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 

HAVE YOU COMMITTED SACRILEGE?

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



Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 19
Location: Arizona

PostPosted: Sat Mar 06, 2004 5:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have. I have two GVII's, one I use as an enlarger set-up in my walk-in closet cum darkroom. The other goes out of the house with me. On the the sacrilege I committed. I have two tripods, a Bogen 3021 which also shares the occasional burden of an F4s and a 69 Fuji. When I use those two cameras I uses a Giotto ball head. However, with the GV, I was getting too much flex to suit my taste. My other tripod is a Majestic 3300.
The Majestic head has a 3/8-16 stud and the Bogen also has a 3/8-16 stud sans head of choice. Please forgive me, fellow users and owners, but I took a drill and drilled out the 1/4-20 socket in the base of the tripod mount of my lovely GVII. I then tapped it to 3/8-16 and now I can use both tripods and they are equally happy with their newly modified friend.

Since you have obiviously read this far, can anyone recommend a modern 69 roll film back that will fit a Graflok back? I am most concerned with reliability and precision (film flatness and spacing). I really don't relish the idea of jerking the lens off my 69 Fuji and figuring out how to adapt the rest of the camera to my GV.

Go ahead and drill that sucker out! In this case you can always make a large hole smaller with one of those little screw-in adaptors.

Cheers to all,

_________________
If it weren't for me, where would I be?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
disemjg



Joined: 10 Jan 2002
Posts: 469
Location: Washington, DC

PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

More a matter of practicality than sacrilige. I always questioned the strength of those little 1/4-20 tripod screws, and the 3/8-16 is NOT going to fail. And, as you point out, you can always bush it back to the smaller size.

While the GV's weight could be carried by the 1/4-20 (with mabye not as much margin of strength as we would like) other cameras are over the limit. I got a B&J Grover 5x7 outfit for $95; the problem was there was no tripod mount. I made my own out of a plumbing T joint, epoxy bedded to fit the hex rail. A plumbing flange serves as the base, and its threads are filled by a pipe plug. That was cut flush, drilled for our friend the 3/8-16, and the new mount given a coat of hammertone gray for a nice look. The camera weighs about 14 or 15 pounds and I would never trust it to a 1/4-20
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
shawnkielty



Joined: 18 Jun 2003
Posts: 6
Location: San Francisco Bay

PostPosted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know about modern backs for this -- alas -- aren't all of the graflok backs the same? I have a GVI with a spring back -- and am using a graphic 23 back on a separate spring back -- and it's just dandy. The graphic 23 is designed to go into the graflok back, if I am not mistaken. Mine works very well -- but I understand the film advance can get boogered on these.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Rangemaster



Joined: 06 Jul 2001
Posts: 412
Location: Montana, Glacier National Park

PostPosted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have used Linhof, Wista, Toyo and Calumet backs on my Views with a Graflok with no problem in the past, I also have modified one of my spring backs to be able to slip the Wista back on, just like on a Wista Field Camera.

Dave
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
danimal



Joined: 22 Jun 2001
Posts: 48
Location: Upper Sonoran Desert

PostPosted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,
I commit scarelige all the time. That's part of the fun of being a heathen. Now, to your other question. Use whatever Graflok or International compatable roll back you like. They'll all fit.
Dan


[ This Message was edited by: danimal on 2004-10-28 15:31 ]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
djon



Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 174
Location: New Mexico

PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hassleblad and Rollei dealt with film flatness with a plate of glass. It'd be easy to do with a Graflex roll back, assuming you don't mind a little dust.

The other ways of doing this might be a vacuum back or spring loading after the film's advanced (very tricky mechanics)...a mere pressure plate can't do the trick, doesn't even do it with most 35mm cameras.

I don't think it's a real issue unless you're doing macro photography where the amount of film lack of flatness would be a higher percent Vs the focal distance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Fromm



Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 1881
Location: New Jersey

PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

On 2004-11-23 09:06, djon wrote:
Hassleblad and Rollei dealt with film flatness with a plate of glass. It'd be easy to do with a Graflex roll back, assuming you don't mind a little dust.

The other ways of doing this might be a vacuum back or spring loading after the film's advanced (very tricky mechanics)...a mere pressure plate can't do the trick, doesn't even do it with most 35mm cameras.

I don't think it's a real issue unless you're doing macro photography where the amount of film lack of flatness would be a higher percent Vs the focal distance.

Its the other way 'round, I think. Don't we get minimum depth of focus given aperture with the lens focused to infinity?

Cheers,

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



Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 174
Location: New Mexico

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dan, I get lost in the possible optical semantics, never did grasp a lot of the basics (love camera movements, however!)... so I'll just say I doubt film flatness is a real-world problem for Graflex roll backs, but if I'm doing critical copy work do I make the assumption that it's smarter to use sheet film.

Since the Hass and Rollei filmplane glasses were used on cameras intended for space travel and wherever it is people use TLRs (in their nostalgia?), maybe you're right.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Graflex.org Forum Index -> View 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