Bad camera, should I return it?

[optique]

I know this might be a stupid question but I wanted to find out for sure

I bought a Crown Graphic w/135 Optar from a well respected new and used camera shop, for $300, rated as 8 or better.

This was to be my first LF camera.

When I attempted to close it back up, it would not. Something was preventing the rails from sliding back into the box part of the camera.

After some tinkering, I found that if I pushed on the rail a certain way, the rail would slide into the box part of the camera, but this is awkward to say the least.

I just got it Friday night so I have not shot film yet. However, the lens and shutter seem to work, and the rest of the camera looks good.

Should I live with it, or return it and look for a better camera?

Thanks very much.
Steve.

 

[Akki14]

Did you pull out the lens-bit (i'm using technical bits), focus a bit, then push the lens-bit back in and forget to "unfocus" and roll the rails back by using the focusing knob? At least on my ye ancient top handle speed graphic, it's not smart enough to pull in the focusing rails by itself, that's left up to the user to remember.

 

[Ian Grant]

You have to slide everything back, it doesn't happen any other way. Sounds like the rear rails have been damaged by someone closing the camera improperly. I bought a Speed Graphic like that for parts but was able to replace the rails and re-bild the camera.

The seller may try and say you damaged the camera so be careful.

Ian

 

[optique]

Ian and Heather,

I will look at it all again. Kind of disappointing since I wanted a immediately working camera. I guess this is what you get for buying a 50+ year old camera. I did not use any force to close it, so the problem can not be mine.

Ebay has buy it now Crown and Speed Graphics ranging from $350-$600, and most look better than mine. I had hoped to break into LF on the cheap, but a new Tachihara camera ($650) and a $200 used lens are looking better all the time.

Thanks
Steve.

 

[optique]

I took the camera outside under the bright sun and the exact problem is evident. To make a long story short, I just need to apply slight pressure to the side of the left rail and it slides into the box. The right rail seems ok.

I had my first experience loading sheet film into a holder and now I am off to take my first shots.

Thanks for your responses.
Steve.

 

[Ian Grant]

Steve I have 3 Graphics, a Crown, a Speed devoid of a shutter and a pre-Anniversary Wide angle Speed Graphic special. I use them but usually only when I'm not permitted to use a tripod.

They are OK cameras but not really ideal as a first LF camera, however once you know what your doing they are quite useful cameras.

For some reason they have became very over hyped and "Buy It Now" prices are high, they sell for far less here and the LFP info site.

If you can get your money back get a Wista, Tachihara, Shen Hoa etc thatsa far better option and all are far more versatile.

Ian

 

[optique]

Ian,

What is the main reason why my camera would not be a good first LF purchase? Too old and worn out? I am mostly into landscapes, presumably fairly "movement free", so I thought this camera would be appropriate. I can say already though the 135mm lens is not wide enough for my taste.

If and when the time comes, the Tachihara 45 or Shen Hao 45 comes to mind. Maybe get a good used 100mm lens for around $200.



Regards
Steve.

 

[Monophoto]

What is the main reason why my camera would not be a good first LF purchase? Too old and worn out? I am mostly into landscapes, presumably fairly "movement free", so I thought this camera would be appropriate. I can say already though the 135mm lens is not wide enough for my taste.
.

A camera is basically a light-tight box that holds film. In that respect, Graphics perform very well. And if you are mainly interested in landscape and other genres that don't require much in the way of movements, they are just fine.

"Old and worn out" - perhaps but not likely. There are field cameras being used by the ULF gang that are >100 years old and that are truly "old and worn out" - but still functional.

The usual complain about graphics is that they have very little accommodation for movements (essentially none with a 135mm press lens). You can put a conventional LF lens with a larger image circle on a Graphic, and while that will give you the ability to maneuver within the physical constraints of the camera design, it will still be a bit limited.

The most likely problem you may have with landscape is the absence of forward tilt - something that is sometimes useful to bring a foreground into focus. Graphics have reverse tilt - intended to facilitate dropping the bed so that the front of the camera bed doesn't intrude into the image when using a wide angle lens. It is relatively easy to disassemble the camera and reverse the front standard so that this becomes forward tilt.

 

[Ian Grant]

Steve, I now really only shoot landscapes. The Graphics only have a small amount of front tilt & only in landscape mode, but I shoot portrait mode as well. So poor because of lack of movements.

No they usually aren't too old and worn out Even the two real dogs I've bought off Ebay have been fully restorable, and are now excellent working cameras.

I guess because I started LF with a view camera and more movements than lenses are capable of I expect or rather want all the movements possible. However I'm able to live within the constraints imposed by Graphics if it means thats the only way to get an image.

Ian

 

[Tomf2468]

A crown graphic is a fine place to start. You do pay more for them than "I" think they are worth. You pay for the "name". Many cameras this age have an oddity or two, only you can decide if you want to live with it.

If you do return it, consider a used Burke and James press camera. Half the price (sometimes less than half) of the Crown and in some ways (for landscape) a better camera. Revolving back and easier front tilt. Not nearly the "name" value ;-)

Tom

 

[optique]

Bad camera not so bad, but a few questions now

Ian, I suspected you started with more capable gear as your reason for stating that. Graflex is really your point and shoot camera!

Monophoto, that issue of foreground focus and depth of field is something I struggle with, on roll firm cameras, nice to hear about forward tilt. I have AA's "The Camera" so I will read up on it.

Tom2468, I thought $300 was too much for this camera, too. Trust me, I looked for alternatives to Graflex. If forced to use ebay, I use buy it now, but there is really not much of ebay to begin with. I vastly prefer to use KEH, BHphoto and others over ebay, but again, no real selection. You would think LF gear is in short supply.

Now that I have been in the field with the camera, I have a question: Is the GG known to be especially dim on the Crown? Aperture was wide open.

I will develop my first images in trays, but I was thinking about using black 2in sch 40 pvc to make some tubes. Any comments on tubes?

Thanks for all your help.
Steve.

 

[k_jupiter]

1.) A Crown or Speed is a fine camera to learn on. Not so overwhelming you get totally lost, not so simple you get bored, not a POS so you don't get frustrated. I learned to shoot on an old orbital, but my first LF was (is) a Pacemaker Speed. I still use it. I have a 150 fujinon 6.3 lens on it, the GG is bright because it still has the Fresnel lens attached, it's a dark box. Light enough to take anywhere with a backpack, you don't need 40 lbs of tripod, and yes, they are cheap. not as cheap as they use to be, but still.

2.) Instead of mucking about with PVC pipe (as I spent many a hour doing) get yourself a Patterson System 4 tank, about 8 1/2 inch high one. Then get some nylon window screen, cut into 5 1/2 inch squares. Sew two edges together with about a 1/2 inch seam to make a tube. You should have 4 tubes that will take 4x5 film and cause the film, emulsion inwards into tubes. Place the center tube of the Patterson in the tank, place the four tubes on end around the center tube, put the top on, and process in daylight like it was roll film. You will be amazed at how easy this is.

Welcome.

tim in san jose

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian, I suspected you started with more capable gear as your reason for stating that. Graflex is really your point and shoot camera!

Now that I have been in the field with the camera, I have a question: Is the GG known to be especially dim on the Crown? Aperture was wide open.

Yes, in an earlier post I said I started with a View camera, I have a De Vere whole plate/half plate/5x4 monorail which is too heavy for landscape work, but has great movements, I haven't used it for over 20 years. Movements are very important with LF work and there are some images I just couldn't shoot with a Graphic.

The screens on Graphics are very dim, I measured mine against my Wista and found a (there was a url link here which no longer exists). My new screen is lost in the post somewhere or I'd post details of the improvement.

Ian

 

[optique]

Ian,

Thanks for the info on the dim Graphic screen.

I perused your gallery, and I like your train related photos! Great work. I wish I could see the actual prints.

That first photo on your site, Pynant, did that require a lot of darkroom work?

Thanks and have a good day.
Steve.

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian,
That first photo on your site, Pynant, did that require a lot of darkroom work?
Steve.

Thanks Steve, no it was easy to print, most of my negs are, from memory just a little dodging on the left. I haven't actually made an Exhibition print of it yet, but it's reproduced in Steve Anchell's new Edition of The Darkroom Cookbook.

Ian

 

[optique]

Tim,

I like your idea a lot and will try tonight. Thanks.

Also this made me do some research. Seems some people are just putting s sheet or two of film into a tank so they push against the sides, and then process as normal, but I will bet the anti-halation layer will be a an issue.

I will report back.

 

[k_jupiter]

Tim,

I like your idea a lot and will try tonight. Thanks.

Also this made me do some research. Seems some people are just putting s sheet or two of film into a tank so they push against the sides, and then process as normal, but I will bet the anti-halation layer will be a an issue.

I will report back.

Yes. the AH layer might be a factor. Two sheets in a tank can also overlap while agitating. For my 5x7 and 8x10 negatives I use daylight paper development tubes on an electric roller. There are ridges in the tank that allow for fluids behind the film.

I also used PVC tubes in this same Patterson setup and you have to give it a short fixer bath after removing the film from the PVC tubes to get the AH layer off. I then would wash in a dip tank by loading the wet film onto 4x5 Stainless holders.

Try the window screen, you might never use anything else.

tim in san jose

 

[optique]

Yes. the AH layer might be a factor. Two sheets in a tank can also overlap while agitating. For my 5x7 and 8x10 negatives I use daylight paper development tubes on an electric roller. There are ridges in the tank that allow for fluids behind the film.

I also used PVC tubes in this same Patterson setup and you have to give it a short fixer bath after removing the film from the PVC tubes to get the AH layer off. I then would wash in a dip tank by loading the wet film onto 4x5 Stainless holders.

Try the window screen, you might never use anything else.

tim in san jose

should I use the development times for roll film or sheet film, for the screen method?

 

[k_jupiter]

should I use the development times for roll film or sheet film, for the screen method?

Developers I use (Wd2d+ and Pyrocat-HD) don't differentiate. If they did, I would start with the sheet film and adjust from there. It's all just recommendations anyway. Do an evaluation on what you see in the developed negative highlights. The shadows are a function of exposure time and won't be affected by a minute or two of different processing time.


tim