Century Graphic 2x3 - Couldn't Resist...

[Dennis-B]

...this beauty at my local used camera shop. Although the bellows are a replacement, everything else is nice.

A word of caution on the lens from the seller. It's an Ektar 101 f/4.5; shutter is a Synchro-Rapid 1/800 -

From The Seller -

The shutter properly fires, however the release pin
occasionally sticks in the depressed position.
This prevents the shutter from cocking sometimes -
service may be needed for ease-of-use.

Is this easily repairable?

Here's its "baby picture". Picking up the camera on Monday.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I just picked one up myself. Sort of a shell version- no rangefinder, no strap, no focus screen. I pulled the viewfinder off, cut a Mamiya RB screen to fit, and use it as a mini view camera. Found a Schneider Xenotar 80mm for cheap already mounted in the right board and can close up the camera with it in place. Been enjoying it. The full Graflex back is very nice.

The shutter problem is probably very minor. If the actual speeds are close enough to use, I'd just do some naphtha drops at the release at most. If you open it up, stay on the top side and simply spot clean pivots, etc. and relube sparingly.

Enjoy.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Hey, Dan, I'm all for solidarity among Dans but I disagree with you on a couple of points.

The 80/2.8 Xenotar doesn't cover nominal 6x9, is really a normal lens for nominal 6x6. If you want a relatively fast 80 that covers nominal 6x9, try the similar -- but with greater coverage -- 80/2.8 Planar.

Graphic fans notwithstanding, Pacemaker Graphics in general and the Century and its twin the 2x3 Crown have only one generally useful movement. The 2x3ers have 19 mm of front rise. They claim to have shift and fans assert there's tilt, but both are usable for only a limited range of focal lengths and focused distances. If you want a 2x3 view camera, get a Galvin or a Cambo or an Arca Swiss or ....

Graflex Inc. and predecessors' nomenclature confuses everyone. The Century has in integral Graflok back, sometimes called International. The Graflex back was used on Graflex SLRs and was an option for Graphic press cameras. Accessories that fit a Graflex back won't attach to a Graflok and vice versa.

The Syncro-Rapid 800 shutter is an invention of the devil. Fragile, flaky.

Cheers,

Dan

So you'll know, I have a Century, a 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic and (long stories) 2 2x3 Crowns. I like them, they're very useful, but they have their limits.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I'm using the Xenotar for 6x7. Or cropping down to 6x6. I've tried a little rise and yep, 6x7 is the limits of this lens. If you can find me an 80mm Planar in a shutter for $200, I'll be happy to give it a try

I doubt I will ever get clear on the names of the different backs and such. I'll try to remember.

I had a Crown Graphic a while back which got my back to 'view camera' work. Moved to a Horseman VH when I decided I wanted real movements. There's a nice 75mm Nikkor with a large back focus distance that works well on the Horseman for semi-wide. this Century was a fluke purchase. Although I do appreciate the wide angle focusing. I have an Acugon 47mm that works well with the lens on the rear section of the focus rails and dropping the bed.

I worked on a Synchro-Rapd 800 recently. Had to remove the M/F flash sync escapement to get one set of speeds to work, but once I did that it was a fine 1- 1/400 shutter (with the 1/800 giving almost 1/400). Will never go deep into one of them.

 

[abruzzi]

I wish sheet film for these little cameras was more available. I have a baby Technika with both 2x3 film holders and 6.5x9, I have a 6x7 roll back, but it’s kind of useless since I can hardly see through the viewfinder with that back on. The 2x3 you can get the Foma films. 6.5x9 I think may be available from Adox, but I haven’t been able to find it in the US, so I cut down 5x7. The best way I’ve found to develop these little sheets is the 20th Century Camera reels in a Patterson tank.

 

[Paul Howell]

Free style carries both Foma and Ilford in 2.50 X 3.50 but no true 6X9. I have one 6X9 back for my Mamyia Universal, have not tired to see how well 2.5 X 3.5 will fit the 6X9 back.

 

[shutterfinger]

https://www.graflex.org/speed-graphic/century-graphic.html
The Century was made from 1949 to 1970.
Black bellows 1949-1954
Red bellows 1954-1963
Black bellows above serial number 532884 -1964 -1970
https://www.graflex.org/graflex-products-list.html

 

[abruzzi]

Free style carries both Foma and Ilford in 2.50 X 3.50 but no true 6X9. I have one 6X9 back for my Mamyia Universal, have not tired to see how well 2.5 X 3.5 will fit the 6X9 back.

the standard 2.25x3.25 sheets are too small for a 6.5x9 film holder, they'll just fall out, unless you tape them in place. Real world, the 6.5x9 sheets are exactly one quarter of 5x7 sheets, so with a decent cutter you can get 4 6.5x9 sheets out of one sheet of 5x7, but I've found my ability to do things well in complete darkness is limited, so I found some 2.25x3.25 holders from Glennview, and use the slightly smaller film, precut so I don't have to.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Free style carries both Foma and Ilford in 2.50 X 3.50 but no true 6X9. I have one 6X9 back for my Mamyia Universal, have not tired to see how well 2.5 X 3.5 will fit the 6X9 back.

That's because 6x9 is a half-assed metric approximation to the actual size, 2.25" x 3.25". Yes, I know that the length of nominal 6x9 and nominal 2x3 roll holders' gates varies between 78 and 84 mm, also that some nominal 6x9 roll film cameras have even longer gates. Also, the gates' height ranges from 56-57 mm.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have just the one 6X9 single sided holder but have 6 double sided 2.5 X 3.5, of course they wont fit my Mamyia sheet film back. I also have a Busch and Graphic, need a lens for the Graphic. The Kodak 101 on the Busch with very poor coverage, thinking about about a Topcon Super 90 which cover the limited movements on the Graphic .

 

[grat]

Freestyle carries ADOX CHS II 100, Arista EDU in 100 and 400, FP4+ and HP5+ in 2.25x3.25. Works nicely in both my double-sided holders and grafmatic.

Does NOT work nicely in my Epson V800 MF film holder. I'll be printing a holder soon.

But I kind of like using the rangefinder + 120 film back.

 

[choiliefan]

I've been shooting Instax in adapted wooden Graphic film holders on my Century and Graflex XL cameras lately.
Even screwed junker 40mm Bronica Zenzanon-E lens cells into a copal shutter to go wider than my 65mm Angulon.
My Century came with the 80mm 2.8 Xenotar lens and left-hand grip with cable release. It's the same grip as the XL with a different body mount which slips into the lower strap holder and locks in place via the tripod socket. I can't imagine parting with any of this equipment. Too much F.U.N...

 

[Dennis-B]

Hey, Dan, I'm all for solidarity among Dans but I disagree with you on a couple of points.

The 80/2.8 Xenotar doesn't cover nominal 6x9, is really a normal lens for nominal 6x6. If you want a relatively fast 80 that covers nominal 6x9, try the similar -- but with greater coverage -- 80/2.8 Planar.

Graphic fans notwithstanding, Pacemaker Graphics in general and the Century and its twin the 2x3 Crown have only one generally useful movement. The 2x3ers have 19 mm of front rise. They claim to have shift and fans assert there's tilt, but both are usable for only a limited range of focal lengths and focused distances. If you want a 2x3 view camera, get a Galvin or a Cambo or an Arca Swiss or ....

Graflex Inc. and predecessors' nomenclature confuses everyone. The Century has in integral Graflok back, sometimes called International. The Graflex back was used on Graflex SLRs and was an option for Graphic press cameras. Accessories that fit a Graflex back won't attach to a Graflok and vice versa.

The Syncro-Rapid 800 shutter is an invention of the devil. Fragile, flaky.

Cheers,

Dan

So you'll know, I have a Century, a 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic and (long stories) 2 2x3 Crowns. I like them, they're very useful, but they have their limits.

Dan, I'll be picking up the camera tomorrow, and I'll try a couple of drops of naptha to see if the pin loosens up. There's a shop locally which does repair shutters, so they may become an option.

That stated, if I were to decide to go with a different lens, would the Nikkor Q, or the Topcor lenses in 105mm be a good substitute? They're a bit more plentiful. I plan to use roll film pretty much exclusively, since sheet film is so sparse.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Dan, I'll be picking up the camera tomorrow, and I'll try a couple of drops of naptha to see if the pin loosens up. There's a shop locally which does repair shutters, so they may become an option.

That stated, if I were to decide to go with a different lens, would the Nikkor Q, or the Topcor lenses in 105mm be a good substitute? They're a bit more plentiful. I plan to use roll film pretty much exclusively, since sheet film is so sparse.

Thanks for asking. For years I used the 101/4.5 Ektar as the gold standard against which I tested other lenses. You can read about all that at http://www.galerie-photo.com/telechargement/dan-fromm-6x9-lenses-v2-2011-03-29.pdf

Sometime after I wrote that piece I did some rather more formal lens testing and the standard issue normal lenses for 2x3 Graphics surprised me. I rated them 103/4.5 Graftar (in Century = Alphax shutter)>101/4.5 Ektar>the legendary 105/3.7 Ektar. When I mentioned this on graflex.org -- if you don't know it, visit -- several people remarked that their experience matched mine. I didn't test a Wolly 101/4.5 Raptar = Optar, expect it would be worse in the corners than the 101/4.5 Ektar.

That said, the 101/4.5 Ektar is a fine lens. Modern lenses such as the ones you mentioned have two advantages. They're in newer shutters and they have more coverage, which is wasted on a Century.

The Century and 2x3 Crown work well with lenses shorter than normal. If you're thinking of adding lenses for your Century -- if you aren't, why? -- I've made a nearly complete annotated list of lenses for 2x3 cameras. You can download it from https://1drv.ms/x/s!AggQfcczvHGNgYhYGeQuOzsBIyw8Og?e=XQwugI

Enjoy your Century,

Dan

 

[madNbad]

Dan, I'll be picking up the camera tomorrow, and I'll try a couple of drops of naptha to see if the pin loosens up. There's a shop locally which does repair shutters, so they may become an option.

That stated, if I were to decide to go with a different lens, would the Nikkor Q, or the Topcor lenses in 105mm be a good substitute? They're a bit more plentiful. I plan to use roll film pretty much exclusively, since sheet film is so sparse.

For several years I had a Horseman VH-R and used it exclusively with roll film backs. The 105 Topcor is a fine lens with good coverage for the limited movements of the smaller bed cameras. There are so many great lenses for this format it's hard to pick just one!

 

[Dennis-B]

An update:

Picked up the camera today from the dealer. While not immaculate, it's extremely clean, and the shutter would only stay cocked intermittently. I found some naphtha, and applied a couple of drops to the slot where the cocking lever rides, after removing the lens elements. At first, it wouldn't stay cocked at all. I could see that some naphtha had migrated to the shutter blades, so I carefully dabbed the blades with a cotton ball until I couldn't see any more. It still wouldn't stay cocked, so i walked away, leaving the shutter to air dry. A few minutes ago, I tried the shutter again, and it's cocked 20 straight times, and the shutter speeds "sound" fairly close, compared to a Graphex. I'll let it dry overnight, and reassemble things.

Now, comes another question. I have a Graphic 23 back that I'd like to use. I removed the standard back, and the "23" back fits into place. I slid the levers to lock the back in place, but even though it fits, it will not lock; will easily slide to the right until it contacts the rangefinder tube. I've looked at this from every angle I can think of, but I don't see anything resembling a "lock" to keep the back from sliding. Any suggestions?

 

[shutterfinger]

I removed the standard back,

Do you mean the focus panel? Its the piece with the ground glass.

I slid the levers to lock the back in place, but even though it fits, it will not lock

Does the Graphic 23 have both light blocking ribs? The inner one should seat into a grove in the back while the outer one should be just on the outside of the back edge.
The graflok sliders should just go over the outer lip edges of the Graphic 23.
Post pictures if you don't get it figured out.

 

[Dennis-B]

Do you mean the focus panel? Its the piece with the ground glass.

Does the Graphic 23 have both light blocking ribs? The inner one should seat into a grove in the back while the outer one should be just on the outside of the back edge.
The graflok sliders should just go over the outer lip edges of the Graphic 23.
Post pictures if you don't get it figured out.

Bingo! Looks like the left side rib has been removed, if ever there. Looks like it may have come from a 4x5 Graflex back assembly. Looks like I'm in the market for one that works. Thanks for the help. Much appreciated!

 

[Donald Qualls]

I just got a Century myself, I'll try to remember to look at the (seemingly working) Graflok back on it when I'm at home. I don't think there's a rib on the left side; that would be the side that gets the smooth (hinged flap) end of a film holder, and normally wouldn't have a rib, AFAIK.

 

[Dennis-B]

This is the back. Any and all comments welcome:

 

[Donald Qualls]

That matches my (known working, with my RB67) Graflex 22 back, and hopefully the 23 I have on the way (should get to me in the next few days). It also matches the Graflok interface parts of my three RB67 roll film holders.

To mount that to your Century, you'd remove the ground glass panel by lifting the two chromed levers and sliding to the right, put this roll holder in place (its rib will drop into the matching groove on the camera back), and slide the two chrome tabs so they tighten into the edge grooves on the upper and lower edges of the roll holder.

 

[shutterfinger]

That's an early manufacture roll film holder. This is a later version:

The progression was addition of the second rib, pin rollers, then the lever wind. I do not know the dates, pin rollers in the mid 1960's and the lever wind in the late 1960's. The second rib likely came into being in the late 1940's or early 1950's.

 

[Dennis-B]

Things just keep getting better. I was at the same local shop today, and was discussing my efforts with the Ektar that came with the camera. Although he's a Leica aficionado, we had a decent discussion about the "Baby Graphics". He asked me to wait while he got a Speed Graphic case out of his car, and he brought it in, so we could examine it. The case had that "been unopened in the basement for xx years", but inside was a beautiful Century Graphic, along with the original Graflex Graflar, and along with it, 2 extra RH10 roll film backs, and a 127mm f/4.7 Kodak Ektar, mounted on a 2.5; sq lens board, four sheet film holders and a pack film back. I started drooling over one of the RH10's, which is finished in a gray leather matching my Century. I asked him what he wanted for the 127 and the RH10, and walked out with both for $100. This RH10 back fits perfectly, and I'm going to try out the lens soon. I know that the 127mm Ektar is a wide angle for 4x5, but it seems it might be a good short telephoto (a al 210mm for a 4x5).

As it turns out, the original RH10 I have is going back on the Mamiya Universal via a 3-D printed adapter.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I know that the 127mm Ektar is a wide angle for 4x5, but it seems it might be a good short telephoto (a al 210mm for a 4x5).

Huh? Normal focal length for 4x5 is 150 mm. So the 127 Ektar isn't a very wide wide angle on 4x5.

Normal focal length for 2x3 is 100 mm. 127 mm is longer than 100 mm, but not much. FWIW, standard issue telephoto lenses for 2x3 Graphics were 8" (203 mm) and 10" (254 mm) Wollensak TeleRaptars/TeleOptars and they were true telephotos. 8" lenses, non-telephoto, have been made to work on 2x3 Graphics but they're not comfortable fits. Come to think of it, the 127/4.7 Ektar isn't a true telephoto either.

Not all long focus lenses are telephotos.

 

[Dennis-B]

Huh? Normal focal length for 4x5 is 150 mm. So the 127 Ektar isn't a very wide wide angle on 4x5.

Normal focal length for 2x3 is 100 mm. 127 mm is longer than 100 mm, but not much. FWIW, standard issue telephoto lenses for 2x3 Graphics were 8" (203 mm) and 10" (254 mm) Wollensak TeleRaptars/TeleOptars and they were true telephotos. 8" lenses, non-telephoto, have been made to work on 2x3 Graphics but they're not comfortable fits. Come to think of it, the 127/4.7 Ektar isn't a true telephoto either.

Not all long focus lenses are telephotos.

I should have been a bit clearer; the 127mm on 4x5 is "widish", not wide angle. It's a "longer" lens for the Century. The Supermatic shutter goes to the edges of the lens board. At any rate, I've often preferred a slightly longer lens for landscapes. In 4x5 I tend to work with the 180mm Wide Field Ektar, and the 8.5" Commercial Ektar.