Why keep a 2x3 Crown Graphic?

[gfen]

I swear I posted this last night, but I don't see it. Evidently, I either never made it past preview message, or the Internet hates me. So, I'll post it again.

In short, I've been looking for a hand-holdable 4x5 to take with me on my honeymoon to Mexico in a couple months. Stumbled on an auction for an advertised Crown Graphic.

So, I bought it. Buyer beware, and well, when it came it turned out to NOT be a 4x5, but instead only a 2x3. No fault of the seller, she doesn't appear to be a camera dealer, and she did advertise exactly what it its identification listed it to be, so as far as I'm concerned, its no foul from her side.

So, do I keep it? Considering the camera's 50 years old, its in remarkably good shape. Of course, the leatherette is a little worn, and the the metal a little dull, but its only real downside is the leatherette on the front panel is completely split and falling off. The rangefinder, teh part I cared about, is in perfectly good shape and would probably perform better if I took the time to clean the collected dust out of its workings.

However, for all of these things, it doesn't do me any good. I've already got a modern 645 camera, and while I could use this to share lenses effectivly with the 4x5, it doesn't seem to be the most reasonalbe reason to keep it. I could always keep it for the Kalart, that way when I find a 4x5 CG, I know I'll have a working RF, but that's also not a valid reason to want to keep the whole camera.

It doesn't have a Graflok back, instead it has the older spring back, which means I guess i can't even use it with a modern roll film back.

So, do I keep it? Is it worth having around or will it possibly fulfill any useful purpose or is it purely destined to live life out as a novelty in my camera collection?

-sigh- Anyone want a baby Crown? :)

-gfen, still searching for a 4x5 CG.

[ISO 2]

Gfen,

Since you're in the market for a proper 4x5" handholdable camera, you might find some of the parts transferable....the mahoganite might make an interesting roll film container with a built in lid ;)

I really wanted to get into using a Graflex but had no need for 4x5" and went for a Century Graphic. I feel as torn in your dilemma as I am with mine (probably worse). Not a single exposure from the camera: I have one lens which has been in "repair" for 4 months; no accessible parts, no lensboards and virtually an empty camera body until I get the lens back. It doesn't have a Kalart rangefinder either. One day I locked the bed in drop position and it took me another half a day to unlock. The leather handle fell apart on first use, almost dropping the camera, but catching it deftly between my ankle and my football flick foot back into my left hand. Unfortunately the camera hasn't proved to be as adept without a lens ;(

I've been thinking your camera would make a great pin hole camera with cut sheet film.....wouldn't mind getting a hold of that Kalart finder though......

[Dan Fromm]

Well, if you want to put up with one, you can use roll film in your 2x3 in an Adapt-A-Roll 620 holder. These devices will happily feed from a 120 spool, but insist on taking up on a 620 spool. I use 'em with my 2x3 Speed and Century, rewind exposed film back to a 120 spool before sending it to the lab. That's what changing bags are for. Read more about AARs at www.graflex.org

Check with people more expert than I am on www.graflex.org's helpboard, but I don't think you can easily swap your 2x3 Crown's Kalart to a 4x5.

645 is half-frame 6x9. 645 transparencies look pretty punk next to 6x9s. 6x9s look pretty punk next to 4x5s, but they cost less.

The real question for you, I think, is whether any Graphic will suit your style of working. If you can do without much movements -- in my experience, front rise is all except the Super Graphic have that's useful -- and can live with focusing on the GG for all lenses but the one (1) the RF is set up for, perhaps you should keep it.

FWIW, I use a variety of lenses on my Century, ranging from a 38/4.5 Biogon at the short end to a 10.16"/9 Taylor Hobson, a better lens than the more commonly-used 250/5.6 TeleRaptar, at the long. If you wanted to buy the lens, your camera will accept and focus a 35/4.5 ApoGrandagon. But then, I'm nuts. My Century is the cheapest 2x3 Graphic, effectively a plastic-bodied Crown. So yes, your camera can be useful if you want it to be. If not, not.

Cheers,

Dan

[Gem Singer]

Hi Gfen,

You could try to find a Calumet roll film back in the 6x7 or 6x9 size. Slide it under the groundglass, and use it as a roll film camera. Or, you could purchase 2x3 cut film holders and use one of the few 2x3 sheet films that are still available. In any case, they are pretty cameras to look at on a display shelf when they are all polished up.

I'm still trying to understand why a guy would want to take a 4x5 camera outfit (even without a tripod) along on his honeymoon. Especially Mexico. Are you sure you really want to get married?

[gfen]

I've got a mostly-broken 4x5 Pacemaker Speed sitting in the closet, too. That was my first introduction to LF, and I won't get rid of it. However, trying to use it as anything other than a poor man's field camera is an exercise in futility. Most of the pieces were gone when I got it, the front shutter release doesn't work, and I've since then decided I'd peel off the leatherette and let the wood make it look pretty if it wasn't going to live out its true purpose. That's a work in progress, work I don't take too seriously, so it doesn't progress very much. :)

As for taking a 4x5 with me to Mexico on my honeymoon, Eugene, well, it was that or the 8x10, but even I can admit that I'll have better things to do than that. ;) I figured a little hand-held 4x5 was a far better answer, not to mention it'd be more fun than just using any old camera to make your vacation snapshots with. While I never worked with my existing SG in the hand, I do know that its enough movements to do what I need to do (most of the time, I figure without the FP shutter, it'll that much more useful, wish it had a revolving back or swing, though), and just sort of mucking around with handholding this baby CG, it seems like it might be a perfectly good companion on those day trips to the Mexican pyramids. Well, if it were 4x5, at least. Heh.

I wasn't sure what rollfilm backs were out there, I had heard of the Adapt-a-Roll unit, but as per your post, it doesn't come too highly regarded, plus I don't want to have to spend the case to buy into something that then relies on other parts that no longer exist (620 spools). The Calumet option sounds far more useful, in the long run. However, despite that, since I have no MF enlarger, I tend to like to just contact print my LF negs, and then pay someone money for anything that I truly, truly like, which is why the 6x9 option doesn't really excite me like it should.

[Moe_4073]

Gfen, there is absolutely no practical reason for having a 2x3 Graphic. But, being a very impractical person I do own a 2x3 Speed Graphic which spends most of it's time sitting on a shelf. I do occasionally like to dust it off and play with it, mostly shooting roll film (using an Adapt-A-Roll and mainly Efke 100) and even sheet film (HP5+ is/was? still available along with Efke). If you truly want to get rid of it, they seem to go for ~$100 on eBay (and for twice that amount if it is a Centry Graphic). Cheers,

[Jim Rice]

If it were me, I'd find a home for the 2x3 and get a 4x5. The 4x5 will do everything the 2x3 will, and much more. The exception to my advice is if weight and size are issues.

[Dan Fromm]

ISO2, who's holding your lens hostage? We need to know who's not safe. Re boards, try www.mpex.com. They used to be a stock item, should still be. Visit www.graflex.org for help.

Eugene, AFAIK Calumet backs are for 4x5 cameras, not for 2x3.

gfen, who looks down on my humble AAR 620s? I don't, and I use 'em. Re 620 spools, as I said, they're to be reused and of course they're around. Just look. For 2x3, the Calumet option is nonexistent.

Cheers,

Dan

[Adrian Ng'asi]

I think either way you benefit - put it on a shelf and it appeals as a collector or as in my case, I used mine everytime I travel (in very hardcore places). Films are available in sheets of 21/4X3 1/4. I have 2 lenses that goes with it and the negs are extremely sharp. In my collection I have a Hassy, 4X5 Shen Hao, a Rolleiflex and Century Graphic - they are all incredible. Simply, you are the limit and not the equipment!

Enjoy it,

Adrian

[Darin Cozine]

The 2x3 graphics are nice cameras, but the ones without a graflock really limit your choice of film. I would reccomend trading it in. But you might want to get another 2x3 with a graflock rather than a 4x5. If you are going to be hand-holding, the 2x3s are much lighter and easier to wield.

[gfen]

Well, gotta say it seems like the general consensus is that unless I want to start a collection, its not worth holding onto.

A shame, but the realist in me has to agree. Next stop is Graflex.org to see if I can use the Kalart on the 4x5 Crown I get, next, and then its off to see if I can either send it back for a refund, or I put it back up, myself.

Which, translates to, "I'm lazy, I'll pretend I'll do something with it and then forget about in the cabinet for another six months...Crap, what do I do with this now? Let's see if I can find a 120 holder!"

Finally, just so I don't come off as someone with absolutely no sense of priority, its not just a honeymoon, persay, but also our wedding. Which means that for a portion of it, her family will be there, too. What better excuse to avoid the headaches than, "Sorry, I'm going to go photograph flowers in the jungle, now..." :)

-gfen, always schemin'

[Bill_1856]

If it was listed in the Large Format section of ebay without being specified that it was a "23" then you were scammed, whether intentionally or not. Send it back.

[Jim Galli]

At risk of pissing Dan off I have to say if I'm going through the motions of setting up a ground glass camera, focusing with movements etc. and developing individual sheets, 4X5 is almost too miniscule, and 2X3 is out of the question.

I wouldn't pass judgement on the seller too quickly. If they had good pictures, and / or mentioned it was a 101 f4.5 lens you've got all the info you needed to know it's a 2X3. The buyer has SOME of the responsibility in this auction game. A link to the sale would help.

[Dan Fromm]

Jim, I won't quarrel with you. Whether 2x3 or 4x5 or "larger x larger still" makes sense at all depends on the user's goals and resources.

FWIW, I almost always shoot my tiny Graphics straight ahead, and they suit me fine. As I keep saying, they're not for everyone. Neither is "huge x huger".

Cheers,

Dan

[gfen]

Actually, it came with the 127/4.7 Ektar, which is one more reason I naturally assumed it was the 4x5 version.

Anyways, no need to have this degenerate into an argument on film size and nomenclature, for all intents and purposes, if the "Large Format Photography" webpage has a section devoted to 6x9 cameras, well, then obviously my baby Crown is LF, albeit just barely.

[CXC]

My first LF was a Crown Graphic 2x3. It served only to get me hooked -- I ended up throwing it away and getting a Shen-Hao 4x5. Which I have since upgraded. More than once.

Now that I have some experience, I can't understand why anyone would want a 2x3 camera with movements, or to hand-hold a 4x5. MF is the way to go handheld, and LF belongs on a tripod.

My opinion. Add $2 and you can get a cup of coffee.

[Bill_1856]

Hey, now we know. 6x7 is Medium Format, 6x9 is Large. It's amazing what a difference 2 cm can make (as my ex-girlfriend used to remind me).

[John Alexander Dow]

I have a baby speed graphic, and I see it as near the ultimate medium format camera. Quite portable (unlike my enormous Micropress - Speed Graphic 4 x 5 copy), it can actually be held at eye level without having to lean backwards to balance. It has three different viewing options (frame, finder, and screen), two shutter options. Admittedly mine does take a rollfilm back. I am seriously thinking of upgrading to a more modern lens (mine has cleaning marks and soft focus is not always required!) and a horseman rolfilm back or two (expensive). If only the front lensboard would tilt DOWN, it would then be perfect. For me.

JayDee

[gfen]

JD,

Of course the lens can point down, just drop the bed and then use front rise to bring the lens back up, but dont' correct its downward tilt.

Press cameras aren't real view cameras, as people like to point out, but they're remarkably adaptable for a number of situations, which people like to forget.

There's an article somewhere on largeformatphotography.info that went into lots of detail on the Graflex press cameras. It was excellent, so much so that I think I'll go find it and read it again now that I'm really wanting to get in touch with my press photographer side :)

[John Alexander Dow]

The bed don't drop on my camera. Is this possible on the 2 x 3 baby graflex speed graphic? - If yes, how?

regards

JayDee

[gfen]

You know, I've never tried with my 2x3, primarily because as you see by the thread, I wasn't sure if I even wanted it.

Are you sure you're trying to drop the bed correctly, I know I'd have never gotten it right if the guy who gave me the camera didn't show me how it worked..

To drop the bed on teh 4x5 model, you sort of have to push down on the supports in the same manner you would if you were going to return teh bed to the upright position, but instead of bringing it up, push them down, hold htem down, and push the bed down at the same time.

Err, it makes sense in my head.

[Dan Fromm]

John, if this http://www.graflex.org/speed-graphic/miniature-speed-graphic.html (http://www.graflex.org/speed-graphic/miniature-speed-graphic.html) is your camera, you have a Miniature Speed Graphic whose bed doesn't drop. Another way to recognize it, if that's what you have, is that it has the old-style focal plane shutter (many, many, speeds, the new-style has just six), a wood lensboard, and fixed (not folding) infinity stops.

"baby" is a common name applied indiscriminately to the Mini and to the 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic. The Pacemaker Graphics' beds drop.

Good luck,

Dan

[John Alexander Dow]

Definitely a later pacemaker - aluminium lensboard, 6 speed shutter, graflok back, shutter release on edge of body.

I will check again tonight when I get home.

thanks to all

JayDee

[Dan Fromm]

John, if it is a Pacemaker then the bed will drop. To drop the bed, roll the bed rails all the way to the back. Then press down on the struts that support the bed, and press the bed down. To raise the bed, roll the bed rails all the way to the back, press down on the struts, ...

It is VERY IMPORTANT that you roll the bed rails all the way back before dropping or raising the bed. If you don't do this, you will damage the links that connect the inner and outer bed rails and risk damaging the blocks that hold the inner bed rails.