2x3 Century Graphic Camera

OptiKen · Dec 11, 2015

I don't mean to appear argumentative....I just don't understand and I am hoping for enlightenment.

Why shoot a 2x3 camera? It seems like a lot of work for a little negative to me.

Why does a modern photographer choose to shoot 2x3?

Old-N-Feeble · Dec 11, 2015

Ease of use (roll film), per frame cost, ease of processing, availability of certain films, overall lighter system weight, cheaper lenses, no access to a 4x5 enlarger, etc.

OptiKen · Dec 11, 2015

Old-N-Feeble said:
Ease of use (roll film), per frame cost, ease of processing, availability of certain films, etc.

So most people use a roll back for 120 film rather than 2.25x3.25 sheet film?

Prof_Pixel · Dec 11, 2015

As the owner of a 23 Speed Graphic, I liked the ability to shoot 1 or 2 shots on cut film or film pack for immediate processing as well as being able to shoot 120 roll film when I needed more images. I also used to play around with other lenses/filters and did a little with the front standard swings and tilts. (Also, a 23 enlarger was cheaper (and smaller) than a 45 enlarger.)

Old-N-Feeble · Dec 11, 2015

OptiKen said:
So most people use a roll back for 120 film rather than 2.25x3.25 sheet film?

I would think so, yes. I certainly would.

shutterfinger · Dec 11, 2015

With a 2x3 you can use sheet film; 120 in 6cm x6cm, 6cm x 7cm, or 6cm x 9cm; 70mm; and 220. 70mm and 220 are getting harder to get if not gone completely. Some makes of 6cm x 4.5cm roll film holders may fit also.
Very versatile.

Paul Howell · Dec 11, 2015

Ditto, I have a sheet film back for my Mamyia press, when 2X3 was readily available being able to shoot a sheet or two of film using the zone system was a plus.

Dan Fromm · Dec 11, 2015

Well, on the other hand, why not? And why limit oneself to a Century Graphic? If one wants to use 2x3 Graphics and shoot an interesting range of focal lengths without taking extreme measures, one needs a short one (Century or 2x3 Crown, both have minimum extension of 34.9 mm, will focus a 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon to infinity with mm to spare) and a long one (2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic). For focal lengths up to around 480 mm, given a short and a long 2x3 Graphic cobbling up a tandem Graphic isn't that hard.

You shouldn't compare what can be done with a 2x3 Graphic with what can be done with a 4x5 or larger camera. Compare with a 35 mm or medium format camera. Years ago a friend who was very proud of his Pentax 645 came by. I showed him some 2x3 trannies. He remarked that next to them his looked pretty punk. You have to remember that 645 is half frame 2x3.

Re cheap lenses for 2x3. Um, er, perhaps if we're thinking about ancient tessar type normal lenses, some of which are outstanding. Decent wide angle lenses for 2x3 can be quite expensive; if you don't believe me, price a 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon and don't forget the center filter. Longer lenses, with the exception of some elderly telephoto lenses for formats no larger than 2x3, are all for 4x5 cameras. They don't have to be horribly expensive but they can be.

To get an idea of what's possible, see http://www.galerie-photo.com/telechargement/dan-fromm-6x9-lenses-v2-2011-03-29.pdf. I've added a few lenses since that piece was published. The most outrageous is probably a 45/9 CZJ Goerz Dagor that barely covers. On the whole a 47/5.6 Super Angulon is much preferable.

There are also real view cameras for 2x3 that offer movements. I don't care what lying enthusiasts and people who've never used the cameras say, the only generally useful movement that 2x3 Graphics offer is ~ 19 mm of front rise. I have a couple of 2x3 Cambo SCs. Nice cameras, heavy, and the standard cases for transport are bulky. But I can do things with them that aren't possible with my little Graphics.

One last thought. The original post is misplaced, 2x3 is usually seen as the largest medium format (but how about 6x12, ... , 6x24?), not as the smallest large format.

tessar · Dec 11, 2015

The frames on a 2x3 rollback are proportionally nearly identical to the frames on 35mm film. If you want this wider frame on MF instead of the usual square, 2x3 is the answer.

Old-N-Feeble · Dec 11, 2015

There are plenty of affordable lenses that cover 2x3 from 47mm to the maximum extension the camera's rail and bellows can handle. Not everyone needs or wants the best of the best lenses such as Apo Grandagon or Super Angulon XL.

Dan Fromm · Dec 11, 2015

Hmm. There's no avoiding the 35/4.5 Apo Grandy is a 35 mm lens that covers 2x3 is wanted.

In 47 mm, there's the Super Angulon and the very rare 47/8 Ilex SA clone. I just checked eBay sold listings for 47 SAs. The least expensive f/8 went for $224.99, the least expensive f/5.6 for $287.64. The great deal was a 2x3 Crown with Graflok and "ground glass" (I hope that means focusing panel) and 47/8 SA that went for $274.95.

In 65 mm, there were three (3) 65/8 SAs for $100 or less plus shipping. This is a surprise, teaches me to check to see whether the bottom has fallen out.

On 2x3 Graphics, Super Angulon XLs and similar lenses are overkill. Their coverage can't be used.

On the whole, low is much lower than it was the last time I checked. Thanks, Mike. for pushing me to check.

Sirius Glass · Dec 11, 2015

I do not understand it either. Besides 2x3 Century Graphic Camera is MF not LF, so this thread is in the wrong forum.

Old-N-Feeble · Dec 11, 2015

Where was it mentioned that a 35mm lens was wanted? Did I miss it?

A very nice full lens set for a 2x3 Crown could be be had for reasonable money.

47mm SA
65mm SA
101mm Ektar
150mm Xenar or 152mm Ektar
203mm Ektar

wombat2go · Dec 12, 2015

tessar said:
The frames on a 2x3 rollback are proportionally nearly identical to the frames on 35mm film. If you want this wider frame on MF instead of the usual square, 2x3 is the answer.

Hi Tessar,
The RH10 frame is 58.0 by 67.7 mm for an aspect ratio of 1.17
The 35mm frame is 24.0 by 35.5 mm for an aspect ratio of 1.47

The RH8 frame is 57.4 by 77.7 mm for an aspect ratio of 1.35 which is closer to 35mm,
however as far as I could find, the RH8 was not available for the 2x3 back.

Dan Fromm · Dec 12, 2015

wombat2go said:
Hi Tessar,
The RH10 frame is 58.0 by 67.7 mm for an aspect ratio of 1.17
The 35mm frame is 24.0 by 35.5 mm for an aspect ratio of 1.47

The RH8 frame is 57.4 by 77.7 mm for an aspect ratio of 1.35 which is closer to 35mm,
however as far as I could find, the RH8 was not available for the 2x3 back.

Meandering marsupial, the RH-8 is indeed available to fit 2x3 backs. I have several. Its predecessor, the Graphic/Graflex 23, has a gate 57.5 x 82.7 (measurments taken today), aspect ratio 1.44. The RH-8's gate is shorter because there's a pin roller at each end; this is the only difference between the RH-8 and older Graflex roll holder shells. The pin rollers are supposed to improve film flatness; users don't agree about this.

As far as I know there's no standard for 2.25" x 3.25" (abbreviated to 2x3, and metric 6x9 means 2.25" x 3.25") roll holders' gates. As you've pointed out, late Graflex roll holders' gates are shorter than one would expect. The longest I'm aware of is the Linhof 6x9 Super Rollex, available to fit 2x3 and 4x5 backs, at 84.5 mm (measurement taken from my 4x5er). I'm sure that corrections will come, but please, don't tell me about cameras with integral roll holders, e.g., the Brooks Veriwide.

fotch · Dec 12, 2015

OptiKen said:
I don't mean to appear argumentative....I just don't understand and I am hoping for enlightenment.

Why shoot a 2x3 camera? It seems like a lot of work for a little negative to me.

Why does a modern photographer choose to shoot 2x3?

For the same reason that they choose any format.

Sirius Glass · Dec 12, 2015

OptiKen said:
I don't mean to appear argumentative....I just don't understand and I am hoping for enlightenment.

Why shoot a 2x3 camera? It seems like a lot of work for a little negative to me.

Why does a modern photographer choose to shoot 2x3?

So that they can bitch about having trouble getting film.

Nokton48 · Dec 12, 2015

I like shooting multiple 2x3 sheet frames. Freestyle sells this film in 100 & 400 Aristo.
Easy to develop in a 120 Nikor film tank with 2x3 Nikor sheet film rack.
Can do twelve sheets at a time.

wombat2go · Dec 12, 2015

Dan Fromm said:
the RH-8 is indeed available to fit 2x3 backs.

Thanks for that info Dan, I see there is a photo of one ( Cat # 1252) on http://www.graflex.org/speed-graphic/accessories.html
and a 2X3 Graflex RH 8 Lever wind Singer for sale at KEH.

ColColt · Dec 12, 2015

I don't have a dog in this fight but one of the greatest combat photographers/journalist of the 20th Century was Margaret Bourke-White. In her book,"You Have Seen Their Faces", in conjunction with text by Erskine Caldwell, she makes me mention of the cameras she used on their trek throughout the deep South back in the 30's photographing share cropper families and tenant farmers. She mentions the Linhof 3 1/4x4 3/4 as well as a Soho 2 1/4x3 1/4and goes on to mention it was used a good for the outside work she done. "The flexible front board of this camera is well adapted for following action,as the amount of stopping down necessary to keep depth of field to a minimum, making it possible to use maximum speed.

If that format was good enough for her...well, that would be enough for me if I were so inclined.

aoresteen · Dec 12, 2015

It's a great format IMHO. I started shooting 2.25 x 3.25 around 1972 with a 30's German folding camera and now use a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Cambo 23SF view camera. I should have my 2x3 Crown Graphic back from a major overhaul this week. 8 shots on a 120 roll , 16 on a 220 roll and I can use sheet film. My main enlarger since 1980 has been a Beseler 23C and 2.25 x 3.25 is the largest negative that it can take (I do have a 5x7 enlarger but I use the 23C most).

tessar · Dec 13, 2015

Hi wombat,
Just to clarify my post, I have a 23 Pacemaker Graphic with the rare Graflex back and an older Graflex 8-exp. rollfilm holder. As Dan Fromm says, this yields an aspect radio of 1.44:1 compared to the 1.5:1 ratio on 35mm, pretty close. I like this rollfilm holder because I can also use it on my 23 Graflex SLR. Graphic/Graflex specs are confusing. It took me a while to figure them out with much help from the Graflex website.

RSalles · Dec 13, 2015

I think it's funny to be "snobbed" by folks with their D-800 and EOS MkIII gear when we cross each other, me with my 1939 Ektar lens and a Miniature Speed Graphic - I think inside my head "if you did even know wath I left home when I choosed to come with this..."

Cheers,

Renato

Sirius Glass · Dec 13, 2015

Nokton48 · Dec 14, 2015

My Plaubel Makiflexes have a 2x3 Back which takes Graphics, Riteways, Linhofs, even the Mamiyas (I think!)
Here is one of the cameras with a 2x3 Linhof Back in it. Would like to find some more of these Linhof 2x3's.

003 by Nokton48, on Flickr

2x3 Century Graphic Camera

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency