Converting a speed graphic into an SLR

[maltfalc]

has anyone ever tried it? i'm thinking of building a clip-on mirror box and viewfinder to go between the FP shutter and the bellows.

[BrianShaw]

Sounds lkk I’lle too much work to me. Why not get a Graflex SLR?

[Dan Fromm]

has anyone ever tried it? i'm thinking of building a clip-on mirror box and viewfinder to go between the FP shutter and the bellows.

Try it and report on problems encountered and solved.

[maltfalc]

Sounds lkk I’lle too much work to me. Why not get a Graflex SLR?

i'd rather have one camera with the full functionality of a speed graphic and a graflex slr than have to carry around two cameras with lower combined functionality, and i'd rather spend $20-$50 on materials than several hundred on a camera.

[maltfalc]

Try it and report on problems encountered and solved.

plan to, just doing all the research i can before finalizing the design and going to town on my speed graphic with power tools.

[Ethan]

has anyone ever tried it? i'm thinking of building a clip-on mirror box and viewfinder to go between the FP shutter and the bellows.

sounds ambitious, do you plan on having the mirror connected to the shutter, or will you lock it up prior to shooting?

[Jim Jones]

Why not start with a Graflex and add a rangefinder, sports finder, and whatever else you need to make it work like a cobbled up Graphic?

[Dan Fromm]

sounds ambitious, do you plan on having the mirror connected to the shutter, or will you lock it up prior to shooting?

PMFJI. That would lose an important part of the Speed Graphic functionality. Speed.

[maltfalc]

sounds ambitious, do you plan on having the mirror connected to the shutter, or will you lock it up prior to shooting?

PMFJI. That would lose an important part of the Speed Graphic functionality. Speed.


i'm thinking a trigger-like small lever on the right side of the mirror box by the speed graphic's shutter release to raise and hold the mirror in position with one finger while triggering the shutter with another finger. just a quick double click. that would also give me the option of adding a cable release socket later on and using one of those dual cable releases meant for macro bellows.

[maltfalc]

Why not start with a Graflex and add a rangefinder, sports finder, and whatever else you need to make it work like a cobbled up Graphic? because i have a speed graphic, not a graflex slr. that's what i have, that's what i'm starting with. no point buying an slr and trying to turn it into a speed graphic if i already have a speed graphic. besides, it wouldn't work the other way around. squeezing a clip-on mirror box into a speed graphic to gain all the functionality of an slr is pretty straight forward. removing the mirror box from an slr, extending the bellows all the way to the fp shutter, adding longer focus rails and a drop bed, adding movements to the front standard, adding a rangefinder, etc. to match the functionality of my speed graphic and making it all easily reversible is just not going to happen.

[domaz]

With today's technology it's probably easier to put a digital camera that is pointed at the ground glass (with baffling to block stray light of course) and use your phone to view the output. Many people just take pictures of the ground glass as-is and the quality is decent. A ground glass with a fresnel (as most Graflexes have) would probably look pretty good for viewfinding purposes.

[maltfalc]

With today's technology it's probably easier to put a digital camera that is pointed at the ground glass (with baffling to block stray light of course) and use your phone to view the output. Many people just take pictures of the ground glass as-is and the quality is decent. A ground glass with a fresnel (as most Graflexes have) would probably look pretty good for viewfinding purposes.you're missing the point. i have a speed graphic so i can shoot 4x5 film or plates. i want to add the functionality of an slr so that i can do that with moving subjects or handheld without the delay of focusing and framing and then having to load the film and wind the shutter and pull the dark slide before taking the shot. if i want digital photos i'll just use my dslr as a dslr.

[domaz]

you're missing the point. i have a speed graphic so i can shoot 4x5 film or plates. i want to add the functionality of an slr so that i can do that with moving subjects or handheld without the delay of focusing and framing and then having to load the film and wind the shutter and pull the dark slide before taking the shot. if i want digital photos i'll just use my dslr as a dslr.

I'm not suggesting you use the digital camera as a picture taking implement- just saying you use a small digital camera as a way to view the ground glass "eyes up" without using a darkcloth. You would still need to load the film holder before taking the shot though. This does have the advantage that you can use any lens you want. If you didn't know using even a slight wide angle lens on a 4x5 SLR is impossible because the mirror gets in the way. Maybe this doesn't matter to you- and if it doesn't why not just buy a existing 4x5 SLR like a Graflex RB?

[Daniel Unkefer]

My large format focal plane cameras don't like wider lenses and the mirror can impact the rear cell when trying to focus up close. Which is why Graflexes like normal to longer lenses Just sayin Best of Luck and show us what you end up with

[maltfalc]

I'm not suggesting you use the digital camera as a picture taking implement- just saying you use a small digital camera as a way to view the ground glass "eyes up" without using a darkcloth. You would still need to load the film holder before taking the shot though. This does have the advantage that you can use any lens you want. If you didn't know using even a slight wide angle lens on a 4x5 SLR is impossible because the mirror gets in the way. Maybe this doesn't matter to you- and if it doesn't why not just buy a existing 4x5 SLR like a Graflex RB?if i needed a reflex viewer i'd just build a reflex viewer, not an slr. "If you didn't know..." you really think i'm designing a custom slr speed graphic and it hasn't occurred to me that moving the bellows forward about half a foot and sticking a mirror box behind it is going to prevent me from shooting with wide angle lenses? i can still use "any lens i want" (within the normal limitations of a speed graphic) by removing the mirror box. that's why i'm building a removeable mirror box and one of the reasons i'm not buying an slr. obviously buying an slr was one of the first options i considered. i might be crazy, but i'm not stupid.

[maltfalc]

My large format focal plane cameras don't like wider lenses and the mirror can impact the rear cell when trying to focus up close. Which is why Graflexes like normal to longer lenses Just sayin Best of Luck and show us what you end up with yeah, i know. that's why i'm going to the trouble of building a camera that can switch between being an slr and a view camera. best of both worlds, half the weight to lug around, hundreds of dollars saved.

[Havoc]

I do get your point. But I remain unconvinced. You'll still have to take the mirror box along, be able to store it when not in use and make a well aligned and light tight connection between all. All the time keeping the mirror box itself in good shape. So you'll need 2 covers to put on it as well. And don't forget that a rectangular tube with 2 opposite sides missing is rather flimsy so it will have to be very solidly constructed, certainly because your mirror will need to be able to remain well aligned (angle and distance to the GG) and free to move. Not impossible but I doubt it is practical in the field. Or that that removable mirror box is much lighter than a light field camera.

Wish you all the luck with this project, curious how it will turn out.

[jnantz]

maltfalc:

good luck with your project !
I have a speed and series d and sometimes wish the speed had an easier way to focus, than you know the LF dance.
are you planning on having a peep hole on top or the back to focus and if you do will it be more accurate than the ground glass that's already there or hyperfocal work
or using the rangefinder that may or may not have been included with your camera and adjusted to one of your prime go to lenses.

a portable prism inside your camera sounds good :)
J

[maltfalc]

I do get your point. But I remain unconvinced. You'll still have to take the mirror box along, be able to store it when not in use and make a well aligned and light tight connection between all. All the time keeping the mirror box itself in good shape. So you'll need 2 covers to put on it as well. And don't forget that a rectangular tube with 2 opposite sides missing is rather flimsy so it will have to be very solidly constructed, certainly because your mirror will need to be able to remain well aligned (angle and distance to the GG) and free to move. Not impossible but I doubt it is practical in the field. Or that that removable mirror box is much lighter than a light field camera.

Wish you all the luck with this project, curious how it will turn out.

storage is no problem, it'll fit in a foam padded case or camera bag just as easily as a lens or flash or any other camera accessory. the mirror box will have a front and back, they'll just have 4x5 cutouts. there's no reason i can't add extra bracing between the mirror box and camera if there's a bit of flex and the front and beck will be attached to the steel frames of the fp shutter and bellows, so i'm not worried. alignment of the mirror and gg with the film plane is easy to check when the film plane has it's own gg. the light seals at the ends will be basically the same as the seals between the bellows and fp shutter since all i'm doing is splitting that connection into two connections. some wood, foam, a few small metal parts, a thin glass mirror and gg aren't going to weight much.

[maltfalc]

maltfalc:

good luck with your project !
I have a speed and series d and sometimes wish the speed had an easier way to focus, than you know the LF dance.
are you planning on having a peep hole on top or the back to focus and if you do will it be more accurate than the ground glass that's already there or hyperfocal work
or using the rangefinder that may or may not have been included with your camera and adjusted to one of your prime go to lenses.

a portable prism inside your camera sounds good :)
J

no peephole, just a great big gg on top with a hood like any other large format slr.

[jnantz]

no peephole, just a great big gg on top with a hood like any other large format slr.

shouldn't be too hard to cut the top off of a camera and stick a hinged mirror in there
sounds fun!
are you planning on manually moving the mirror UP to block the ground glass and be out of the way of your film / plates ?
or a springed arm ?
if springed, you might look into using the sunshade that is on pacemakers, it already has a spring you might be able to slide a mirror
on the dark slide holder clip and it might be close to the right dimension and easy to slide in ...
you could probably remove the graflock back altogether, put a second one on the top of the box , the sunshade inside with a mirror
.. come to think about it there might be a slr type press camera that has that design, unless I am thinking of something else. ...
J

[maltfalc]

shouldn't be too hard to cut the top off of a camera and stick a hinged mirror in there
sounds fun!
are you planning on manually moving the mirror UP to block the ground glass and be out of the way of your film / plates ?
or a springed arm ?
if springed, you might look into using the sunshade that is on pacemakers, it already has a spring you might be able to slide a mirror
on the dark slide holder clip and it might be close to the right dimension and easy to slide in ...
you could probably remove the graflock back altogether, put a second one on the top of the box , the sunshade inside with a mirror
.. come to think about it there might be a slr type press camera that has that design, unless I am thinking of something else. ...
J i'll be cutting a roughly 2"x5" section out of the top then reattaching it with a hinge so it flips up out of the way and the gg can come up right in front of the fp shutter to minimize the amount of bellows space taken up by the mirror box. i'll be adding a small lever to the mirror box near the fp shutter release so i can raise the mirror with one finger and release the shutter with another finger.

[Bernice Loui]

Arca Swiss Reflex:
https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/arca-swiss-reflex-26-c-6bc477ba1f

4x5 Graflex RB SLR:
https://20thcenturycamera.com/products/4x5-graflex-rb-slr-superreflex-angle-finder-conversion

THE GRAFLEX SUPER 4×5 SLR:
https://www.japancamerahunter.com/2014/06/graflex-super-4x5-slr-custom/

Reflex 4x5 camera IS limited to lens focal lengths long enough to clear the mirror to film holder. This means not using the reflex mirror set up for any wide angle lens (likely 100mm and less). This is essentially carrying over the fixed box with fixed lens mind-set-ideology into sheet film which is not the same in many ways.

TLR is another option to the SLR aproach:

https://dustyman.com/post/141693824257/diy-focusing-hood-for-the-gowlandflex

http://www.glennview.com/sinarTLR.htm


Bernice

[maltfalc]

Arca Swiss Reflex:
https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/arca-swiss-reflex-26-c-6bc477ba1f

4x5 Graflex RB SLR:
https://20thcenturycamera.com/products/4x5-graflex-rb-slr-superreflex-angle-finder-conversion

THE GRAFLEX SUPER 4×5 SLR:
https://www.japancamerahunter.com/2014/06/graflex-super-4x5-slr-custom/

Reflex 4x5 camera IS limited to lens focal lengths long enough to clear the mirror to film holder. This means not using the reflex mirror set up for any wide angle lens (likely 100mm and less). This is essentially carrying over the fixed box with fixed lens mind-set-ideology into sheet film which is not the same in many ways.

TLR is another option to the SLR aproach:

https://dustyman.com/post/141693824257/diy-focusing-hood-for-the-gowlandflex

http://www.glennview.com/sinarTLR.htm


Bernice

i'm familiar with all those cameras. i have considered all of them as options as well as the option of building a tlr, which i already have two perfectly good designs for. as previously discussed in this thread, for my specific needs, building an slr out of a speed graphic is the best option available. that is the topic of this thread. i'm not looking for alternatives. i know the focal length limitations of slrs. those have also been discussed in this thread previously, and again, that's why i'm making the mirror box removeable. it's typically more like 180mm than 100mm btw, but that's fine for my specific needs. i don't care in the slightest about mind sets or ideologies or fixed boxes with fixed lenses (this has neither). it's just a camera, a tool for taking photos.

[jnantz]

i'll be cutting a roughly 2"x5" section out of the top then reattaching it with a hinge so it flips up out of the way and the gg can come up right in front of the fp shutter to minimize the amount of bellows space taken up by the mirror box. i'll be adding a small lever to the mirror box near the fp shutter release so i can raise the mirror with one finger and release the shutter with another finger.


sounds like an interesting plan! I have several LF / SLR type cameras and sometimes the body that holds the mirror even when seated all the way up to the top of the box, well it clips the image, so keep in mind it might be necessary to maybe add a little height / width to the box.
If I can ask, do you do street work? 'scape imagery / architectural or portrait sort of photographs?... and do you have a favorite f-stop ? I ask because there may be other ways in addition to what you are doing, to quickly focus and compose.

btw doll house mirrors are thin and can be trimmed with scissors and glued to anything..

good luck

[Drew Bedo]

I haven't read any of this thread except for the title, so I may be way off-base here but . . .

Why not get one of the Graflex Reflex cameras? Why not get an RB 67?

[BrianShaw]

I haven't read any of this thread except for the title, so I may be way off-base here but . . .

Why not get one of the Graflex Reflex cameras? Why not get an RB 67?

Try reading just one post (other than your own): post #4. Your suggestion makes too much sense if the real goal is to photograph with a LF SLR, I fear. LOL

[maltfalc]

I haven't read any of this thread except for the title, so I may be way off-base here but . . .

Why not get one of the Graflex Reflex cameras? Why not get an RB 67?

read the thread.

[maltfalc]

Try reading just one post (other than your own): post #4. Your suggestion makes too much sense if the real goal is to photograph with a LF SLR, I fear. LOL

the "real goal" is to have the functionality of a LF SLR available for subjects that a speed graphic isn't suitable for. i've been over this again and again. BUYING AN SLR IS NOT A VIABLE OPTION FOR ME, AT ALL, PERIOD. if you can't be respectful, get lost.

[BrianShaw]

the "real goal" is to have the functionality of a LF SLR available for subjects that a speed graphic isn't suitable for. i've been over this again and again. BUYING AN SLR IS NOT A VIABLE OPTION FOR ME, AT ALL, PERIOD. if you can't be respectful, get lost.

If you can’t be polite and stop writing like a jerk I will “get lost”. I’m okay with your tinkering effort… it’s just a long way to go for that goal. If you can’t afford or just don’t want to buy another camera that fits that need, I can respect that. I would like a Graflex SLR and won’t pay the price too.

[maltfalc]

sounds like an interesting plan! I have several LF / SLR type cameras and sometimes the body that holds the mirror even when seated all the way up to the top of the box, well it clips the image, so keep in mind it might be necessary to maybe add a little height / width to the box.
If I can ask, do you do street work? 'scape imagery / architectural or portrait sort of photographs?... and do you have a favorite f-stop ? I ask because there may be other ways in addition to what you are doing, to quickly focus and compose.

btw doll house mirrors are thin and can be trimmed with scissors and glued to anything..

good luck

the mirror's most likely going to be a cut down dollar store mirror. very thin glass. won't have any supports apart from the hinge, bumpers in the mirror box for the front edge of the mirror to rest against and maybe some thin stiffeners along the sides. i've got plenty of room to work with above the light path. i shoot a bunch of stuff, but mostly models. i have considered every way available to me to focus, compose and take a photo and even created some new ones. this is my best option.

[Dan Fromm]

OP, I'm having trouble visualizing the camera design you're talking about. Please post a sketch.

[Dugan]

I'm curious to see how this project transpires.
I'm not quite clear on your design ideas.
Would you please document the process with pics so we can see how it progresses?
Best of luck!

[maltfalc]

If you can’t be polite and stop writing like a jerk I will “get lost”. I’m okay with your tinkering effort… it’s just a long way to go for that goal. If you can’t afford or just don’t want to buy another camera that fits that need, I can respect that. I would like a Graflex SLR and won’t pay the price too.
it's the shortest/best route available to me.


Your suggestion makes too much sense if the real goal is to photograph with a LF SLR, I fear. LOL
yeah, sounding real respectful here.

[alan_b]

the mirror's most likely going to be a cut down dollar store mirror.

Don’t commercial SLRs use front-surface mirrors? I’ll be interested to hear how this works.

[Randy]

I am just a bit confused as to how a reflex mirror that is of suitable size to give off an image to fill a 4X5 ground glass (like my Graflex Series D RB) can fit inside a speed Graphic body...or am I not understanding the design? I suspect that I can't make a judgment until I see a sketch of the design.

[LabRat]

On a Graflex, most of the boxy body is the mirror box and is large... They only use longer focus lenses due to this...

You would be well informed by prototyping the mirror box, front lens extension, and FP placement in card or foam board to see the distances needed to get a lens to focus correctly, and work out the order of operations needed to operate camera functions on demand (in a timely fashion)...

A lotta hills and walls for this project... ;-)

Steve K

[maltfalc]

OP, I'm having trouble visualizing the camera design you're talking about. Please post a sketch.



I'm curious to see how this project transpires.
I'm not quite clear on your design ideas.
Would you please document the process with pics so we can see how it progresses?
Best of luck!

no sketches yet, but i'll post some eventually. i usually do most of the design work in my head and save the sketching and 3d modeling for when i need to map out the exact measurements. just picture a slimmed down version of a graflex slr, except the back half and bottom is a pacemaker speed graphic and the bellows and front standard of the speed graphic are mounted to the front of the slr instead of being recessed inside a larger body.

[maltfalc]

Don’t commercial SLRs use front-surface mirrors? I’ll be interested to hear how this works.

i can live with a slight double image if i have to, or i could just strip the paint off the back of the mirror, or use a thicker front-surface mirror i've got.

[maltfalc]

I am just a bit confused as to how a reflex mirror that is of suitable size to give off an image to fill a 4X5 ground glass (like my Graflex Series D RB) can fit inside a speed Graphic body...or am I not understanding the design? I suspect that I can't make a judgment until I see a sketch of the design.

with the rear 2" of the mirror box recessed into the body and the remaining 2-3" sticking out the front with the bellows in front of that. having to cover 4x5 instead of 5x5 and not having the lens and bellows on the inside makes it a lot smaller than an rb.

[maltfalc]

On a Graflex, most of the boxy body is the mirror box and is large... They only use longer focus lenses due to this...

You would be well informed by prototyping the mirror box, front lens extension, and FP placement in card or foam board to see the distances needed to get a lens to focus correctly, and work out the order of operations needed to operate camera functions on demand (in a timely fashion)...

A lotta hills and walls for this project... ;-)

Steve K

yes, i know that already. i don't know why people keep bringing it up, like i've never seen an slr before. my mirror box needs to be (roughly) 4" tall, 5" wide, 4"-5" long (depending on how much of the mirror i can have sticking out into the bellows without hitting anything), a little extra length at the back to slot into the fp shutter and a 4"x5" raised section on top for the gg to match the depth of the fp shutter and back. i'm probably going to be limited to 180mm or longer lenses. order of operations is simple: check that the two ggs are aligned properly, load the film holder, set the shutter speed, pull the dark slide, frame and focus my shot with one hand then hold down the lever to raise the mirror and release the shutter with the other hand.

[Drew Bedo]

Try reading just one post (other than your own): post #4. Your suggestion makes too much sense if the real goal is to photograph with a LF SLR, I fear. LOL

Well of course you are right about reading the thread. I am visually impaired and the effort to read a lot of text is off-putting. Today the easier to read title caught my attention and I responded "reflexively" (yes it IS a pun!)

I still haven't read much of the thread probably won't'. However I do appreciate that some folks are moved to DIY things because they can.

[Drew Bedo]

i'd rather have one camera with the full functionality of a speed graphic and a graflex slr than have to carry around two cameras with lower combined functionality, and i'd rather spend $20-$50 on materials than several hundred on a camera.

Take a look at what the Leica folks had to do to convert a well designed Range Finder camera into a SLR. The mirror box ("vizoflex housing") is pretty complex mechanically. There is a level of precision required to make the viewfinder image parfocal with respect to the focal plane. The added bulk isat least half to two thirds agan as much. The added depth of body or back focus limits the use of shorter lenses and on and on. In the early 20th Century, all these challenges were addressed by creating an LF SLR from the ground up.

And I don't think "$20-$50 will come close to covering the materials you'll need to convert a press camera into a LF SLR.

However, I do wish you well in this project. Please keep us informed on how it goes and post pictures.

You might also consider as an an interim project, creating a Twin Lens Reflex in 4x5 first to get your feet wet. That will involve the many of the4 same challenges as an SLR while side-stepping the mechanics of a moving mirror.

[maltfalc]

Take a look at what the Leica folks had to do to convert a well designed Range Finder camera into a SLR. The mirror box ("vizoflex housing") is pretty complex mechanically. There is a level of precision required to make the viewfinder image parfocal with respect to the focal plane. The added bulk isat least half to two thirds agan as much. The added depth of body or back focus limits the use of shorter lenses and on and on. In the early 20th Century, all these challenges were addressed by creating an LF SLR from the ground up.

And I don't think "$20-$50 will come close to covering the materials you'll need to convert a press camera into a LF SLR.

However, I do wish you well in this project. Please keep us informed on how it goes and post pictures.

You might also consider as an an interim project, creating a Twin Lens Reflex in 4x5 first to get your feet wet. That will involve the many of the4 same challenges as an SLR while side-stepping the mechanics of a moving mirror.

i'm familiar with the visoflex and the novoflex and the precision involved in cameras. save me some typing and scroll up to my last comment directly above your two comments where i discuss the dimensions and lens limitations. $20-$50 isn't a guess. i know the parts and materials i need and how much they cost. i'll be real surprized if i hit $50. a tlr is no way to "get my feet wet". i have a couple designs for tlrs. one would be simpler than building an slr, but cost as much as buying one, the other would be about as cheap as building an slr, but not any easier and any tlr is going to be less precise and more cumbersome to use than an slr, not to mention added lens costs. i think you're overestimating the mechanics involved in flipping a mirror up and down with my finger and a basic trigger mechanism.

[Drew Bedo]

Sounds like you have this project well in hand.

Please keep us all informed as you proceed and post pictures.

I do wish you all the best in this.

[BrianShaw]

At the risk of offending you... I ask in all sincerity.

Can you describe the use-case you are addressing? A regular 4x5 Graphic has met all of my needs over the past 40 years. Focus on GG when time and tripod permits, focus using rangefinder most of the time (which is relatively quick), and range focus with the scales on the bed when "snap shooting". Composition on GG when focusing on GG; composition in viewfinder (either "accessory" or wire frame, with appropriate masks) when using rangefinder or bed scales. These, in natural light as well as flash situations.

I'm all for tinkering and inventiveness. I just can't quite imagine what situation/constraints you are designing for or how the sequence of events that you previously described are any quicker or more precise that those used by press photographers in the past.

[maltfalc]

At the risk of offending you... I ask in all sincerity.

Can you describe the use-case you are addressing? A regular 4x5 Graphic has met all of my needs over the past 40 years. Focus on GG when time and tripod permits, focus using rangefinder most of the time (which is relatively quick), and range focus with the scales on the bed when "snap shooting". Composition on GG when focusing on GG; composition in viewfinder (either "accessory" or wire frame, with appropriate masks) when using rangefinder or bed scales. These, in natural light as well as flash situations.

I'm all for tinkering and inventiveness. I just can't quite imagine what situation/constraints you are designing for or how the sequence of events that you previously described are any quicker or more precise that those used by press photographers in the past.

the point is to eliminate any delay between framing, focusing and taking the shot when shooting handheld or with moving subjects. scale focusing won't do that. rangefinder focusing won't do that unless i use a focuspot or laser pointer, neither of which are all that useful on a bright sunny day and would limit me to a single lens and a single focal point with no preview of what else in the photo is going to be in focus. i want to end up with something better than snapshots and photos of people doing their best impression of a mannequin.



I just can't quite imagine . . . how the sequence of events that you previously described are any quicker or more precise that those used by press photographers in the past.composing the image on a gg while maintaining focus with one hand and raising the mirror and releasing the shutter with a two-finger trigger pulling motion with the other hand is about as quick and precise as it gets. a fraction of a second delay as the mirror rises between focusing and taking the shot.

[jnantz]

At the risk of offending you... I ask in all sincerity.

Can you describe the use-case you are addressing? A regular 4x5 Graphic has met all of my needs over the past 40 years. Focus on GG when time and tripod permits, focus using rangefinder most of the time (which is relatively quick), and range focus with the scales on the bed when "snap shooting". Composition on GG when focusing on GG; composition in viewfinder (either "accessory" or wire frame, with appropriate masks) when using rangefinder or bed scales. These, in natural light as well as flash situations.

I'm all for tinkering and inventiveness. I just can't quite imagine what situation/constraints you are designing for or how the sequence of events that you previously described are any quicker or more precise that those used by press photographers in the past.

The bed scale and range finder only work with 1 lens. :)

[maltfalc]

The bed scale and range finder only work with 1 lens. :) you can have a whole row of bed scales, but trying to guesstimate exactly how far away your subject is while peaking over your camera to read the tiny print on the scale is no way to live. :p

[jnantz]

you can have a whole row of bed scales, but trying to guesstimate exactly how far away your subject is while peaking over your camera to read the tiny print on the scale is no way to live. :p

a whole row of bed scales? not sure what the point is, sounds like a pain, and useless unless it is for performance art. I have better in the moment flexibility using a Delmar or Cyclone not a speed or graflex slr.

[BrianShaw]

The bed scale and range finder only work with 1 lens. :)

That’s exactly right. Later Graphic rangefinders had different cams for different lenses, that made it more possible to be a convenient interchangeable lens camera. And it’s a lot easier, generally speaking, to have multiple infinity stops than multiple vernier focus scales. But even that’s not very convenient. Let’s face the reality… Graphics and Graflexes are best as single lens systems. :)

[jnantz]

That’s exactly right. Later Graphic rangefinders had different cams for different lenses, that made it more possible to be a convenient interchangeable lens camera. And it’s a lot easier, generally speaking, to have multiple infinity stops than multiple vernier focus scales. But even that’s not very convenient. Let’s face the reality… Graphics and Graflexes are best as single lens systems. :)

couldn't agree more! :)

[Drew Bedo]

A tangent thought . . .but relavent:

The subject of range finder focusing and by implication hand held shooting has come up.

No one has yet brought up the Polaroid conversions to 4x5 format. Hand held by design and with focus coupled Leica-like combined range/view finder (and Conatx too of course).

Buy one off the shelf from e-Bay. Would also make a great DIY project.

[Havoc]

No one has yet brought up the Polaroid conversions to 4x5 format. Hand held by design and with focus coupled Leica-like combined range/view finder (and Conatx too of course).

Again a single focal length system. And the OP wants to be able to change lenses while not having to fiddle with changing cams, reading different scales etc. When using "long" lenses he wants an SLR, focusing when looking at the GG and when using "wide" lenses he removes the mirror box and uses the GG at the back. I really can see where he wants to go. But...

Then I remember that we are talking 4x5 so at most he can use something like a Grafmatic and have 6 shots.

Somehow there are a lot of contradictions here. But then agian, anything that is an excuse to make it into a project is a valid one. I would be lying if I would say I do not have several sketches for 4x5 cameras on my pc. :p

[maltfalc]

Again a single focal length system. And the OP wants to be able to change lenses while not having to fiddle with changing cams, reading different scales etc. When using "long" lenses he wants an SLR, focusing when looking at the GG and when using "wide" lenses he removes the mirror box and uses the GG at the back. I really can see where he wants to go. But...

Then I remember that we are talking 4x5 so at most he can use something like a Grafmatic and have 6 shots.

Somehow there are a lot of contradictions here. But then agian, anything that is an excuse to make it into a project is a valid one. I would be lying if I would say I do not have several sketches for 4x5 cameras on my pc. :p

yeah, i'm only interested in adding functionality to my current gear, not giving up it's current features for other features i'd like to have. i'd love to use an slr with wide lenses too, but i'll have to settle for a tlr at best with those. i'm not seeing any contradictions in anything i've said. you seem to be adding extra assumptions that may be leading to whatever contradictions you're perceiving. a grafmatic would only help if i was trying to take multiple shots really quickly. i couldn't care less about that. i want an slr solely to eliminate any delay and potential movement between composing/focusing the shot on the gg and actually taking the photo. if i can do those two things one right after the other, i have all the time in the world to load a film holder or wind the shutter, etc. without worrying about losing the shot.

[Havoc]

i'm not seeing any contradictions in anything i've said. you seem to be adding extra assumptions that may be leading to whatever contradictions you're perceiving. a grafmatic would only help if i was trying to take multiple shots really quickly. i couldn't care less about that. i want an slr solely to eliminate any delay and potential movement between composing/focusing the shot on the gg and actually taking the photo. if i can do those two things one right after the other, i have all the time in the world to load a film holder or wind the shutter, etc. without worrying about losing the shot.

If you don't have any problems taking the time between 2 shots, then what is wrong with a rangefinder? It would be even better as the delay between deciding to take the shot and taking it is smaller. You do not loose the time that the mirror needs to go up. If you're working with models you could even go for a faster synchronisation time with flash.

In case I would use an SLR I'd like not to loose the time to put in another film holder etc. I'd like a motorised film drive. Or I'd just put the lot in hyperfocal and be done. So yes I understand your spearate points. But the whole just doesn't come together. Then again, it is your project.

[ethics_gradient]

If you don't have any problems taking the time between 2 shots, then what is wrong with a rangefinder? It would be even better as the delay between deciding to take the shot and taking it is smaller. You do not loose the time that the mirror needs to go up. If you're working with models you could even go for a faster synchronisation time with flash.

In case I would use an SLR I'd like not to loose the time to put in another film holder etc. I'd like a motorised film drive. Or I'd just put the lot in hyperfocal and be done. So yes I understand your spearate points. But the whole just doesn't come together. Then again, it is your project.

This is what I was going to say. Focus with the RF, and learn to compensate for parallax using the optical viewfinder for composition. This worked fine for press photographers for decades. If you don't want to swap between the RF and VF, you could buy (or make) a Kalart Focuspot.

I used to use my Speed handheld with a wide open Aero Ektar focusing this way. It worked great.

OP seems really set on the idea of doing it their way though.

[maltfalc]

If you don't have any problems taking the time between 2 shots, then what is wrong with a rangefinder? It would be even better as the delay between deciding to take the shot and taking it is smaller. You do not loose the time that the mirror needs to go up. If you're working with models you could even go for a faster synchronisation time with flash.

In case I would use an SLR I'd like not to loose the time to put in another film holder etc. I'd like a motorised film drive. Or I'd just put the lot in hyperfocal and be done. So yes I understand your spearate points. But the whole just doesn't come together. Then again, it is your project.

it takes longer to type "flip" than it does to flip the front edge of a little mirror up four inches while my other finger is already on the shutter trigger. with the rangefinder i'm limited to using a single lens, focusing on a single point at a time, then roughly composing my shot with the finder while who knows what happens to my focus. that's a shitty way to have to shoot. almost all my lenses are barrel lenses and i can still use the couple that have flash sync in the way you mention when the mirror box is removed. i could also add a flash sync to the mirror itself for a third option, so i'm not worried about flash sync.

[maltfalc]

This is what I was going to say. Focus with the RF, and learn to compensate for parallax using the optical viewfinder for composition. This worked fine for press photographers for decades. If you don't want to swap between the RF and VF, you could buy (or make) a Kalart Focuspot.

I used to use my Speed handheld with a wide open Aero Ektar focusing this way. It worked great.

OP seems really set on the idea of doing it their way though.

i'm not a 1940s press photographer taking newsprint quality snapshots. i'm not you shooting whatever you shoot at whatever your standard of "great" is. i'm not shooting just one rangefinder-synced lens under conditions where a focuspot is always useable. the set of options available to you are not the same as the set of options available to me. it's my photography, of course i'm set on doing it my way, that's what makes it mine.

[BrianShaw]

Absolutely… you are correct… it’s your idea and your photography… and you are clearly set on doing it your way. We don’t need to understand and you don’t really seem to want us to understand. It’s all good. I’m eagerly awaiting a sketch of your concept. A timeline of the sequence of operation would also be nice because the various descriptions appear to possibly include contradictions. I love innovative solutions, especially elegant designs, and I’m actually interested in understanding…

[maltfalc]

Absolutely… you are correct… it’s your idea and your photography… and you are clearly set on doing it your way. We don’t need to understand and you don’t really seem to want us to understand. It’s all good. I’m eagerly awaiting a sketch of your concept. A timeline of the sequence of operation would also be nice because the various descriptions appear to possibly include contradictions. I love innovative solutions, especially elegant designs, and I’m actually interested in understanding…

you've got 6 pages of me spending i don't know how many hours now straightforwardly answering the same questions over and over and over again, including every question you've asked me. there's already a basic "timeline of the sequence of operation" on page five. spoiler alert: it's basically the same as any other lf slr. if that's not enough there's plenty more details scattered throughout the thread. if you actually manage to pin down one of these "possible contradictions", let me know what it is.

[BrianShaw]

you've got 6 pages of me spending i don't know how many hours now straightforwardly answering the same questions over and over and over again, including every question you've asked me. there's already a basic "timeline of the sequence of operation" on page five. spoiler alert: it's basically the same as any other lf slr. if that's not enough there's plenty more details scattered throughout the thread. if you actually manage to pin down one of these "possible contradictions", let me know what it is.

Well, okay. I guess I’ve been put in my place. I’ll be going simplex… rx only… awaiting the great reveal. Good luck on your project.

[Paul Ewins]

I think your biggest challenge is going to be working out how to detach and reattach the rear of the bellows when you convert from Press camera mode to SLR mode and back again. Everything else has already been done one way or another. FWIW the Gowlandflex SLR uses a different system with a mirror that slides sideways rather than swings up.

[maltfalc]

I think your biggest challenge is going to be working out how to detach and reattach the rear of the bellows when you convert from Press camera mode to SLR mode and back again. Everything else has already been done one way or another. FWIW the Gowlandflex SLR uses a different system with a mirror that slides sideways rather than swings up. graflex solved most of that challenge for me already. detaching them is just a matter of pulling off two little clips at the top and bottom. they're easy to get to by removing the gg or lens board. i'll probably replace those with sturdier, easier to grip versions with d rings or something. i've looked into sliding mirrors before, sideways or dropping like a guillotine shutter, as well as split mirrors with the lower front section of the mirror flipping down on it's own so the rest of the mirror won't hit shorter lenses as it flips up, and hinged mirrors with the lower front section of the mirror flipping backwards and folding up against the underside of the rest of the mirror, and spring loaded rotating disk mirrors with wedge shaped cut-outs and adjustable tension that do double duty as the reflex mirror and the shutter and don't black out the viewfinder when you take a photo but instead just create a brief shadow sweeping across the image.

[Havoc]

and spring loaded rotating disk mirrors with wedge shaped cut-outs and adjustable tension that do double duty as the reflex mirror and the shutter and don't black out the viewfinder when you take a photo

You looked at pellicle mirrors? No blackout at all with them. Will be hard to find in large size but can be made. OTOH your mirror will not have to be as large as 4x5 as it sits closer to the lens. National Photocolor still makes them.

[maltfalc]

You looked at pellicle mirrors? No blackout at all with them. Will be hard to find in large size but can be made. OTOH your mirror will not have to be as large as 4x5 as it sits closer to the lens. National Photocolor still makes them.looked into them and already have one that should be the correct size for 4x5. not crazy about the light loss though or shooting through an extra layer of glass i need to keep clean or having to deal with the stray light coming through the viewfinder without a mirror flipped up to cover it. if the standard flippy mirror turns out to suck i can always swap them later, but i was thinking of using the pellicle mirror as a beam splitter for taking red/cyan colour photos with b&w film.

[ethics_gradient]

Curious if you have any examples of your photography, OP. Perhaps we could offer some additional insight?

[maltfalc]

Curious if you have any examples of your photography, OP. Perhaps we could offer some additional insight? i'm building an slr to expand my LF photography into areas i'm not currently well equipped to shoot, so nothing i can think of that would be relevant to a thread about building an slr, no.

[Drew Bedo]

And now for an off-the-wall suggestion:

During the international internet dustup surrounding the Polaroid conversions back in the early 2K decade, I often wondered about creating a 4x5 SLR based on the Polaroid SX-70 folded light path. The SX-70 format in large medium format or smallish LF already.

The camera might be made so as to fold like the Polaroid, or more simply designed to be rigid.

Changing lenses and focal length could be dealt with by using interchangeable "film backs" (on the bottom) to increrasse the back focus distance.much like swapping lens cones on other cameras. and adding in a focusing eyepiece.

Heck, it might be possible to build a proof of concept prototype from an SX-70 or One-Step body.

No, this is not helpful to the Speed Graphic/SLR project of this thread, but perhaps some other DIY guy will pick it up.

Cheers to all.

[Embdude]

Sounds like something Peter Growland would have already tried. I have a Linhof 4x5 reflex housing but it attaches to the rear of the camera and moves the film plane back considerably. It was part of the Aristophot system. It limits the use of lenses less than 300mm at normal lengths but it is completely nondestructive. Your plan sounds better for a weight and size... like a 4x5 visoflex housing... I have often wondered how those large Kodak copy lens prisms would work as a 4x5 slr prism viewfinder.. good luck!