[LargeFormat] Graflex 120 6x9 Roll Holder Loading Question

[Richard Knoppow]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "philip lambert" <philip.lambert@ntlworld.com>
To: <largeformat@f32.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 12:16 AM
Subject: Re: [LargeFormat] Graflex 120 6x9 Roll Holder
Loading Question


> I had a Miniature Sp Graphic that used cutfilmholders and
I sold it for this
> reason. Later I bought a Linhof Rapid Rollex and this
would slide in where
> cutfilm holders used to go and could evidently be used
with most 2x3
> cameras, including the Century Graphic and Technika,
without taking off the
> ground glass.  The drawbacks were it was 6x7 not 6x9 and
also Linhof prices.
> Philip
>
  That's interesting to know. I think my roll holder is
actually 6x7, or at any rate the same aspect ratio as 4x5,
not a big deal if I can get it to work.
  If I can make a thing like the Graflex Spring Kit I can
use the back on this camera. The spring kit was a pair of
spring metal brackets. The look much like the leaf springs
that hold the ground glass panel in the back of the camera,
in fact, they mount in place of these springs (and of course
the ground glass panel).  The ends are bent down and inward
to hold the accessory. If you look at the back of an
Anniversary Graphic or similar camera, you will find that
there is a semi-circular cutout to clear the hinges to which
the springs attach to the ground glass panel. The ends of
the spring kit springs are bent to fit into these cutouts.
When the ground glass panel is removed the accessory fits in
place of it and is then held in by these springs bearing on
it at the corners. I have one for a 4x5 Anniversary Graphic
and it works fine. Not as convenient as the Graflok back but
it works. I think it should not be too difficult for someone
with a little sheet metal skill to make them. Since Graflok
backs have been rather expensive for 4x5 cameras, and are
almost impossible to find for the 2x3 the springs can be
useful. Note that the Miniature Speed Graphic does not take
the same Graflok back that fits the Pacemaker 2x3 Graphic.
The Mini has a flash synch contact built into the back. I
think a Pacemaker back would probably fit but wouldn't have
the contacts. Since the contacts are for focal plane flash
bulbs its loss would probably not be significant. In any
case, I have a little more more work to do on this camera. I
will then post some notes on my experience repairing and
setting up the Kalart rangfinder.
  As a side note, the original lens on this camera was a
Wollensak/Graflex Optar f/4.5, 105mm. It was pitted so I
replaced it with an Ektar. I decided to check the aerial
image of the Optar even though its too badly damaged to use.
What I found is interesting. In the past I checked a
Wollensak f/4.5 135mm Raptar, the same lens as the Optar.
This lens has lots of coma although its sharp in the center.
Since I don't have another example I didn't know whether it
was a design error or a manufacturing error. I still don't
for this focal length but the 105mm Optar turns out to be a
good lens. About the same amout of coma as the Ektar (low)
and quite sharp. Unfortunately, the effect of the etching is
a great deal of haze from flare so the lens is useless.
However, its caused me to reconsider the possibility that
Wollensak's designs may have been OK, at least with this
series. Graflex may have done some QC to eliminate the dogs
before selling them with their house brand on them. I have
one other Optar, the f/5.6, 190mm lens on my Super-D
Graflex. This is an excellent lens, I also have a 15"
Tele-Optar, another Wollensak lens, which is also excellent.
So I don't quite know. The other dog is an Enlarging Raptar
just plain soft.

---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com