Graflex.org

wkatez · Joined: 18 Dec 2001 Posts: 10 Location: Northeast Florida

I have acquired a reasonably mint Century that I am outfitting for landscape work. I have located the following lenses in my price range and would appreciate opinions from members with experience with any or all of these lenses. The 3 candidates are: Zeiss Planar 80mm f:/2.8 (from XL); Ziess 100 mm f:/2.8 (from XL); and Scheidner Xenotar f:/2.8 already on Century board. I would have to have one of the XL lenses taken off the XL barrel and mounted. Which would give me the best results?
Thanks,
Wayne
Confused in Florida

_________________
WKatez

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

The 100mm zeiss will give full coverage at 6x9. The 80 Planar is really designed for 6x6. you can squeek 6x7 out of it but the corners may be soft below f11

I've been told the Xenotar was sold on Century cameras. I know that the 80 planar will not allow the door to close on my pacemaker speed and you need to remove the rear cell to put the lens on the camera and the screw the rear cell on through the rear of the camera.

For landscape work where you'll be on a tripod with apertures at f11 or smaller, think about an 80mm wf ektar. They are smaller, lighter and great performers. The same could be said of the 90 angulon (not the super angulon which is a large hunk of glass)

alecj · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 853 Location: Alabama

Les is right - except for the 100mm, the other lenses won't truly cover 6x9. I had the 80mm Planar for my Century and it was fuzzy at the corners of 6x9. That lens WILL allow your Century to close, when mounted, but as he said you have to mount it by screwing the rear element on from the rear.

Since your goal is landscape, I'd look some more for lenses with more coverage.

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

alecj · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 853 Location: Alabama

I had the Grey Century, Les. Don't know if any difference with black models. Before I bought the lens, I asked Graflex that question, and they mounted one to find out. They taught me the technique of mounting the rear element from the back. It was one of the XL lenses [with Graflex engraved on the shutter ring] which Olden Camera had bought up and was selling for $99 as I recall.

That was the "good old days" where you could just call Rochester and ask. If they didn't know, they'd find out and call you back!

Henry · Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2001 6:29 pm Post subject:

Don't overlook the 65mm f/6.8 Optar for the Century. Mine, in no. 1 Graphex shutter, gives good service if stopped down to f/11-f/16. Camera movements are limited (you can get more front rise by removing the sports finder frame), but for landscape work this may not be as important as, say, architectural photography. This lens does vignette some with front rise, but the darkenend upper corners look good when they're "in the sky." As with most lenses of that era and design, they are hard to focus (use the "least worst" method) and the edges go soft, but within its limitations its an OK piece. Also, I wonder if you'll find that an 80mm will make that much difference in 2x3 over a 90 or a 101 ("normal")?

The other problem with the 65 Optar is finding one. I looked pretty diligently for three years before picking one up at a camera show for $75. Best money I ever spent, except for the $15 I paid for my GE DW-68 exposure meter.

cgoff · Joined: 24 Aug 2001 Posts: 18 Location: Connecticut

Hmmmm that makes me wonder what the differences are between a Century and a Pacemaker Speed.

Could it be that the standard is allowed to set deeper in the body in the Century?

Isn't the difference that the Century does NOT have a focal-plane shutter (besides plastic vs wood body)?

Correct me, of course, if I'm wrong. There's always more to learn about these cameras, and I'd never claim to be an expert.

C. Goff
________
Mercedes-Benz OM642 engine

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

I was under the idea assumption that the depth the front standard could go in the body was the same on the Century, Crown and Speed and it was the fact that the Xenotar was in a smaller shutter that allowed it to work on a Century.

I was on my way to put my Planar back on ebay when (and this is the embarassing part) I remembered that I actually own a Century! I keep forgetting about it because it doesn't have a rangefinder. So I unearthed it dropped my planar in closed my eyes and carefully shut the door, and it closed!!!!

It seems as though the standard is allowed to go in not more than a milimeter or two deeper into the body and it's the cross part of the yoke (focus rails) that hits the bottom of the shutteron the pacemaker. 2mm deeper and it fits!

So now (as soon as funds are available) I'm looking for a 2x3 Crown.

[ This Message was edited by: Les on 2002-01-02 18:48 ]

jdman · Joined: 13 May 2001 Posts: 302 Location: Midwest

This is probably not very helpful, but I just measured the distance from the front standard to the front edge with the following results. 2x3 Crown .943, 2x3 Century .905,2x3 Speed .892. Looks like the crown has the edge in clearance for a lens. Russ

Dan Fromm · Joined: 14 May 2001 Posts: 2144 Location: New Jersey

Les · Joined: 09 May 2001 Posts: 2682 Location: Detroit, MI

This is probably not very helpful, but I just
measured the distance from the front standard
to the front edge with the following results. 2x3
Crown .943, 2x3 Century .905,2x3 Speed .892.
Looks like the crown has the edge in clearance
for a lens. Russ

Actually that's very helpful! That means I don't have to worry about the Crown not working! So the Crown beats the Speed in 2x3 as well as 4x5!

_________________
"In order to invent, you need a good imagination and a lot of junk" Thomas Edison