Graflex.org

aoresteen · Joined: 26 May 2004 Posts: 67 Location: Newnan, GA, USA

What are the widest lenses that the Century G 23 and the Crown G 23 can take? I've looked but I can't seem to find any exact listing.

Thanks!

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2120 Location: New Jersey

Anthony, the shortest reported here is the 35/4.5 Apo Grandagon, which covers 2x3. The shortest I have and use is a 38/4.5 Biogon, which doesn't.

I take it you're back from Iraq. If so, welcome home.

aoresteen · Joined: 26 May 2004 Posts: 67 Location: Newnan, GA, USA

Dan,

Thanks!

Yes I'm back, thanks! All in one piece thank God!

So, a 65mm will work ok with focus to infinity?

I took my Cambo 23SF view camera to Marco Island a few weeks ago and it was too much to carry around. I need to get a lighter rig for 2x3.
_________________
Tony Oresteen
Newnan, GA

WWW.oresteen.com

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2120 Location: New Jersey

Henry · Posted: Mon May 11, 2009 7:40 pm Post subject:

I use the 65 Optar on my Century. Infinity focus is 'way back in the box, and movements are very limited, plus focussing is challenging, shall we say---although I don't know that it's any more challenging than with any other 65, since I've never tried any.

aoresteen · Joined: 26 May 2004 Posts: 67 Location: Newnan, GA, USA

Henry & Dan,

What do you guys think of the Optar 65mm? I shoot B&W (HP-5) and do landscapes mostly. I make 10x15 inch or 12x18 inch prints from the negs.

I do shoot a little C-41 - 160 Portra NC and I just ordered 20 rolls of the new Kodak Ektar 100.

What does the 65mm Optar sell for these days?

Thanks!
_________________
Tony Oresteen
Newnan, GA

WWW.oresteen.com

troublemaker · Joined: 24 Nov 2003 Posts: 715 Location: So Cal

The 65mm 6.8 Optar and Raptar (same thing) have been running between $80 and $125 for a few years on wePray that I have been sporatically paying attention. I sold mine last year for about $110 IIRC, a bit more than I payed for it. Henry isn't kidding these are tricky to focus requiring a little patience. They are OK lenses; not the sharpest tool in the shed. I switched to a 65mm 6.8 Angulon as it is a little sharper, and about a third less weight in it's smaller Linhof Compur shutter. It is also a tad bit less of a PITA to focus. The little 00 shutters require a custom cable release holder with a lock as there is only a Bulb setting for focussing preview etc...
I also picked up a very nice f8 65mm Super Angulon about the same time which offers almost 4x5 coverage and tons of movement on a 2x3 and has reasonably good image quality. The rear cell of the f8 SA fits easily through the front standard wherea as many faster WA lenses will not.

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2120 Location: New Jersey

Tony, I hated my 65 Optar. Never got a sharp shot with it. I don't think the problem was focusing since my 65/8 Ilex is dimmer and takes better pictures.

When I lucked into a 65/8 Ilex I sold the Optar.

The 65/6.8 Raptar/Optar and the functionally equivalent (but very different design) 65/6.8 Angulon just barely cover 2x3 and have too short back focus to be usable on 2x3 Speeds. 65 SAs and the Ilex just cover 4x5 and will make infinity on a 2x3 Speed.

troublemaker · Joined: 24 Nov 2003 Posts: 715 Location: So Cal

I hate Dan's 65 Optar too. And I must say I'm quite glad he sold it.
I never hated mine, but they are pretty much limited to smaller prints no larger than 11x14 and that's asking a lot, which I got a couple times. But for the most part, images start to come apart by 8x10 as it is not what most would consider a sharp lens for big enlarging. They shoot color OK and contrasty B&W. It also depends a lot on composition. Part of the issue is also the fact that it is very difficult to set up focus on a smallish 6x9 view screen. And while Dan is correct that the Angulon, which I opine to be a much better lens, has only a 109mm image circle at f16 as compared to the f8 SA with a 155mm circle. A completely different animal. I did some stuff in Utah with the f8 lens and never had to worry about coverage using rises, shifts and fwd tilts (my front standard is turned around). Another advantage with using the f8 series lenses is that they locate a little farther forward on rails allowing easier use of movements on a Crown or Century.

Henry · Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 6:10 pm Post subject:

aoresteen, since you asked: I've pulled some OK enlargements, 12.5" X ~15+", from the 65 Optar, mostly cityscapes and landscapes, so I know pretty much what mine is capable of and what its limits are. Samples differences may account for varying results with any lens, so I wouldn't dismiss the 65 Optar out of hand. In fact, not knowing any better, I waited and waited for one to show up at a camera show, and when I saw one at $75 I pounced on it without even tryng to bargain with the seller. That was taking a chance, I know, but in this case it worked out. Since I scan negs into 'shop I can use the Unsharp Mask to advantage (but that, too, has limitations and it's easy to tell when you've oversharpened---it's worse than being a tad fuzzy). So I try to do as much "in the camera" as I can, because I abhor digital trickery. The other 65s mentioned here are undoubtedly better optics, but I was/am on a limited budget!

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2120 Location: New Jersey

Now that I think of it, the 65/8s have one drawback on the Century/2x3 Crown. They make infinity with the front standard on the hinge. Setting mine up is a little fiddly, so I mainly use it on my Speed.

Tony, you can't get by with just one Graphic.

troublemaker · Joined: 24 Nov 2003 Posts: 715 Location: So Cal

Now you know why I finally gave up and flipped my front standard around. Only on the one backpacking camera, but it's been slightly handy at times.

blwallen · Joined: 21 Mar 2002 Posts: 19 Location: Central Illinois

After having tried unsuccessfully to mount a 47mm Super Angulon--the older style in a #00 Compur--on my Horseman VH, I decided to try it on my Crown 23. The articulated rack on the Crown easily focuses the 47mm lens, while it is still on the case portion and the drop bed can be used without interfering with front standard movements. I think if I remove the wire finder on the front standard, I may be able to manage a bit of rise and perhaps back tilt. Front shift is pretty much blocked by other components in the case.

There is apparently a modification that can be made to the clamping pads that engage the rail. I've seen an article, but now can't find it. New GG and a Fresnel are in order.

So among other things, the thin Graphic 23s--Century and Crown--make economical SW bodies, in addition to their other successes.

blwallen · Joined: 21 Mar 2002 Posts: 19 Location: Central Illinois

I mentioned modifications that can be made to Pacemaker Graphics to increase their front movements. Here are some descriptions in previous issues of View Camera:

Jan/Feb 2005 and Mar/Apr 2005 have articles by Gordon Osmundson generally describing the history of Graflex and Graphic cameras, lenses that can be used on them, and their strengths and limitations.

May/Jun 2005 had an article by John Blackford outlining the information I was looking for--a relatively simple modification that allows shift movements for Pacemaker Graphics. John didn't state and I have no way to determine if this modification might also work with Anniversary or earlier Graphics.

In May/June 2006, David Keil described a procedure to increase the amount of front tilt for Graphics.

The modifications appear to be ones that a careful worker with a hand grinder could manage with limited risk to the equipment. John's article suggests that only a minimal reduction in corner radius is necessary to enable shift movements.