Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,267   Posts: 1,534,338   Online: 761
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11
    jmooney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Morrisville, PA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    643
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1234 View Post
    Do you routinely crop your 135 film to 8x10 or do you print FF 6.7x10?
    I usually crop 35 but with these Polaroids I'll be using them full frame and displaying as-is or maybe doing some transfers.

  2. #12
    jmooney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Morrisville, PA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    643
    Quote Originally Posted by Fotoguy20d View Post
    Jim,

    A good option for an 8" lens is the Ektar 203mm f7.7 (or Kodak Anastigmat 203mm). It can cover 5x7 with a little movement and is sharpest wide open. Makes a nice complement to the 127mm Ektar.

    Look for a Pacemaker Graphic (Speed or Crown) with a Graflok back. The Speed's rear shutter adds weight and increases the depth of the body (which might be a problem with wider lenses - at 90mm, the front standard on my speed is just clear of the body)

    Dan

    Thanks Dan. I'll look for the 203, I have a 5X7 as well and it sounds like I can make use of it on there as well. I don't go nuts with movements so a little coverage is fine for me.

  3. #13
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    My main 3 lens kit for the crown was a 90/8, a 135, and a 210. IIRC the Nikkor 360 tele was also lots of fun on there. It was at the outermost edge of the bellows draw but lots of fun. I think I did use a 65 on my crown, with some minor adjustments.

    By the way the default tilt on the crown is in the wrong direction in my opinion (downwards), and this is easily remedied.

    My main annoyance with the crown was the lack of rotating back. But creative minds find ways...
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  4. #14

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    The Crown Graphic was really designed as a press photographers tool, and meant to be used hand held. Why bother with a rotating back when all that's necessary is to re-orient the camera? It was never meant to be a "fine art" tool. No reason why it can't be used that way, but that wasn't its intended use.
    Frank Schifano

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,010
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    My main annoyance with the crown was the lack of rotating back. But creative minds find ways...
    Which makes me wonder why the B&J press (Watson?) is so rarely mentioned. A couple months ago, I picked one up for $100 (paired with a 4x5 Crown suitable only for parts). It seems heavier than the Crown (if that's possible) but has nice looking front movements and a very stiff rotating back (presumably the stiffness could be remedied). And, I have yet to use it, sticking with the Crown.

    My primary lenses on the Crown are a 90/6.8 Optar (I have a 90/8 Nikkor-SW I never use for no good reason at all), 203mm f7.7 Anastigmat, and an occassional visit to the 135/4.7 Optar.

    Dan

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Texas, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Quote Originally Posted by jmooney View Post
    I usually crop 35 but with these Polaroids I'll be using them full frame and displaying as-is or maybe doing some transfers.
    Then to achieve similar FOV on 4x5 you'll need a 120-127-135 for the wide end and a 240-270 on the long side. Be sure whatever you buy has enough image circle for rise/fall/shift you want. The 127 Ektar really doesn't have much, if any, room to play. Maybe consider a 120 Angulon and a 240 Tele Xenar or 250 Tele Optar?

  7. #17
    Whiteymorange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Boston area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,275
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Venchka View Post
    and another thing...........

    The Polaroid 550 holder works with Fujiroid 4x5 material. Polaroid 405 (somebody verify that number) with Fujiroid 3 1/4" x 4 1/4" products.
    The Polaroid 405 works great with the Fuji 3 1/4 x 4 1/4, but beware, the holder does not fit under the GG back on my spring-back Speed Graphic. The springs are attached to the GG back by pins in slots which run out of travel room just a hair shy of a good fit. I'm in the process of modifying the screw in mount so that the back can move out about 1/4 inch more. A Grafloc back would solve my problems, but would cost more than I want to spend on this problem at this time. The 550 is the same thickness and, I assume, would have the same problem.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    692
    A Speed Graphic and no Graflok back? Curious. The Graflok back is required for the Polaroid holders. My Zone VI doesn't have a Graflok/International back. I got the 550 under the GG once. I won't do it again. Too tight.

    The Fujinon-W 46mm filter ring 125mm/5.6 lens in Copal #0 shutter is the closest match size wize to the 127mm Ektar with a huge increase in image circle. Double+ the price too. That said, I haven't run out of image circle with the 127mm Ektar on my S.G. Perhaps I didn't try hard enough. The 127+203 pair would be hard to beat for size and image quality.
    Wayne
    Deep in the darkest heart of the East Texas Rain forest. Apprentice Analog Activist.
    ... And to paraphrase Yoda, there is no how, only do.
    Vaughn
    My Photos Online

  9. #19
    Whiteymorange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Boston area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,275
    Images
    26
    A Speed Graphic and no Graflok back? Curious.
    According to Graflex.org, the Graflok back was introduced in 1949. Mine predates that by a few years.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    692

    Learned something new

    Quote Originally Posted by Whiteymorange View Post
    According to Graflex.org, the Graflok back was introduced in 1949. Mine predates that by a few years.
    Didn't know. Mine was born in 1953.
    Wayne
    Deep in the darkest heart of the East Texas Rain forest. Apprentice Analog Activist.
    ... And to paraphrase Yoda, there is no how, only do.
    Vaughn
    My Photos Online

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin