I love my 203mm Ektar---I've been using the screen to focus but I'd like to mark infinity in order to speed up handheld use.. Finding infinity waaay out there isn't a problem but deceiding how close I want to be is. Since I've read that the 203mm is optimized for large apertures, I'm thinking "f/8 and be there" or maybe f/11? I don't know which, so I was wondering if anyone here uses a 203mm hand held at infinity and what works?" Which aperture do you find is sharper? How close can you expect to get to the subject and still be in focus ? I realize this is an idividual thing and for me could only be a place to start, but its raining outside and Internetting about speed graphics is probably the next best thing to shooting with them!

IF you have your RF set for another lens, and it is in cahoots with the existing scale. You can simply set your infinity stops for the 203 to match infinity on the exisitng scale. Then make a scale on the other side coinciding with the RF and scale that matches it. The other way is to measure and check focus and RF coincidence and mark your new 203 scale. Then to shoot hand held you set the scale and moving forward or back to allign the RF and thusly the 203 should be in close focus.
The old handbooks describe this SAFE-SET method in detail for using auxilary lenses on the Graphic cameras. I've acquired old Graphics withas many as three scales mounted, but have seen pictures inmanulas with four, two on each side.
There may be a couple problems with this however. First, you are dealing with a 203mm lens with shallow depth of field, esspecially wide open, and I am thinking you want to shoot something like portraits, relatively close. Which brings up that your scale and lens standard will have to be dead on. The other issue is camera shake. Though the 203 is a nice light little package, it's still way out there at the end of the bed focussing at eight feet.

IF you have your RF set for another lens, and it is in cahoots with the existing scale. You can simply set your infinity stops for the 203 to match infinity on the exisitng scale. Then make a scale on the other side coinciding with the RF and scale that matches it. The other way is to measure and check focus and RF coincidence and mark your new 203 scale. Then to shoot hand held you set the scale and moving forward or back to allign the RF and thusly the 203 should be in close focus.
The old handbooks describe this SAFE-SET method in detail for using auxilary lenses on the Graphic cameras. I've acquired old Graphics withas many as three scales mounted, but have seen pictures inmanulas with four, two on each side.
There may be a couple problems with this however. First, you are dealing with a 203mm lens with shallow depth of field, esspecially wide open, and I am thinking you want to shoot something like portraits, relatively close. Which brings up that your scale and lens standard will have to be dead on. The other issue is camera shake. Though the 203 is a nice light little package, it's still way out there at the end of the bed focussing at eight feet.

How did that happen?
Too much seawater again?

Springback,
I'm not sure what you are trying to do. I used f/Calc to create a table of "in focus" distances with the lens focused at 10' to 60' in 10' increments at each f stop from f8 to f45 and the hyper focal distances and in focus range at each f stop from f8 to f45 and printed the info table on a 3 x 5 index card that I slip into the darkslide clips on the popup hood of the camera so that it readily available. RF focus, read scale, look up in table. Set camera according to my desired componsition and shoot.
f/stop.....HFD(to have infinity in focus).....focus range

f8......181'.....90'-inf
f11....123'.....63'-inf
f16......91'.....45'-inf
f22......65'.....32'-inf
f32......46'.....23'-inf
f45......32'.....16'-inf

Does this help?

Yes, good to have the HFD, and not a bad idea to look up the DOF chart for this lens and do a couple test shots. I made cards for the lenses I take in the field. The only problem I found when I tested was that the information on the plug-in chart I found on the internet was pretty far off, and the old charts I found in my old Graphic manuals got me closer. So after testing a little compensation was required. It's good to know whether shooting lanscapes for HFD, and DOF certainly for portraits.

Thanks to all who replied- what a great resource! Now I have a starting point!

When I calculated the HFD's with f/Calc I used the diatances that brought infinity into the distance box and not some close measurement. I just checked the numbers I listed and they are ballpark close to the numbers published in Kodak's information. See page 61 of the 1953 Kodak Ektar Lens Catalog.