Graflex.org Forum Index Graflex.org
Get help with your Graflex questions here
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

105mm f/3.7 Kodak Ektar vs smaller f/4.7... problems!

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Graflex.org Forum Index -> Lenses Help
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
steverose108



Joined: 13 Sep 2001
Posts: 6
Location: San Diego, CA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2001 6:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi! am new to the forum (though not to camera repair or restoration) and appreciate any thoughts or advice you guys might have! ANyway, just got done building my "dream" 23 Speed Graphic out of a Speed, a Crown, and a pile of junk rangefinders and parts. Now I know everyone says the Crown is the 'desirable' camera but I like the idea of a 1/1000 shutter speed plus the ability to take action shots with the famous Graphic FP shutter 'lean' so I built up the Speed with the better lens, lever wind, Graflok, etc. with the Crown as the #2 camera, f/4.7 Ektar, spring back and knob wind roll holder. I had heard the Ektar f/3.7 is God's own lens, exceptional, etc. from various sources incl. Ed Romney and your lens forum guys. It certainly dwarfs the regular f/4.7 in size and weight. Like an idiot I did not realize until AFTER the camera was done, rangefinder painstakingly dialed in over every spare minute for days, etc. that I cannot raise the front with the camera focussed much further than 10-15 ft. or so, it hits the inside of the case! I can tilt the lens but have to first rack it out to loosen the knobs, then back in. In other words, when you set the infinity stops the bellows are only out an inch and a bit... the front standard rests over the hinged bed, half on the back rails and half over the front. Really defeats the point of building this camera- let alone lugging it around.. if you can't use the movements! I looked in Romney's guide and it looks like his lens sets as far back (on a Crown without FP shutter, but the open area in the divided front case is the same). Now, I am weighing the pro's and cons... If I put the smaller f/4.7 back on and go thru rangefinder hell again the camera will focus at infinity further out on the rack, so I can use the (admittedly limited) adjustments I wanted the camera for...but at what cost? Is the f/3.7 that much better a lens, that I should keep it instead? I had intended to sell the second camera to help pay for the project, not keep it. Thoughts? advice? THanks! Steven
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Les



Joined: 09 May 2001
Posts: 2682
Location: Detroit, MI

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2001 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm going to make some assumtions first.

You say that the 4.7 ektar is smaller and lighter, so I will assume it's a 101 Ektar.

It sounds like you won't be able to have both movements and an FP shutter.

I would think that the significantly shallower body of the Crown would get the standard out beyond the body to allow for rise. Before going through rangefinder hell, put the 105 on the crown and ground glass focus, If you can't find the GG use a piece of window glass cut to fit the inside of the roll back and tape it into place, then use a loupe to focuse the image.

Here's where you lose me, You state, "If I put the smaller f/4.7 back on ... the camera will focus at infinity further out on the rack, so I can use the (admittedly limited) adjustments I wanted the camera for."

If this f4.7 lens is a 101 ektar it will not focus farther out, it will focus closer in, amplifing the problem
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Fromm



Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 1882
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2001 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

On 2001-09-14 12:00, Les wrote:
I'm going to make some assumtions first.

You say that the 4.7 ektar is smaller and lighter, so I will assume it's a 101 Ektar.

It sounds like you won't be able to have both movements and an FP shutter.

I would think that the significantly shallower body of the Crown would get the standard out beyond the body to allow for rise. Before going through rangefinder hell, put the 105 on the crown and ground glass focus, If you can't find the GG use a piece of window glass cut to fit the inside of the roll back and tape it into place, then use a loupe to focuse the image.

Here's where you lose me, You state, "If I put the smaller f/4.7 back on ... the camera will focus at infinity further out on the rack, so I can use the (admittedly limited) adjustments I wanted the camera for."

If this f4.7 lens is a 101 ektar it will not focus farther out, it will focus closer in, amplifing the problem

Henry, I have both lenses and my 101/4.5 has a longer back focus (flange to film distance at infinity) than my 105/3.7.

I'm having problems replying to the original post. He can use the tubular viewfinder (why use the wire frame?) or he can just use the 101. If he must use the frame finder, the 101 is plenty good enough.

Cheers,

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steverose108



Joined: 13 Sep 2001
Posts: 6
Location: San Diego, CA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2001 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for your fast response, gentlemen! I will swap things around a bit and test. Yes, it seems illogical but the 101 seems to come out further from the case, like Dan says also. I will measure but to my eye it seems like the same case depth in both cameras; the Speed has a partition and rear compartment for the FP that makes the overall case dimension deeper of course. So I don't think just swapping the 3.7 onto the crown will do much. I will try it and ground glass focus as Les suggests. Dan, since you have both lenses, what do you think of the difference(s) between them, if you had to choose? I have yet to do a comparison test, but this weekend I hope to shoot a roll with them both on the Speed (gound glass focussed). Looks like I may have to keep the 4.7 on whichever camera to get the use of movements. Thanks, will update you later in the week. Steven
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan Fromm



Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 1882
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2001 2:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

On 2001-09-14 15:04, steverose108 wrote:
Thanks for your fast response, gentlemen! I will swap things around a bit and test. Yes, it seems illogical but the 101 seems to come out further from the case, like Dan says also. I will measure but to my eye it seems like the same case depth in both cameras; the Speed has a partition and rear compartment for the FP that makes the overall case dimension deeper of course. So I don't think just swapping the 3.7 onto the crown will do much. I will try it and ground glass focus as Les suggests. Dan, since you have both lenses, what do you think of the difference(s) between them, if you had to choose? I have yet to do a comparison test, but this weekend I hope to shoot a roll with them both on the Speed (gound glass focussed). Looks like I may have to keep the 4.7 on whichever camera to get the use of movements. Thanks, will update you later in the week. Steven

um, er, ah, overall I like the 101 better BUT I've never been sure that I focused the 105 correctly. Two problems, switched to a SubSea/Graflex back when trying it, may have put the ground glass in backwards. Have to test some more.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Les



Joined: 09 May 2001
Posts: 2682
Location: Detroit, MI

PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2001 2:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the excuse to let me play with my toys.

I have a PM Speed, a Mini Speed, two 105s and a 101.
The 101 and one of the 105s are on Mini Speed boards so I chucked both of these up and focused about a 1/2 mile away. I noted on a focus scale (the wrong one i'm sure, but it's still a good reference point) where these two lenses focused and from my experiment, they are practically equal, no effective difference in the distance from the ground glass, and thus from the body between the two lenses (acutally it was about 1.5mm).

Furthermore both of these lenses focused at infinity so the standard was JUST outside the body allowing for full rise of the standard.

I then chucked the other 105 in the PM Speed and found that it too focused just out side the body. Something interefered with the drop bed, but the part of the front standard on the rear links was so small I thought I could fudge it. Well I couldn't, but I did pull the standard out, dropped the bed, pushed the standard as far back as I could (hitting the rear rails) the tilted the lens back and checked the ground glass. It focuses at about 3 feet give or take.

I don't have an explaination as to why your 105 focuses inside the body and mine outside the body. I was focusing onthe ground glass instead of a roll back, but that shouldn't make a difference of 1/4"

I also believe now that you won't be able to use lens fall or lens swing on anything but macro shots for either the 101 or the 105, but you should be able to get lens rise and shift with the 105 on the Speed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Fromm



Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 1882
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2001 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

On 2001-09-14 15:04, steverose108 wrote:
Thanks for your fast response, gentlemen! I will swap things around a bit and test. Yes, it seems illogical but the 101 seems to come out further from the case, like Dan says also. I will measure but to my eye it seems like the same case depth in both cameras; the Speed has a partition and rear compartment for the FP that makes the overall case dimension deeper of course. So I don't think just swapping the 3.7 onto the crown will do much. I will try it and ground glass focus as Les suggests. Dan, since you have both lenses, what do you think of the difference(s) between them, if you had to choose? I have yet to do a comparison test, but this weekend I hope to shoot a roll with them both on the Speed (gound glass focussed). Looks like I may have to keep the 4.7 on whichever camera to get the use of movements. Thanks, will update you later in the week. Steven

Steven:

Sorry to keep coming back at you. I took my 2x3 Speed out and checked. The 105 sits, just barely, on the front rail when the front standard is up against the infinity stops. Set like that, with the bed as far back as possible, i.e., focused a little through infinity, the wire frame finder clears the body by about 3 mm.

Could you have put your ground blass in backwards? Could your back not be attached right? I know that these questions are implicity insults, and I apologize for them. I've made both mistakes.

Cheers,

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Fromm



Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 1882
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2001 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

On 2001-09-14 15:04, steverose108 wrote:
Thanks for your fast response, gentlemen! I will swap things around a bit and test. Yes, it seems illogical but the 101 seems to come out further from the case, like Dan says also. I will measure but to my eye it seems like the same case depth in both cameras; the Speed has a partition and rear compartment for the FP that makes the overall case dimension deeper of course. So I don't think just swapping the 3.7 onto the crown will do much. I will try it and ground glass focus as Les suggests. Dan, since you have both lenses, what do you think of the difference(s) between them, if you had to choose? I have yet to do a comparison test, but this weekend I hope to shoot a roll with them both on the Speed (gound glass focussed). Looks like I may have to keep the 4.7 on whichever camera to get the use of movements. Thanks, will update you later in the week. Steven

Steven:

Sorry to keep coming back at you. I took my 2x3 Speed out and checked. The 105 sits, just barely, on the front rail when the front standard is up against the infinity stops. Set like that, with the bed as far back as possible, i.e., focused a little through infinity, the wire frame finder clears the body by about 3 mm.

Could you have put your ground blass in backwards? Could your back not be attached right? I know that these questions are implicity insults, and I apologize for them. I've made both mistakes.

Cheers,

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steverose108



Joined: 13 Sep 2001
Posts: 6
Location: San Diego, CA

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2001 5:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Les and Dan- thanks again for taking the time to puzzle this out with me! I have been real busy with (grad)school and am just getting back to you..and the cameras. No offense taken at all, I admit to doing some idiotic things in general not just repairing cameras. I do think the backs are OK. I DID swap lenses and sure enough, with the 105 back on the Crown and the 101 on the Speed both now come to infinity (stops, that is) well out on the rails allowing for full movements. Finally dawned on me that the front compartment is the same on both cameras BUT the Speed has much more distance back to the film plane (due to the FP compartment...i.e, we need to think of the distance from rear lens glass to film plane on both cameras...and it seems that the 105 is short enough that, as Les found, the front standard clears the case by only a few mm at infinity; on my Speed not enough to raise the standard. You could pull the wireframe up, but this is not really my issue. Swap em around and there's room enough to use the full rise. I took a roll of Spanish style art-deco buildings at Balboa Park here in San Diego- these are from an early worlds-fair expo in the 20's-30's. Full rise on most shots up at the taller bell towers. Beautiful detail and definition with the 105! The neg looks very even and sharp corner to corner, and at 16x20 still holding a LOT of detail even though the grain is visible thru my enlarger focus-scope. Ilford pro 400 film. I can believe all the stuff about the Ektars helping to win the war (superior rare-earth glasses and coaatings developed for aerial photography, etc). Even more impressive considering the Nazis prob. had the best Zeiss could do in their aerial cameras. I will post a shot if you are interested... Steven
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Graflex.org Forum Index -> Lenses Help All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group