200 mm Imagon mount for Graflex

[Mark Woods]

I didn't complete the process for the previous post.

[mdarnton]

When I have a lens without a flange, I make a birch plywood (Baltic Birch) lens board, cut the hole slightly small for the threads, then gradually enlarge it until the lens will thread in reasonably securely. It's not necessary to have a perfect fit-- I make the holes intentionally irregular so that the threads bind in only three or four places. That's enough grip, and no more is needed. If you have too good of a fit over too much area, the lens will be too hard to get in but won't necessarily be more secure. Waxing the board where the threads bite will help, and to get it started you can make the hole slightly tapered, wider on the entrance side.

Plywood is necessary so that the board won't simply split in half and drop the lens. I have had some very heavy and expensive lenses hung this way (36cm Heliar, 11.5" Verito) for several years. If you do the job carefully, the lens' own threads will be completely uninjured, and if someday you find the right ring, you can use it.

My question would be if there's enough space around that shutter to go into most Graflex cameras' recessed fronts.

[Daniel Unkefer]

My Barrel Mounted Imagon Collection:
I bought a number of #3 rings brand new last year from Midwest Photo Exchange.
They had dozens of them at the time.

2016-02-22 16.49.40 by Nokton48, on Flickr

[plaubel]

I'm sure that the Rodenstock manual of my 200mm Imagon in barrel says "designed for 9x12cm", but my Imagon looks well on 5x7", too.

It's a later version then yours, Hendrik.
It came with an adapter for connecting the barrel with a shutter out of an 180mm Mamiya 6x7 lens.

Ritchie

[Bob Salomon]

I'm sure that the Rodenstock manual of my 200mm Imagon in barrel says "designed for 9x12cm", but my Imagon looks well on 5x7", too.

It's a later version then yours, Hendrik.
It came with an adapter for connecting the barrel with a shutter out of an 180mm Mamiya 6x7 lens.

Ritchie

That adaptation was originally made and sold by Zorkendorfer. Then, later on, it became a Rodenstock branded adapter. Which one do you have?

[plaubel]

Hi, Bob,

my version is a "Zörk Tubus", so it should be a Zörkendorfer.
I have no experience with my Imagon and medium format sizes, I only use it for 9x12cm, 4x5", 5x7".

By the way, let's have a look at the original manual, where Rodenstock sayed:

"The useful angle of the Imagon is 40 degrees.
So you can use the 200mm Imagon up to 9x12 cm (and the 300mm up to 13x18cm)".

Two sentences later, they name the option of using on 6x6cm, too, especially Rollei SL66 and Mamiya RB 67.

The 200mm Imagon is definitely designed for 9x12cm.

In general, , German lens designers have been very carefully with the format size, so often you can step up one size, of course depending on your demands, and ratio..

Best,
Ritchie

[Bob Salomon]

Hi, Bob,

my version is a "Zörk Tubus", so it should be a Zörkendorfer.
I have no experience with my Imagon and mdium format sizes, I only use it for 9x12cm, 4x5", 5x7".

By the way, let's have a look at the original manual, where Rodenstock sayed:

"The useful angle of the Imagon is 40 degrees.
So you can use the 200mm Imagon up to 9x12 cm (and the 300mm up to 13x18cm)".

Two sentences later, they name the option of using on 6x6cm, too, especially Rollei SL66 and Mamiya RB 67.

The 200mm Imagon is definitely designed for 9x12cm.

In general, , German lens designers have been very carefully with the format size, so often you can step up one size, of course depending on your demands, and ratio..

Best,
Ritchie

The problem isn't coverage. The problem is the amount of halo at the desired aperture at the desired magnification. Many people prefer the effect at 7.7 with the second disk fully open. But when you then use the 200 on 45 that degree of halo will be different at the same magnification as it would be on ,edium format. But the halo from the 250 at that setting and disk and magnification will be the same as the 200 on medium format. And, technically, the 120 and 150 Imagons were actually made for medium format up to 66/67.
Rodenstock had discontinued Imagons shorter then 200 or longer then 300 sometime before 1986 when we became the Rodenstock distributor. Some years before that a German portrait/wedding photographer named Bernhard Schmactenburg went to the Rodenstock factory and negotiated a deal where he would buy entire production runs of the 120 and 150 which would then be only sold and distributed by Schmactenburg. He also went to Prontor Werke and arranged for a special version of the Prontor Professional shutter with unique controls that he would then mount those Imagons into for use on Hasselblad C and EL cameras as well as his own focusing helical system and adapter mounts and tubes for other MF and 35mm cameras. Originally, in the USA the Schmactenburg system was only sold through a portrait studio in Texas. After a few years Rodenstock then asked us to take over the distribution of those special lenses so we then did so with Schmactenburg up to about 1996 when we transferred the Rollei MF distribution to Samsung who, at that time, owned the Rollei factory.

[plaubel]

The problem isn't coverage. The problem is the amount of halo at the desired aperture at the desired magnification.

Missing a 250mm Imagon, I can't compare both, but I am sure that you are right.
And, in saying "designed for 9x12 cm", I trust in Rodenstock, too :-)

Ritchie

[Neal Chaves]

Henrik,
I sent you a PM. I think I have just what you need, ready to go.
Neal

[hendrik faure]

Are you kidding us? Or do you simply enjoy profound vignetting on 8x10?
Can you share some examples for us, Mark?

Thank you

200mm Imagon, portrait distance, no movements, 8x10 film, uncroped V750 scan