Pacemaker Speed Graphic
After my recent (and continuing) foray into the world of analog film with a Holga and after having read this article, I am now pondering a Pacemaker Speed Graphic 4x5.
Here's what I know about film and medium format: Nothing. I got that same nervous / sick feeling when I was changing a roll of film in the Holga that I got cleaning my sensor for the first time. :lol3
So anyone have any advice? Is the Speed Graphic a reasonable choice? Should I consider something else? I don't want to drop a load of cash on this. Am I crazy for thinking about just jumping right into medium format film? The only serious photography I've done has been with APS-C and now FF digital cameras.
Also, where does one get the equipment? I was thinking I'd just drop by some kind of used camera store to see what I could find. Anyone have any other suggestions?
Here's what I know about film and medium format: Nothing. I got that same nervous / sick feeling when I was changing a roll of film in the Holga that I got cleaning my sensor for the first time. :lol3
So anyone have any advice? Is the Speed Graphic a reasonable choice? Should I consider something else? I don't want to drop a load of cash on this. Am I crazy for thinking about just jumping right into medium format film? The only serious photography I've done has been with APS-C and now FF digital cameras.
Also, where does one get the equipment? I was thinking I'd just drop by some kind of used camera store to see what I could find. Anyone have any other suggestions?
0
Comments
If you are serious about large format I think you would appreciate the extra advantages that a true "view camera" platform provides. The Speed Graphic has very limited controls and was designed for sports photography and journalistic photography decades ago. It was really never designed for fine art photography.
I use a Calumet monorail view camera that has full tilts and swings and drops. These things are important to gain the full value of the large format. You will also need lenses with broad enough coverage to handle the movements of the camera.
Prepare yourself for the rather massive cost of quality lenses in that format and the large cost of film purchase and processing, not to mention printing and scanning (as appropriate.) This is not a trivial endeavor.
A very good alternative to large format film photography is stitched digital photography using one of the newer full-format 35mm digital camera bodies and/or T&S lenses (in Canon speak) or PC lenses (in Nikon speak).
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I miss that camera. back in the mid-70's shooting color 4x5 slides ran to about $8/shot with processing, (I used a lab rather than building my own).
That part I do not miss.
If I were to go back to sheet film, I think I'd prefer a field camera.
When I bought that old Graphic, I had the option to buy a couple of speed graphics. I kick myself every once in a while for not doing so.
Loading film is a very dark closet thing. My results were about as good as shooting a reasonable P&S digital on manual now is. I usually managed to forget to do something that mucked up the shot. Like re-focus or stop the lens back down after focusing, or any number of other things.
I had only two lenses and one was basically a super-wide angle, the other more of a portrait lens.
Basic requirements are a light meter, a good one, then a big bag to carry all the lenses, (no zoom), at least on the old stuff. I had a huge wooden legged German tripod, my entire kit weighed in over 70 pounds. I carried it all in the winter up a trail to take pictures of a lake and waterfall.
I screwed up my pictures so I should have just carried the 35 and been happy... Live and learn.
But, as that article states, breath-taking images are possible. Not cheap or fast, but possible.
And then there is the whole looking like Jimmy Olsen thing to consider...
It is amazing that these were the "common" photojournalist camera at one point, with the gigantic flash bulbs and domes on top.
While you can adjust the aperture and shutter speed, that's about it. For all the costs of getting into large format, it would seem a better route to go with a view camera to really be able to take advantage of all that film area.
If you were more after a nostalgic camera, however, put on a fedora and a double breasted suit and you'll be ready to step into the 50's newspaper scene with one of these in hand.
www.finesart.com
Another is the Peter Gowland pocket view cameras or even his GOWLANDFLEX twin lens.......
Good Luck with your film adventure......there is a lot to be learned from film............patience is one....but patience should come second nature to a parent:D
If you look occasionally on the Flea Market, or even KEH, you can find very good deals on these cameras with lenses included. Many Pentax+80mm packages are around for less than a decent dslr.
Good luck
The Speed Graphic was a clunker - even for its time. I cut my teeth on press type cameras but, never liked the Speed Graphic. The image is of the type of Graphic kit which I used as a young Navy Photographer in the late 1950's and very early 1960's. It had not changed much from the cameras used in the 1930's and 1940's.
The Crown Graphic was a bit better because it did not include the heavy focal plane shutter mechanism which the Speed had. You used two types of shutter in the Speed Graphic: a between the lens shutter which, depending on the lens, allowed speeds of up to 1/200 or 1/400 second and a focal plane shutter at the back of the camera which allowed speeds of up to 1/1,000 second. Most Speed Graphic kits included a 150mm lens as standard. However, my Crown Graphic had a wider 127mm lens which I really liked better.
By the way, the requirement to use a rangefinder in one window (see side of camera) and a viewfinder in another window (see top of camera) was slow and inefficient.
In order to use either of the shutters on the Speed Graphic, the other shutter would need to be open. I almost never used the focal plane shutter which required you to wind it up and which was extremely loud and shook the camera violently when operated. That is why I opted for the Crown Graphic and later the Linhof Press Camera.
I first used a Crown Graphic which didn't have that damn heavy focal plane shutter apparatus and which was both lighter and safer to use. By "safer" I mean that you would never lose your images while shooting with the between the lens shutter while the focal plane shutter was closed. The cry of "Oh S__T!" was sometimes heard from the darkroom when the photographer removed the film holder from the fixer to see a clear film with no image and knew exactly what had happened. This happened even to expert photographers. I ended up using a 4x5 Linhof Press Camera at the end of my cut-film shooting days.
I used 4x5 view cameras long after I gave up using 4x5 press cameras. I gave up on the press cameras when I decided that there was medium format film and there were medium format cameras (such as the Rolleiflex) which would give me the image quality I needed. I was not a photojournalist and I did not use 35mm film until late in my shooting days and then only for the photography of wedding receptions. I seldom needed large blow-ups of reception images.
I used 4x5 view cameras as long as I shot film professionally. Again, I preferred the Linhof view camera over any of the graphic view cameras. It operated much more smoothly and was a jewel to use.
However, any cut film shooting is a PITA. Each holder contains two sheets of film and is large and heavy enough the shooting large amounts of film is not often an option. Some folks say that it forces the photographer to be more careful in shooting but, I don't like anything that forces me to do anything. Note: There were film magazines which held twelve sheets of film but these were extremely heavy and a PITA to use. There were also film packs which also contained 12 sheets of film but this film was so thin and flexible that it was not great to process and print with. Processing 4x5 film requires large and dedicated equipment, tanks, sinks and dryers. Storage of 4x5 film also requires space.
By the way, there are still view cameras and field cameras being manufactured in the 4x5 format, by Linhof, Toyo, Sinar and Horseman.
There are also digital backs for large format cameras. Although terribly expensive, this is what I would be using if I needed the capabilities of a view camera.
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
Mike, a great forum for large format can be found here.
Derek
What did Cinderella say when she left the photo shop? "One day my prints will come."
Enjoying the forum on 4x5 Graphics; I shot high school sports and yearbook photos, 1958 - 61, with a Speed Graphic, then a Pacemaker. About 15 years ago, I was in Eureka, California, and bought an old complete Speed Graphic press kit in a battered black steel case, on-camera bulb flash unit, extension flash, working Speed Graphic camera, film holders, etc. - the complete working photographer's set of equipment. The case is battered, shows years of field wear and tear. It is likely this belonged to an active press photographer from the fifties, perhaps from the Eureka area. Would love to learn about who was active with newspapers in that area at the time. I cannot believe that I did not ask the seller about the system's history at the time! Seems like these things are more important now than they used to be.