Graflex Super Graphic???

davetravis · Dec 30, 2006

Well, I'm still researching LF, (I'll be too fat and out of shape to ever use it before I'm done! ), and am seeing much talk about how great these "Super Graphics" are for landscapes and general nature photography.
I've seen "mint" ones going for much less than real field cameras, and they come with lens and 120 backs.
Question: Would this be a great "starter outfit" for nature photography?
I'll be mostly using a normal lens, but would like some wide angle too.
DT

kb244 · Dec 30, 2006

http://www.graflex.org/speed-graphic/super-graphic.html

Seems like an electronically controlled shutter, least thats if I am reading it correctly. Also says it's more compact than say my pacemaker crown graphic.

I would think that most of the graflex, much like my crown graphic 4x5 would be good for starter camera if you are gona use sheet film, and maybe a 90mm wide angle lens.

If you must use 120 roll film, its probably just better to stick with a smaller 2-1/4x3-1/4 speed or crown graphic as opposed to going 4x5 then trying to get a roll back for it lol. But that's just my opinion. Though seems like that super graflex would have more movements than my crown, which could be good for landscapes to a degree.

BrianShaw · Dec 30, 2006

Super Graphic would be just fine for what you want to do. One advantage that Karl did not mention is that Super Graphic has a rotating back. Roll film back works just fine on 4x5 and are readily available in 6x6, 6x7, and 6x9. So are viewfinder masks to help make framing easier. One thing about Super Graphic to know is that the lens board is not the same as in Pacemaker/Crown - it has mechanism in it to utilize the solenoid in the front frame for electronic release. These lens boards are not easy to find. The Pacemaker/Crown lens boards can be used/adapted but will not offer the convenience of the electronic release.

Dan Fromm · Dec 30, 2006

kb244 said:
http://www.graflex.org/speed-graphic/super-graphic.html

Seems like an electronically controlled shutter, least thats if I am reading it correctly. Also says it's more compact than say my pacemaker crown graphic.

Electrically triggered, that's all. Instead of a cable release there's a solenoid that accomplishes the same thing. I don't have a Super, so can't report on how the electric shutter release is in use, but from a distance it looks as useful as the Pacemaker Speed/Crown body release for the front shutter, i.e., an unnecessary nuisance.

BrianShaw · Dec 30, 2006

Dan Fromm said:
I don't have a Super, so can't report on how the electric shutter release is in use, but...

I do, and I can. When hand-holding the SuperGraphic the electric release makes the camera a DREAM to use. The release is on the left side, immediately under your thumb if you are holding it with the strap. Electric relase isn't very useful when on tripod, however... a standard cable release is better in that situation.

C A Sugg · Dec 31, 2006

One item to definitely try to get with a Super Graphic is the quick tripod release adapter. (I've forgotten Graflex's name for it) You bolt that to the tripod, then the camera can be latched to it (or unlatched) with a quick squeeze. The primary reason I recommend this is that, at least on the 1960s "Husky" tripod I was using, the tripod head blocked the back rotation. With this device, it was easy to pull it off to change orientation.
Charles

waynecrider · Dec 31, 2006

Nature photography? You mean animals, birds etc with long lenses? No. Landscapes and portraits, and maybe some handheld stuff, yes.

The Super Graphic, not Super Speed which came with the crappy high speed shutter, was my first 4x5 and I'm sorry I sold it. The rotating back alone was worth it. They all were intended to be used as all Graphics, handheld, easier with the electronic release. If I was intending to do landscape or architectural photography I'd probably pass and buy something else. I haven't followed their prices but the last I remember they weren't cheap in real nice condition.

Roger Hicks · Dec 31, 2006

waynecrider said:
If I was intending to do landscape or architectural photography I'd probably pass and buy something else. I haven't followed their prices but the last I remember they weren't cheap in real nice condition.

Seconded. Legendary, yes. Romantic, yes. Much use today? Only for a limited range of applications...

Cheers,

R.

BrianShaw · Dec 31, 2006

In addition to the limitations mentioned by Wayne, let me add sports photography. I tried shooting kiddy baseball and basketball -- too much of a challenge for this camera. Using flash with it is tough also. What other limitations might one need to be aware of?

kb244 · Dec 31, 2006

BrianShaw said:
In addition to the limitations mentioned by Wayne, let me add sports photography. I tried shooting kiddy baseball and basketball -- too much of a challenge for this camera. Using flash with it is tough also. What other limitations might one need to be aware of?

I think thats where the flip up sports finder comes in handy (besides 4x5 much larger than 35mm, that you could crop the region you wanted if you wanted to. )

BrianShaw · Dec 31, 2006

Well, perhaps Karl. I've reverted to 35mm SLR with fast film and zoom lens for baseball, and the same plus strobe for basketball... as long as the referee allows the strobe, that is.

BTW, I never used the Graphic wire finder until just the other day when I tried the one on my 1940 Anny. Now I'm a believer... 66 years later. Perhaps I'm a slow learner???

p.s. I'm the kind of guy who still squints through the viewfinder of digital cameras. My wife laughs at me and wonders why...

Roger Hicks · Dec 31, 2006

kb244 said:
I think thats where the flip up sports finder comes in handy (besides 4x5 much larger than 35mm, that you could crop the region you wanted if you wanted to. )

A very fair point. Some of the best boxing pics of all time are on 4x5.

Cheers,

R.

davetravis · Dec 31, 2006

Thanks for all the replies!
I compared the movements of todays compact field cameras to those of the super graphic and found they were very comparible for general nature stuff. I really love fine craftmanship and see the super as a very well made classic for much less $$$. Has anyone ever used one with a 90mm or wider lens?
DT

BrianShaw · Dec 31, 2006

I do not own a wide angle lens nor have I used one, but the 90 mm Optar was a standard lens for the Super Graphic. They are seen on eBay frequently at moderate prices, but only on rare occasion on a SuperGraphic lens board and with the matching cam.

kb244 · Dec 31, 2006

BrianShaw said:
I do not own a wide angle lens nor have I used one, but the 90 mm Optar was a standard lens for the Super Graphic. They are seen on eBay frequently at moderate prices, but only on rare occasion on a SuperGraphic lens board and with the matching cam.

Actually I think 90mm is wide for a 4x5, 137mm or so would be more 'normal'

BrianShaw · Dec 31, 2006

Yup, 135mm Optar or 127mm Ektar(?) were the standard normal length lens for 4x5 Graphics. 90 Optar was the standard wide-angle focal length for 4x5 Graphic. When I wrote "standard" I meant 'originally sold by Graphlex for use on...' rather than 'normal focal length'.

Roger Hicks · Dec 31, 2006

BrianShaw said:
I do not own a wide angle lens nor have I used one, but the 90 mm Optar was a standard lens for the Super Graphic. They are seen on eBay frequently at moderate prices, but only on rare occasion on a SuperGraphic lens board and with the matching cam.

Dunno about Graphics but a 90 on an MPP Micro-Tech or Micro-Press allowed NO movement. MPP ripped off the best of both Graphic and Linhof cameras. I have used many MPs with 89 Wrays or 90 Angulons.

Standard for 4x5 is normally regarded as 6 inch = 150mm. The 135mm and 5 inch (127mm) lenses were wide-angles, very roughly like 35mm on 35mm.

Cheers,

R.

BrianShaw · Dec 31, 2006

I believe that you are correct Roger about the probability of no room for movement with a 90 Optar. Movements aren't very important in press photography. This is certainly something to be aware of if trying to use a wide angle Optar and Graphic camera for, say, architecture work -- it probably won't do what one wants.

You are also correct about 150 being considered normal for 4x5, but for press camera the wider (135/127mm) was more commonly used. That's why they are dime-a-dozen on the market but the 152mm Optar is much less frequently seen.

Roger Hicks · Dec 31, 2006

BrianShaw said:
You are also correct about 150 being considered normal for 4x5, but for press camera the wider (135/127mm) was more commonly used. That's why they are dime-a-dozen on the market but the 152mm Optar is much less frequently seen.

Absolutely; the press always favoured w/a lenses. And some (not all) of the 5 inch and 135mm bottles are very good (with movements) on 6x9 -- and modern film is so much better that I suspect a modern 6x7 comes close in grain, sharpness, resolution and possibly even tonality to an old 5x4.

Cheers,

R.

BrianShaw · Dec 31, 2006

Before I aquired a modern view camera and lenses some 20 years ago, I used a roll film back (RH-10: 6x7) and the Optar 135 to do some relatively successful architecture photography. It's much easier to do with a full-movement camera and modern optics, but the 135 Optar (Tessar-type) on Super Graphic -- and a smaller aperture to help the optics out -- got me by.

waynecrider · Jan 1, 2007

davetravis said:
Thanks for all the replies!
I compared the movements of todays compact field cameras to those of the super graphic and found they were very comparible for general nature stuff. I really love fine craftmanship and see the super as a very well made classic for much less $$$. Has anyone ever used one with a 90mm or wider lens?
DT

Yep, used a Nikon F8. It sits well back on the rails close the the door hinge.
Here's a link for a lens test page. You can check some resolution testing.
http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html

One thing about the older lenses is coverage and resolution into the corners. Consider that.

Oh yea, forgot the finder which is nice. You just need the cams. A 135mm cam will most likely work with the original lens that was available for the camera but don't expect it to really work with all 135mm lenses, especially with short focusing. The GG is the best way to go there. A real nice alternative in a step up body would be Toyo's AII which was the progression of the Graflex body since they bought the patents.. It gives you back movements and has the same sturdy shell. IF this is a first camera for tripod work with just your typical rise movements it's a good way to go. From my own experiences and those that I read of others, and if you find the format to your liking, you'll start looking for something either larger (8x10) or with more movements and the ability to use longer and shorter lenses easily.

Just a little note about Graflex's and boxing. They were dumped quite fast when 35mm came around. In looking at the old footage of fights on TV, I've seen alot of 35mm photographers around the ring and only the occasional odd camera.

Roger Hicks · Jan 1, 2007

waynecrider said:
Just a little note about Graflex's and boxing. They were dumped quite fast when 35mm came around. In looking at the old footage of fights on TV, I've seen alot of 35mm photographers around the ring and only the occasional odd camera.

Dear Wayne,

You are of course absolutely right, But even so, don't you find it amazing how incredibly good some of those old 4x5 inch boxing shots are? I suspect that it was a much more skilled activity in those days: you had to know your camera (and the sport, if you can call it that) much better.

There's also the point that today we only see the great boxing (and indeed general news) shots from 4x5. How many lousy shots were there too?

Cheers,

R.

BrianShaw · Jan 1, 2007

Wayne Sez so very accurately "From my own experiences and those that I read of others, and if you find the format to your liking, you'll start looking for something either larger (8x10) or with more movements and the ability to use longer and shorter lenses easily." That's my story too! Super Graphic kept me happy for a year or so, then I bought a light monorail and modern lenses. I still use the Super Graphic, though, on a regular basis.

Re: boxing and press cameras... I'm in utter awe of the whole range of press work done with these old cameras, LF film (even with the help of Grafmatics and pack film), and flash bulbs. It took real talent to get an image that tells the story with only a few exposures and many pounds of equipment in ones hands. I recently started playing "Wee-gee Jr.", complete with Graflite and flash bulbs. I'm finding it much easier to make mistakes and bad pics than good ones!!

Graflex Super Graphic???

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency