Graflex Graphic View Vs Speed Graphic (Both 4x5)

[braxus]

What are the general differences in using a Graflex Graphic View 4x5 camera, vs a Speed Graphic 4x5? Only thing I can see if the Graphic view is a traditional view camera with tilt and shift, and has the longer bellows extension. And that camera will use the same lens boards the Speed Graphic uses. I just BIN'd a Graphic View camera, so I will be selling off my Speed Graphic. The price was cheap enough to consider and the Speed Graphic was more restrictive to use. Unless my Speed Graphic is worth next to nothing, I'll just end up keeping it too.

Any ideas of what a Speed Graphic is worth, with the Graflex 135mm lens? I'm keeping the Ektar lens currently on my Speed Graphic and will be swapping on the 135mm.

 

[Jim Jones]

The Graphic View uses the same lens board as the Anniversary model of Speed Graphic. 1947 and later Speed Graphics use a pressed metal lens board that doesn't fit on the Graphic View. Adaptors were available to mount these boards on a Graphic View or Anniversary Speed Graphic. The lenses usually mounted on press cameras have insufficient coverage to permit much rise or tilt of the lens.

I rely on the price of items that actually sold on ebay for the average value.

 

[removed account4]

hi braxus:

you can also poke around the apug-classifides to get some sort of worth/value on your speed graphic and lens.
my guess is together they are worth between 150-250$ depending on which model ( spring back vs graflok, anny vs pacemaker, crown vs speed )
and that model's condition. as jim said, the pacemaker/crown/speed had a round edged lensboard that don't fit on a graphic view ...
there were also a few models of the graphic view some had a spring back some had a graflok back as well.
have fun with your new toy !

 

[Paul Howell]

I would keep both, the Speed for travel and action, the view for other portraits, landscapes, cityscapes and still lifes,

 

[braxus]

Here is the picture of the camera I got. To me it looks like it is using the Speed Graphic board, so I'm guessing the adapter is already mounted on the camera? After a few responses I may just keep my Speed Graphic. People have mentioned carrying around the View Graphic with a tripod can be cumbersome. I do have the case with this.

 

[braxus]

Another question- is the Graflex 135mm lens comparable in quality to my Ektar 127mm? I thought I read once the Ektar is a better lens then the stock one, though movements can be a problem for coverage. So as long as I don't adjust the movements, I should be okay? Also I read I think the View Graphic only has 12" of focus adjustments, so it would seem the Speed Graphic has more at 12.5"?

 

[Prof_Pixel]

To me it looks like it is using the Speed Graphic board, so I'm guessing the adapter is already mounted on the camera?

That lens board adapter looks really cobbled together. I can't believe it came from Graflex!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Different cameras for different uses:

• Graflex Graphic View camera is a studio camera which would not be as easy to carry and use in the field
• Speed Graphic is a press camera for hand held use and can be also used as a view camera with limited movements

 

[removed account4]

Here is the picture of the camera I got. To me it looks like it is using the Speed Graphic board, so I'm guessing the adapter is already mounted on the camera? After a few responses I may just keep my Speed Graphic. People have mentioned carrying around the View Graphic with a tripod can be cumbersome. I do have the case with this.

yes ! that adapter is what you want. speed graphic boards have a nice small profile. that adapter makes it easy if you keep both cameras ( as long as your speed is the same vintage )

the camera looks like it is missing the knerled knob for the compendium hood, no big deal ... do the other photographs of the camera show if it had the tripod mount/bracket ? some had a tilting head, some didn't and some brackets go missing altogether. its great you got the case with it, they are extremely handy.

 

[BrianShaw]

You really should shoot with the Optar before succumbing to the internet chatter that it is inadequate. Sure, there are better lenses but the Optar is (and never has been) a slouch.

 

[shutterfinger]

Your Graphic View http://www.graflex.org/articles/graphic-view/ has a Factory lens board adapter on it. The adapter is not fully closed at the top.
http://www.southbristolviews.com/pics/Graphic/manual-pdf/GVII-Instruct2.pdf
http://www.southbristolviews.com/pics/Graphic/manual-pdf/GraphicView2Service.pdf
http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/kodak_4.html
The Ektar 127 was designed for 3x4 and just covers 4x5 with soft corners and no movements. How sharp a vintage lens is today depends on how close to nominal it was when manufactured and how it has been treated since.

 

[j-dogg]

I've shot the 127 on a 4x5 Graphic View I, it will cover at f16 with sharp corners but very little movements.

 

[John Koehrer]

The missing screw is only needed if you use the compendium hood. No big deal
It's an american thread so if you want something later wander down the the local Ace hardware
& look for a thumbscrew.

The case is OK for storage & maybe using in the car to keep the camera from bouncing around other than that it's close to ten pounds
dead weight.

 

[braxus]

Yeah I saw it was missing the focussing hood. I have one on my Speed Graphic and I was debating to swap it on, but I think I'll just look for a used parts sale. I can use a dark towel in the mean time. Is it easy to screw on the stock hood? It doesn't look like it would be easy to do that. This camera does come with the tripod mount, so I'm good there. I wouldn't be able to use the camera otherwise.

 

[braxus]

 

[shutterfinger]

Its a Graphic View I with a Spring/Graphic back. The serial number is on the rear standard.

 

[removed account4]

it has the tripod mount!
if you don't a tripod to use this with yet
i used mine with a black tiltall, not a old one,
not a brand new one, it was new in 88'
the gv and tiltall were meant for eachother !

 

[braxus]

I wonder if I could get a Graflok back for this camera, so I can also use roll film holders? Looking at a RH8 for this. Was there any roll film back larger then 6x9?

 

[bdial]

The Graphic View II has a Graflok, I suppose the back from one would fit if you could find a parts camera (Shutterfinger would know for sure), but just buying a GVII is probably easier.
If you're going to use it on a tripod with a pan/tilt head, you may want to substitute a bolt for the handle on the mount block. I found the handle got in the way.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I wonder if I could get a Graflok back for this camera, so I can also use roll film holders? Looking at a RH8 for this. Was there any roll film back larger then 6x9?

The Graflok back should be on the Graphic View camera.

If one is going to use the volume and mass of a 4"x5" camera, then one might as well shoot 4"x5" film. Anything smaller is a waste of camera capability and it does not give the user the real experience of using a 4"x5" camera. Just use a MF or 35mm camera instead.

"Fakin' it but just not makin' it."

 

[removed account4]

I wonder if I could get a Graflok back for this camera, so I can also use roll film holders? Looking at a RH8 for this. Was there any roll film back larger then 6x9?

there are a roll film adapters bigger than 6x9 i think one was for sale here on apug in the classifieds within the last few weeks.
it would probably be a lot less trouble and much easier to cut a dark slide in half and make a split 2x5 holder ... a x-acto knife, ruler/edge and dark slide are much cheaper

 

[mdarnton]

Another option for mounting on a tripod is to remove the tripod's own head, and get a 3/8 > 1/4 adapter block to connect the two. That's what I did, and the Graflex head is totally sufficient and lighter, anyway. If you want a Graflok back, you should have gotten a Graphic View II--a separate Graflok back will cost you about what the whole camera could. But Calumet made a roll back that will slide in without removing the focus panel. . . . maybe. It depends how far you can pull the spring back open. Search Ebay for Calumet or Cambo roll back. That's easier than an RH8, anyway.

 

[j-dogg]

The Graflok back should be on the Graphic View camera.

If one is going to use the volume and mass of a 4"x5" camera, then one might as well shoot 4"x5" film. Anything smaller is a waste of camera capability and it does not give the user the real experience of using a 4"x5" camera. Just use a MF or 35mm camera instead.

"Fakin' it but just not makin' it."

Not necessarily true, if you want movements or perspective control on 6x9 it's not a bad idea.

This is the exact camera I have but I have the factory Graphic View lensboard mount, and I bought it on here for 30 bucks. I haven't used it in a while man I should dust it off and put some film through it

 

[braxus]

I'm not worried about not having a Graflok back on the view camera, as I believe I have one on my Speed Graphic. That said if I need a screen cover anyway, they are usually sold with backs. I will look for one, but I'm not concerned if I don't get one at all or for a long time.

 

[shutterfinger]

I do not know if a Graflok back off a View II will fit on a View I or not, the only difference in the back frame part numbers is the suffix and there are 5 back possibilities, 4x5 Graflex, 4x5 Graphic, 4x5 Graflok, 4x5 to 3x4 Graflex, 4x5 to 3x4 Graphic, with 2 varriations of the Graphic and Graflok (no fresnel, with fresnel), suggest they will. A non fresnel version can be milled to accept a fresnel, a fresnel version will need shims to use a ground glass only. The focus hood for the View is a different catalog number than a Speed/crown. They may not interchange.