Looking For Advice About 4x5 Film Holders

[William D. Lester]

I am relatively new to 4x5 photography. I presently own a couple of Riteway film holders and some Lisco Regal II film holders. I like the fact that the Riteway holders don't have the small steel hooks to lock the slide in place. They seem e asier to use. There is also a caution that the holders can't be used with Linhof f cameras. Does anyone have any advice that they might share about any advantage s or disadvantages of one over the other. Are there any other options / makers t hat I don't know about? Any adivice is welcome.

Bill Lester

[Mark Windom]

I use both Riteway and Toyo holders.

I have had a rare Riteway holder that had light leak problems but for the most part they are very adequate. One nice feature is the ability to imprint a number on the sheet. I, too, like the fact that you don't have to deal with the hooks found on other holders.

The Toyos are probably the best made holders I have seen. Very solid construction and I have never had a light leak problem. They are about twice as expensive as the Riteways so cost becomes a factor.

I can't comment on the Lisco Regal's.

Bottom line, stick with the Riteways.

[Timo Ripatti]

Bill,

I use a bunch of Lisco Regal II's when I work indoors. I like the hooks, they are one step safer if I manage to grab the holder at the darkslice. When working behind the camera, I haven't noticed any slowdowns because of the hooks. Sure, they are always in the way when I unload the holders in the dark... I like the finishing of the Liscos, the rounded corners, and the recessed part inside to help me locate the edge of film. At closer inspection I notice that there are two kinds of darkslices, ones made sort of anodized aluminum and ones made of plastic-like alloy. Aluminum curves and bends easily (if I keep them in back pockets of my pants) and it is a drag to reshape them. The plastic-sorta thing has a "memory", stays better in shape. Maybe it cracks if I go too far... Outdoors I use Kodak Readyloads. They take less space, they weigh less, they are convenient, but they also cost almost two times more than the film you load in dark, and there are dramatically less choices of film type. There's also an alternative to Kodak: Fuji Quickload. Fuji works well in the Readyload back, once you find out how far you must retract the protecting sleeve... Whatever your choice, I advice you stay with well established brands because holders have differences with their thicknesses, and some may cause out of focus exposures. Maybe someone reading this could quote a holder test from a magazine?

cheers,

Timo

[Brian Ellis]

Is the statement about Riteway holders and Linhof cameras correct? If so, why is that? I planned to try the Riteways with my Technika V camera the next time I bought holders and don't remember hearing about this incompatability before (though I learn something new all the time so the fact that I haven't heard of it certainly doesn't mean it's wrong). Is there any problem using the Toyo holders with non-Toyo cameras (i.e. with a Technika V)?

[Bob Salomon]

Fidelity/Lisco/Riteway are all made in Hollywood by the same company. This company is part of the same group that owns, among other companies, Calumet and Cambo.

While all of these holders work in any 45, including Linhof, the new Riteway holders have a latch that the Linhof backs do not depress so the slides do not come out of the holder properly. Of course, since the parent owns Cambo, the Cambo type back seems to operate the holder differently than the Linhof back.

With Linhof we have found that the Fidelity Elite holders can also be a problem when brand new with Linhof as they don't always set fully into the back and you can lose 1/2" of film area until the rough, sharp edge on the bottom of these holders wears down slightly so they then fit properly. This does not happen with the Lisco holders.

When we brought this up to the factory in Hollywood they claimed that the Fidelity and the Lisco holders were made in the smae mold which seems unlikely as the feel of the bottom edge is different on these models.

Since Linhof discontinued their holder series they have been selling the Lisco holders in G

[Jack Fisher]

The older Linhof (as in my early Technika III and earlier) cameras were sold with the GRAFLEX type backs. The ground glass and viewing hood would need to be removed in order to install a Graflex style film holder. These holders are wider (exactly 5 inches) and have grooves on the sides for the slides on the camera back to grab and hold. Graflex 4X5 SLR cameras have a similar way to mount the holders.

Later Linhof Technikas have a spring back (Graflok type), and take the standard holders that slide in under the ground glass. I have since replaced the back on my old Tech III with the later type back, thanks to help from folks on this net. (Thanks Brian).


Jack

[Don Dudenbostel]

I have a mix of Fidelity, Riteway and Lisco holders that I used in my Master Technika over 30 years. Never a problem form any. I feel my old Riteways that I bought back in the mid 60's are the best of all of them.

[EuGene Smith]

The older Linhof (as in my early Technika III and earlier) cameras were sold with the GRAFLEX type backs. The ground glass and viewing hood would need to be removed in order to install a Graflex style film holder. These holders are wider (exactly 5 inches) and have grooves on the sides for the slides on the camera back to grab and hold. Graflex 4X5 SLR cameras have a similar way to mount the holders.

Later Linhof Technikas have a spring back (Graflok type), and take the standard holders that slide in under the ground glass. I have since replaced the back on my old Tech III with the later type back, thanks to help from folks on this net. (Thanks Brian).


Jack

Er, I think we have our FLEX and FLOC swapped around.

The old spring back was the type where you slid the holder under the ground glass. You couldn't use the regular roll film holders with this style back.

The Grafloc (also called Universal) back had the 2 sliding lock bars that gripped accessory backs on each side to hold them in place.

Both types of backs can be found with the name GRAFLEX on them, as that identifies the maker rather than the type of back. Similar backs of both types may be seen with other names on them, or more often than not, no maker's name.

Eu

[Robert A. Zeichner]

Is the statement about Riteway holders and Linhof cameras correct? If so, why is that? I planned to try the Riteways with my Technika V camera the next time I bought holders and don't remember hearing about this incompatability before (though I learn something new all the time so the fact that I haven't heard of it certainly doesn't mean it's wrong). Is there any problem using the Toyo holders with non-Toyo cameras (i.e. with a Technika V)?

I have quite a variety of Fidelity and Lisco holders. At one time, Fred Picker used to recommend the Riteway holders with the white release buttons in lieu of the metal L hooks, plastic handles with which you pull out the slide and the numbering wheels. I have Riteway holders that have the hooks instead of buttons just like most of my other non-Riteway holders. I also have 6 holders with the buttons, handles and wheels that say "Lisco Mark II" on them. So, I'm not sure that the brand necessarily tells you everything. The buttons get activated when you insert the holder into the back of the camera. Some camera backs have a space where the button would end up and so they don't get pushed in and you can't withdraw the slide. They worked fine on my Wisner and other wooden cameras in which I've tried them.

One feature I've found in the older Riteway holders (ones with the metal wire bale on the slides) that I like is the flap bends down further and provides more access when loading.

[Jack Fisher]

Er, I think we have our FLEX and FLOC swapped around.

The old spring back was the type where you slid the holder under the ground glass. You couldn't use the regular roll film holders with this style back.

The Grafloc (also called Universal) back had the 2 sliding lock bars that gripped accessory backs on each side to hold them in place.

Both types of backs can be found with the name GRAFLEX on them, as that identifies the maker rather than the type of back. Similar backs of both types may be seen with other names on them, or more often than not, no maker's name.

Eu

"FLEX and FLOK" are not swapped, but often confusing.

The GRAFLEX holders are exactly 5 inches wide and have slots down each side. They are labeled GRAFLEX on each holder, and are too wide to fit under the ground glass of a GRAFLOK (sometimes called Universal) or spring back, and were designed for the Graflex SLR cameras. My old Tech III had such a back, and accommodated the wider holders. The sliders on that back (similar to the sliders on GRAFLOK backs), fit into the grooves on those wide holders.

The "standard" holders are 4 and 3/4 inches wide and will slide under the ground glass of a spring back or GRAFLOK back. Some such holders may have grooves (such as my GRAFMATIC, the Polaroid holder, or a roll film holder), and when the ground glass is removed from the GRAFLOK style back, will lock onto that back as the sliders lock into the grooves on those 4 and 3/4 inch wide holders. It is also possible to slide such holders under the ground glass (except for the roll holder).

None of my Fidelity holders have grooves on the sides. I also have a few old wooden 4X5 GRAPHIC no. 5 holders which have no grooves on the sides, but are 4 and 3/4 inches wide and are designed to slide under the ground glass of a GRAFLOK, Universal, or SPRING BACK, sometimes called an International Back.

GRAPHIC, GRAFLOK vs GRAFLEX... Eeeeccchhhh... It is easier to see than to describe. Somewhere there is a treatise on backs and holders for 4X5 cameras, but I am unable to find it. Maybe it was in View Camera Magazine.

At any rate, the thread was about different BRAND holders, and not the difference in backs. Sorry to digresss...

Jack