Graflex.org

[WilsonLaidlaw]

I have only three 70mm/50 exp. cassettes for my Combat Graphic. Two original very worn and tatty Graflex ones and one new and unused Kodak, loaded with very old but freezer kept Ektachrome 64 (how on earth to get that developed E6 escapes me). The light tightness of the original cassettes is dubious, meaning I have to load the camera in the dark, which is not easy. It is actually not even that easy in daylight, with the very small sprocket holes, which must sit very firmly on the drive sprockets or the clockwork drive will rip the film.

I have been offered from two sources, new or as new Hasselblad 70mm cassettes. Does anyone know if these are the same as the Kodak cassettes used in the KE-4? I have been unable to track down any more original Kodak ones. In their battleship grey paint and dual end caps, they certainly look very similar to the Kodak.

Any help appreciated.

Thanks Wilson
_________________
Wilson

[WilsonLaidlaw]

I got some information from elsewhere and thought I would post here, in case it might assist others.

1) The "Hasselblad" 70 mm cassettes are not Hasselblad at all. They are bog standard Kodak 70mm cassettes, which Hasselblad have not even bothered to repaint and cover over the Kodak logos. All they did was re-box them in a cheap cardboard box, instead of the nice tin Kodak supplies them in and no doubt, added a 200%+ mark up when selling. They fit perfectly in the Combat Graphic.

2) Linhof 70mm cassettes will also work. I suspect they are also originally Kodak but at least Linhof repainted them black.

The Combar Graphic is in considerably better condition than I feared it might be. Cosmetically it is in good condition for a military camera of its age. The film advances at least single frames, with the film counter working and zeroing. The shutter fires off, albeit it sounds a bit sluggish to me, which is hardly surprising. The lenses are in pretty fair condition but the helicoid on at least the standard 4 inch lens, is extremely dry and stiff and the other two lenses need their helicoids lubricating as well. The rangefinder works and seems accurate enough. The RF ghost image is however weak and some work needs to be done here on what Graflex call the optical bar, which transfers the ghost image to the viewfinder. Hopefully Cameraworks-UK will be able to resurrect the clockwork motor drive but if not, at least I can still take single frames. Given the cost of 70mm film, a motor drive might be a very expensive luxury.
_________________
Wilson

[Henry]

Very interesting thread. It seems that there was (and doubtless still is) a good deal of re-branding going on in the industry.

For the benefit of those of us who speak a variant dialect of English, can you define the term "bog standard" for me? It doesn't seem to be in common usage here in the colonies.

[WilsonLaidlaw]

Henry,

I can do no better than point you in the direction of this article: http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/bog-standard.html I think it is wrong however and the phrase is considerably older than they feel but just probably was not used in the printed word. I suspect it is military slang from WW2 or maybe even earlier. I am sure I was using it before 1968.

Wilson
_________________
Wilson

[Henry]

Wilson,

Thanks for the information. Intrigued, I attempted to track it down further via Google, which led me to the OED and this citation:

bog-standard

The Oxford Dictionary of Phrase and Fable
© The Oxford Dictionary of Phrase and Fable 2006, originally published by Oxford University Press 2006.
Bog-standard ordinary or basic. The term probably comes from an alteration of box-standard, an informal term for a motorcycle or other mechanical device which has no modifications, but which is in the condition in which it came out of the manufacturer's box.

That's as close as we're likely to get, as near as I can tell. I recall a professor of mine in grad school remarking that sometimes we must live with suspended judgements. Or, to quote Pooh-Bah in The Mikado, "Choose your fiction and I'll endorse it." This seems an appropriate expression in this context, when even the OED is inconclusive!

Cheers,

Henry