Some more Crown Graphic questions

[trondsi]

In some ways, I quite like my Crown Graphic (although I have had some sharpness issues), and I use it both hand held and more carefully on a tripod.

-I currently use an Optar 135mm lens. Are there other 135mm lenses out there that you think are distinctly sharper? If so which ones?

-I might also look for a camera with similar functionality, but with a back that can be rotated. The Busch Pressman cameras look interesting, but do these have lenses that are easily interchangeable with the Crown Graphic?

 

[BrianShaw]

I’m sure someone will chime in and educate you on lens design... it won’t be me, though.

I sought the same solution with my first Graphic, a SuperGraphic. Replaced the Optar with a more modern design from the 1980’s... a Schneider Symmar-S. Yes, it was sharper. But I don’t recall if the camera would fold or not with the new lens. Then went back to the Optar and never again worried about sharpness because the difference wasn’t, as you say, distinctly more sharp. I still get great results with an Optar by using other techniques like aperture and a tripod.

SuperGraphic has a rotating back.

Don’t know much about the Pressman but in general a lens is a lens. Quite possibly the only real difference will be the lens board.

 

[Doc W]

If you want a similar camera but with a rotating back, then check out the Super Graphic (NOT the Super Speed Graphic). You can check out all the models on the graflex page.

 

[hsandler]

Some comparison of one sample of a 135mm optar to two alternatives here. https://www.flickr.com/photos/hsandler/albums/72157679759008983

 

[shutterfinger]

Pacemaker Crown and Speed Graphic lens boards made from 1947 to 1957 have 4 bumps, two top and two bottom for the lens board locks to engage.
Pacemaker Crown and Speed Graphic and Super Graphic lens boards made from 1958 to 1973 have 8 bumps, the same 4 as the earlier boards for Crown and Speed graphics and 4 larger bumps, 2 left and 2 right for Super and Super Speed Graphics.
The graphic boards made from 1958 to 1973 will interchange with any 4x5 Graphic camera made from 1947 to 1973.
The only difference between a Super Graphic and a Super Speed Graphic is the label on it. The Super Speed came with a Rodenstock Optar in a Graphic 1000 shutter while the Super came with a Graflex Optar in a Graphex shutter.
The Super Graphic lens boards have a built in lever which trips the shutter when the Super graphic electronic release is used. Super Graphic lens boards are hard to find, the battery door is frequently missing, the 22.5V batteries the camera uses are hard to find and expensive.
http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/graflex_6.html
https://graflex.org/helpboard/viewtopic.php?t=4647 ,https://graflex.org/helpboard/viewtopic.php?t=6211 and https://graflex.org/helpboard/viewtopic.php?t=4653 are technical articles for the Super/Super Speed graphic rangefinder I wrote.
Other brands of cameras use different lens boards and will require remounting the lens onto their lens boards or duplicating the focal length to have two cameras that use the same focal length lens.
Linhof Technica is another camera line that you may like.
Busch Pressman lens boards are hard to find. Busch pressman were also sold as Sears Tower Press.

 

[trondsi]

Some comparison of one sample of a 135mm optar to two alternatives here. https://www.flickr.com/photos/hsandler/albums/72157679759008983

Very interesting. You can actually see the blurriness of the Optar in the corners. Thank you!

Edit: Is it just me or is the Optar actually sharper than the Xenar in the middle of the photo?

 

[trondsi]

Pacemaker Crown and Speed Graphic lens boards made from 1947 to 1957 have 4 bumps, two top and two bottom for the lens board locks to engage.
Pacemaker Crown and Speed Graphic and Super Graphic lens boards made from 1958 to 1973 have 8 bumps, the same 4 as the earlier boards for Crown and Speed graphics and 4 larger bumps, 2 left and 2 right for Super and Super Speed Graphics.
The graphic boards made from 1958 to 1973 will interchange with any 4x5 Graphic camera made from 1947 to 1973.
The only difference between a Super Graphic and a Super Speed Graphic is the label on it. The Super Speed came with a Rodenstock Optar in a Graphic 1000 shutter while the Super came with a Graflex Optar in a Graphex shutter.
The Super Graphic lens boards have a built in lever which trips the shutter when the Super graphic electronic release is used. Super Graphic lens boards are hard to find, the battery door is frequently missing, the 22.5V batteries the camera uses are hard to find and expensive.
http://www.cameraeccentric.com/html/info/graflex_6.html
https://graflex.org/helpboard/viewtopic.php?t=4647 ,https://graflex.org/helpboard/viewtopic.php?t=6211 and https://graflex.org/helpboard/viewtopic.php?t=4653 are technical articles for the Super/Super Speed graphic rangefinder I wrote.
Other brands of cameras use different lens boards and will require remounting the lens onto their lens boards or duplicating the focal length to have two cameras that use the same focal length lens.
Linhof Technica is another camera line that you may like.
Busch Pressman lens boards are hard to find. Busch pressman were also sold as Sears Tower Press.

Thank you for the info.
Does this mean that a lens mounted on a Pressman would be hard to use on a Crown Graphic if I wish? Or is it easy to make such a lens fit the Crown Graphic lens board?

 

[shutterfinger]

Graphic and Pressman lens boards are not interchangeable and there are no adapters to use one board on the other.
The only way to use the same lens on both cameras is to remove the lens/shutter from one board and mount it on a board for the other camera.

 

[Dan Fromm]

-I currently use an Optar 135mm lens. Are there other 135mm lenses out there that you think are distinctly sharper? If so which ones?

Y'r problem isn't central sharpness, it is coverage. Any 135/5.6 lens from, in alphabetical order, Fujinon, Nikon, Schneider and Rodenstock will do what you think you need. Later Symmars (all but the convertible) are preferable to the convertible. Fujinons are usually the least expensive even though they have as good a reputation as their competitors.

As far as I know, a 4x5 Crown won't close with any of these lenses mounted. That's the advantage of older lenses. If you have the money and can wait for one to turn up, a 135/6.3 Wide Field Ektar shoots very well on 4x5 and y'r camera can be closed with one mounted.

http://www.largeformatphotography.i...to-look-for-information-on-LF-(mainly)-lenses has a link to my list of links of interest to LF photographers. This includes links to lens manufacturers' catalogs and to compilations of data from them. If you want to educate yourself about coverage claims and lenses' dimensions, use it.

 

[Jim Jones]

. . . The Busch Pressman cameras look interesting, but do these have lenses that are easily interchangeable with the Crown Graphic?

The Burke & James press cameras have rotating backs and are usually relatively inexpensive, The proprietary lens board on the Busch (and on the less common Meridian) can be a major problem. The B&J uses a 4" square lens board that was also used on many other cameras of that time. Adaptors are available to use Crown Graphic lens boards on the B&J. The B&J lens boards are an advantage to us who sometimes used other cameras with the same board. They are easy to fabricate with basic woodworking tools. However, a Graphic may be more practical in most respects. Most of its competitors used infinity stops that didn't fold down like those in the Crown Graphic. If one uses only one lens, this is no problem. I consider the build quality on the Graphic cameras to be better than on the B&J, despite the B&J's metal construction.

 

[Paul Howell]

B&J made a very robust 4X5 press camera for the Air Force in the 50s to perhaps the early 60s, has built in cams for 4 lens, rotating back, was heavy due to the focal plane shutter. Don't recall if it took roll film backs or just 4X5. I believe it was all metal construction. Other option is a Lindhoff (sp?) or Horsman, both great camera, good lens, well made,

 

[Nodda Duma]

Burke and James 4x5 press camera has a rotating back and accepts standard 4” lensboards. On my speed graphic I use the Kodak Ektar 127 f/4.7 lens. Beautiful lens, wide open and stopped down.

 

[removed account4]

the schneiders tha say "linhof" on the lens are the cream of schneider crop ...
not too expensive on FLEabay ...
can't really go wrong there ( except in some cases where people took things apart and
reassembled wrong or serious abuse ) .. shutters will need a cla..

 

[Pioneer]

I use a Linhoff Schneider 135/4.7 which I am quite happy with, particularly as I was able to get the Kalart rangefinder properly adjusted for it (not an exercise I want to repeat real soon.) I doubt it is the sharpest tool in the shed but it is close enough for the type of photography I do, particularly since I shoot my Crown handheld over 80% of the time.

 

[trondsi]

Here's a recent photo that I am pretty happy with (keep in mind, this is just a hobby for me). I think it shows some strengths and weaknesses of the Optar lens. I managed to keep the tree pretty sharp, but again the photo goes soft on the lower right and a bit on the left too. Most people don't notice this though. Maybe I will just try to get the most out of the Optar lens for now, at least until a nice deal on another lens presents itself.

Bristlecone pine, White Mountains, California. Velvia 100.

 

[BradS]

It if a beautiful photo. The Optar is a great lens. The softness you speak of is, I think, due to depth of field/depth of focus. It (the softness) is not the fault of the lens....any 135mm lens at the same aperture would likely have done about the same. What f-stop is this? The optar is a simple and elegant four element in three groups design (like the Schneider Xenar and Zeiss Tessar). It performs quite well at f/16.

 

[trondsi]

It if a beautiful photo. The Optar is a great lens. The softness you speak of is, I think, due to depth of field/depth of focus. It (the softness) is not the fault of the lens....any 135mm lens at the same aperture would likely have done about the same. What f-stop is this? The optar is a simple and elegant four element in three groups design (like the Schneider Xenar and Zeiss Tessar). It performs quite well at f/16.

Thank you! It is f/22 1/25sec. If you look closely, it is more than just depth of field. Looking at it with my loupe, I can see that the right and left edges are nowhere in sharp focus, so I am now convinced that this is a thing with this Optar lens. You can also see it in the link that Hsander posted above. Still, the lens is very sharp towards the middle.

 

[BrianShaw]

It if a beautiful photo. The Optar is a great lens. The softness you speak of is, I think, due to depth of field/depth of focus. It (the softness) is not the fault of the lens....any 135mm lens at the same aperture would likely have done about the same. What f-stop is this? The optar is a simple and elegant four element in three groups design (like the Schneider Xenar and Zeiss Tessar). It performs quite well at f/16.

Amen

 

[shutterfinger]

If you have gone through the camera and lens as described in the two threads about the Optar's softness and want to do some more advanced testing then download the high resolution USAF 1951 target in this link
https://jimdoty.com/learn/lenses/usaf_test/usaf_test.html . Print out multiple copies on glossy photo paper as its the sharpest at your printers highest resolution (photo printer preferred). Mount them on a flat wall or large board so that you fill the frame of your Crown at 10 feet. I cut off the label at the bottom and printed at 2x2 inch at 2800dpi. I used PS to fill an 8x10 sheet, printed, cut on a rotary trimmer and attached to foam core with double sided tape.
Set the camera up on a tripod, level it on all three axis, and adjust so that the back is parallel to the wall/mount board. Evenly light the target and make an exposure with the lens wide open. Process and examine.
Lens cells fit into the barrel with minimal clearance and can cock in the barrel if removed and reinstalled. I would not be surprised if either the rear cemented pair or the inner front element is cocked 0.0001mm outward at the bottom of the lens as mounted on the camera.

The next step if the sharpness/softness is not equal on the edges of the frame and the cells are seated properly in their barrel, neither the front or rear barrel or shutter is bent, is to start rotating the cells 1 at a time in 90° increments and retesting until it is as even as possible. I would start with the rear and work forward. Mark the edge of the cell for reference.

 

[lobitar]

In some ways, I quite like my Crown Graphic (although I have had some sharpness issues), and I use it both hand held and more carefully on a tripod.

-I currently use an Optar 135mm lens. Are there other 135mm lenses out there that you think are distinctly sharper? If so which ones?

-I might also look for a camera with similar functionality, but with a back that can be rotated. The Busch Pressman cameras look interesting, but do these have lenses that are easily interchangeable with the Crown Graphic?

I had the chance to pick up an somewhat battered Pressman 4x5 a couple of years ago. After servicing it I like it a lot, except it does not accept normal roll film holders! Also the lensboards are clumsily designed and a bit hard to make in a hurry. But the front tilts and shifts a lot (but dont rotate around vertical axis, if I'm not mistaken).

 

[Dan Fromm]

lobitar, of course your Pressman accepts roll film holders. Busch made an insertion type roll holder for Pressmen. Unfindable these days, but they were made. L. Tatro Inc. and successors made insertion type roll holders for press and view cameras with spring backs. Adapt-A-Roll 620, they can feed from a 120 spool but must take up on a 620 spool. And the 4x5 AAR 620's gate is offset 7 mm towards the insertion side of the gate. Cambo made insertion type roll holders for press and view cameras with spring backs. Go look.

 

[lobitar]

lobitar, of course your Pressman accepts roll film holders. Busch made an insertion type roll holder for Pressmen. Unfindable these days, but they were made. L. Tatro Inc. and successors made insertion type roll holders for press and view cameras with spring backs. Adapt-A-Roll 620, they can feed from a 120 spool but must take up on a 620 spool. And the 4x5 AAR 620's gate is offset 7 mm towards the insertion side of the gate. Cambo made insertion type roll holders for press and view cameras with spring backs. Go look.

Thank you, Dan, it somehow eloped me that these insertion holders existed. I will try and find one here in Copenhagen, shouldn't be impossible. And thanks again.

 

[EdSawyer]

btw, a crown should fold up with any of the modern 135mm plasmat lenses mentioned, no problem. I have a crown with a 135/3.5 xenotar that folds up inside just fine, so any of the plasmats (which are smaller than the xenotar) should be fine too.

-Ed

 

[trondsi]

btw, a crown should fold up with any of the modern 135mm plasmat lenses mentioned, no problem. I have a crown with a 135/3.5 xenotar that folds up inside just fine, so any of the plasmats (which are smaller than the xenotar) should be fine too.

-Ed

Thanks for the info, but I am not really sure which ones are plasmat lenses? How do you like the xenotar lens?

 

[Dan Fromm]

Thanks for the info, but I am not really sure which ones are plasmat lenses? How do you like the xenotar lens?

Trondsi, go here http://www.largeformatphotography.i...to-look-for-information-on-LF-(mainly)-lenses for links to manufacturers' catalogs and other useful information. The catalogs show lens cross-sections.

Plasmat types are roughly symmetrical, each cell has three elements. From the outside in, a cemented doublet (two elements), an air space, and a singlet (the third element). For some reason we tend to refer to Fujinon Ws as plasmats even though some (six elements in six groups) aren't. The typical LF plasmat is f/5.6 or slower.

The Xenotar you're thinking of is a five element double Gauss type. It is a variant of the six element double Gauss type, sometimes called planar type. Roughly symmetrical, each cell has three elements. From the outside in, a single, an air space, and a cemented doublet. Five element double Gauss types (Xenotars, some Zeiss Oberkochen Planars) replace one of the cemented doublets with a singlet. All are good lenses, but with less coverage than the typical plasmat of the same focal length. Six element double Gauss types, starting with the TTH Opic and Dallmeyer Super Six are (f/2.0 and f/1.9 respectively) are faster than plasmats. Five elementers are typically f/2.8.

I take it you're dreaming and haven't shopped yet. 135/2.8 Xenotars and Planars are much more expensive than 135/5.6 plasmat types.