At
http://graflex.org/speed-graphic/which-model.html
it states that:

Quote:

The widest suitable for a Speed is 80-90mm.

referring most likely to a 4x5, but was wondering what is the widest that would normally work with a 3x4 speed?
There is a Schneider 80mm f2.9 I've been looking at.. and wondered if it would function well on a 3x4, with enough room to use the movements if needed.
The reason for this question is that when I use the 120 roll film adapter on the 3x4, the 135 Optar gives me a to 'full' of a negative at times.

Peter, the quotation is wrong. For 3x4 Speed Graphics, minimum flange-to-film distances are:

Anniversary: 63.5 mm
Pacemaker: 66.7 mm

Its wrong for 4x5s too, the 4x5 Pacemaker Speed's minimum is also 66.7 mm. And its horribly wrong for 2x3s. The shortest lens I use on my 2x3 Pacemaker Speed is a 1.75"/2.8 Elcan in barrel; it covers only 6x6, though, doesn't come close to covering 2x3.

If you check data from lens makers' sites or the slightly out-of-date list of lenses on this site you'll see that there are many lenses with focal lengths as short as 60 mm +/- that will focus to infinity on your 3x4 Speed. Pay attention to coverage, I believe you need a lens that covers at least 127 mm to get good image quality in the corners.

Good luck, have fun, don't believe everything you read,

Dan

thanks allot for the clarity... reading different posts, it seems most 3x4 speeds had a 127mm, although press people liked them for the 4x5 because of the wider image, even if they didn't get the corners.

I have an Anniversary, been loving it, even though a 3x4..

The 10th ed. (1954) of "Graphic Graflex Photography," p. 24, says the 65 and 80 Wide Angle Optars and Wide Field Ektars will work on 3x4. Don't know about coverage w/movements, though.

Thanks for the help, ..

The lens I'm looking at is not an Optar... and reading the info again, it states that it has a built-in focusing mount and depth-of-field scale, and can be used with any bellows camera set at infinity.
So no movement using it on the speed.

Yet with a roll film adapter that shoots 6x6, I really don't have to worry about the corners.

You are confusing focal length with image circle. True, a 127mm focal length is considered "normal" for the 3x4 camera but a lens needs to produce an image circle of [ the square root of 3 1/4² + 4 1/4²; 10.5625 + 18.0625=28.625 taking the square root = 5.3502336397581741495630759274711, convert to millimeters =]135.89593444985762339890212855777mm to cover the negative.
Now the actual image size is less than the negative size and the film holder specifications state that the image area is 4.228 x 3.131 so 4.228² =17.875984, 3.131² =9.803161; adding them =27.679145 and taking the square root = 5.2610973190010465724479405799684, convert to millimeters = 133.6318719026265829401776907312 to cover the image area of a 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 film holder.

Image circle needed for a roll film holder
A= the short side of the format you wish to cover
B= the long side of the format you wish to cover
C= the diagonal of the format
A²+B²=C²
1 inch = 25.4 millimeters.

I just love these approximations

With windows calculator in Scientific mode the copy-paste makes rounding extra key strokes.

I feel cheated. I can only enter nine digits into my Mac 10.6 Dashboard calculator.

hey peter k

just so you know that Schneider 80mm f2.9 was sold on a lot of 23 cameras BUT It DON'T COVER a 6x9 by Schneider lens data @

http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/xenotar/data/2,8-80mm.html

it shows a IC of 91mm a 23 needs of about 99mm & your 3x4
will need 127 or so

NOT 80mm or 90mm are wide angle!! they needs to say
wide angle or wide field!!!!!

haha.. oh boy...
I'm in lens trouble again

Quote:

He told me that people like me who wanted SLRs with on-board light meters would never learn the basics. I thought he was wrong but you just proved him right.

ok.. thanks 45pps,
(for 4x5 positive post, squared)
yes I am confusing focal length with image circle... again and again..
maybe if I became a lens...
I'll have to sit down and copy ur math.. and perhaps the light will shine through to the corners.

Banjo... more clarification,, thanks.. I can use all the help I can get.

Ok//.. math or not... velll keep trying, danks fer yer patience.

My Graphic 22 RFH has a 57mm x 57mm film opening. It requires a 81mm image circle to cover it.

My Graphic 23 RFH has a 57mm x 78mm film opening. It requires a 96.6mm image circle to cover it.

45PSS wrote:

My Graphic 23 RFH has a 57mm x 88mm film opening. It requires a 105mm image circle to cover it.

Go measure again. None of my 2x3s is that wide. The ones with pin rollers are 57 x 78.

error corrected.