T. Thank you
Perry

[Top]

A brief cavaet:
Troublemaker is refering to the 'E' series Kalart side-mounted RF.
The Kalart'F' series is actually adjustable to a greater range of focal lenghts, but it's construction makes mirror replacement problematic.
And the Hugo Meyer RF aren't adjustable for focal lenght beyond setting up for a specific lens.
Top