I know the Graflock back is more versatile but is the Graphic back that much of a step down? The Graphic back will still take a Polaroid back and ready load holders. What are the downfalls of a Graphic vs. a Graflock back?

Thanks.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: BobF on 2003-07-22 07:08 ]</font>

Quote:

On 2003-07-22 07:07, BobF wrote: I know the Graflock back is more versatile but is the Graphic back that much of a step down? The Graphic back will still take a Polaroid back and ready load holders. What are the downfalls of a Graphic vs. a Graflock back? Thanks. <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: BobF on 2003-07-22 07:08 ]</font>

The Graphic back won't accept most roll holders. If you're shooting 4x5 and don't plan to use 120 film, having a camera with a Graphic back isn't much of a handicap. If you have a 2x3, its very limiting because of the few emulsions available in 2x3 sheet film.

Cheers,

Dan

Dan, thanks very much. Roll film isn't a problem. I use a Mamiya C220 for my medium format shooting. I don't yet have a 4x5 but am looking to acquire one. In order to improve chances of getting one in reasonable condition and at a reasonable price I think I need to consider models with Graphic as well as Graflock backs.

Of all the different models I still believe the best value is the 4x5 Crown Graphic with a Kalart rangefinder and a Graphic back.

You'll be limited to using a Calumet C-2 or Horseman slide in holders for 120 roll film but this camera is really too big for roll film.

You won't be able to use the cams to change the rangefinder for different lenses as you can with the Top Rangefinder models. But finding the right cam can be very difficult. They made over a dozen different cams for the 127mm lens as each lens is slightly longer or shorter than 127mm. So The top RF isn't as great as it may seem. The Kalart RF can be adjusted to fit most moderately wide to moderately long lenses .... say 100 to 180mm. The rest you could ground glass focus.

Like Dan, I reverse my opinion when it comes to the 2x3. A Graflok back is a necessity. There is very little sheet film available and its all black and white. Unlike the 4x5 this camera fits 120 film very well.

Les, thanks for the response. I'm used to using ground glass focusing on my Mamiya TLR so would probably use that in most cases on a Crown; foregoing the rangefinder. It is indeed a 4x5 that I'm interested in.

Bobf, I asked a similar question a while back and oddly enough, got about the same answers I originally went out of my way to get a Speed with a Graflok because I thought that I would need it. Then I got a View II with a Graphic back. I was upset enough that I bought a Graflok back for it very soon. Sounds like I really need that Graflok???
Well... I also originally bought a Graphic 22 roll holder for the Speed thinking I would do roll film (I also have a C330 for that). Hated the idea of removing the GG panel to install the roll holder. So I bought a Calumet C2 slide-in holder. Never used it... After a few years, I've never removed the GG panel except for cleaning & lubing. And it's something I'd sure hate to do in the field!
So, not really adding much, I agree with all of the above. A Graphic back is just fine.
One thing I will use the Graflok for though is the Graflarger back that turns the camera into an enlarger (if I ever get a darkroom set up again...). Supposedly it can be mounted on a camera with a graphic back, but there's some disassembly required... And you may have no interest in the Graflarger? If not, be happy with a Graphic back. I would have been, and saved a bit on money too...

Thanks Rich. Appreciate the insight from your experience.

the whole Graflarger thing is interesting. If you only have a closet for a darkroom then ignore this...
But if you've got a space that can be dedicated, even a dedicated closet, then an Omega D2 is a WHOLE lot better than a Graflarger.

And right now a complete Graflarger is running just over $100 while Omega D2s are being sold for less than shipping costs.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Les on 2003-07-23 17:11 ]</font>

LOL! I live in a 1 bedroom apartment that has no closets. Just a few armoirs. Fortunately here in Toronto there's an excellent DIY place where you can rent darkroom space by the hour.

Quote:

On 2003-07-23 15:36, Les wrote: the whole Graflarger thing is interesting. If you only have a closet for a darkroom then ignore this... But if you've got a space that can be dedicated, even a dedicated closet, then an Omega D2 is a WHOLE lot better than a Graflarger. And right now a complete Graflarger is running just over $100 while Omega D2s are being sold for less than shipping costs. <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Les on 2003-07-23 17:11 ]</font>

Les, if you can get me a good D2 for less than the shipping, let me know! I may not have a darkroom yet, but that would be the incentive. Although I may look into an 8x10 enlarger someday I doubt I could afford one...

Quote:

On 2003-07-23 15:39, BobF wrote: LOL! I live in a 1 bedroom apartment that has no closets. Just a few armoirs. Fortunately here in Toronto there's an excellent DIY place where you can rent darkroom space by the hour.

A small place has advantages, if you live alone. I've done a lot of bathroom-darkroom work. And my old darkroom had no running water. The only thing you really need is...dark... and maybe an electric outlet. The smaller the place, the easier it should be to block out the light. I'm even considering trying contact prints in a batheroom that just barley fits the seat & sink. The only thing stopping me so far is time and a contollable light source for the print as there's not enough room for the enlarger or Graflarger. I find inovation part of the fun...

The big problem with any temp space is the setup/clean up time. Depends on what sort of person you are. Some people would go crazy if you told them they need to setup all the trays etc before starting. Then told them they need to put everything away when done. If you can handle that then temp spaces aren't very hard to make work. It's even worse if you need to put away your enlarger-)

For contact printing how about this. Get yourself some of the gel ND filters that Roscolux makes. The price is fairly low for a big sheet. Cut them to the size needed. I guess 8x10? Lay how many you need over the glass. Now with this setup you should be able to just turn on the room light and get reasonable exposure times.

Setting up & taking down is a pain, but I keep everything in large plastic storage bins and it's pretty easy. Although the wife really doesn't appreciate the bins laying around
I've thought (and bought) of a small clamp-on light and 15 watt bulb but haven't tried it yet. I wanted a contact printer but the cost is more than I was willing. And I thought of 8x10 Polycontrast filters on top of the contact frame. But I never thought of neutral density filters so I could just flick on the room light! Great idea. Of course there may be a problem with even coverage depending on the angle of the light & frame, but it's worth a shot. I still have to build/buy a frame or shelf to stack the three trays. Used to use one in my old darkroom to save space but it got dedicated to something else when I moved. Now if I could just buy some time....

LOL! I see threads go off on tangents here like they do on a couple other photography boards I participate in. Good stuff!

If you haven't bought the contrast filters yet consider spilt filtering using the Roscolux filters. For the price of 1 12"x12" filter you'll get two 24"x20" filters. Spilt filtering I guess is more visual but then that works for me better.