Graflex.org

RichS · Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 4:48 am Post subject:

Yep, I could get a standard long lens for the 8x10 instead of a tele for the 4x5. But...
I don't plan on using the 8x10 all that much. I'm very fond of Polaroid film and at 10.00+ per shot, that would really limit my shooting for the 8x10. Not to mention the processor I'd have to carry around...
It has something like 27 inches of bellows. For those familiar with it, it's a B&J View (Field) with an extension. Not my first choice, but in excellent original condition and at a very good price, so I grabbed it. Haven't even given it a good 'going over' yet. It was quite frozen when UPS dropped it off this afternoon...
Other problems with using the 8x10 I am facing now. I don't have a tripod that will hold it! Never thought of that. And now that it's been mentioned. if anyone has any suggestions for a good old tripod in my range (not expensive), send me a mail at rich@southbristolviews.com and I'd really appreciate it.
Everything else for the 8x10 is just as much larger and heavier. Speaking of which... Why didn't anyone mention that an 8x10 is _NOT_ twice the size of a 4x5, and considerably more than twice the weight!

I was as shocked when I opened this box as I was when I opened the box of that tiny Crown #1 tripod...
Anyway, back on subject. The lens I recently missed was supposed to just cover 8x10. That would give it dual use if true. If not, than I would just be completing my 4x5 dream lens set. Later, I could look into a longer tele for the 8x10

The 500mm tele is far from a priority, but it will be for the 4x5. Unfortunately now, a tripod has moved up the priority list...

Rich...

Nick · Joined: 16 Oct 2002 Posts: 494

If you get a 4x5 back for your 8x10 camera you'll actually be shooting 4x5 film in the camera. I don't know if a 4x5 back is available for your camera. The downside is the bigger camera. Personally I'm thinking of a 8x10 with a 5x7 back. Almost bid on a camera yesterday but needing a bigger tripod made me wait. Supposedly surveyors tripods are strong enough and if you can find one used not too expensive.

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

Surveyor's tripods will work, but you'll have to modify/machine the top as they have a different clamping system.

If your not shooting the propellers in a wind farm, your 4x5 tripod will probably work. I've used a Star D and Bogen 3020, but admit to having the larger 3050 and just got a nice grey Majestic at a local bankruptcy sale for $50. The Majestic is just that, but I won't be hauling it more than about 50 feet away from the car.

When it was new a Crown #3 or 4 was common under a B&J and occasionally you'll find a Crown tripod on ebay with "Army Corp of Engieers" stamped on it. I don't recommend the #1 however

RichS · Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 2:29 pm Post subject:

I was thinking the #1 could hold up the 1000mm lens when I extend the bellows out all the way and add the lendboard extender

Yeah, I would love an old #3 or 4 but I've only seen one, that I've ever noticed anyway.
My "4x5 tripods" won't really work because they're all my "35mm tripods" overextending themselves a bit... Although I do have a wood platform model that may just hold it. I'll give that a try later today.

So far, the biggest problem in tripods, besides price, is selection. I saw the Majestics and like them, but there's several models and the sellers all say "heavy duty" with no model numbers... Then there's Quickset. I have an old one that I bought overly used back in pre-70's and it still works great. But again, my model is not quite big enough for the 8x10...

Bogens tend to be expensive and I am not familiar with Star-D so I'll have to do some more checking.

At this point, I would rather have a bigger/heavier tripod than a smaller one that's easily carried. I don't think this is a system that I'll be backpacking with anytime soon... It would all be "out of the trunk" if anything... I've seen many models that look like they would be okay, but so far I'm not familiar with what would be a reasonable cost and we already know how those pictures can fool me

So hopefully I'd be doing some more research before I grab one..

Thanks...
Rich...

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

I know you were joking about the #1 and the lens, but I do just that!. I have a Deardorff and when the 24" artar goes on I bring along to light stands and some clamps, because once both those rails get out there and the bellows becomes a sail, it's the only way to hold things down.

The Star D was a very common 35mm /med format, no frills tripod from the late 40s through the 70s. It's got cult status now. A friend of mine used to shoot an 11x14 deardorff field camera and after a while used two of these tripods rather than one heavy one. It was easier to move around and more stable. He just didn't do any shooting from a 2 foot wide precipice.

You can divide the Pro photographers into three groups. 49% will love Gitzo, because they have a life time warranty, are built (and weigh) like a tank. 49% will love Bogen because they are well built, repairable, and while there's no warranty, parts are cheap and I paid 2/3 of a Gitzo. The other 2% think both are crap and will only use ash tripods from old growth forests because it dampens vibrations. Out of the three, Bogen will be the cheapest.

I suggest you go for the 3050. With the common 3047 head it will go just above 6 feet which is better than that #1 you have, and while not as compact as a Crown Tripod, it will be rock solid and you won't feel like your playing with tinker toys when setting it up.

Survey tripods rarely get above 5 feet unless you find a surveyor from Iowa who has had to survey corn fields (then they go to 12 ft)

_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison

RichS · Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 3:52 pm Post subject:

Joking? You mean that you don't think I'll get a 1000mm lens for the 8x10?

Yep, I was kidding a bit. But I've seen you mention before about supporting the lens up front and I believe it would help a lot. So far, it's not something I've had to worry about. Maybe if I ever do get to use this 8x10 though? Right now the longest lens I have for it is 12 inches though. And if it can't support that by itself, I should be looking for another camera...

I just saw a Star-D, smal pic but at least I know what it looks like now. Was there only one model? Nice looking but of course I can't judge it's size

I've seen that 3050 suggested more times than I can remember. Maybe I should just go with the popular opinion here? BNut I was never that kind of person... I've been known as "contrary" more than once

If I had the extra cash, I'd buy one of each and compare myself. So I'll just have to decide if I want the Mejestic, which I now like; or the Star-D, which I don't know too mcuh about but it's pretty; or the 3050 which everyone seems to suggest? But when I can't stand there and play with them first hand, it might be better to go with the popular vote... I'll start looking for a 3050 and just hope no one starts calling me a "conformist"...

Although I would probably be in that 2% category...
I knew I should have made friends with those surveyors when they came through here a few years ago

Thanks!

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

I just did a search on ebay for both Majestic and bogen 3050. The black Majestics go for more because they are 'current' , the Grey's are the older ones that they purposely stopped making parts for, so they could stay in business. The trouble is these rarely need parts. One like mine, but in better condition, went for a mere $42!

If that's what grey majestics are going for these days, then I'd start there. I've seen several different model numbers, but the one with tubular legs and a geared head is the one you want. The top plate was changeable so you can find the me with a 6x6 top or a 3" dia round top, or even a video/film sliding rail. Don't let the top stop you from a good deal. It's nothing more than a slab of aluminum with 4 screw holes and one through hole.
The Star D is better for backpacking. It's the minimalist tripod.

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

I just did a search on ebay for both Majestic and bogen 3050. The black Majestics go for more because they are 'current' , the Grey's are the older ones that they purposely stopped making parts for, so they could stay in business. The trouble is these rarely need parts. One like mine, but in better condition, went for a mere $42!

If that's what grey majestics are going for these days, then I'd start there. I've seen several different model numbers, but the one with tubular legs and a geared head is the one you want. The top plate was changeable so you can find them with a 6x6 top or a 3" dia round top, or even a video/film sliding rail. Don't let the top stop you from a good deal. It's nothing more than a slab of aluminum with 4 screw holes and one through hole.
The Star D is better for backpacking. It's the minimalist tripod.

Nick · Joined: 16 Oct 2002 Posts: 494

Somebody tried to convince me LF cameras actually can get away with lesser tripods then 35mm. I'm not sure that they convinced me but here goes.

With many LF camera you can move the tripod mount so the centre of the weight is over the tripod head at all times. This combined with the greater weight of the camera tends to steady things down. It seems to make sense but some how I wonder-)

The tripod I'm using for the 4x5 is only rated for something like 12lbs. The camera alone isn't much less. Everything seems okay.

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2144 Location: New Jersey

RichS · Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 9:55 pm Post subject:

Wow, I never thought of a 40inch ariel lens! What a great idea! But then I'd need TWO Majestics

The Star-D looks oddly similar to the tripd I got with my last GVII (and thought it might have been the Graflex tripod). It has no name and I'll have to check some more pics... But it doesn't look like it would hold the 8x10. Maybe the Star-D is heavier?
So far I'm leaning heavily toward the Majestic and Bogen 3050. Have to admit that I like the looks of the Majestic head. So maybe I'll buy both, keep what I like and sell what's leftover?

Although I could use a better tripod for the GVII also. Mine are borderline, but I do have 3 that hold it okay. Still like the looks and feel of the old wood tripods the best though...
And thanks Les for letting me know about the Majestic colors and legs. I was wondering about that. Actually liked the looks of the ones with round legs better for some odd reason. On the other hand, I've also seen higher prices... But they'll go back down as soon as I buy one

Rich...

[ This Message was edited by: RichS on 2003-01-28 13:56 ]

RichS · Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2003 10:01 pm Post subject:

45PSS · Posted: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:41 am Post subject:

I've got a gitzo low profile head that I picked up off eeeee by mistake. It has a 4 inch by 6 3/4 inch camera plate, one threaded mount hole at the front of the plate and a 3 1/2 inch long slot with a standard 1/4 20 lock screw at the rear. The main handle is 15 inches long. I would like to get my $120 back someday and am only mentioning it here as it will hold that fully extended 8 X 10 with that giant aerial lens.
Charles

_________________
While a picture may be worth a thousand words, a quality photograph is worth a million.

[ This Message was edited by: 45PSS on 2003-01-28 19:44 ]

RichS · Posted: Wed Jan 29, 2003 3:54 am Post subject:

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

The moderator has become temorarily blind and mute and is now leaving the Lens Forum...

_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison