PDA

View Full Version : Widest lens on the Graflex Super D 3 x 4?



joshdaskew
8-Sep-2010, 01:11
Hi, I am interested in purchasing one of these, mainly for the use of 3.25 x 4.25 Fuji instant film... Was just wondering what the widest lens I can use on this is? I know 150mm or so is the standard but just wondering if it was possible to take wider? I have a 135mm Xenotar I have in mind, as well as a 105mm medium format lens (although this is probably no doubt way too wide). What are the constraints involved with such a camera/lens combination? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

Brian Stein
8-Sep-2010, 03:38
For the minimum focal length measure the distance between the ground glass and the lens mount with the focus fully racked in. This will be the approximate minimum unless you go to a recessed lens board.

The only specific information I can find is the manual at http://www.butkus.org/chinon/graflex/auto_graflex/auto_graflex.htm This seems to indicate lenses between 4.5 inches and 8.5 inches were in use . So it looks like a 120 mm or so should work, making the xenotar ok (I think it will just cover 5x4) but not very wide.

Walter Calahan
8-Sep-2010, 04:15
Very difficult to put a wide angle and get its full range of focus on the Graflex regardless of its format due to the mirror. You can put a very wide lens on the camera, but you will not be able to focus to infinity.

I put an Aero-Ektar 178 on a 4x5 Graflex, but can't focus out further than @6 or 7 feet.

joshdaskew
8-Sep-2010, 21:25
Hi, Thanks so much for the reponse! i don't actually have the camera unfortunately so can't do my own measurements.. Would you be able to elaborate on what effect the mirror has on lenses and how this doesn't allow you to focus to infiniity? I mainly plan to use if for portraits but was also looking to put a medium format lens (Pentax 105mm 2.4) on the front... i realise that this possibly won't cover the full frame.. What potential problems would I run into using this? It would be mounted on an extension tube on a standard board... Might it be possible but just not to infinity as you have mentioned?

Ok, thanks so much again. Cheers Josh

Sevo
9-Sep-2010, 01:16
Been there, done that. That is, toyed with using modern medium format retrofocal lenses on intermediate format gear. While I haven't tried on a Graflex, I've tried, unsuccesfully, on my Mentors and Makiflexes - and your 3x4" has a minimum of 14cm swing, 2cm more than these 6.5x9cm cameras.

It can't even be done on 6.5x9. And least of all with Pentax 6x7 lenses, as that has a horizontal mirror with barely more swing than a Hasselblad, and a mere 80mm register - way too short to leave any room for a mirror with at least 12cm swing radius, and even less for the bigger mirror swing on a 3x4.

Even Mamiya RB lenses (with about 110mm register) don't focus beyond a few cm on my rotating back 6x9's, and going by the dimensions, RB wides could not even be retrofit into another barrel to make them fit a Graflex, as their rear element can't clear the mirror at infinity. Only long lenses (with plenty of air between rear element and mount) could be remounted, but there already is no shortage of long lenses for old reflexes.

leighmarrin
9-Sep-2010, 01:23
Josh, the problem with the Graflex mirror is that many lenses will HIT it, or prevent it from its full travel. Your proposed 105mm lens will not need an extension tube, but just the opposite. For it to focus at portrait distances, it will have to go the opposite direction with a recessed lensboard, and will then surely interfere with the mirror.

FWIW, I have an older non-auto Series D 3x4 Graflex from the 1930s, and when I put a 127mm/f4.7 lens on it, its bellows will only allow a focus range of about 12 to 20 inches. The 6 3/8" B&L Tessar that came on mine is a sharp lens, and I'm quite happy with it.

leighmarrin
9-Sep-2010, 01:24
Josh, the problem with the Graflex mirror is that many lenses will HIT it, or prevent it from its full travel. Your proposed 105mm lens will not need an extension tube, but just the opposite. For it to focus at portrait distances, it will have to go the opposite direction with a recessed lensboard, and will then surely interfere with the mirror.

FWIW, I have an older non-auto Series D 3x4 Graflex from the 1930s, and when I put a 127mm/f4.7 lens on it, its bellows will only allow a focus range of about 12 to 20 inches. The 6 3/8" B&L Tessar that came on mine is a sharp lens, and I'm quite happy with it.

joshdaskew
10-Sep-2010, 20:59
Cool, Thanks so much for the responses! So it may just be a matter of sticking these things onto my large format camera and using them that way.. Are there any other options that you guys can think of? There seems to be only rangefinder cameras that seem to accommodate this size...

So I am assuming that for these cameras and their relevant film size, there is no "standard" lens (as in, a 50mm in 35mm terms) and that the lens that comes with both the 3 x 4 version (150mm) and the 5 x 4 version (190mm) are all going to be slightly longer because of the inherent problem with the mirror?

Brian, according to the chart that you have provided, then my 135mm Xenotar should work.. Anyone see any problems associated with this? Would I be able to focus at all distances?

Ok, thanks so much to all of you, it is greatly appreciated! Cheers Josh

Brian Stein
11-Sep-2010, 02:03
There are standard lenses in the same way a 50mm is standard for 35mm: roughly the length of the film diagonal give or take a bit. Although this make both 150 and 190 slightly "long" for their formats, proportionately they are much the same as 50mm is slightly long for 42mm diagonal of 35mm.
The mirror issue as I understand it means that certain designs of lens (retrofocus wide angles) wont cut it because they tend to stick out at back, and that there is a definite shortest lens you can get to focus because of it.
If you are going to have a limitation in focus it is going to be at distance: the closer the subject the more you have to rack the lens out. From the lens chart from the instruction manual the xenotar should work ok, but the experiences of leighmarrin with a pretty close by lens indicate it's very much going to be try and see

Sevo
11-Sep-2010, 02:41
Cool, Thanks so much for the responses! So it may just be a matter of sticking these things onto my large format camera and using them that way..

On large format reflexes you are limited by their rather copious mirror boxes and the lack of large format retrofocals build for that situation. The Xenotar might already be a tight fit, being huge for its focal length.

joshdaskew
12-Sep-2010, 21:04
Ok, Thanks so much for all the responses, greatly appreciated! So it is as much a matter of the lens physical hitting the mirror as it is about lens coverage/projection? So I guess my Xenotar 150mm 2.8 is also out, cause that one is really quite huge.. Thanks again, may be a matter of getting one and having a play around with some of the options out there.. Cheers Josh

Daniel Unkefer
12-Sep-2010, 22:15
Yes, the problem is the mirror hitting the rear of the lens, like when it is focused in infinity position. I'm running into this, when using my 150mm f2.8 Xenotar, and my 240mm Tele-Arton, on deep recessed lensboards, on a Plaubel Makiflex Standard.

Bottom line is that I am using those lenses only for closer-up shooting. I test-fire the camera, to make sure it's not impeded by the rear of the lenses.

joshdaskew
13-Sep-2010, 00:48
hi Daniel,, thanks so much for the response! Good to hear of someone looking to use similar lenses to me.. In your experience with the 150mm Xenotar, are you able to get a full body standing portrait? Focus to infinity is not so important to me as I would be mainly using this for portraits/fashion type applications? What sort of back are you using with this setup? 3.25 x 4.25 Polaroid or a film roll back? I guess my description of getting a full body standing portrait will be different depending on which one you are using...

Thanks again. Best Regards Josh.

Daniel Unkefer
13-Sep-2010, 04:17
Josh,
I'll have to try and see if I can get a full length portrait with the 150mm F2.8 Xenotar on my Plaubel Makiflex. I have not had much experience with using it, I'm just getting going with it. I've had alot of fun restoring the camera and getting going with the lenses, I worked on them alot this last weekend. Alot of metal filing and painting! I use 120 film to get a 6x9 horizontal or vertical, and a 4x5 sheet film back which gives me a 9x9 cm image. I have only made a couple of test exposures on sheet film so far, I am using a 4x5 Linhof sheet film holder, which has a spring-loaded pressure plate, should be very nice!

Great camera, I also have the Makiflex Automatic, with 180mm Auto Xenar, and the 210 Auto Xenar. Manual lenses I have are the 120mm Imagon, 150mm Imagon, 150mm F2.8 Xenotar, 240mm tele-Arton, 270mm Tele-Xenar, and the 360mm Tele-Xenar. I just bought a 240mm Xenar, but I haven't received it yet. Lensboards for this camera are hard to find, but I have just purchased five new ones, which widens my horizons with the Makiflex.

I'm using Durst Enlarger recessed lensboards, and attaching these to flat Plaubel lensboards. That enables me to use alot of lenses that would not work otherwise. And I have three recessed Plaubel lensboards, which are quite rare and hard to find. But Yes, there is the issue with the mirror, but I think, I can get a full length, I will check it out tonight.

joshdaskew
14-Sep-2010, 00:33
Hi Daniel, Thanks so much again for the post, very informative indeed! I have never seen this camera but sounds extremely interesting! Thanks for checking to see if you can get a full length, much appreciated! So I am assuming your 120 Imagon does not focus to infinity? Look forward to the results. Cheers. Josh

Daniel Unkefer
14-Sep-2010, 03:59
Here's my Makiflex Standard, with 150mm F2.8 Xenotar on a Plaubel Peco Jr Recessed lensboard. On the left, is a Plaubel Flat lensboard, with a 240mm Tele-Arton. A Durst Enlarger recessed lensboard allows for even deeper recess than the Plaubel recessed board, so the lens is quite usuable. It will focus to infinity, but the camera mirror hits the long, thin rear cell, on the Tele-Arton. On the right is an extra Plaubel Recessed lensboard.

The problem is the length of the rear cells, on these two lenses. They work well for closeups, however. My other lenses don't have these issues, they don't have big rear cells. The 120mm Imagon is mounted on a Plaubel Recessed lensboard, and yes, it focuses to infinity on this camera, no problem at all. The imagon dosen't have a rear cell at all.

Was under the weather yesterday, will try a full length with the Xenotar tonight. My guess is that it will work, without a problem. My first test target was the front of my car, about fifteen feet away. I really like how the Xenotar wide-open produces paper-thin DOF, and I like the "look" of the bokeh. Need to get out and do some more initial testing.

joshdaskew
16-Sep-2010, 00:03
Wow! That is an impressive setup! What format do you shoot with it? Thanks so much again, look forward to hearing about the results... Cheers Josh

Daniel Unkefer
16-Sep-2010, 04:14
What format do you shoot with it?

Josh,
The Makiflexes have a removable back, it also interchanges with the one from the Plaubel Peco Jr 6x9 view camera. I have two groundglass backs, one has a bail, and takes single exposure 6x9 sheet film plates, of a type I have never seen before. I have twelve of those 6x9 sheet film plates, they came with the back, from Germany recently. The other groundglass back I have is removable, and I can attach filmbacks that fit the Plaubel Makina rangefinder camera, or the Peco Jr series. I have six Plaubel Makina 6x9 sheet film holders, and two 6x9 rollfilm holders, that give eight 6x9 exposures on a 120 rollfilm. I am looking for a few more 6x9 rollbacks, and some 6x6 filmbacks, so I can shoot more choices in 120 film. Finally, I have a Plaubel Sheet Film back, which will take 4x5 Graphic-type film holders. This back produces a 9x9cm square exposure on 4x5 sheet film, Polaroid, or 4x5 Graphmatic. I have six 4x5 Linhof holders, that I am going to use with the 4x5 back. The holders have a pressure plate built into them, providing incredible resolution in 4x5 photography.

Lots of choices available, as you can see. The Makiflex is bulky, but not excessively heavy. I have hiked for a day with it without any problem whatsoever. It is also good for handholding at faster speeds. On a tripod I use a cable release from the Sinar Norma camera.