Graflex.org

Emil Zelasko · Joined: 03 Feb 2004 Posts: 19 Location: Cleveland Ohio

Hello,

I was hoping to improve the screen brightness of my Super Speed Graphic and ordered a piece of glass from Satin Snow. After doing further research, I wonder, is this replacement worth the trouble? And would the removal of the fresnel improve the brightness as well?

RichS · Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 1:49 pm Post subject:

This is one of those subjects where you may get a lot of opinion, but all that matters is what you want/like... So here's my opinion...

Satin Snow is probably the best GG you can get anywhere. I have a couple here and love them and I plan on ordering a few more when I get around to it...

That said, the GG on Graflex cameras is pretty good too. I have older Pacemakers through a Super. An SS GG will not be appreciably better than the factory glass. BUT, on many of my Graflex cameras, I had to remove the GG/Ektalite and wash them in mild dish detergent & water! Especially the older ones.

I would NEVER recommend removing the Ektalite (freznel) in a Graphic camera for several reasons. First, you'll really regret it! Especially if you use a wide lens. Get used to looking at, but not paying attention to those little rings of the freznel. Don't use a loupe of higher magnification than about 4X.

Next, if you remove the Ektalite, you'll have to shim the GG back to the same distance away from the back as the thickness of the Ektalie or else your focusing will be off.

And, you'll put a dent in the value of the camera. A minor point...

So, my opinion is simply: The Sating Snow glass is the best on the market and DO buy it as a replacement (to use now or when/if you break the original). Do NOT remove the Ektalite screen. And choosing between the SS GG or the factory glass will be entirely up to you...

glennfromwy · Joined: 29 Nov 2001 Posts: 903 Location: S.W. Wyoming

Satin Snow glass is indeed a fine product. I like it as much for the smoothness and lack of "grain" as anything. For the price, a wide investment. Cleaning the fresnel screen is advice well given but caution is due. These things are plastic and scratch very easily, so take it easy. Don't use a scrub brush and don't use a cloth to dry it. Just let it drain dry. If you have hard water, final rinse in distilled water will prevent spots.

_________________
Glenn

"Wyoming - Where everybody is somebody else's weirdo"

Henry · Posted: Mon May 09, 2005 2:59 pm Post subject:

Ditto above endorsements of Satin Snow. I have one on my Century with fresnel. You cannot beat the quality or the price!

45PSS · Posted: Tue May 10, 2005 5:17 am Post subject:

[ This Message was edited by: 45PSS on 2005-12-24 21:37 ]

troublemaker · Joined: 24 Nov 2003 Posts: 715 Location: So Cal

Henry · Posted: Wed May 11, 2005 6:05 pm Post subject:

Stephen, I fitted my "Ektalite" fresnel (purchased from Robert Pins in NJ) by trimming its edges, leaving four "ears" at each corner. These ears fit neatly into the cut-outs in the corners of the gg focussing frame, behind the gg, positioning the fresnel in the proper relationship to the gg (smooth side of fresnel facing lens, ridged side facing ground surface of the gg, smooth side of gg facing photographer, and (very important) all of this without changing the position of the ground glass! (Plane of focus is the same as if fresnel were not there.) The fresnel is held in place against the gg by the ears, and the gg is secured in the normal way by the two retaining clips. No modification of any part of the original set-up or structure of the focussing frame is necessary with the method I used, and no shims either.

The trickiest part is trimming the plastic fresnel screen. I covered the surfaces with masking tape so as not to mar them, measured and marked the dimensions right on the tape, and did the trimming with a cutting wheel in the Dremel tool (must use slow speed and go carefully so as not to melt the plastic!). Once you are part-way through the plastic on each side, you can snap off the waste material, and smooth, fit, and finish the cuts with a sandpaper nail file.

Now I don't know if any of this is applicable to a 4x5. It worked on my Century.

[ This Message was edited by: Henry on 2005-05-11 11:28 ]

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

This is one of those problems where all the king's horsemen and all the king's (engineers) stay up late at night and spend lots of money figuring out empirically EXACTLY how it should be done.

Only to find a commoner with no advanced degrees, doing it the wrong way and getting the right results.

I've heard from third party people working in the 21st century and I've seen the paper work from Graflex. Both point to the fact that the optics of the fresnel lens have an effect on the point of focus.

When Graflex added the Ektalite screen they milled the frame at HALF the thickness of the screen, not the full amount. I've also measured a couple of these frames and they are indeed right around half the thickness shorter.

Your solution doesn't address the optics at all. I'm assuming you haven't noticed a loss of sharpness. Have you tried shooting something with the lens wide open?

Les

Henry · Posted: Thu May 12, 2005 12:11 am Post subject:

Les, I'm familiar with that point of view (!), but I don't see how it could possibly apply in this case. Since I have not changed the position of the ground glass at all, it still occupies the film plane, so focussing on the gg with loupe as always should produce sharp negs, which in fact is the case. Remember, I am focussing on the gg image *as seen through the fresnel* (this is crucial!), so any focus shift caused by interposing the fresnel is already accounted for! Under those conditions, I don't understand how the film could see anything different from what I see.

Now if one is focussing by the rangefinder, that's perhaps a different proposition. Even there, I have not noticed any degradation of sharpness. I suspect that any focus shift is so minimal that for all practical purposes it can be disregarded, especially on the 2x3.

No, I haven't tried shooting wide open. That might reveal something. I can think of at least one way to test the practical aspects of the fresnel-as-lens theory (which I'm willing to accept, BTW), but the test would involve with-and-without-fresnel shooting at various f-stops (including wide open). Maybe someday I'll feel the urge to devote a half day or so to the necessary disassembly/reassembly repetitions of the gg/fresnel set-up and see what results. As for now, I'm satisfied with image sharpness, and I've been shooting with the fresnel for quite a while.

Afterthought: since I'm focussing wide open, to maximum sharpness, then stopping down, image stays sharp! So now I'm wondering how that consideration could relate to the fresnel question? Provisional sense here is that it doesn't.

[ This Message was edited by: Henry on 2005-05-13 12:06 ]