PDA

View Full Version : Press Camera Rangefinders - ROUNDUP



holmbāgu
28-Jun-2011, 12:37
Hey all,

In my search for a 4x5" press camera, I'm often left wondering about the rangefinders. My understanding of the various makes and models is limited and I'd like to know more.

I know that some use cams and some are adjustable. I'm curious which ones are which and what exactly this entails. For instance, can a Kalart adjustable rangefinder be used on any focal length? How quickly can you do the adjustment, and is this the kind of thing you can do in the field?

As far as I can tell, these are the most common rangefinders:

Graflex Top Mounted - cams, Graflex cameras (I'm not considering these cameras)
Kalart - adjustable, seems to be the most common on many makes
Busch Vue-Focus - ___?, seen on the Busch Pressman in lieu of a Kalart sometimes
Hugo-Meyer - ?

What am I missing? What calibration mechanism do the Vue-Focus & Hugo-Meyer use?

What would you recommend for someone who wants to use it on a variety of lenses? (135mm, 180mm & 315mm)

Thanks much!

Dan Fromm
28-Jun-2011, 13:07
I hope you're not assuming that you can buy a camera and then find and buy a rangefinder and mount it. Most press camera RFs are factory-mounted -- the Graphic top RF wasn't offered as a DIY add-on -- and loose Kalart, Busch, and Meyer RFs are very very scarce.

The Graflex top RF is the only one that has interchangeable cams. The Kalart seems to be the only one of the others that can be set up for anything but a normal lens. And adjusting a Kalart in the field isn't to be done lightly.

If you must have a press camera with an RF that couples to more than one lens, accumulate your small monetary units until you can buy a Linhof. I believe -- Bob Salomon, please jump in -- that cams can still be cut for relatively modern Linhofs.

Steven Tribe
28-Jun-2011, 13:08
My personal view is that the best and most reliable rangefinder is one that has been demounted and locked away somewhere.

Press photographers had to use them - we don't have too, fortunately.

BrianShaw
28-Jun-2011, 13:13
What would you recommend for someone who wants to use it on a variety of lenses? (135mm, 180mm & 315mm)

Thanks much!

SuperGraphic. Lenses must be in shutter, though, since this camera does not have a focal plane shutter.

holmbāgu
28-Jun-2011, 13:16
No, I'm not going to try to install a RF. I'll just buy the complete package, but it might determine which auctions or offers I go after.

As for the Linhof... how many days of rice & beans would it take to save up for that? For the same reason, I'm not considering a Super Graphic. They're just too expensive when you consider the other 3 that usually sell for about $150. My budget is tiiiiight.

If I didn't want to use a rangefinder for its intended purpose, I wouldn't have asked about it.

Robert Hughes
28-Jun-2011, 13:27
The Vue Focus on my Busch Pressman is dead on - much closer to in focus than my guesstimations have been. When I got the camera I assumed the rangefinder would need adjustment, but it was right from the get-go (except for the one time the mirror popped off its mount from the -20F cold; I re-cemented it in place and everything was fine). Normally I just use it as a sanity check, and sometimes find my eyeball estimate was off after checking, then walking it out with a measuring tape. But it only works with the one default (Raptar 135) lens - any other lens would need a different cam/arm to work through the focus range.

In any case - the ground glass is right, as long as I can see it through the loupe.

holmbāgu
28-Jun-2011, 13:34
Thanks Rob,

So is that the case with the Vue-Focus; it can't be adjusted, period? 135mm or 127mm?

Steven Tribe
28-Jun-2011, 13:40
Sorry to be a wet blanket, but you cannot expect an elderly rangefinder to be in good order and capable of the adjustment range it had when it was new. At $150 you can expect a light-tight camera etc. - but not a useable Kalart. Sellers are usually unable to judge the Kalart's (and probably the other's) condition and functioning. The mirror coating is likely to be gone or going so a new 50/50 mirror section is needed - this requires some skill to mount.

Ivan J. Eberle
28-Jun-2011, 14:58
A Super Graphic with a working RF might be sniped for $250 nowadays (I found a working one here For Sale section awhile back for this amount). Finding a cam for anything but the 135mm Grafex/Optar might take some doing, or you may wind up making one yourself. None of the original cams are likely to be a precise match for more modern lenses even in the same stated focal length.

Bob Salomon
28-Jun-2011, 15:36
I hope you're not assuming that you can buy a camera and then find and buy a rangefinder and mount it. Most press camera RFs are factory-mounted -- the Graphic top RF wasn't offered as a DIY add-on -- and loose Kalart, Busch, and Meyer RFs are very very scarce.

The Graflex top RF is the only one that has interchangeable cams. The Kalart seems to be the only one of the others that can be set up for anything but a normal lens. And adjusting a Kalart in the field isn't to be done lightly.

If you must have a press camera with an RF that couples to more than one lens, accumulate your small monetary units until you can buy a Linhof. I believe -- Bob Salomon, please jump in -- that cams can still be cut for relatively modern Linhofs.

Linhof V and the current Master Technika use the same cams. We only need the lens to cut a cam for these cameras. For a IV we need the lens and the camera to cut a cam.

IanG
28-Jun-2011, 15:43
Sorry to be a wet blanket, but you cannot expect an elderly rangefinder to be in good order and capable of the adjustment range it had when it was new. At $150 you can expect a light-tight camera etc. - but not a useable Kalart. Sellers are usually unable to judge the Kalart's (and probably the other's) condition and functioning. The mirror coating is likely to be gone or going so a new 50/50 mirror section is needed - this requires some skill to mount.

You said wet blanket :D I half agree, I've 5 fixed range finders on LF cameras 3 work fine and are accurate but 2 of these 3 dimly, replacement beam splitter mirrors will help enormously. Luckily a kind member of this forum passed on his spare half silvered mirror glass. The other two range-finders need looking at, someone had tinkered with the Super Graphic I knew that when I bought it cheap the other's just not fitted to a camera.

My experience is that some cameras come with a different FL lens to the cam, that was the case with my Crown Graphic, Hugo Meyer range0finder & 135mm Tessar, I swapped the cells to 150mm and an year later suddenly discovered the range-finder was accurate.

I've worked on a few range-finders before re-aligning & calibrating them and have 2 or 3 reasonably accurate external (hot shoe) ones. The best is a pre-WWII model which I bought 10 days ago - 2 range finders for 5 ($8), this is still bright & easy to use and quite surprisingly accurate, the downside is the scale is in feet the camera I'd want to use it with has a helical focus marked in meters.

Once a new beam spitter mirrors added there's no reason why a range-finder won't have the same degree of adjustment as the day it was made.


Back to the OP's questions the Hugo Meyer range-finders are made for specific FL lenses there's no adjustments to re-set them for a different lens, you need a Kalart for that.

You've missed Wray range-finders from your list though they are only found on a few British cameras.

For inter-changeable lenses you need a top mounted Speed/Crown graphic, a Super Graphic or Toyo 45a and possibly clones, a Linhof or an MPP.

Remember that the British MPP Micropress of 1950/1 (basically a re-bodied Speed Graphic) had a top mounted range-finder long before the Graphics and MPP cameras used cams like the Linhof.

Ian

Jim Jones
28-Jun-2011, 17:24
The Hugo Meyer rangefinder on an Anniversary Graphic I used many years ago was adjustable. The adjustments had external scales so perhaps the rangefinder could be adjusted in the field for different focal lengths.

rdenney
28-Jun-2011, 20:08
Given that the Graflex top rangefinder cams are hard to find, I have opted to install a Kalart on a top-RF Speed Graphic to support two lenses in the field. I have not yet finished connecting up the Kalart, but the body of a Top-RF Pacemaker has all the necessary holes for the Kalart. You need the rangefinder, the right actuating arm (the Pacemaker-vintage arm was different than earlier arms), and the follower that attaches to the focus rail. I'm still looking for that follower, and the screws to attach it. It's probably easier to buy two Pacemakers, one with the top RF and one with a Kalart, and move the Kalart, linkages, and focus track to the Top-RF model. Then, sell the now non-RF Graflex to someone who is happy focusing with the ground glass.

I intend to adjust my Kalart for an 8-1/2" Ilex Paragon, for which there was no cam for the top RF even if one could be found. I've looked at those cams and I don't fancy trying to fabricate one. I have the cam for a 127mm press lens. I will use 90, 127, and 8-1/2" lenses on this camera, and I'm happy scale-focusing or using the ground glass with the 90.

With a Graflex, you can mount several focus scales pretty easily, along with several sets of infinity stops.

Rick "who hasn't had time to pursue that project in a while" Denney

Frank Petronio
28-Jun-2011, 20:22
I don't know how many people do this, but if you used a separate rangefinder -- like one of the electronic home-construction or golfing models, you could get your distance information. This could be transferred to ANY camera with a simple home-brew focusing scale (as simple as hash marks on the rail or a piece of tape).

In the movies, the director of photography uses an actual tape measure.

holmbāgu
29-Jun-2011, 13:32
Thanks everyone for the replies.

I think this helps me narrow down my choice significantly. I'm gonna go with a Kalart and I think I've seen these on B&J Presses & Busch Pressmans (Towers too). Graflexes are out because they lack a rotating back, and because of the price.

That is unless someone can confirm that the Hugo-Meyer is also adjustable, but it appears we have two conflicting opinions(?).

My goal is to use this camera just like a press photographer would have back in the day, like Weegee, in addition to using it as a field camera (I don't need a lot of movements). Hopefully I can find a good working RF, and if not, I'll try to resurrect the beam splitter.

The input is much appreciated, even the wet blankets ;)

BrianShaw
29-Jun-2011, 13:49
Dude... learn to google. (I HATE it when people say this, but I feel obligated to say it.) This took 2 seconds:

http://graflex.org/speed-graphic/hugo-meyer.html

But also read what's at the bottom of this page:

http://graflex.org/speed-graphic/features.html

Sincerely,
Brian the other wet blanket

Dan Fromm
29-Jun-2011, 15:11
Graflexes are out because they lack a rotating back, and because of the price.

I think you mean Graphic (a press camera) not Graflex (an SLR).

Why is the lack of a rotating back a deal-killer? Why not just put the camera on its side?

I can understand why price is a deal-killer, am not sure you have a good enough grasp of the prices the cameras you're looking at actually sell for.

Sirius Glass
29-Jun-2011, 15:12
Graflexes are out because they lack a rotating back ...

Actually Graflexes usually have Rotating Backs; Graphics do not have Rotating Backs. ;)

johnielvis
29-Jun-2011, 19:09
forget the camera-mounted rangefinders--you can get one to track well for one lens, but even then the range is limited---and the RF's are all old and the mirrors usually going---or other problems---PLUS,, the RF arm on the inside interferes with movements for shorter lenses--you'll get no shifting to the right.

I got a fotoman rangefinder--it's smaller, can be mounted on any camera with cold shoe...or even tape or velcro---it's field calabratable---you put a distance scale on the field camera bed for each lens and you're in business---I usually used only one infinity stop for each lens---fold down kind...so one lens is set in by one stop and another by another stop...

laser rangefindeers are probably better but will gather attention when using them if your pointing the laser at people or cars or something--may get you arrested

ALSO--fotoman/external rangefinders are smaller than the kalarts/hugo meyers

I thought the super speed was metal and HAD a revolving back!!!!

Ivan J. Eberle
29-Jun-2011, 19:53
A really well adjusted Kalart with a good mirror is a thing of beauty. Having one allows you keep a Grafmatic or roll back attached, and framing can be done with the wire sports finder on cameras like Speeds, Crowns, Supers, and my fav, the Meridian 45CE. Yes, the side-mounted jobs only allow one lens at a time... but configured like this a 135mm is about perfect for grab shots. Too, the Kalart had the Focuspot attachment, which can be modded to be the slickest converging-laser-dot-projecting RF imaginable.

leighmarrin
30-Jun-2011, 01:56
Actually Graflexes usually have Rotating Backs; Graphics do not have Rotating Backs. ;)

Not quite true: the Super Graphic and the Super Speed Graphic RF press cameras have a rotating back, and are capable of more movements than the older Speed Graphics. (It's corn-fusin': just checked my Graflex-made Super Graphic which has a 135mm Optar in a GRAPHEX shutter.)

What a friend we have in graflex.org, when it gets confusing.

--Leigh M. in Santa Barbara, Calif.

holmbāgu
30-Jun-2011, 11:13
Brian, yes, I too hate it when people say "Use Google". I do use it, and I use it a lot. Next time, just tell me the information and then you'll get the credit for being so smart. If the good lord wanted us Googling everything, he wouldn't have created message boards.

Dan, I don't know what you're talking about. I've been watching just shy of a dozen auctions for B&J Presses & Busch Pressmans. The range is consistently from about $140 to $220, give or take. GRAFLEX is a brand that manufactured a variety of cameras. AFAIK, the Super (Speed) Graphic is the only 4x5" press-style camera (made by the Graflex corporation) with a rotating back and the prices are too high. It's like the difference between a Guild a Gibson guitar; you can get an equal quality Guild for less than buying the Gibson name.

Ivan, you've articulated exactly why I want one! :D

BrianShaw
30-Jun-2011, 11:40
Brian, yes, I too hate it when people say "Use Google". I do use it, and I use it a lot. Next time, just tell me the information and then you'll get the credit for being so smart. If the good lord wanted us Googling everything, he wouldn't have created message boards.

I can assure you... there will not be a "next time". :rolleyes:

holmbāgu
30-Jun-2011, 11:46
Sorry if my response was snippy, but is that so unexpected? I mean, I like being called "Dude" as much as the next guy...

Dan Fromm
30-Jun-2011, 14:19
Dan, I don't know what you're talking about.

What part of "Why is the lack of a rotating back a deal-killer? Why not just put the camera on its side?" don't you understand?


GRAFLEX is a brand that manufactured a variety of cameras.

Graflex Inc., predecessors, and successors were companies or divisions of larger companies.

Graflex Inc, and predecessors made Graflex SLRs. Graflex Inc, predecessors, and successors made Graphic press cameras. When you write "A Graflex will or won't meet my needs," the reasonable experienced person will understand you're talking about an SLR made by Graflex Inc. or a predecessor. If you had meant a press camera you'd have written "A Graphic ..."

If you can't communicate clearly you're going to have to put up with queries and corrections.

Similarly, if you can't find easily-found information for yourself you're going to have to put up with suggestions that you learn to feed yourself.

Always remember that posts on public bulletin boards sometimes get responses that don't please.

Good luck shopping. Before you buy a camera, investigate why 4x5 B&J and Busch press cameras tend to sell for less than 4x5 Crown Graphics in comparable condition.

And remember my experience with Premo 12s. I found one with an 85/6.3 B&L Tessar in Compound for relative pennies, bought it. A week later I found another with 85/6.3 CZJ Tessar in Compound for relative pennies, bought it too. At the time I did this 2 others were on offer for more than relative pennies. I haven't seen another since then.

BrianShaw
30-Jun-2011, 18:21
Be careful Dan or you'll get a snippy response too. ;)

Dan Fromm
1-Jul-2011, 02:50
Funny thing, Brian, is that the person who posts here as holmbāgu (holmburguesa in Japanese) is probably the person who posts on APUG as holmburger. That one and I had an amicable exchange of messages there. I'm a little surprised that holmbāgu snapped at you.

holmbāgu
1-Jul-2011, 08:07
Hey guys,

Ok, yesterday I might have been a bit testy. I'll blame it on the 104 weather here in Kansas, and on the disconnect & sense of "anonymity" created by the internet. But Dan is right (and an excellent interpreter of Japanese!); I'm on APUG as holmburgers and that name is linked to my real name in many ways... so, long story short, I need to keep that in mind.

I hate to burn bridges, and so I hope you guys will forgive me.

That being said.... I DON'T WANT NO STINKIN' GRAPHIC! ;)

BrianShaw
1-Jul-2011, 10:40
We all have days like that. High temps + humidity can make anyone cranky. We're starting a week of high temps but even with low humidity I might get cranky; who knows.

I shoot with 2 different Graphics and love them. They aren't for everyone though. Good luck with whatever you decide upon.

BrianShaw
1-Jul-2011, 10:42
I forgot - All is OK, no forgiving required.

Ivan J. Eberle
1-Jul-2011, 11:23
The only Graphic that has anything close to a full range of moves is the Super/Super Speed and, as mentioned, it has the rotating back.

Put a Crown over on it's side in portrait orientation and there isn't any tilt available, unless you've modified/ruined the front standard.

Tilt is too necessary and useful to give up, especially in portrait mode. No Crowns/Speeds for me, either, thanks just the same.

Holmbagu, don't get too hung up on the lowest possible camera price. You'll likely spend a great deal more on film and processing than on the camera if you stick with it as more than just a passing fancy. Too, the cheapest cameras are likely to have a dodgy RFs. Better to buy the best camera you can possibly afford than one with sketchy RF (or bellows, or shutter, for that matter).

olderdog
15-Sep-2011, 14:51
And now that no one has any reason to see this.

One that's overlooked (I might have missed it) is the Wista 45RF Technical Camera, which has an integral RF, Separate VF , a rotating back and that makes provision for interchangeable lenses, i.e. 135, 150 and 180, without adjustments. It's still sold, i.e tinyurl.com/3n866cy will take you to B&H, but in terms of the LF site, it would be better to go through a link on the main page. Sells new for about $3800, but I've seen it for under $1K at a dealer (didn't buy it and it's long gone). I've got a twisted interest in Press Cameras and there were some pretty sophisticated European press cameras but they rarely come up on the auction site and usually pricy. The Graflex org site lists some of the American alternatives. I've replaced the RF mirror in Leicas, but it can be tricky. Edmund sells them, but the pieces are larger than needed, so require cutting, etc.

A note on the RB - it tends to make the camera's larger and heavier which doesn't bother some people. The Graphic is usually used as a field camera and given my decrepit state, I try to cut weight. When I was in the trade during the dark ages, I used 35 and MF for most work and when the need for LF came up, I used an 8x10 studio cam, usually a Graphic for field work that for the most part did not need much in the way of movements.

Graphic prices have gone up, although if you've exhausted the usual sources, you might want to check KEH or Ritzcam. The auction sellers too many times et unrealistic prices, thinking they're much scarcer than they are, and finding a complete camera gets harder as would be sellers break components down to subcomponents. FWIW, I've got some Maximars and Recomars in my folding collection. the 9x12 Maximar is a bit slow, but a very compact lightweight LFer. Once in a while, you'll run into one that's got a coupled RF, sometimes Kalart. Nice if it works. Strictly flip the box, no RB.

ghe67
16-Sep-2011, 08:53
If you wont to shoot 4x5 film and you if you want a very precise rangefinder, automatic parallax correction, IMHO the Graflex XLRF is your best option.
I love the camera, it use lenses from 58mm to 180mm, just the 270mm lens is not coupled.
you can shoot 2x3, 6x9 and 4x5 film with the 4x5 Graflok adapter, 120 roll film and all the Polaroid backs, GG focusing also, very well built and a lot of parts still available. I think it's One of the best camera ever made in the 60/70'.
If you are interested to know more give me a shout.:) I'm a great fan of the XL.
Ciao
Giorgio

banjo
16-Sep-2011, 15:26
will holmbāgu

ITS not 104* here in my part of Kansas today!!
But for what it looks like you are asking for the Super Graphic /Super speed Graphic
is what you need AND the price has not been that BAD AS I have been seeing Busch
pressman D going for more then I ever paid for a Super Graphic /Super speed Graphic
AND in my way of thanking the Super Graphic /Super speed Graphic is one of the BEST EVER MADE

holmbāgu
19-Sep-2011, 12:12
Hey guys,

Thanks for the new replies to the old query.

Well, since all of this, I've gone with a B&J Press and Kalart. I got one in pretty good shape, awesome "fiber" case, big flash, and an old Zeiss lens for $100 shipped on eBay.

Hey, if that's what Weegee used, it's good enough for me! ;)

Of course, the RF is not really working (Murphy's law?). In fact, looking through it the image is totally unclear. I popped it open and there's a small "lens" & retaining ring bouncing around inside, but I'm not sure where it goes because all the peeps have at least 1 piece of glass on them.

I also don't really understand the coupling mechanism.

So for the time being I've got a good press-as-field camera, but still not a hand-holder.

Why not much love for the B&J press?



Banjo, where's your KS? Beautiful day here!

banjo
19-Sep-2011, 16:00
hey I thank that Weegee was paid to use the B&J
as I have also seen pics of him with a Speed graphic
http://graflex.org/articles/weegee.html

you mite need a new beamsplitter !!
I am getting read to do about 3 or 4 of mine
as I just got in new beamsplitter today


I live out west in Ulysses

banjo

holmbāgu
20-Sep-2011, 08:25
You're probably right about getting paid for that. There's some pretty funny literature out there with him endorsing it.

Regardless, they are really gorgeous cameras. I'm totally impressed by the build. As long as the back is light tight (so far untested), I'll be pleased as pie.

Hey, if you've got any extra beamsplitters that you need to get rid of, let me know! :D

Never been to Ulysses, but I'm sure it's beautiful out there.

Kuzano
20-Sep-2011, 10:18
From my own experience, I suspect one of the reasons you see the Busch Pressman D so inexpensive is because of the very small lens board and opening. Quite limiting on lens choices.

Secondly, the Pressman D is a huge tank.
Third, the Pressman has nowhere near the movements of the Graflex Super or Super Speed, nor the rangefinder quality of a Super/Superspeed rangefinder in good working order.

Hence the lower prices. I've never pursued the B&J because I prefer much more quality than I have ever seen in that press camera. Also selling at budget prices.

The "hidden" movements on the Super/Super Speed increase it's value in my eyes. By "hidden" movements, I mean the front shift and front swing that many never discover using the thin Chrome tab at the bottom front of the front standard.

banjo
20-Sep-2011, 10:36
hey holmbāgu

http://www.scientificsonline.com/mirror-type-beamsplitter.html
probably made of polycarbonate, cut it with a Plexiglas scoring knife.
is $15.95 + shiping from them

AND like Kuzano said AND I too like the Super Graphic /Super speed Graphic
BUT I do have a Busch D & a B&J speed press & the Super Graphic /Super speed Graphic is wroth 3 x the price of a Busch D & 5 x B&J

Jan Normandale
20-Sep-2011, 11:46
FWIW... re read Frank Petronio's sole comment in this thread pertaining to rangefinders. Some good advice there and it's a low cost solution

P2 if IRC

banjo
2-Oct-2011, 14:08
Hey holmbāgu

if you wont to try & change out your Beamsplitter


this is by Richard Knoppow

This stuff works fine and is the right thickness.
http://www.scientificsonline.com/mir...msplitter.html
The piece costs about $15 US and is enough to make several
mirrors.
I've meant to write a procedure for replacing it to
supplement the one already on the Graflex.org site. That one says you must break out the old mirror. This is not so. The mirror is held by two spring clips but it has some wax like material to cement it. This can be removed by using a little acetone or even lighter fluid. The clips are removed carefully because you will reuse them. Note how they are oriented. Use the old mirror as a pattern to cut the new one. Use a carbide scribe to mark the glass, it will snap at the scratch. I got my scribe at Home Depot for $5 US. This is also the right tool to use for ground glass. Its much easier to remove the old mirror and replace it if you remove the entire mirror assembly. However, once its remounted you must make sure the mirror is at an exactly 45 degree angle. A small drafting triangle will work for this. When the mirror is replaced place a drop of cement at the corners to make sure it doesn't drift with time. Airplane glue works fine and is easily removed if you have to. If the mirror is cut accurately it will just drop in. The coated surface of the mirror must fact the eye window of the rangefinder. Because it is a 50%-%50% splitter is difficult to see which side the mirror is on. However, this can be done by looking at the reflection of a small light placed near the mirror. When the mirror is facing you light must travel through the mirror coating twice to be refected
by the inside surface of the glass so the second reflection
will be much dimmer when viewed this way. The other way the two reflections will be nearly equal in strength. If the mirror is placed backward it will throw all the adjustments way off plus it may result in a double reflection.
Once the mirror is mounted the mirror assembly is
replaced (held by one screw) and adjusted for 45 degree
angle. Then you will probably have to readjust everything
although you may be lucky. Start with the lateral
coincidence adjustment. I've posted instructions on setting up Kalart rangefinders to the Graflex.org site, but again want to post a revised and clarified version. The key is to get the infinity adjustments right to begin with. This involves making sure the actuating arm is set right and the initial infinity setting of the lens frame are correct. On Speed and Crown Graphics using the Kalart the infinity stops should be set so that the camera must be racked out perhaps 1/16th inch from the mechanical stop. I recently posted a letter to the Graflex.org help board in the Speed Graphic section on how to set the actuating arm correctly. Faded beam splitter mirrors seem to be very common on Graphics of a certain age. I don't know what happens to them. Fortunately, they are easy to replace and once done will probably never have to be done again. A makeshift fix is to place a neutral or colored filter over the upper window of the RF. This will increase the contrast of the two images although it is no substitute for replacing the beam splitter.

There is no eyepiece on the rangfinder but most came with a plain tube to shield image. This was not supplied on all Graphics or it may be missing. Some RFs have coarse threads in the eyepiece for this to thread into, some have a bracket on the back of the camera in line with the eye window of the RF for this tube.
There were also telescopes made to fit the Kalart. One
was made by Kalart but there were others. I've never managed to find one. A telescope on the eye window has the effect of having a greater base distance for the rangefinder and thus increasing its accuracy. Back when the Contax camera came out to compete with Leica it advertised it had a greater RF base so was more accurate. The Leica, however, had a 2X telescope built in so the _effective_ base of the two was about the same.
The Kalart is very accurate when set up correctly.
Correct set up is tedious but once done will not have to be done again unless the lens is changed.


Richard Knoppow

Ivan J. Eberle
2-Oct-2011, 14:39
Broken link, Banjo.

The blueish beam-splitter mirror that I bought a couple of years ago from Edmund Scientific was thinner than what the one I removed from my Kalart, but worked well enough after shimming from the back side (so that the front surface was in the original location). It's more than a little tricky to cut to size in the small rectangle needed. I too used a carbide point glass cutter, but found that I also needed duckbill pliers with the jaws covered in heatshrink tubing to get the job done.

Better instructions are found on the Graflex.org site and Jo Lommen's page.

banjo
4-Oct-2011, 15:08
Ivan
maybe but Richard Knoppow is one of them from on Graflex.org site & there mite
be one of he's new ones there as this one is maybe 6 years old

holmbāgu
10-Oct-2011, 12:18
Thanks for the tutorial Richard. I'd like to give this a shot sometime soon.

Currently though, I can't even see a clear image through my RF and it's not because of the beamsplitter, but one of several of the lenslets inside is loose and I'm not sure where it goes. I could probably figure that out, but if someone knows which window requires a supplemental lens on the inside, that might help me out.

Also, can anyone find a good picture that shows the coupling mechanism for the rangefinder to the focusing/rack assembly? Mine seems like it's been jerry-rigged at some point; either that or it's just a super primitive design. I haven't looked hard yet for a picture... maybe I should post a shot of mine.

Anyways, thanks!