Wide or long lenses for Speed Graphic

[Lachlan Young]

I was just wondering what the widest angle lens that can be fitted to a Speed Graphic is - I have heard mutterings of 65mm - is that correct and if so how much movement is available? Also what is the longest lens that can be fitted to a Speed Graphic and still be able to focus reasonably close (This can include telephotos)? As they only have double extension bellows I presume anything non telephoto over about 250mm will be too long.

All help much appreciated,

Lachlan

 

[BradS]

I don't know how short you can go. I do know that a 90mm Angulon will work just fine. It is a hassle however because at infinity, the lens does not come out of the house. I think movements would be severely restricted for anything shorter.

The non-telephoto 210mm is about the longest that is of practical use, if you want to be able to focus reasonably close.

 

[df cardwell]

90 - 250

120 - 210 is more practical

.

 

[joneil]

90mm Angulon is the shortest I have ever gone, longest, I have used both 300mm and 380mm. The later lens is a 15 inch Wollensak, and it appears to have been designed/manufactured with the Speed/Crown Graphic in mind, so not sure about other brands/types, but 300mm can do.

joe

 

[removed account4]

i've used a 58mm.
i regularly use a 65mm super angulon, 10' and 15" tele optars, no problem with rise and fall.

john

 

[Dan Fromm]

Lachlan, it depends on the Speed Graphic.

The shortest lenses I use on my 2x3 Pacemaker Speed are a 58/5.6 Grandagon and a 1.75"/2.8 Elcan. The Grandagon will, I understand, just cover 4x5. The Elcan really covers only 6x6, maybe 6x7 if you don't care about image quality in the very corners, and should make infinity on a 4x5 Pacemaker too. Not a lens for 6x9.

The longest lens that's comfortable to use on my 2x3 Speed is a 12"/4 Taylor Hobson Telephoto. It makes infinity with the front standard on the inner rails, i.e., inside the box. At infinity it vignettes slightly -- a couple of mm at each end of the frame are lost -- on my camera because the compressed bellows gets in the way. I understand that this lens will just cover 4x5, so it should be usable on a 4x5 Speed too. The lens was made for Vinten F95 and early Agiflite cameras.

The longest lens I can use on my 2x3 Speed is a 305/9 Apo Nikkor, front-mounted on a Copal #1 with extension tubes as needed between lens and shutter. Looks ridiculous, works well, focuses to 1:10.

The longest lens commonly used on 4x5 Graphics is the 15" TeleOptar that Jnanian mentioned. Schneider and Rodenstock also made tele lenses in around that focal length, and I'm pretty sure they'll do too.

Your question about movements puzzles me. As is well known, Graphics have minimal movements. A little front shift that's hard to use without getting unintended swings, a little front rise, useless back tilt. And with lenses that make infinity inside the box rise is limited by the wire-frame finder, which will hit the box before all of the 10 mm or so of rise that's available has been used. This can be cured by dismantling the front standard and removing the finder.

 

[monomon]

My Crown Graphic has enough movements for my landscapes - around 30mm rise, 30mm fall (with drop bed and full back tilt), forward tilt (drop bed, full rise and tilt back), as well as the others you mentioned.

 

[darinwc]

This from the graflex.org website:

The widest suitable for a Speed is 80-90mm.
The Crown Graphics and Super Graphics have a thinner chassis than the speed graphics and can be used with a 65mm lens on 4x5.

note that this is speaking of the 4x5 crown and speed graphics. The speed graphics doesnt allow for wider angles because the focal-plane shutter doesnt allow the inner rail to go as far back.

if you have a rececced lensboard, you may be able to go a little wider on a crown. You probably wont be able to use the focal plane shutter on the speed if you do this, or it may not work at all.

 

[jd callow]

i've used a 58mm.
i regularly use a 65mm super angulon, 10' and 15" tele optars, no problem with rise and fall.

john

I too have used a 58mm as well as a 75mm, they wind up inside the camera therefore movements are nil.

 

[Dan Fromm]

My Crown Graphic has enough movements for my landscapes - around 30mm rise, 30mm fall (with drop bed and full back tilt), forward tilt (drop bed, full rise and tilt back), as well as the others you mentioned.

Directions for modifying a Graphic to allow forward tilt have been published in a number of places. But when I've tried to use drop bed plus back tilt and front rise to get fall or forward tilt I've found that the range of focal lengths over which the combinations work is quite limited.

It might help if we defined which size of Graphics we're talking about. Darin gave, I think, limits for 4x5s. You are clearly thinking of 4x5s too. I shoot 2x3s, which are smaller and have less.

Lachlan, what size Graphic are you fantasizing about today?

 

[monomon]

Directions for modifying a Graphic to allow forward tilt have been published in a number of places. But when I've tried to use drop bed plus back tilt and front rise to get fall or forward tilt I've found that the range of focal lengths over which the combinations work is quite limited.

It might help if we defined which size of Graphics we're talking about. Darin gave, I think, limits for 4x5s. You are clearly thinking of 4x5s too. I shoot 2x3s, which are smaller and have less.

Hi Dan,

Yes, that's my confusion (sorry) - I'm talking about a 4x5 Crown. I've only just got mine recently, and when it came with the front standard reversed to give forward tilt without the dropbed (and all rangefinders removed).

But after using it a couple of times, I re-reversed it, and now use it as originally designed. Only mod I'm thinking of is to put a tripod bush on the top.

I mainly use a Nikkor W 135mm, which seems to me to be an ideal lens for the graphic, as it is light but with enough coverage that full movements can be used.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Lachlan, what size Graphic are you fantasizing about today?

I now am the proud owner of a Pacemaker Speed Graphic with a Kalart rangefinder coupled to a Kodak Ektar 127mm f4.7 - just like the one on the left hand side of the page HERE.

Hope this helps,

Lachlan

 

[Dan Fromm]

I now am the proud owner of a Pacemaker Speed Graphic with a Kalart rangefinder coupled to a Kodak Ektar 127mm f4.7 - just like the one on the left hand side of the page HERE.

Hope this helps,

Lachlan

Great! Good for you, I'm sure you'll get good use out of it.

If you have the money for one and are willing to hack your camera, the shortest lens you can use on it that will cover 4x5 is probably the 44/5.6 Super Aviogon. One of my neighbors has one, I've held it in my lap. A while ago someone in Japan posted an image of a 4x5 Graphic with a 44 SA, Google might find it for you. Very rare lens, not inexpensive.

Otherwise, if you're interested in stretching the limits you'd best do your own homework. The 4x5 Pacemaker Speed's minimum flange-to-film distance is 2 5/8". Of modern lenses, Schneider's and Rodenstock's are the best-documented. The shortest they offer that covers 4x5 and has minimum flange to film distance at infinity >= 2.625" is the one for you. In tele lenses, the 15" (381 mm) Tele Raptar is close to your camera's limit and not too expensive.

Cheers,

Dan

 

[darinwc]

Monomon,
while you just have the one lens, I suggest you keep the front standard reversed. Using the front axis tilt on the crown is so convienient with the standard reversed. Also, if you are looking for a really wide lens that will go on the inner rail, you can also keep the front reversed.

 

[Jim Jones]

Lachlan -- That nice little Ektar 127mm doesn't really have enough coverage for much use of front rise or tilt. You can have somewhat the equivalent of back tilt by using the drop bed, rising front, and the front standard tilt. It isn't as convenient as a view camera, but certainly beats nothing. A fascinating source of information on this camera is Graphic Graflex Photography by Willard D. Morgan and Henry M. Lester. Get at least the 8th edition to cover the Pacemaker. This book is usually available online from used book dealers.

 

[Lachlan Young]

If you have the money for one and are willing to hack your camera, the shortest lens you can use on it that will cover 4x5 is probably the 44/5.6 Super Aviogon. One of my neighbors has one, I've held it in my lap. A while ago someone in Japan posted an image of a 4x5 Graphic with a 44 SA, Google might find it for you. Very rare lens, not inexpensive.

I think I have found it 2/3 of the way down THIS page (while you are there check out some of the other wacky lenses - especially the second from top) - the Aviogon looks very heavy and very expensive!

Thanks for all your help,

Lachlan

 

[David H. Bebbington]

I just checked my top-rangefinder 4x5" Crown Graphic. Without movements, a 65 mm Nikkor focuses at infinity at the front of the rear track with this racked forward about 8 mm, I think a 47 mm would focus OK with no movements (haven't got one to try).

I can never understand why people want to modify the tilt movement, this works great as it is with lenses of 135 mm and more, for shorter lenses on the back focusing track, it is REALLY not hard to use the side tripod bushing and a ball-and-socket head to mount the camera upside down. I just did this and easily got front-to-back sharpness with the camera about 5 1/2 feet off the ground with the 65 mm lens with just a couple of degrees of tilt and the camera standard at front of the rear track. Rising front with a 65 mm would be very limited, but it would be with any camera without a wide-angle bellows.

As regards telephoto lenses, I have a 360 mm Tele-Xenar which seems to have a back focus of about 200 mm and focuses very easily on the Crown Graphic with lots of bellows draw to spare. My longest lens is a 500 mm Osaka, with a huge barrel that projects around 6 inches forward of the lens panel. This will focus on the Crown to about 40 feet. If this was a problem for me, I could easily make an extension box about 2 inches long which would of course give a closer minimum focus (I guess about 20 feet).

Regards,

David

 

[darinwc]

"Without movements, a 65 mm Nikkor focuses at infinity at the front of the rear track with this racked forward about 8 mm."
"I can never understand why people want to modify the tilt movement"

David, reversing the front standard does not damage or cut the camera in any way. It allows for the use of schleimpflug without any fussing with dropping the bed and using full rise. And it is way easier than using "the side tripod bushing and a ball-and-socket head to mount the camera upside down."

Unless you need to drop the bed and have a lens on the front rail (a 90mm lens would require this), I dont see any reason why you would NOT reverse the front standard.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Unless you need to drop the bed and have a lens on the front rail (a 90mm lens would require this), I dont see any reason why you would NOT reverse the front standard.

I take your point, but one problem I do have with my Graphic is that I have a Beattie screen fitted (in general a very good idea) which does such a great job that I have trouble seeing vignetting. A further factor with the 65 mm lens is that it really needs to be stopped down to f16 or f22 to cover 4x5" fully, which makes it difficult to check coverage, as a general principle I don't really like a situation in which the lens will end up "looking at " the baseboard if I apply too much of a movement. It may be a matter of taste, but turning the camera upside down is only a matter of detaching the snap fitting on one end of the strap handle and mounting the camera via a second quick-release plate I keep attached to the side - it takes about 5 seconds!

 

[darinwc]

"I don't really like a situation in which the lens will end up "looking at " the baseboard if I apply too much of a movement"
well, if the lens is on the inner rail you can still drop the bed to get it out of the way. Though on a really wide lens like a 65mm, it may still show. Turning the camera up-side down wont make a difference, the bed may still show on the top instead of the bottom.

Also, no matter how much you tilt the lens (using axis tilt), it wont make a difference in whether or not the bed shows.

"It may be a matter of taste" I guess so. Nice things about an up-side-down graphic is you get lens shade. And you also get fall, which is nice to have of your lens is running out of coverage.

 

[monomon]

Unless you need to drop the bed and have a lens on the front rail (a 90mm lens would require this), I dont see any reason why you would NOT reverse the front standard.

The reason I re-reversed my front standard on my Crown 4x5 (ie put it back to the factory position) was to be able to use front fall as well as rise, which you can't do without dropbed/back-tilt.

The other movement that I wanted to explore was forward tilting of the rear standard by combining tripod and camera movements, which also requires the back-tilt.

With the front standard set to forward tilt, Scheimpflug stuff is a little faster, but the other movements are not possible.

I'm very new to all this, but I have already found a couple of situations where front fall would be useful, which is why I decided to do the swap back.

Please excuse me if I have misunderstood something along the way.

Pete

 

[monomon]

Actually the front standard is so quick and easy to reverse, I did wonder if it was part of the original design/intention.