Graflex.org

[riochico]

I have been using a super speed graphic for about five years. But I still have a lot to learn about this camera in particular and large format in general. So any advice about the following concerns would be very welcome.

Whenever I need a vertical shot with my 90mm wide angle lens I tilt the camera 90 degrees on the tripod (to avoid getting the bed in the photo). Clumsy but workable. I susupect this may also be easier to do by using the drop bed instead. But am not sure what adjustments I should make with the rising/tilting front to adjust for the drop. All I want is a nice straightforward image -- without the bed in the photo. Any suggestions about how to do this?

Somebody just suggested I use a loupe to focus, which I have never done before. Instead I have always used a powerful pair of eyeglasses. I have just tried a loupe for the first time and find it hard to get it in to the focussing screen, particularly in the corners, because of the pop-out metal frame (which also protects the screen) on my super speed graphic. But it sure seems to help a lot to use a loupe when I can manage it. Does anybody else have experience and/or advice about using a loupe with this camera?

Despite the fact that it is slowly dawning on me that I have not yet even learned how to use the camera I bought about five years ago, I am thinking about upping the ante to 8x10. Any suggestions about an economical close cousin (metal, field) to the Super Speed Graphic that I could consider, or where to search for used 8x10 gear.

I see many wooden 8x10 cameras on the market and wonder how their stability and reliability is in the tough field conditions where I work compared to a metal field camera like the Graflex. What happens to wooden cameras when they get wet?

I have an old 90mm f6.8 and newer 135mm f5.6 Schenider lenses both in Copal shutters. Would either cover of these be usable with an 8x10 or would I have to junk them?

I see that some 8x10 cameras can take a 4x5 back, which I guess is somewhat similar to using a 120 back on my Super Speed Graphic. Maybe this would enable me to find a good use for the above lenses with an 8x10 camera, and also avoid the need to carry two field cameras around? One is enough already!

Peter

[RichS]

Boy there's a lot to reply to there

First off, if you're using a Super, why not just rotate the back instead of the whole camera?

As far as a loupe. I use one and like it better than anything else I've tried. I keep those cheap drug store reading glasses handle just in case. 3 power for focusing, 1.5 for reading
I use the Toyo loupe. It's the right power for me and just long enough to reach out through the pop-up hood.

Now, 8x10... Yes, you can get a metal field very similar to a Speed (no fp shutter of course), but you're going to pay for it. Figure $1000 minimum and upwards to $3000. Used, a Kodak Master View comes to mind. I sure wouldn't mind having one myself but it's way beyond my means. I'd rather spend the money on lenses, and Century Universals
Oh, and then there's the Century Universal. Good luck finding one, but I personally consider it the best all-round wood field you can get. If you can get one and it's in working order... And it's not very sturdy. It's a good example of trading weight for ruggedness...

There's nothing wrong with wood fields 8x10's. They're still made and many prefer them. Getting mildly wet shouldn't afftec them as they're either painted or clear coated. But you sure wouldn't want to saok one...

If you're on a budget, go for an older wood model and put the money into lenses because neither of your 4x5 lenses will even come close to covering 8x10. Sorry about that. And most 8x10 will have trouble with even a 6 inch lens (150mm) let alone a 90mm (3.5 inch). My Burke & james can just barely handle a 5 inch lens but it's a tight squeeze. considering a 12 inch lens would be "normal" for 8x10, a 6 inch is pretty wide. 5 inches or about 120mm is just about as wide as is possible with a 110mm barely covering on cameras that can manage it. So, yeah, you'd need new lenses


_________________
----------------------------------------
"Ya just can't have too many GVIIs"
----------------------------------------

[riochico]

Thanks for the reply Rich. Yes, I can rotate the back on my super speed graphic for a vertical shot, but when I have the 90mm lens mounted, which I use most of the time, the front of the lens bed is visible in the bottom of the frame, which is no fun, hence my curiosity about the drop bed.

[t.r.sanford]

If the "Super" drop bed works similarly to the "Pacemaker" design, the general idea is to drop the bed, then tilt and raise the front to compensate. The extent to which you need to raise the front depends on the distance between the lens and the back, so varies with the focal length and the subject distance. The only way I know of to gauge the amount of rise required is to compose and focus with the bed level (and visible on the groundglass), then lock the tripod head tight, drop the bed, unlatch the front standard and loosen the thumbscrews that lock the front to the standard, then push the front back and pull it up while observing the effect on the groundglass. You want to restore the composition to what you saw with the bed flat. I've done this often with a "Century" 2-1/4x3-1/4, and it is fairly straightforward.

No press camera is a really good choice for work with extreme wide angle lenses. I've often thought that the ancient "tailboard" design would be ideal for that kind of work.

[RichS]

[Les]

Any suggestions about an economical close cousin (metal, field) to the Super Speed Graphic that I could consider, or where to search for used 8x10 gear.


As said before you can't use economical and metal filed camera in the same sentence. If you're going to go econimical, get a Kodak 2D. These were the Chevrolet of the industry, made by the tens of thousands and work very well. No they won't be as sturdy as a Toyo on a foba, but you won't have to rent two assitants to go shooting, either.


I see that some 8x10 cameras can take a 4x5 back, which I guess is somewhat similar to using a 120 back on my Super Speed Graphic. Maybe this would enable me to find a good use for the above lenses with an 8x10 camera, and also avoid the need to carry two field cameras around? One is enough already!

Unless you need the bellows draw for a very long lens on 4x5, the only benefit for a 4x5 back is proofing part of the 8x10 shot on polaroid.

Okay let's say you want to go out shooting and the 4x5 back has replaced the 4x5 camera, but you'll still need to lug 4x5 holders, you won't be able to use the wide lenses (like the 90) on the 8x10 camera even if you have a 4x5 back, so you'll be limiting what you can do with a 4x5 and every shot you'll look at, you think 4x5 or 8x10???.

Life is too short, take one format at a time. Now this doesn't quite equate to 4x5 vs 8x10, but I"m in a similar position with my 5x7 and a 4x5 back, With all the extras to lug around, it's easier and cheaper to just compose a 4x5 shot and shoot it with 5x7. The price difference in my case is not that great.

Lenses. As you've noticed you don't need as many lenses in 4x5 as you do in 35mm ( I said NEED not want). It goes even further with 8x10. I've seen it before many times. Magic happens with an 8x10 and a 10" Wide Field Ektar. Recent studies have shown the Ektar to be as sharp a lens as you'll ever need. It's also not quite as contrasty as the latest multicoated lenses. That means the shadow will be slightly open and readable. If you want the extra contrast, move up a 1/2 grade paper.
Deardorfs are nice ( I own one) but a 2D will get you there at 1/3 of the cost. If you want another lens I say the next up is a 14" comm ektar.


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