Yes, I have all of those and two extension backs also. I have shot Efke 25 in mine and it works great. With the ground glass back adapter you can also use off-brand roll holders for 120 film. I use the slide-in Rada and a very nice Plaubel Makina. I know when Kodak Medalist hit the market my father could never have afforded one and he wasn't a poor man at the time. He settled for the Kodak Target Six-16 for his family shooting. I still have that camera.Yes, the Medalists also had interchangeable backs for 2.25”x3.25” and 6x9 sheet film in individual film holders and film packs. These have a ground glass back that can be swung out of the way or removed entirely.
Interestingly the camera also has a mechanism to recalibrate the rangefinder when the accessory back is attached, even though the film plane shifts back several millimeters.
got a Mokba 4 Soviet camera. The quality was surprising and it works perfectly. Contrary to popular belief, nobody was suffering a Monday morning vodka hangover when they made mine.
Opinions vary greatly on this forum, but to call the Kodak Supermatic shutter a box camera grade shutter is doing a good job of showing just how far they do vary. Could it be that you had a shutter that some dimwit tried to repair before and really mucked it up????? I have repaired many cameras and lens/shutters and I can't tell you how many times I've run into the nice gift some dimwitted, self taught, fly by the seat of your pants repair jerk left me.I opted for the Mockba 4 because I the viewfinder on the 5 was 1/4 mile away fro the lens, way up in the corner. Parallax problems in photography of close areas of people concerned me. I also read that modification has to be done to stop light leaking. I like my 4, but wearing glasses I have to take them off to see the edges of the front framefinder. Very nice camera though. But slow to operate for people as dependent on glasses as me. I liked that Medalist 2, but the shutter escapement was so completely worn out it was useless. Not sure if I'd ever buy another, because that shutter mechanism was box camera grade. Plus the need to rewind 120 film onto 620 spools. The Medalist is a heavy camera for its size, and not shaped for getting a good grip on the thing.
Yes, the Medalists also had interchangeable backs for 2.25”x3.25” and 6x9 sheet film in individual film holders and film packs. These have a ground glass back that can be swung out of the way or removed entirely.
Interestingly the camera also has a mechanism to recalibrate the rangefinder when the accessory back is attached, even though the film plane shifts back several millimeters.
Quote:
I have come to the same conclusion - almost. I use mostly a AF SLR for 35mm stuff - handheld or not and 4x5 or 5x7 for the rest. My medium format cameras stay in the closet.
Yes, the Medalists also had interchangeable backs for 2.25”x3.25” and 6x9 sheet film in individual film holders and film packs. These have a ground glass back that can be swung out of the way or removed entirely.
Interestingly the camera also has a mechanism to recalibrate the rangefinder when the accessory back is attached, even though the film plane shifts back several millimeters.
Just watched your shutter service video. I have my first Medalist, a Medalist II shipping to me today and it has a sticky shutter. Hopefully your video will help me get it going again.
It's an old video, probably needs to be re-done, but glad to see people are still benefitting from it
He told me that he was in the Pacific, in WWII on a aircraft carrier. The entire fleet was told toss their Speeds overboard and the Army buried hundreds of speeds after the war to prevent the surplus gear from killing off Graphic and Kodak
Hello all
So I have just sold my battered 4x5 Speed Graphic as Dan Daniel is converting a Kodak Medalist accept 120 roll film. The increase in portability (for me) means that the medalist is a better camera than the Graphic.
I know that professional photographers during WW2 and later wars often preferred these smaller medium format cameras for the smaller form factor of the camera. The overall quality of a properly exposed, developed and printed/scanned 4x5 negative cannot be denied though.
So just for fun, I was just curious to see if other members have had to choose between these two cameras and what they chose, and the reason for these choices?
NB: I also have a full 4x5 film camera system (wista 45n) so I do have another 4x5 camera!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?