Using older cameras

Lachlan Young · Jul 4, 2006

DBP said:
And that reaction pales in comparison to a bunch of teens and twenty-somethings having their first encounter with a #5 flashbulb going off.

WHUMP!!!!!
Sadly my 1947 pacemaker speed graphic has X-sync only :rolleyes:

But it does have provision to mount two flashguns - a graflex and a Heiland one on each side

Lachlan

Dan Fromm · Jul 4, 2006

Lachlan Young said:
WHUMP!!!!!
Sadly my 1947 pacemaker speed graphic has X-sync only :rolleyes:

But it does have provision to mount two flashguns - a graflex and a Heiland one on each side

Lachlan

Lachlan, your Pacemaker Speed's focal plane shutter synchronizes with FP-class bulbs. The camera has a bipost connector on the right side next to the shutter selector slide. That connects to the FPS. Go to www.graflex.org to learn more.

What shutter is your lens in?

Good luck, have fun,

Dan

Donald Qualls · Jul 4, 2006

Lachlan Young said:
Were Pentax or any of the other 'majors' to make the Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 screw mount today they would have to sell them at $1500 each just to cover costs.

No way it could even be produced these days -- thorium glass is a thing of the past, and while there are "better" glasses that aren't radioactive, they're even more expensive than thorium glass was in the 1960s. However, you're probably right about the pricing of a comparable lens, given what's being asked for the current crop of "designer" lenses for the few remaining new-manufacture film bodies. IIRC, I paid about $100 for my Spotmatic, back in 1981, including that Super Takumar.

Lachlan Young said:
Sadly my 1947 pacemaker speed graphic has X-sync only :rolleyes:

But it does have provision to mount two flashguns - a graflex and a Heiland one on each side

If you have either of those flashguns, check if they have an on-flash contact. If so, they're designed for use with non-synch shutters using a "synchronizer" -- a solenoid device that attaches to the lens board and fires the shutter on command from the flash. You mount the bulb, focus, cock the shutter, pull the dark slide, and when you press the button on the flash the same pulse of current that fires the bulb fires the shutter -- automatically inserting the required 20 ms delay to let the bulb ignite and come up to peak brightness before the shutter fully opens. This method worked with 1920s vintage dial-set Compur shutters, and it'll work with any more modern shutter that has a release lever that can be hooked to the synchronizer.

Or, as the other poster suggested, you can use FP bulbs, but they're both rarer (hence more expensive and harder to find) and EVEN BRIGHTER -- similar light levels to a #5 or #11, but lasting 150 ms or so, for a 1/8 second focal plane shutter travel time (regardless of slit setting), instead of 30 ms.

DBP · Jul 4, 2006

Lachlan Young said:
WHUMP!!!!!
Sadly my 1947 pacemaker speed graphic has X-sync only :rolleyes:

But it does have provision to mount two flashguns - a graflex and a Heiland one on each side

Lachlan

My 1944 Anny is x-synch too. But I just acquired a 90mm for it which is both X and M. Might have to recalibrate the rangefinder for it, then shoot with two #11s. Hope DHS doesn't come after me for that.

Walt Sharp Jr. · Jul 4, 2006

I love my old cameras but don't have the time to do them justise.
Look at my subscribers gallery, (Walt), for the street scene with the tall buildings and people walking. This was taken with a 127 size film (J&C has this and other old films) 12 exposures to a roll. Neg size 1-5/8 square. The camera is from the mid 50s and has a built in flash using M-2 size bulbs. This scan is from a 8x8 Silver print. I don't think it would make an 11x14 but could be a little larger then. shown. Duraflex cameras, popular in the late 50 & 60s came in serveral models. some with limited adjustable lenses, some not. Uses 620 film, available form J&C. If you do use your oldies be sure you can process the film. B&W processing is out of site. Walt Sharp

srobb_photo · Jul 5, 2006

I want to thank all of you for you input. Looks like I have caused a few to wax romantic over their older cameras. I will have to see about cleaning the Brownie and then check on film.

I had almost forgot about the camera my Mom gave me. This was one she has had since..... well probably before I was born. It is an Argus seventy-five. The plastic frame around the top viewfinder is broke on one side, but not sure if that will affect it's picture taking ability. No telling how many pics of me that camera took.

Think I may go back to the butkus site and see if I can find something on these two.

DBP · Jul 5, 2006

There is a copy of the Argus 75 manual here http://www.argoflex.com/Manuals/75.htm. You may also find the Argus Collectors Group site http://arguscg.tripod.com/ of interest. Argus was a major factor in American amateur photography for decades.

battra92 · Jul 6, 2006

Why do I shoot classics? Well, there are a lot of answers as to why I personally can be found taking a shot that will possibly hang in a gallery using anything less than an 8x10 large format camera with super expensive lens and whatever.

First of all, I am a college student. I work two jobs to make ends meet and life is expensive. I like the size of the MF negative but can't afford a Hassleblad with expensive glass and all the whizbang features. Heck, right now I can't even afford a Mamiya RB67 or a Rolleiflex. If I want to shoot MF I have a couple options options: the first being to get out one of my TLRs. I have a couple TLRs but nothing better than an Argoflex E, I'm afraid. The second option is to get out one of my folders. Now, I'll tell you, I have an Ansco Speedex 45 for 6x6 and a Zeiss Ikon Nettar 515 for 645 and that is more than adequate for me.

Secondly, there are just times when the big new cameras are just not practical. There are times I don't even want to lug around my Nikon N75. A folder can do a great job as well if I don't mind guessing distance and using a handheld meter. I will say that I'm pretty confident or at least comfortable with my little $10 eBay meter and my $30 Nettar. Why buy something else and learn it all over again when it won't give me what I want? Besides, with that money saved, I can buy more film and processing.

Third, and I know this will make someone cry, but no one gives a care what camera you use! Well, no one of importance anyway. I know we like to have peeing contests but frankly, does anyone care what camera Ansel Adams used? I don't. I had a photograph hanging in an art gallery that was shot on a Canon Canonet QL 17 using Fomapan 100. No one ever asked me the film or dev or camera. All they asked me was what I saw and felt about my image.

Honestly, if you like old cameras, good for you and welcome to a fun segment of photograpy. If you feel you must use certain features or you just prefer it, good for you and have fun with your camera and let's see some good pictures!

ricksplace · Jul 6, 2006

In another ten years, ANY film camera will be an old camera.

All I shoot is old cameras, from my pre-anny Speed Graphic (approx 1930) to a Pentax MEsuper as my "newest".

I prefer simplicity over techie gadgetry.

"The more complicated the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain"
-James Doohan

srobb_photo · Jul 6, 2006

Hey, battra, I like how you think. You know one of the reasons I would love to use some of my older cameras? Because it would make me work my mind and reach back to the dusty files in memory about using a manual camera. I love my Canon EOS Rebel, but like everything new and techie, it makes life too easy. The more new stuff comes out, the softer and lazier we become.

Now I need to know if I am to use one, or both, of these cameras, what needs to be done for me to shoot 120 film in them? They both took 620 and the obviously don't make that anymore. I am anxious and curious as to what I can do with these two old relics.

TheFlyingCamera · Jul 6, 2006

srobb_photo said:
Hey, battra, I like how you think. You know one of the reasons I would love to use some of my older cameras? Because it would make me work my mind and reach back to the dusty files in memory about using a manual camera. I love my Canon EOS Rebel, but like everything new and techie, it makes life too easy. The more new stuff comes out, the softer and lazier we become.

Now I need to know if I am to use one, or both, of these cameras, what needs to be done for me to shoot 120 film in them? They both took 620 and the obviously don't make that anymore. I am anxious and curious as to what I can do with these two old relics.

You can get 620 film from J&C (an APUG sponsor no less!) and you can always use 120 film either re-spooled onto 620 reels or with filed down 120 reels to fit the thickness. I've even put 120 film through an old Kodak Autographic 6x9 designed for 620 without modification and it worked fine, if a bit tight on the winding.

Donald Qualls · Jul 6, 2006

TheFlyingCamera said:
You can get 620 film from J&C (an APUG sponsor no less!) and you can always use 120 film either re-spooled onto 620 reels or with filed down 120 reels to fit the thickness. I've even put 120 film through an old Kodak Autographic 6x9 designed for 620 without modification and it worked fine, if a bit tight on the winding.

Do note (and J&C clearly states this also) that what J&C sells as 620 is "resized" 120 film -- the inner wrapper is opened and the spool, with the film still rolled on it, is trimmed for both diameter and length to match the 620 spec. This thins the flanges a little (even after taking the thickened rim off, they have to come down a little more than a millimeter, split between the two ends), though that hasn't been know to cause light leakage. However, the center hole and drive slot aren't changed, and a few 620 cameras will jam due to spool wobble, while many will fail to take up to these spools.

For whatever it's worth, of the eight 620 cameras I own, only two won't accept 120 supply spools hand trimmed only for diameter: an Ansco Pioneer 620 and a Savoy 620, both of which jam on the slight extra length of the spool. Of the others, the Brownie Hawkeye Flash, Brownie Bullseye, Duaflex IV, Brownie Flash Six-20, and Kodak Reflex II will all work with either diameter trimmed or unaltered 120 supply spools, and the Argoflex EF, after a minor and theoretically reversible modification, works with unaltered 120 spools in both positions. If I used the Pioneer 620 or Savoy 620 more, and didn't have a large supply of 620 spools, I'd probably try a roll or two of the J&C "resized" 620 film, but at their prices and on my budget, I'll keep respooling for the rare occasions I want to feed those (fairly crappy) cameras, and carry a heavy pair of nail clippers and empty 620 spools for the other cameras when I'm using them.

Whiteymorange · Jul 11, 2006

The Duaflex is the one old camera that I own which has completely failed to excite me. I have been on a quest to use each and every one of the old cameras that have been given to me (I'm working on it, Donald. The one you sent will be used this month... maybe.) Since my much loved F-in-law gave me the Duaflex, I was quite excited to go out and do it justice. It came to me with box, instructions, flash and flashbulbs. No matter what I did, however, I couldn't get excited about the camera. The lenses were clear, the shutter worked well, the film was easy to get or modify but the entire experience left me cold. As a result, the images were flat and boring. The quality of the lens is no worse than those on many of my other cameras, but it just didn't do it for me.

Point being... I think the experience of using an old camera is dependent on many non-technical factors, your mindset most important among them. If the equipment intrigues you, if the memory of a similar piece of gear in your hands or in the hands of an ancestor brings out the creative in you, if the reaction of the people around you to what is happening becomes a factor; then you will have a good time and make good images.

Quality is another issue. I have found that the best lenses I own are old lenses, much due to the fact that I am... frugal. Consequently, I find myself using cameras that are old without even thinking of them as old. As long as I have a comfortable relationship with the gear, it is simply an extension of my eye. I have a long way to go to build that relationship with each and every one of my cameras, but I know it can be done.

Oh, one more thing. Old cameras are also a disease. Inexpensive, often beautiful in their own right, they lead to G.A.S. (also known as Galli-Oleitis.) The result of this, for an inefficient and forgetful man like me, is the discovery that one has, at any one time, six or so cameras with film in them, waiting to be taken for a walk.

Donald Qualls · Jul 12, 2006

Whiteymorange said:
Oh, one more thing. Old cameras are also a disease. Inexpensive, often beautiful in their own right, they lead to G.A.S. (also known as Galli-Oleitis.) The result of this, for an inefficient and forgetful man like me, is the discovery that one has, at any one time, six or so cameras with film in them, waiting to be taken for a walk.

Only six? Piker.

Let's see here -- Counting loaded film holders for large format cameras as "loaded", I've got two 16 mm, six 35 mm, one 828, one 127, ten 120/620, and three large format, all loaded with film, plus three or four more that are fully functional but not currently loaded for one reason or another, and three or four that are waiting more or less prompt repair work. And that does NOT count my pinhole cameras: another 35 mm, three 120, and a 4x5 (plus a shutter with pinhole for one plate camera and a pinhole body cap for my Spotmatic, both included in the previous count), all loaded or ready to use with loaded film holders.

The newest of those cameras is a Vivitar PZ-3125 P&S 35mm, less than ten years on; the oldest is an Ica 225 Ideal, 9x12 plate camera with 15 cm f/4.5 Tessar in #2 dial-set Compur, made in or before 1926.

If the aliens land in *this* back yard, you can bet I'll have a *bunch* of out of focus, poorly exposed images, in a variety of formats...

Lachlan Young · Jul 12, 2006

Dan Fromm said:
Lachlan, your Pacemaker Speed's focal plane shutter synchronizes with FP-class bulbs. The camera has a bipost connector on the right side next to the shutter selector slide. That connects to the FPS. Go to www.graflex.org to learn more.

What shutter is your lens in?

Good luck, have fun,

Dan

Yup, found that. The shutter is a Supermatic with an Ektar 127mm in it - a stunningly contrasty lens. It is great for handheld shots - now where did I put that pack of #5 flashbulbs...
I'm going to try and get another speed graphic without lens to strip down and turn into a field camera as I don't really want to mess with the accuracy of the camming on my current Graphic.

Lachlan

Dan Fromm · Jul 12, 2006

Lachlan Young said:
Yup, found that. The shutter is a Supermatic with an Ektar 127mm in it - a stunningly contrasty lens. It is great for handheld shots - now where did I put that pack of #5 flashbulbs...
I'm going to try and get another speed graphic without lens to strip down and turn into a field camera as I don't really want to mess with the accuracy of the camming on my current Graphic.

Lachlan

Why ruin a pefectly good camera? The tubular VF slides off, if you think it will get in the way. The RF adds little weight, and once removed from the camera its parts will slowly disappear. You're young and should be able to bear the weight.

Lachlan Young · Jul 12, 2006

Dan Fromm said:
Why ruin a pefectly good camera? The tubular VF slides off, if you think it will get in the way. The RF adds little weight, and once removed from the camera its parts will slowly disappear. You're young and should be able to bear the weight.

No, I am not going to ruin my current working Speed Graphic but I am looking for another Speed Graphic with a knackered RF & possibly a dead body shutter too - there is a good page on Jon Grepstad's site about refinishing a Crown Graphic into a field camera and I don't see why the same couldn't be done to a Speed.

Lachlan

Dan Fromm · Jul 12, 2006

Lachlan Young said:
No, I am not going to ruin my current working Speed Graphic but I am looking for another Speed Graphic with a knackered RF & possibly a dead body shutter too - there is a good page on Jon Grepstad's site about refinishing a Crown Graphic into a field camera and I don't see why the same couldn't be done to a Speed.

Lachlan

Um, the only advantage a butchered Speed has over a butchered Crown is greater maximum extension. The Speed will weigh more, but as I've remarked you're young and probably strong.

The two advantages a butchered Crown has over a butchered Speed are somewhat less weight and shorter minimum extension.

A Speed with a working focal plane shutter can use lenses in barrel. They're often relatively inexpensive. Since you're a student and probably short of cash a Speed with a good FPS -- hang the add'l weight and inability to use short lenses -- may make best sense for you.

Cheers,

Dan

Donald Qualls · Jul 12, 2006

Well, and "short lenses" in terms of not working with a Speed means shorter than 90 mm. A Crown can focus infinity with a 65 mm, but if you're a student short on funds, you're very unlikely to afford a 65 mm that will cover 4x5.

The *other* advantage of a Speed is that you can get them in pre-Pacemaker models, like the Anniversary. No movements to speak of (though I don't see any reason you couldn't fabricate a replacement front standard to support fall, swings, and tilts in addition to the stock rise and shifts), but the simple 4x4 rabetted lens board is something anyone with access to a table saw and adjustable hole saw can turn out in half an hour each, plus glue drying time. The stamped boards for the Pacemaker Speed and Crown are much harder to come by, and more expensive; with an Anny or pre-Anny, there's no excuse for not having each lens on its own board.

Lachlan Young · Jul 13, 2006

Dan Fromm said:
A Speed with a working focal plane shutter can use lenses in barrel. They're often relatively inexpensive. Since you're a student and probably short of cash a Speed with a good FPS -- hang the add'l weight and inability to use short lenses -- may make best sense for you.

That was pretty close to what I am looking for - ideally with a non functioning RF, knackered body leather, and with a dead or missing viewfinder but with a functioning body shutter and otherwise in good mechanical condition. An Anniversary Speed, or pre Anniversary, or Pacemaker Speed in the above condition would be quite acceptable - anyway I am not really intending to use WA lenses, well no wider than 90mm anyway.

Thanks for the advice,

Lachlan

Paul Howell · Jul 13, 2006

You may want to look for a Graflex, like a Speed but a 4X5 SLR, they were also make in 41/4 X 3 1/4. Not as handy as a good working Range Finder, but usable. ICA and few other firms made 4X5 SLRs.

Chan Tran · Jul 14, 2006

More than 20 years ago I bought an old Polaroid 150 for $15. I probably over paid for it at that time. I shot a few roll of polaroid roll film and then I couldn't get the film any more. I went out and get me a box of 10 sheet 4x5 of Kodak Vericolor type S film (It's called portra now I think) and simply put a sheet of film in the camera and close the back. I used a changing bag to do this. It took aprox 3.5x4.5 image on the 4x5 sheet. The result was actually very good.

theandy · Jul 16, 2006

I think it's just a matter of fun to shoot with an old, "cheap" camera. When it comes to terms I choose my good camera of course. But somehow it's more fun to take pictures with an old model, maybe even a box camera. It's that special "feeling" when you hold it in your hands, feeling the weight, the shape, the form.
I don't expect the best pictures from those cameras, sometimes the result doesn't even matter to me but rather the whole process before.
I recently bought an Lubitel 166 U Box camera and I don't know wether it is good in handling or taking pictures... I just hope it works
Has anyone experiences with that camera?

Andy

Ole · Jul 16, 2006

Lachlan Young said:
... with a non functioning RF, knackered body leather, and with a dead or missing viewfinder but with a functioning body shutter and otherwise in good mechanical condition. An Anniversary Speed, or pre Anniversary, ...

That's what I've just bought, except the only thing which seems to be missing is the lens board. That doesn't matter, since I have a small stack of them. It remains to be seen whether I can mount my smallest iris holder on one and still fit it to the camera - if I can, then that's my new Aplanat test bed.

Lachlan Young · Jul 16, 2006

Ole said:
That's what I've just bought, except the only thing which seems to be missing is the lens board. That doesn't matter, since I have a small stack of them. It remains to be seen whether I can mount my smallest iris holder on one and still fit it to the camera - if I can, then that's my new Aplanat test bed.

I'm going green with envy!!

Lachlan

Using older cameras

Lachlan Young

Dan Fromm

Donald Qualls

DBP

Walt Sharp Jr.

srobb_photo

DBP

battra92

ricksplace

srobb_photo

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Donald Qualls

Whiteymorange

Donald Qualls

Lachlan Young

Dan Fromm

Lachlan Young

Dan Fromm

Donald Qualls

Lachlan Young

Paul Howell

Chan Tran

theandy

Ole

Moderator

Lachlan Young

Using older cameras

Membership Council

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency