Lens recommendations- 6x9 'view' Graflex 180-210mm?

[Dan Daniel]

I am often using a Century Graflex 6x9 'view' camera these days. I bought a 203mm Kodak Ektar lens, mainly for the shutter to mount a 100mm Ektar set. Testing the 203, I like the mild telephoto but the lens itself is low contrast due to mottled coatings and such. Its f/7.7 aperture isn't the easiest for framing, also.

Any recommendations for a compact view camera lens in the 180-210mm range? Don't need a modern f/4 with coverage for 8x10 and multicoating and such. The camera has 80mm square lens plates and a small throat so I imagine that many recent (i.e. after 1980?) lenses simply won't fit. Maybe there's a sleeper folder or 3x4 'SLR' lens out there I could pick up for low cost and remount. Maybe I just need a clean copy of the 203?

(longer than 210 won't focus on this camera)

Price range- maybe up to $400 if there is something special (180mm Heliar??!!)

Thanks.

 

[Besk]

Nikon made a 200mm F8 lens. Should fit - too bad it is a F8.

Frankly, I would go after a better 203. Just like the 100mm Widefield Ektar (if that is the Ektar you are talking about) the 203mm is has 4 elements, single coated.

 

[randyB]

If you actually have a Century Graflex 6x9 Press camera then you are limited by the bellows draw so 190/200mm would be your limit and would give you only infinity focus. You can cheat a little by using a "top hat" lens board, they can be hard to find for your camera. You might consider using a 150/165mm lens which would give you the ability to focus closer for portraits. With the 6x9/6x7 format, you have plenty of image fidelity so that if you need to crop a little you will still have a very sharp image. The Sironar, Symmar style lenses would work very well, the more modern lenses will be a tiny bit sharper but better contrast.

 

[randyB]

There is nothing wrong with modern Xenar, Tessar style lenses, they render a lovely image.

 

[Paul Howell]

Just to add to Randy B, you have a press camera not a "true view camera" as it was indented to be used hand held, with shorter lens. The thinking was by using a wide lens the news photogpghers could garb a large scene and then crop for publication. As noted the flat bed bellows is rather short limiting the length of the lens. In addition most came with rangefinders, top or side mounted, I think the Century was top mounted, a few were sold as zone focus. The rangefinder was likely paired with a 101 or 90mm lens. I have the Bush version of the Century, it has a side rangefinder, matched to a Kodak 101 F4.5. Does you camera have a rangefinder?

 

[randyB]

Coffee finished, here is what I found, keep in mind these sizes are for the rear component not including the retaining ring. Also, these are for my lenses, you may find slight variances in size depending on year of manufacture.
150mm f/5.6 Sironar (1975) = 1 5/8"
150mm f4.5 Xenar =1 1/2"
Wollensak Raptar 190mm f/4.5 = 1 7/8" a much under-rated lens, Tessar formula
Red Dot Artar 8 1/4" f /9.0 = 1 5/8"
Repro Claron 210mm f/9.0 = 1 1/4"
Fujinon W 180mm f/5.6 = 2 1/8" I was surprised it is this big, the other brands may also be this big.

Have you checked if you can enlarge the hole to accommodate a bigger lens?

Also keep in mind that on the longer lenses, the shutter may actually be bigger/wider than your lens board which would make it difficult/fiddly to mount.

On my 6x9 kit, I limit the longest lens to the 150mm Xenar, it does a fine job.

Good luck, RB

 

[randyB]

If this looks familiar it is because I replied to a question in the large format section and I thought it might also apply to this question.

 

[Dan Daniel]

A little more info in response to some questions:

My Century Graphic is stripped of the rangefinder and the viewfinder. I am using it as a very crippled view camera. I know that it isn't considered a view camera, but within its limited movements it can function similar to a Horseman VH.

The 203 I have now has been mounted with a 4mm 'extension on the back of the lens/front of the lens board. Which gets me focus up to about fifteen feet. Most likely a 210mm would not work or require some more finagling.

A clean 203 might be the simplest way forward. I had one years ago and it wasn't anywhere near as low contrast as this one.

Or a 180mm . I'll need to study the rear element size- almost no room for any kind of enlargement of the lens opening on this camera.

The 100mm Ektar I may mount on the Kodak shutter for the 203 is the one off of the Medalist camera, not the Wide Field 100mm.

I could take a 180mm Mamiya lens for the TLRs and mount it. Anyone know how heavy that front group is? It certainly projects a long way, and I doubt that the Century Graphic would do well with weight cantilevered off the front.

And yes, there are better cameras to do what I want. And better lenses. But this is sort of a fun side project, not something that I want to set up as a serious kit for now. If that days comes, a Horseman VH would be the camera.

Should I ask this in the large format group?

Thanks for the responses. Helping me think of things I hadn't considered.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have a very old speed, I bought it in 1966, used Navy surplus, if I had known it would be money would have taken better care of it. Over years the I dropped it and broke the rangefinder, held together by duct tape, like you I used as a field camera, also have a 6X9 Graphic, I don't think it ever had a rangefinder, no focal plan shutter, on my list to find a 100 or 101 Houseman super that will cover more movement than the Kodak on the Bush. Not sure about a Mamiya TLR, but the 150 and 250 from the press line up should work, the 150 is pretty light the 250 is a heavy large lens. How bright is the viewfinder on your Graphic, the Bush is really pretty dim.

 

[beemermark]

I have a "modern" Nikon 135mm 5.6(?) lens that just covers 4x5 stopped down but I think it was really made for the 2x3 format. Don't really use it anymore if your interested. Nice compact lens using common 52mm filters

Nikon Nikkor-W 135mm F/5.6 (S)

lens-db.com

 

[grat]

There are some 190mm Ektars out there.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Paul- I replaced the ground glass... oh wait, it came without any ground glass, so I installed a Mamiya 6x7 screen which actually almost covers 6x9. The first lens I got for this camera was an 80mm Xenotar with almost no room for movements, so I use 6x7 roll film holders all the time. The fresnel screen handles the brightness nicely, although it is a little fragile; when I remove the back for installing the roll film holder I put the back in a pocket so it is slowly collecting rub marks.

Beemermark- Looks like a great lens. I already have a 127mm Ektar, though, so I will pass for now. Thanks.

Grat- Looks interesting! I'll see if I can track down any reviews, although I guess a double gauss is a double gauss is a double gauss...

 

[ProfessorC1983]

I use a 180mm/f5.5 Schneider Tele-Xenar with my 6x9 Century Graphic. Works great as long as you don't want to get REAL close.

 

[abruzzi]

get a better 203mm. Its one of my favorite lenses--I use it on 6x9, 4x5 and 5x7. Find one in a compur shutter, and you can drop it in a newer copal if you like. Mine has very good contrast.