Hi,

I am new to large format photography and would greatly apprecite it if you
could help me answer some newbie questions:


Will a new 135mm Nikon lens fit inside a closed Graphic camera?

Is it possible to cam a brand new lens (either a 135mm Nikon or Schneider) to the rangefinder? If yes, then what kind of rangefinder is prefered - a top mounted or Kalart?

How does a Rodenstock Optar on a Super Speed Graphic fare against the modern
4x5 lenses? Is it noticably better then the older coated lenses? Can it be
used wide open without too much loss of quality?

regards,
- mike meskin

Stated focal lenght of any lens is an approximation. Carl Zeiss at one point changed from labeling his lenses as 350mm to 35cm because they were rarely 350mm exactly, but 35.1 cm lens was acceptable.

Graflex benched and accurately measured lenses and had many cams for the 127 and 135mm lenses, because some were as short as 132 or as long as 137.

Now when the lens was made isn't important. If you can find the right cam for that specific focal lenght it would work .

Barring that fishing expedition, the side mount Kalart is infinitely adjustable, so it will work with a 134.7mm lens just as easily as a 135.2mm lens.

Lens comparasons are very subjective. What's your end product, an 8x10 looked at from arms lenght or a 40 x 60 looked at with a 7x loupe?

I often shoot 5x7 and 6x8 cameras with 100 year old uncoated lenses and get astonishing results because I limit my self to contact prints and 2x enlargements. From this experience I will say...
I't my opinion that my well cared for 127mm Ektar from '46, stopped down to f11 will meet or beat any multi-coated, apo-whatever when printed on an 8x10. Blow the end print up to 40 by 60 and the ektar crumbles to dust.

I contend that the performance of any of the original Graflex lenses has more do to with how they were cared for after they were bought than any engineering feat. Will the roddy optar be soft at the edges wide open? Yes. Too Soft? Only you can say that.

that said, the Roddy optar is about 20 years newer than say a typical Ektar. But I'd rather have that older ektar in a Graphex shutter than the Roddy in a Super speed shutter any day. You'll pay a dear price for the lens and at any moment the shutter could/might self destruct.

I am not planning to print anything bigger then 11x14 from any negative. The reason I want to try Large format is because I think it produces the most beautiful look, both very sharp and soft, with very nice depth.
However I tried shooting a 4x5 graflex with a coated Ektar and was ruther disappointed with the results, wide open and even well stopped down (F16). I understand that when stopped down 4-element lenses can be as good as modern ones. However I wanted to try photographing people using available light, and handholding the camera, which means I will need to stick with the maximum apreture. I really like to blur out as much of the unwanted detail as possible, plus I will need as much shutter speed as possible. The lens does not need to be the sharpest one, but it has to produce a nice range of tones, even when shot wide-open.
The idea was to get a camera with a cammed rangefinder and a 135mm lens and then simply relplace the old lens with a modern one of the same focal length, so hopefuly the rangfinder will not need to be re-adjusted.

Would it be a better choice to get an older camera with a Kalart rangfinder, since they seem to more servicable/adjustable?

I was very much impressed with Michael Norton's work who uses a handheld Littman camera.
http://www.littman45single.com/03gallery/gallery.html

Thank you for your invaluable advice,
regards,
- mike

Well, A Crown Graphic with a 127 ektar will be heavier and more cumbersome than a modified Polaroid camera, but This set up should come at 1/10 the price. That gives you a lot of time to practice setting things up, practice focusing quickly. And learning many time photographers set the focus and then moved themselves towards the subject.

I think it would be less frustrating to get a Crown with a Kalart.

I still don't think you need the 1/1000 of a second exposure of a Speed or super speed. Most of the modern shutters got up to 1/500, so you'd be overexposing by one stop should you need the 1/1000 and not have it. that's not a real problem with color neg or B&W. With Chrome you'd have to stop down one more stop. On bright day you'll be well into f8 anyway so again I don't see that as a problem.

15 years a..... make that 25 years ago I wanted a point and shoot 4x5 camera. I got a Crown special with a Xenar lens (tessar formula, that was actually cheaper new than an ektar) and used it as such for many years. I was never 100 % succesfful with hand holding, but it still worked most of the time.

After having a top rangefinder, I acutally prefer the Kalart. Its much easier to adjust.