hand held 4x5 camera

[armentor1@mac.com]

I'm starting to look for a 4x5 setup that can be used off a tripod for portraits using the fuji instant film. I'm thinking a clean crown or speed Graphic with rangefinder so I don't have to check the ground glass. Are these Kalart rangefinders accurate? What should I expect to pay for a setup like this? Are the bulbs for the flash kits still available to purchase somewhere?


dave

[rdenney]

I'm starting to look for a 4x5 setup that can be used off a tripod for portraits using the fuji instant film. I'm thinking a clean crown or speed Graphic with rangefinder so I don't have to check the ground glass. Are these Kalart rangefinders accurate? What should I expect to pay for a setup like this? Are the bulbs for the flash kits still available to purchase somewhere?

Kalart rangefinders can be calibrated to be accurate, especially within the abilities of instant film.

A Crown is smaller and lighter because it doesn't have the focal-plane shutter. Price for a good one is in the $200-400 range, depending on beauty and how much of a hurry you are in. That's without flash. The flash handles sell for too much because they were the prop used in Star Wars for a light saber. But it will include a 127mm or 135mm lens for which the rangefinder is already calibrated.

I'm given to understand that one can still find bulbs, but it would be easier to use an electronic flash with a cable that will adapt the lens's Bi-Post flash synch connection to the PC connection needed by a flash. You can either attach a hot shoe to the camera (with a cable to the lens) or use a potato-masher flash or side grip with shoe. An old-style non-TTL automatic flash like a Vivitar 283 will be perfect--set the f-stop on the lens and fire away.

Rick "easy-peasy" Denney

[BrianShaw]

Three additional comments:

1. Flash bulbs are still available and give out a LOT of light - sometimes too much and they get hard to control. The reliability of the bulbs is generally good but since they are all fairly old that can't be guaranteed and sometimes entire boxes turn out to be duds. Prices vary, but 75 cents each is a normal low price.

2. Often a "non-Crown" version will be priced more competatively.

3. Make sure you know what shutter you are buying. For strobe you'll need one that X synchs.

[jbog]

Flash bulbs are still made - in Ireland.

Link >>> http://www.meggaflash.com/

>>> Jim

[Drew Bedo]

What about one of the 4x5 Polaroid conversions? This is exactly what they were cewated for. and how they are used.

[Corran]

Yeah, get a converted Polaroid. The difference in size and weight from a Crown/Speed Graphic is enormous, RF focusing is easier and more precise, and the price for a really nice Graphic with everything working and in proper order is almost as much as the cheaper Polaroid conversions. I also adapted an electronic flash to my Polaroid and it works like a charm (make sure the shutter you get has an X sync port), and that is a lot less hassle/expensive than flashbulbs.

I've seen Polaroid conversions for use with 3x4 film for as low as $500. Nicer ones that can use traditional 4x5 film I think start around $700 or so. More boutique options go up from there. My Polaroid 900 with a Schneider Xenotar 135/3.5 came to about $1200.

[Marc B.]

The only 4 X 5, instant Fuji pack film still in production is the color, FP100c45.
The B&W, Fuji 4 X 5 instant pack, FP3000b45, last production run/shipments are as we speak.
So, the reliable, fresh dated supply of 4 X 5, B&W Fuji pack may only last another year.
The demise of color in 4 X 5, instant pack, may not be too far behind.

You can refrigerate peel apart instant film, but you can't freeze it. The developing tubes rupture when frozen.

The production, and availability of color and B&W, in the 3.25 X 4.25 size seems to be continuing for the near foreseeable future.

A Mamiya Press/Universal or a Polaroid (Mamiya) 600 may have longer usefulness, as these cameras use the 3.25 X 4.25 instant pack size.

There are pack film holders for 4 X 5 backed cameras that can accept the 4 X 5, instant pack film, and there are smaller backs for 4 X 5 cameras that accept the smaller 3 1/4 by 4 1/4 instant pack films.

The larger backs are the Polaroid 550 or Fuji PA-45.
Smaller backs are the Polaroid 405 or Fuji PA-145

[armentor1@mac.com]

this is a lot to digest, i was originally thinking that this would be a somewhat inexpensive outfit to get into. I'm also a little hesitant to purchase equipment specifically for the instant film if it is so close to being discontinued. That being said these Polaroid conversions are pretty interesting.

thanks for all of the info -
dave

[banjo]

graflex super graphic //graflex speed graphic

[IanG]

Personally I'd stay with a Crown or better still Super Graphic, I use both for hand held work. The advantage is interchangeable lenses compared to a Polaroid conversion.

I could use the rangefinder on the Crown but prefer to compose/focus on the screen, it's still very quick and easy.

You need a decent lens that covers properly 127 Ektars and 135mm Tessar/Xenars are poor. I've a Paragon f4.5 7½” (180mm) that would be superb for portraits and I also more modern aCaltar (Symmar) f5.6 135mm.

Perhaps what surprised me is the quality I get using a hand-held 5x4 camera and HP5, and you need a bit of mass to help you counter possible camera shake.

Ian

[msawdey]

Maybe this confuses matters, but if you want to hand-hold in large format, there's always the route our fathers/grandfathers took: the Graflex SLR. The Super D models, with (semi)automatic diaphragm get pricey, but a regular D with a decent lens on it makes a killer hand-held, as long as you don't need flash. Having only a focal plane shutter, neither electronic flash nor conventional flashbulbs will provide a long enough burst of light to last while the slit makes its way across the film. Back in the day, special flashbulbs with a long burn were made for use with focal plane shutters, and most Graflexes from the late '30s onward have synch terminals from the factory. Just a thought....

[gliderbee]

These are great cameras indeed. Have a look at "the" auction site; there's at least one for sale there (I'm partial, as I'm the seller). Prices quoted hereunder are indeed the "normal" prices for 4x5 conversions.


Yeah, get a converted Polaroid. The difference in size and weight from a Crown/Speed Graphic is enormous, RF focusing is easier and more precise, and the price for a really nice Graphic with everything working and in proper order is almost as much as the cheaper Polaroid conversions. I also adapted an electronic flash to my Polaroid and it works like a charm (make sure the shutter you get has an X sync port), and that is a lot less hassle/expensive than flashbulbs.

I've seen Polaroid conversions for use with 3x4 film for as low as $500. Nicer ones that can use traditional 4x5 film I think start around $700 or so. More boutique options go up from there. My Polaroid 900 with a Schneider Xenotar 135/3.5 came to about $1200.

[Corran]

Did you do yours yourself, or did you get it from somewhere? I noticed you mention a parallax-corrected RF, which despite the price I was very disappointed to NOT have on my custom conversion. Just curious if that's something that could be reconfigured to have on mine.

[gliderbee]

I did not do it myself. I might be wrong but I think only the 110B is parallax-corrected. Maybe you have a 110A ?

[Corran]

I actually have a 900 camera. I'm not sure if the RF is from the 900 or chopped off from a 110B. It's a dual-window one. I need to email him and find out as it's getting highly annoying. I'm doing instant portraits around town at just about the minimum focus distance and it's a huge discrepancy!

[gliderbee]

Polaroid 900 should be parallax-corrected according to the manual, so I guess there's something wrong with yours ...


I actually have a 900 camera. I'm not sure if the RF is from the 900 or chopped off from a 110B. It's a dual-window one. I need to email him and find out as it's getting highly annoying. I'm doing instant portraits around town at just about the minimum focus distance and it's a huge discrepancy!

[Corran]

Good to know, thanks. I will look into it.

[Frank Petronio]

Yeah, get a converted Polaroid. The difference in size and weight from a Crown/Speed Graphic is enormous, RF focusing is easier and more precise, and the price for a really nice Graphic with everything working and in proper order is almost as much as the cheaper Polaroid conversions. I also adapted an electronic flash to my Polaroid and it works like a charm (make sure the shutter you get has an X sync port), and that is a lot less hassle/expensive than flashbulbs.

I've seen Polaroid conversions for use with 3x4 film for as low as $500. Nicer ones that can use traditional 4x5 film I think start around $700 or so. More boutique options go up from there. My Polaroid 900 with a Schneider Xenotar 135/3.5 came to about $1200.

No offense to Corran but I disagree with a lot of what he's saying. I have owned and used several versions of both Graphics and Polaroid conversions and I do not think think the Polaroids are much smaller, they are only differently shaped - the volume is about the same. I also think their rangefinders are terrible compared to the Graphics. The Graphics generally have better backs and are more durable and versatile than the Polaroid conversions. And while I suppose you could overpay a lot for a Graphic and find an amazing deal on a Polaroid conversion, what I've seen is the Graphics running $200 to $500 and the Roids running $800 to $5000 (crazy, eh?)

Sorry to call bullshit Corran. I'm friends with one of the top conversion makers too and while they have their charm, even he isn't going to diss a Graphic.

It's kind of like colleges, if someone invests a lot into something then they'll defend their choices even though the University of Phoenix is probably the better the choice....

Right now I use a Linhof Technika and it is better than the Graphics in every way except weight and price. The Graflex SLRs are also quite excellent for handheld work, I think they are the bomb for short focus portraits. But for general handheld 4x5 work? Just get a classic Pacemaker Crown Graphic Special with a 135 lens of any flavor, with the top rangefinder, and save yourself a lot of headaches. Why do you think a million photojournalists used them for fifty years? They sure didn't go to war with some plastic piece of $hit Polaroid hot-glued together with some foo-foo lens, funky back, and exotic snakeskin leather covering! ;-p (added to protect me from flames.)

[Drew Bedo]

Conversions: Alpinhause, Razzle, Byron and others.

You might also consider the fotoman line. These are hand=held, scale focusing "point-and-shoot" cameras. Focus is transfered from an auxillery range finder to the focusing mount. flash synch depends on the shutter of course.

[Corran]

To be frank, Frank, you aren't "calling bullshit" you're expressing your own opinions about things. And doing it rather rudely, at least in my general direction, if I do say so myself.

For sure, a 4x5 camera has to be a certain size to accommodate the film but still...in MY opinion it's no contest. So how about we actually look at the cameras directly? Here's a couple shots of the two side-by-side. The Speed doesn't even have a lens! Not even a contest which one I want to carry around. I also prefer the Polaroid's handle/grip and the position of the RF. Folded up the difference is even more obvious. RE: the RF, I hate both the top RF and the Kalart of the Graphics. I think the Polaroid is much better. That is my certified opinion.

I'm not dissing the Graphic at all. I have 4 Speeds in my possession right now for some projects. But if we are talking simply weight and size...Polaroid seems to win to me. And don't even give me that bullshit about "defending my purchase." Again, I own and use both. My Polaroid conversion was paid for by...surprise! The sale of two Graphic cams.

RE: price - I recently sold a Crown Graphic in really fine shape for $400 (9/10 shape). I've seen many Polaroid conversions on ebay go for about $500-$600. That's just what I've observed. Sure you can get a beaten POS Crown for $100 or a high-end conversion for $800 but that's not really the norm.

[Frank Petronio]

And with that, welcome to the forum. Polaroid conversions have started virtual wars on the internet.... Do a search for "Littman" for entertainment purposes.

And Corran I apologize for being Frank, I merely disagreed, it's not about you yourself.

[Corran]

I'm sorry if I associated "calling bullshit" with negative connotations. Not trying to start a "war," just pointing out that our disagreement is merely opinion-based, not fact-based.

[Frank Petronio]

It was just the way you phrased your original post in that you were so absolute in your convictions ~ which are mostly the opposite of my experience. So sorry for escalating it up to using the dreaded cow poop word. I probably should have stuck to creatures that emit pellets or something. Rabbit Dung, Llama Nuggets....

[Drew Bedo]

What about one of the Fotoman Cameras. They are scale focusing, hand-held and P&S.

[Gordon Flodders]

Corran, I have several of the converted Polaroids so I can shed some light on them. The 110B and 900 finders are exactly the same, both having a single viewing window. The 110A, 150, 800 and 120 (Japanese 110A) all have peep hole twin windows at the rear. The view through the single window type is very large and should be clear and bright. If the split image in the centre of the image is dull, it means the mirror's coating has degraded and if the yellow coloured bright line parallax frame doesn't move as you focus in close, it's probably stuck or not adjusted correctly. This will not affect the focus, only the framing, however if the focus is off it means the cam has not been ground to suit whatever lens is fitted, or it has slipped on its shaft. The rangefinder fitted to the 900/110B is the best focusing device I have ever come across on any LF camera, providing it has been set up carefully and thoroughly. To check the accuracy is a simple procedure, just check that the split image in the finder lines up perfectly with a sharp image on the ground glass screen at various distances. Looks like your 900 has a 135mm f3.5 Xenotar fitted, if this is the case it should focus down to exactly three feet with amazing accuracy. I just received another 900 that has a dual focusing mechanism, making it much quicker to operate than a standard 900 with its single little wheel. The second larger focus wheel is fitted to the front door much the same as the 110B.
GF.

[Corran]

Yes the focus is fine it's just the framing is not being corrected.

[Gordon Flodders]

Looks like you have two choices, either ship it back to the manufacturer or remove the rangefinder cover an fix it yourself! The bright line frame is just a sliding panel operated by a secondary cam, it can be seen behind the large frosted window. Only four screws hold the top cover on.
GF.

[Corran]

Thanks, I'll take a look myself first. I've fixed lots of fiddly camera things before.

[TheDeardorffGuy]

A couple of years ago I set up a Deardorff Triamapro to shoot handheld. This camera was designed by Merle Deardorff to be a handheld camera and lugging the tripod was a pain. Picking a lens was hard. The 127/135 were too short and I could not get my rangefinder to adjust to the 190 WF Ektar. So I picked a 162mm Ektar. A little longer than narmal and in nearly new condition nice and sharp. This whole operation was to get grab shots at the tractor shows I go to. On the flip up wireframe viewfinder I added a Stanley replacement bubble level that I could see just by looking through the frame. I was using a 12 shot Graflex Film Magazine. So I got everything set up and was ready to go. There are a few things that have to be done. Plan to stop and change sheets. Sounds silple enough but you really have to stop, sit, and shuffle. The other is to focus. Yes, Focus. I have gotten so used to AF on my Nikon I have to remember to focus!! Shooting handheld also lets you know the slowest possable shutter speed you can. Mine is 1/60th. Have fun

[Ari]

I've been through two Technikas, a B&J Press and two Alpenhause conversions in the quest for handheld 4x5.
The easiest to use hand-held were the Alpenhause cameras; well-made, pretty tough, and easy to focus; Steve also does a great job with parallax.
I would have kept the Linhofs, but they were IIIs, and I wanted more movements.

My own opinion is if you want handheld at 4x5 quality, go with medium format; I bought a Mamiya 645 AF, and it's been great.
With MF, you can hold the camera better, focus more easily and focus better, esp with AF, and shoot at a shutter speed that should negate any movement on your part.
With 4x5, handheld, you usually have to use 1/30 (with 100 ISO film), so the gain in film area is often offset by camera shake or improper/fumbling RF use.
With the 645, I set it to aperture-priority, auto-focus, and I get to concentrate on making the photo; there's a lot more futzing with a portable 4x5.
Get a 6x7, it'll scan even better than 645, and keep your 4x5 for contemplative nature scenes or architecture or whatever you need to do that requires a tripod. :)

[Griz]

"My own opinion is if you want handheld at 4x5 quality, go with medium format; I bought a Mamiya 645 AF, and it's been great.
With MF, you can hold the camera better, focus more easily and focus better, esp with AF, and shoot at a shutter speed that should negate any movement on your part."


I think a lot of what he is doing here depends on the ability to have the instant film back so he can provide the portraits on the spot. Not sure if MF is going to be the right fit for that.

BTW, My daughter has been using a converted Polaroid (not sure which) at receptions and markets and selling portraits for $10. It seems people will pay for a well composed, lit, and shot candid when it comes out of the back of an "Old Fashioned" camera. A good day for her is about $200 profit for 4-5 hours work. Sure it's not Jose Villa rates, but the people really get a kick out of the camera and the instant film and she really likes the reaction and appreciation she gets from the people she photographs.

[Gordon Flodders]

With 4x5, handheld, you usually have to use 1/30 (with 100 ISO film), so the gain in film area is often offset by camera shake or improper/fumbling RF use.

My latest beauty is a black Razzle 900 (made here in Australia). It has a front mounted extra large focus wheel running in ball bearings as well as the original thumb wheel. It's fitted with a fast Xenotar 135mm f3.5 lens and can focus from infinity to three feet instantly. The finder is VERY bright and is parallax corrected plus I can also shoot with a faster shutter speed and without fear of shake. It folds up easily without having to remove the front lens element which is quite large. I love it :cool:

GF.

[Ari]

"My own opinion is if you want handheld at 4x5 quality, go with medium format; I bought a Mamiya 645 AF, and it's been great.
With MF, you can hold the camera better, focus more easily and focus better, esp with AF, and shoot at a shutter speed that should negate any movement on your part."


I think a lot of what he is doing here depends on the ability to have the instant film back so he can provide the portraits on the spot. Not sure if MF is going to be the right fit for that.

In that case, no it wouldn't.



My latest beauty is a black Razzle 900 (made here in Australia). It has a front mounted extra large focus wheel running in ball bearings as well as the original thumb wheel. It's fitted with a fast Xenotar 135mm f3.5 lens and can focus from infinity to three feet instantly. The finder is VERY bright and is parallax corrected plus I can also shoot with a faster shutter speed and without fear of shake. It folds up easily without having to remove the front lens element which is quite large. I love it :cool:

GF.

I had a very similar camera by Alpenhause, using a Sironar 150, except it focused even closer.
I, too, loved it, but after a few hundred sheets, I knew I was missing out on some shots because the camera (read: I/me) wasn't quick enough or I didn't have enough light to hand-hold adequately, without fear of blur.
I don't want to limit the fun factor of hand-held 4x5, because they are a lot of fun, but it helps to be well aware of their limitations, too.

[Gordon Flodders]

You're correct Ari, I have used a similar camera and discovered likewise, my biggest problem with the original 900 being the tiny focus wheel that is quite slow in operation. The big wheel focusing is more than twice as fast, as is the f3.5 Xenotar.

GF.

[Matus Kalisky]

I would only mention that there is also a conversion of 3x4 folding Polaroid camera by Chamonix called Saber (http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/saber.html) - it is much smaller and lighter than the 110B or 900 conversions (but also more limited). Browse around here - there have been a thread about it recently which you may find interesting. If I were to try handheld 4x5 (I may if the Project55 will make through), I would try to get the Saber.

[option8]

Since people mentioned the Saber and various 4x5 Conversions I thought the info I posted in this other topic was useful:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?84183-Chamonix-Saber&p=834264&viewfull=1#post834264

Since Ive got a Saber with the same lens as the 110A/B cameras...I figure I could give a little of my personal experience.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5308/5676680433_9e84949b93_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/option8/5676680433/in/set-72157623838141122)

I like hiking in the SE Utah desert...where I personally would not want to take anything heavy. And as you can see in the list at the bottom of this post, there's a reason I took the Saber along with my SX70. Its damn sure light and compact.
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6195/6029406412_dc47ddf88b_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/option8/6029406412/)http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6148/6036129852_7a14e1276b_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/option8/6036129852/)

If you have ever held a Land Camera from the 1970s, you know the bellows struts are not the most solid things made. Its perfectly fine for my needs, but maybe not yours.

The Saber is a "suit your needs" kind of camera. If you have a need for something like it, get one (if you can? is it that hard now?). Its not for replacing anything in your large format gear collection, but add to it.


Here are some straight, no chaser, weight comparisons:

Polaroid 250 Land Camera - 2lb 10oz
Chamonix Saber 127mm Rodenstock in Copal 0 - 1lb 15oz
Unmodified Polaroid 110A/110B - 4lb 8oz
Converted Polaroid 110A/B 4x5 Compact Graflok - 3lb 11oz
(4lbs 8oz with focusing panel ground glass attached)
Converted Polaroid 110A/B 4x5 Compact Body & Graflok - 3lb 6oz

[IanG]

With 4x5, handheld, you usually have to use 1/30 (with 100 ISO film), so the gain in film area is often offset by camera shake or improper/fumbling RF use.


The increase in quality using 5x4 hand held out weighs the use of a 645 handheld, sure ideally you need to stop the LF lens down further in some cases for optimal quality.

I shoot 645 handheld as well as 5x4 but have found that by switching to HP5 @ 400 EI with the LF camera I am still able to get negatives and subsequently prints that are a significant improvement over 100 EI film in a 645.

Perhaps I'm lucky becasue I can normally shoot at 1/200th @ f22 with HP5 but I have gone down to 1/50th @ f11 but then choice of lens becomes more critical too - my Tessar or Xenar aren't as good as my 135mm Symmar at f11.

Ian

[dap]

I'll put a vote in for a printex. They are not easy to find but they do come up for sale a couple of times a year. When they do sell it is usually for relatively low amounts (about $200 give or take). It is definately not sleek or uber compact but it is bombproof for travel and very fast to use. Downsides are that you are going to be stuck with a 127/135mm lens and that you have no movements (not that it matters if you are going handheld). I really like mine.

[anglophone1]

I'll put a vote in for a printex. They are not easy to find but they do come up for sale a couple of times a year. When they do sell it is usually for relatively low amounts (about $200 give or take). It is definately not sleek or uber compact but it is bombproof for travel and very fast to use. Downsides are that you are going to be stuck with a 127/135mm lens and that you have no movements (not that it matters if you are going handheld). I really like mine.

First time I've heard of these, google gave me http://www.retiredcameras.com/printex.html to look at.
Interesting! Clearly as you say bombproof.
Bet it's hard to find a decent one though.....

[Jay DeFehr]

For portraits, it's hard to beat an SLR. Look at Graflex Super D.

[jnl]

Have you seen this thread. You might find it interesting. http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?86921-Wanderlust-4x5-P-amp-S

[Gordon Flodders]

I tried using a 4x5 SLR for portraiture hand held and found some unexpected shortcomings in its operation. Aside from mirror slap causing shake at low speeds, I found the biggest problem was that eye contact with the subject was lost when firing the shutter, so if somebody blinks, I am unaware. The noise of the camera is also prohibitive in certain venues if you wish to remain anonymous. I had trouble with flash sync too, due to the focal plane shutter's limitations and found that even with a relatively fast f4.5 lens, the image was still quite dim, making focus difficult in low light.
A field camera or view camera requires a tripod, so that's a big restriction if spontaneity is what you're out to achieve, because the time spent focusing, then inserting a film holder means the moment is gone.
With my rangefinder, none of the above problems occur. There's no loss of contact with the subject, no problem with flash sync, no vibration when firing the shutter and almost zero noise. Lens speed or aperture setting does not affect the ability to focus in low light and the huge single window viewfinder with parallax correction simply outperforms everything else I've tried.

GF.

[Gordon Flodders]

The latest 4x5 rangefinder with dual focus is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqV7AF-nFQM
It's amazing.

GF.

[dap]

First time I've heard of these, google gave me http://www.retiredcameras.com/printex.html to look at.
Interesting! Clearly as you say bombproof.
Bet it's hard to find a decent one though.....

Outside of the US...I imagine that they would be very difficult to locate. Even in the US they are relatively uncommon (the 2x3 versions turn up more frequently than the 4x5 versions). I think the rarity is due to the fact that other than a smattering of adds in the back of vintage photo mags they were primarily marketed to police departments and other agencies (for crime scene investigations and mugshots - Printex even had optional dedicated attachments available for photographing fingerprints). If police departments were the primary buyer I'd guess than not many were made, and of those, it is probable that very few made their way to civilian hands.

That being said, when they do sell they are not very expensive (They are an incredible bargain when you consider how much other "point and shoot" 4x5 cameras go for). Unlike the one pictured on the website you mentioned most Printex cameras do have coupled rangefinders attached. Due to the rangefinder focusing, well place focusing knobs, and non-folding design they are pretty fast to shoot with. The major problems I have encountered on second hand units (not that I am an expert - I've only handled 3 of them) have been paint flaking, corrosion, seized internal focusing rails, and dim rangefinders. The rangefinders supplied with the camera were the common side mounted models (Kalart and Hugo Meyer) so any issues can be dealt with by refurbishing or picking up a spare off of ebay. The corrosion is usually just a cosmetic issue and the seized rails can be dealt with by stripping the camera down and lubing the rail.

[Jac@stafford.net]

A couple years late - I have several Printex cameras, four of them being 4x5, one highly modified to use a 3" Biogon (http://www.digoliardi.net/printex-mod.jpg).

The major virtue is their light weight. dap's comments are right-on. The focusing gear is soft and the first thing to give trouble.

It is an excellent camera to use with infrared due to the all metal construction.

[photobymike]

i use Graflex, but you better get used to the lenses if you want ot use the range finders. Personally i use the the Crown with the top range finder. I use the Optar 135mm wich is ok but have the 135mm Nikkor for the really sharp stuff i need. The Nikkor does not "calibrate" with the range finders so i use like a view camera. I rarely us the range finder anyway, i use "zone focus" on the distance scale. The range finder is accurate but hard to see through. I tried a Wista range finder 4x5 but was much to heavy.... The graflex is also very cheap and plentiful ....

The only problem with using a graflex 4x5 is the inconsistency of what you are going to get. Over the years there has been a mix and match of parts lenses ect.... The picture shows the focus scales for the different lenses.. For the 135mm there can be 20 different scales... of crap!!! I have to had to setup my own distance scale for each one of the Graflexs i use... My secret weapon is a Stanley Fat Max measuring laser..... The rangefinder has to be tuned for the particular lens installed on the camera which i do not use much.

I just had a question about how to setup the focus screen and there are several ways to do this depending on the part number of the particular casting. I have become some what of a Graflex 4x5 expert ..just to use the camera.

If you can find a Graflex that has been setup by the factory ...you have found a jewel...

90130

[DrTang]

check out what I just got

someone added short bellows focusing to a Cambo PassPortrait body - it has a coupled range/viewfinder from a polaroid that sort of works and a 127mm lens

I am going to yank the rangefinder deal off a big shot and put it on instead I think

handheld / 4x5 / cool

90129

[Jac@stafford.net]

That is downright cool, DrTang!

[Cornelius]

Lol awesome Dr Tang! :D