I bought an "Excellent" "fully functional" Speed Graphic 23 from a UK online camera seller. It has serious issues IMO. Opinions Please. Video inc.

[Lemmythink]

Some things obviously wrong. Should the description be excellent for such an old camera? (Lens board not fitting, loose screw in finder, loose finder, fungus - not fibres it wouldn't wipe off easy , shutter not working and lastly a rangefinder I'm too lacking experience to say).

Two things I'm not 100% certain of.
1) Shutter won't cock or fire. Does the coupling of aperture & shutter speed need a different approach to cocking/firing? Looks like Evri/Yodel threw the camera over a fence 5 ft fence about 6ft onto a path with limited internal packing.
2) I have limited experience of range finders. Do you see this as expected or not in the video? Toward the end of the vid I do see some movement in the rangefinder but its not always there and petty minor when there.

Pretty new to Youtube. I had to scedule a release time. It should be up now.

 

[BrianShaw]

You really don’t need confirmation, I'm sure. It is not in excellent fully functional condition.

The shutter feature you demonstrated is a 1950’s era EV lock. Some folks hate it and others, like me, find it useful. But that has nothing to do with whether the shutter cocks or not.

I’d return it…

 

[Lemmythink]

You really don’t need confirmation, I'm sure. It is not in excellent fully functional condition.

The shutter feature you demonstrated is a 1950’s era EV lock. Some folks hate it and others, like me, find it useful. But that has nothing to do with whether the shutter cocks or not.

I’d return it…

OK thanks.
Could the shutter have been damaged by a blow? Looks like it was thrown over a gate on to a path up the side of the house (eventho I entered delivery info at purchase and have a sign to a safe delivery place at the front door- in other words they didn't even try to deliver it properly).
And the range finder - is this typical of a working one or is that kaput too? Best I could get was at 2:31 in the vid, but that second feint indication (typical?) drifts to catch up with the movement on the focus rail. Should it be more directly controlled?

 

[loccdor]

Unfortunately I've found that a description of Excellent is false more often than not when buying cameras.

Generally I stick to 3 routes:

1) Buy cameras priced significantly below market value from people who claim to not know how they work, with the expectation that you can fix them yourself or pay to have them fixed
2) Stick to normal market value buys from tried-and-trusted sellers that you've been pleased with in the past
3) If the camera does not fall into 2 or 3 above, then make sure you go over every detail with a fine-toothed comb and make sure there's a return policy you can afford

 

[BrianShaw]

OK thanks.
Could the shutter have been damaged by a blow? Looks like it was thrown over a gate on to a path up the side of the house (eventho I entered delivery info at purchase and have a sign to a safe delivery place at the front door- in other words they didn't even try to deliver it properly).
And the range finder - is this typical of a working one or is that kaput too? Best I could get was at 2:31 in the vid, but that second feint indication (typical?) drifts to catch up with the movement on the focus rail. Should it be more directly controlled?

Can’t address the question about delivery issues other than to commiserate. We all have challenges with delivery, often the same ones. Anything is possible but I doubt that was the cause of the shutter. I’d more suspect that the shutter is overdue for a servicing/overhaul and the seller was being “optimistic”.

The rangefinder, likewise, appears to be functional but not ideally so. The rangefinder should track with bed movement without hesitation. The control linkage is probably gummy from age.

All-in-all, it’s likely a restorable camera but that might not be what you had in mind. Neither shutter or rangefinder overhaul is particularly easy without some experience.

 

[retina_restoration]

Unfortunately I've found that a description of Excellent is false more often than not when buying cameras.

Generally I stick to 3 routes:

1) Buy cameras priced significantly below market value from people who claim to not know how they work, with the expectation that you can fix them yourself or pay to have them fixed
2) Stick to normal market value buys from tried-and-trusted sellers that you've been pleased with in the past
3) If the camera does not fall into 2 or 3 above, then make sure you go over every detail with a fine-toothed comb and make sure there's a return policy you can afford

I would add 4) any listing that describes the camera as "Flawless+++" or "MINT+++++", you can be almost guaranteed that the camera is anything but. I've seen cameras listed as "pristine, mint+++++" and there was obvious rust on metal components, badly damaged leather, bent components, and sometimes the conspicuous fact that the shutter was hanging half open, unable to complete the firing sequence dues to copious oil on the blades.
You have to be diligent and comb through the description AND photos, and decide whether or not the item fits the description.

I would send it back for a refund, without hesitation. You can do better.

 

[ic-racer]

Not sure about the UK but in the USA, the ancient "Shutterbug" grading system is still in general use. In that case, "Excellent" is only one click above "Bargain." Usually "Excellent" is pretty rough and well used, but should still work. More details attached:

 

[Ian Grant]

Send it back, it is definitely not as described. I doubt that's the original shutter Graflex used Wollensak shutters, and they also made the Graflex branded lenses, and used a bipolar flash sync. So that Prontor is off something else, because after Wollensak closed Graflex used Copal shutters for Kodak Ektars etc.

At one time Camera House were a leading Birmingham camera store, they closed late 80s or early 90s. If you read their website they hire out equipment as film/tv props.
It's essentially fairly useless as you can't use it with a roll film back, it's Anniversary vintage, no front tilt and a spring back.

Ian

 

[Ian Grant]

Not sure about the UK but in the USA, the ancient "Shutterbug" grading system is still in general use. In that case, "Excellent" is only one click above "Bargain." Usually "Excellent" is pretty rough and well used, but should still work. More details attached:

I think a UK expectation of Excellent is way more steps above Bargain than your list, more like between Like New Mint & Excellent plus. Then there's good used showing signs of cosmetic wear but mechanically sound, then Bargain/well used.

This camera though was sold as Excellent Cosmetic condition, and Fully Functional.

I bought a lens very recently, this was the description
Lens Large format schneider xenar ********** compound

Condition
good condition (8-9/10)
(The condition is personal subjectivity. )

Appearance
Appearance is beautiful. (9/10)
Tiny scuffs from normal use.

Please refer to the photos for more details.

Optical system
very good condition. (9/10)
No haze
No fungus
No scratches
No balsam separation
No oil in the aperture blades.
No cleaning marks
Almost no big dusts;

Please refer to the photos for more details.

Functional
shutter sound good - (8/10)

Bundled Items
All you can see on the picture will be included in a set of a package.

The photos showed the lens and Compound shutter were in amazing condition, almost like new, So I bought it. Note that this was not a native English-speaking eBay seller. But the information was probably on the overly cautious side. In fact the lens looks like "New", the shutter is accurate, the all you see - meant the original lens caps and lens board.

Ian

 

[Lemmythink]

Can’t address the question about delivery issues other than to commiserate. We all have challenges with delivery, often the same ones. Anything is possible but I doubt that was the cause of the shutter. I’d more suspect that the shutter is overdue for a servicing/overhaul and the seller was being “optimistic”.

The rangefinder, likewise, appears to be functional but not ideally so. The rangefinder should track with bed movement without hesitation. The control linkage is probably gummy from age.

All-in-all, it’s likely a restorable camera but that might not be what you had in mind. Neither shutter or rangefinder overhaul is particularly easy without some experience.

Yep, I got it with this description to use it straight away.
Also noted range finder info, thanks. Got to be honest I thought the images to be overlaid would be a lot lot stronger. Took a while to see anything moving, but that as you say might be due to it being gummy and sometimes not actually doing anything?

 

[ic-racer]

In case people don't remember, before the internet, there was "Sutterbug." It was a newsprint magazine and at the time it was the main source of used equipment, outside of one's local shop.
There were no pictures, just columns and columns of listings. The grading system was M M- EX+ EX EX- UG(VG). There was no "EX++++++++"

 

[Dan Fromm]

Send it back, it is definitely not as described. I doubt that's the original shutter Graflex used Wollensak shutters, and they also made the Graflex branded lenses, and used a bipolar flash sync. So that Prontor is off something else, because after Wollensak closed Graflex used Copal shutters for Kodak Ektars etc.

Are you sure? It could well be an original issue lens made by Rodenstock and delivered to Graflex in a Prontor.

 

[Ian Grant]

Are you sure? It could well be an original issue lens made by Rodenstock and delivered to Graflex in a Prontor.

You could be right, however the shutter and lens are much more modern than the camera.

Ian

 

[Dan Fromm]

You could be right, however the shutter and lens are much more modern than the camera.

Ian

Are you sure? Serial numbers -- I couldn't see them in the listing -- will tell us when camera and lens were made. If my data is correct the Century Graphic was produced from 1949 to 1968. I repeat, that Rodenstock lens was original issue for the camera. It replaced a Wollensak triplet in a Century (= Alphax) shutter. Exactly when isn't clear.

 

[Ian Grant]

Are you sure? Serial numbers -- I couldn't see them in the listing -- will tell us when camera and lens were made. If my data is correct the Century Graphic was produced from 1949 to 1968. I repeat, that Rodenstock lens was original issue for the camera. It replaced a Wollensak triplet in a Century (= Alphax) shutter. Exactly when isn't clear.

It's not a Century Graphic, so back to square one. It has a focal plane shutter.

What ever we might say, it's definitely not in excellent cosmetic condition, except perhaps as a film prop. Go see their vwebsite offering props

Ian

 

[F4U]

I can't see the operator's side, but based on the way the handle attaches, it looks like an Anniversary model. And that lens would not have been original, at least in a US model. I don't know how much money L179 is, but if an L is anything like a dollar in worth, I'm afraid I'd be tempted to pack up the thing and send it back. Baby Anniversary Graphics are plentiful out there.

 

[choiliefan]

Send it back and demand a full refund.
No reputable camera seller would describe that mess as excellent condition.
Spread the word to buyers that their descriptions are more "out house" than "Camera House".

Agreed, it appears to be the Anniversary model but (hard to see) may have a Graflok back and missing the adjustable front wire frame.

 

[Lemmythink]

Send it back and demand a full refund.
No reputable camera seller would describe that mess as excellent condition.
Spread the word to buyers that their descriptions are more "out house" than "Camera House".

Agreed, it appears to be the Anniversary model but (hard to see) may have a Graflok back and missing the adjustable front wire frame.

LOL. Out house...Iike that one! Yes the back is like my Sinar but smaller.
TBH I'm not bothered if it's an original lens or other. I just wanted a working camera.

 

[pentaxuser]

I don't know how much money L179 is, but if an L is anything like a dollar in worth,

The L is actually a £ sign which is one pound sterling and the U.S dollar is the equivalent to 4/5ths of a £ or GBP as it is usually referred to so a £ is worth about $1.26

I hope that helps.

pentaxuser -from a small island just off the European mainland

 

[F4U]

The L is actually a £ sign which is one pound sterling and the U.S dollar is the equivalent to 4/5ths of a £ or GBP as it is usually referred to so a £ is worth about $1.26

I hope that helps.

pentaxuser -from a small island just off the European mainland

Thnk you. Being in the US, I guess the pound sign isn't on the keyboard, unlesss it's an alt code I don't know. Maybe the computers sold in Britain replace the dollar sign on the number 4 and shift $ with a pound sign. I knew a pound was more than a dollar. I think years ago it was a LOT more. At any rate, I hate that the OP got stuck with a dog. Between it not having the front frame finder, and some lens with that dastardly EV system of locking the shutter and f stop dials together, I personally would have been most unhappy. I've looked on ebay for Anniversary Graphic 4 x 5's on occasion. They are few and quite pricey, compared to the many baby Graphics there are.

 

[dxqcanada]

I had a baby Speed Graphic that I restored and sold ... I did not even think of listing it as "excellent" even though I did a CLA on the kodak leaf shutter, cleaned the viewfinder and kalart rangefinder ... tested the shutter speeds of the leaf and the focal plane shutter. There are sooo many sellers that have no idea what they are selling, so just describe them based on every other ignorant seller is saying.