Graflex.org

[David A. Goldfarb]

I have a 105mm f:2.8 Xenotar that isn't getting enough use, and I was thinking of maybe picking up a 23 Crown with a Kalart rangefinder and dedicating it to this lens.

My questions for the forum are--

Will the lens fit the camera? It's in a Synchro-Compur #1 size shutter and the rear cell is 48mm in diameter. I'm assuming it won't close with the camera, but I can live with that.

Is the Kalart rangefinder accurate enough to use the lens at f:2.8?

[Dan Fromm]

[David A. Goldfarb]

Thanks, Dan. That's all helpful info. I wonder if Schneider may have designed the 105mm Xenotar to just fit the Graphic standard, since I've read the competing Zeiss Planar doesn't quite make it. In any case, if I decide to use the camera for just this lens, it wouldn't matter as much if I had to attach it from the back.

[troublemaker]

David,
I am finding that as long as the mechanism is smooth and working well, the Kalart RF can be excellent. I just set up a Speed 23 with an Optar 135 and it is dead on and consistent (up to 4 ft). It takes a bit of fooling around, but I had it perfect at 4,15, and infinity in about a half hour (one must go back and forth a few times, but mine was on after three re-settings). This finder was swithced out off of a 4x5(they are all the same i believe with different size coupling arms) I use stripped for set piece field work. I would also be envious of the 2.8 speed and quality of the Xenotar (been looking for one). However, I have two cameras set up with 105 Ektar 3.5's, coated and not, and they are nice (keep a 105 Xenar around too because it's also very nice and would be favorite, but only f4.5). I read the other day that a particular photojournalist liked to shoot at 2.8 because that is the way he perceived the human eye to see. Gene Barnes I believe. I can get the quote if you like...
If the upper splitting mirror has an image but is dull, dim, and irritatingly not there, try holding a magenta acetate filter in front of the top window. I did this and liked the improvement so much that I cut a small square and carefully glued in place on the inside of the cover with a couple well placed gobs of general purpose white glue.
I have recently been using the RF's on my cameras because of a project I have been working on while making some film tests, and not having as much time before the sun goes down, I can move and shoot faster and select my plane of focus easily and quickly using the RF. It is working beautifully, and most importantly, consistently. I think this to be rather important as I am shooting more and more wide open.
Anyway,
There's my two cents worth.
Have fun,
Stephen



[ This Message was edited by: troublemaker on 2005-11-25 13:29 ]

[David A. Goldfarb]

Thanks, Stephen! That's all useful information.

[Dan Fromm]

[troublemaker]

I use an 8x loupe on the GG, and one of my rangescopes to magnify the RF image. ( a nice little machinist's square- depth gauge combo works nice for the infinity stops, but I highly recomend squaring the Front standard along with getting the eccentric and scales all set up to infinity in combination with the infinity and 15ft process of calibration. Then don't touch the standard lock while fine tuning the RF. If the front standard is not exactly where it was when you set the RF, the focuss will be off. Bring the stops back to the Standard and tighten when finished. If the rails are dimpled and the stop set screws pull the stops one way or the other when tightening, change the infinity position of the Front standard and eccentric and start over.) But yeah, you have to go around the block a few times, but after a few laps, everything should come into calibration. I think the hardest thing for most folks would be setting the coupling arm, which if taken into consideration would make my earlier statement of a thirty minute job not so...
As far as the RF focussing well enough to run a 2.8 lens, I think I would then want to have a range scope which magnifies the split image better. Tuning up the RF with both was very helpfull, and should be beneficial in the field. Esspecially if the eye sight isn't what it used to be. Having a little trouble from 15' to infinity myself.
Sorry for the bonus babble
Stephen

[ This Message was edited by: troublemaker on 2005-11-26 16:10 ]

[David A. Goldfarb]

So to let you know how this all turned out--instead of a Crown, I got a Busch Pressman C with a Kalart rangefinder. It turned out just fine. The lens fit with no problems, except for the fact that the camera doesn't close with the lens (which would be a problem with a Crown or B&J as well), and the shutter interferes slightly with the tilt mechanism so it's got a very small amount of front rise in the lowest position, but not enough to cause falloff or other problems.

The rangefinder turned out to be in very good adjustment, so I only had to move the infinity stop and change the infinity adjustment on the rangefinder, and all the other distances fell into line.

It also came with 19 usable filmholders and about a hundred sheets of film so I'm just about ready to take some test shots.

[troublemaker]

Nice...
That happens sometimes. I have a Century set up for a 101 Optar that the RF also works for the 105 Xenar if I want the sharper German lens on, and only need to set the stops.
I like getting extras. Just got a Speed 23 with two roll backs and some goodies I was looking for like square image view finder slides...
Have fun with it and get back on how the fast lens worked out on the first go round...
Stephen

[David A. Goldfarb]

The lens looks pretty nice. Here's a landscape from this morning that I did just to make sure everything was working properly--

That's at f:8 with an orange filter and a little front drop by dropping the bed and tilting the lens back to vertical. Next I'll try some selective focus, handheld with the rangefinder and a wide aperture.

[ This Message was edited by: David A. Goldfarb on 2005-12-02 09:52 ]

[troublemaker]

Very nice. I am assuming this is a sheet of 4x5 (?), and while I thought the Xenotar to be a 2x3 coverage lens, it appears to have no apparent fall off at the edges even with the small amount of movement at the f8 setting.

Stephen

[David A. Goldfarb]

No, that's a little sheet of 2.25x3.25" film--Efke PL100 at EI 200, souped in Acufine. You can find 2x3" sheet film from jandcphotography.com.

The lens covers 2x3" with a little room for movements. Illumination is pretty even out to the edges of the image circle, but then it vignettes sharply. It doesn't cover 4x5" at infinity.

It feels really strange to load those tiny sheets.

[ This Message was edited by: David A. Goldfarb on 2005-12-03 07:30 ]

[David A. Goldfarb]

Here's another one, this time at the near end of the focusing range at about f:5.6, handheld. The film this time is J&C Classic 200 at EI 320 in Acufine--

I focused on the eye of the stone bird using the rangefinder.

[Dan Fromm]

I take it you're pleased.

Cheers,

Dan

[David A. Goldfarb]

It seems to be working out, thanks.

I am finding that the infinity stop is migrating a bit, likely due to old divots on the rail, so maybe I'll file them down or clean off the burrs with a wire brush to see if I can get a cleaner surface for the set screw to grip. Either that or something else isn't quite solid.

I also need a little more practice getting used to this rangefinder. There seems to be a particular angle where the split image is clearest. Might be a glasses issue. It's also a little tricky to sense the point at which one drops out of range, around 4 feet.