Graflex

The Last Naturalists’ Graflex Ever Made – Thomas Evans

Published in the Graflex Journal, 2023, Issue 1.

         The Naturalist Graflex was introduced in 1907, and was produced until 1921. The 1907 Graflex Catalog described the concept behind this unusual design very well:

           “The Naturalists’ Graflex Camera is designed especially for naturalists’ work in photographing birds, wild animals, or similar subjects where long-focus or tele-photo lenses are required. The camera in general design and construction is similar to the regular Auto Graflex, but the increased length of the camera accommodates much longer side arms. These arms are made of heavy brass, giving ta liberal extension, yet maintaining absolute rigidity. The focus is obtained by reflection on the upper mirror, and enables the operator to conceal himself behind a stone or log and focus from the rear of the camera without exposing too much of his person, as would be the case in using the ordinary type of Graflex Camera.”

           “The Naturalists’ Graflex will accommodate lenses of from 12 ¾ to 26 inches equivalent focus, and is fitted with the regular Graflex Focal Plane Shutter.”

           The camera without lens, including one double plate holder was priced at $190.00. The camera with the Bausch & Lomb Zeiss Protar Lens, Series VIIa, No.19, f6.3, was twice as expensive, priced at $378.50. This Protar VIIa lens had a focal length of 13 ¼-inches (336.5mm), and was a combination of two Protar VII lens components of 23 1/8-inches (590.5mm) each. The Protar Lenses were designed to be used in combination, at f/6.3, or each component could be used singly, usually at about f/12.5. And so, this lens could be used at either 13 ¼-inch or 23 1/8-inch focal length. Zeiss, and Bausch & Lomb under contract, made Protar lenses in several focal lengths, and, in theory, some different Protar VII lens components and combinations could be used with this camera.

           The 1920 Bausch & Lomb catalog said this about their Protar VIIa lenses:

           “The series VIIa lens has satisfactorily solved the problem of variety and convenience; for composed as it is of two series VII single Anastigmats, the doublet resulting from the combined components is simply perfection in all the qualities desired in a photographic lens.”

           “As single Anastigmats, the Series VII lenses have a distinct field of their own. They are perfect single lenses, having a speed of F:12.5, which is ample for instantaneous exposures out of doors under favorable light conditions. So perfect are the spherical and astigmatic corrections as to make the single lens almost equal to the doublet, and not only equal, but actually superior to many doublet lenses of other makers…”

           In the 1908 catalog, the Naturalists’ Graflex had a new feature: the view finder could be rotated from horizontal to vertical, to allow focusing from the ordinary Graflex position.

           The Folmer & Schwing Division offered to fit the customer’s own lens to their cameras. Mike Hanemann, in his first-quarter 2001 Graflex Historic Quarterly article, described a Naturalists’ Graflex that had been fitted with an f:5.6, 20-inch Taylor Telephoto lens, and due to the quality of the workmanship he thought that it must have been done by the factory. The modification involved cutting away the top of the lens box to make room for the lens and to allow access to adjust the lens aperture.

 Frank M. Chapman

           Frank Chapman, ornithologist and Bird Curator at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, was an early user of the Naturalists’ Graflex. Mr. Chapman may have been a significant inspiration for the design of this camera. In his 1903 book, “Bird Studies with a Camera”, he described his ideal apparatus for making photographs of birds, which would be a 4x5-inch ‘reflecting’ camera,’ with “… a mirror, set at an angle of forty-five degrees to the plate, is interposed between the latter and the lens, and reflects the image to a ground glass on top of the camera… The mirror, when released, should automatically release a focal plane shutter. Mr. Chapman also recommended that the bird photographer use a convertible Zeiss Anastigmat (Protar), Series VIIa lens, in order to have at hand both a fairly fast normal lens and a lens of about twice the focal length when a single component lens was used. The Naturalists’ Graflex appears to have been designed to make the best use of the B&L Convertible Protar No. 19, as it accommodates both the combined focal length of 13 ¼-inch and the single element focal length of 23 ¼-inch, which are very close to the minimum and maximum focal lengths that can be used with this camera.

           In his 1933 Autobiography of a Bird Lover, Mr. Chapman reflected back on his early experiments at bird photography: “There were no reflecting or Graflex cameras available for our work in Florida, and the naturalist photographer was handicapped by the lack of a camera carrying a long-focus lens with which, without pausing to insert a plate, he could make an exposure at the moment of focus.” The camera that he first tried was made for him by John Rowley who worked with him at the museum, which was a 5x7-inch twin-lens-reflex camera, which he described as cumbersome but practical. I suspect that a Naturalists’ Graflex, as large as they were, would seem quite trim and nimble in comparison to this camera.

           Frank Chapman was the editor of the Bird Lore Magazine, published under the auspices of the National Association of Audubon Societies, and in the March – April 1908 issue, he included a recommendation for the Naturalists’ Graflex, quoting substantially from the Graflex catalog. This prominent recommendation may have been sought-after by Folmer & Schwing, and must have been much appreciated by the company. As a possible measure of Mr. Chapman’s influence, he was an associate of then President Theodore Roosevelt, and the Naturalists’ Graflex page from the 1908 catalog is among Mr. Roosevelt’s papers.

Naturalists’ Graflex page from Roosevelt’s papers.

   Ad for the Naturalists’ Graflex in Bird Lore Magazine.

           In the introduction of Mr. Chapman’s 1908 book, Camps and Cruises of an Ornithologist, he described his photographic outfit: “I still use a reflecting camera of the ‘Graflex’ type, and also a tripod camera … a Bausch & Lomb Convertible Series VIIa No. 10, F. 6.3, with a focal length of eight inches, the component lenses having each a focal length of fourteen inches. Although these single lenses are rated with a speed of only F. 12.5, I have found no difficulty in making satisfactory pictures of birds in flight with an exposure one-thousandth of a second, the lens being wide open. … if one can afford a No. 19 lens of the same series with a focal length of thirteen and one-eighth inch focus, the components being each of twenty-three and one-eighth inch focus, he will materially increase his chances of success…” In this book, he mentions using the 23-inch Protar single component lens for photographing birds at greater than 50 yards.

 Arthur Radclyffe Dugmore

A Radclyffe Dugmore was another prominent photographer of birds and wildlife who may have had some influence on the design of the Naturalists’ Graflex. As early as 1902, the year that the very first Graflex Camera was introduced, he had praise for the camera: “… The Graflex, which, though expensive, is about all that can be wished for. Being strongly made, it will withstand the rough usage incidental to natural-history photography. Its ling draw of bellows allows of the use of a twelve-inch lens, and for objects up to within about ten feet distant a six-inch lens with hand-camera telephoto attachment can be used. … A bird may be caught on the wing with as much ease and certainty as if it were mounted.”

           He goes on to describe his preference in lenses: “The most useful lens for all-round work is one whose two systems or combinations can be used separately. By having such a lens you have practically two in one, the single combination having about double the focal length of the couplet.”

           In a latter book, Mr. Dugmore says: “The reflex camera should be so arranged that the focussing hood admits of use from above and from the back. The advantage of this is that it allows the camera to be held level with the eyes so that the immediate foreground is not shown in the picture. When you are in a canoe you can operate this camera with greater freedom and safety as it will not be necessary to stand up or even to kneel in order to clear the adjacent water or the canoe bow which so often obtrudes itself in such pictures.”

           I don’t know how closely Mr. William Folmer read such books and magazines by naturalist photographers, looking for ideas, but if he did, the desires of these photographers were there to find and inspire his designs.

 Production

           Despite its wonderful design and promotion, it appears that the total number of Naturalists’ Graflex Cameras made would be less than 200. There is no existing record of the cameras made from 1907 to 1914, but the existing records do show that 61 4x5-inch Naturalists’ Graflex Cameras, and one 5x7-inch model, were made from 1915 to 1921. If the rate of about nine cameras per year had been held in the first eight years of production, then that would bring the total to about 130 cameras, but there is really no way to know for sure.

Naturalists’ Graflex production orders from the extant serial number book: [61: 4x5” and 1: 5x7”]

Lot       Amt.    Camera                                                            Serial numbers             Location

6671    18        4x5 Naturalists’ Graflex Cameras        56760 – 56977                        [sheet 4, c.1915]

6677    18        4x5 Naturalists’ Graflex Cameras        76988 – 77005                        [sheet 5]

5801      1        5x7 Naturalists’ Graflex Camera         111700                        [sheet 17]

6845    12        4x5 Naturalists’ Graflex Cameras        111751 – 111762        [1920 – 1921]

6845    13        4x5 Naturalists’ Graflex Cameras        111787 – 111799          [1920 – 1921]

             According to Al Benham’s article: Rural Life Photographer, in the Graflex Journal, Issue 1, 2017, his grandfather, John Calvin Allen, had the 5x7-inch Naturalists’ Graflex, 111700, made-to-order to use to photograph individual beef animals where a long-focus lens must be used to avoid distortion. J. C. Allen wrote of this camera: “The camera will accommodate a 23-inch lens and is focused through a reflector, so the animal is seen on the ground glass until the exposure is made. This is quite an advantage with restless animals, especially in fly time.” Mr. Allen had a rural photographic business in Indiana, as well as running his own farm, and working for a while for Purdue University.

           Assuming that the existing production orders were accurate, then the Naturalists’ Graflex Camera that I have, number 111799, was the last one ever made.

 Naturalists’ Graflex showing the view finder in horizontal position.

 The Last Naturalists’ Graflex

Bausch & Lomb f:6.8, 24-inch, Telestigmat lens.

           The camera arrived with some damage, but in overall very good condition. The slide that holds the lens in place on the front standard had come loose, the screws had pulled out, and this heavy lens had apparently banged around in the lens box, splitting the wooden sides of the box. This was fairly easy to repair, and once the focal plane shutter had been lubricated and exercised a bit, the camera works well. The lens is not the B&L Zeiss Protar VIIa No.19, but is instead a Bausch & Lomb 24-inch, f:6.8 Telestigmat. It is a large piece of glass, weighing 4 pounds. The lens board is a hefty 3/8th inch thick, with no step around the edges, and is just under 4 ½” square.

           The 1917 Graflex catalog still lists the Protar VIIa No. 19 lens for the Naturalists’ Graflex, but the 1919 catalog lists this 24-inch Telestigmat in its stead. Carl Zeiss Optical Works and Bausch & Lomb had entered into a collaboration in the 1890s under which B&L was licensed to produce lenses according to the Zeiss optical designs, but this corporate alliance ended during World War I. The Telestigmat is marked “Pat. Oct. 24, 1918,” and so was developed during World War I, apparently to be used for aerial reconnaissance. As B&L was no longer under license to Zeiss to make the Protar lenses, a new lens was needed, and the Telestigmat would have been an appropriate and readily available substitute.

           In his book “Flight, Action, Camera,” Douglas E. Campbell mentions that in September 1921, the U. S. Navy conducted tests of the 24-inch B&L Telestigmat for use in aerial mapping. Curiously, the Navy concluded that this 24-inch lens did not adequately cover the 4x5-inch format. Later, during World War II and into the 1950s, the U. S. Military did use a B&L 40-inch, f:8 Telestigmat, for aerial reconnaissance, and to photograph nuclear tests.

 A second mirror reflects the ground glass image to the view finder when used in the horizontal position.

Using The Naturalists’ Graflex

           The Naturalist Graflex does not have a revolving back, and the film is held in the landscape position. The view finder stores away compactly when not in use, and can be used from the rear as well as from the top. When used in the horizontal position, a second 45-degree mirror reflect the image from the ground glass back through the view finder. The main body of the camera is seven inches tall by seven inches wide, including the shutter controls, and eighteen inches long. The view finder at the rear of the camera brings the height to twelve inches, and when opened for viewing it reaches sixteen inches tall when vertical. The view finder adds eight inches to the length when horizontal, reaching twenty six inches. So, the camera is roughly three times the length of the standard 4x5-inch Auto Graflex, or about twice the length of the RB Auto Graflex. When the 24-inch Telestigmat is focused at infinity, because it is a telephoto lens it only needs to be extended three inches beyond the front of the camera, and at this focus the camera is well balanced and easy to use hand-held. However, as one focuses on nearer subjects the camera becomes quite front-heavy. When the bellows is fully extended, the camera will focus on a subject at nine and one-half feet, but the camera is then thirty-one inches long, not counting the view finder if horizontal. At this closest focus the camera is unwieldy hand-held, and it is a challenge to use even on a sturdy tripod. Used on a heavy tripod, this closest focus produces an image on the film that covers an area one foot wide.

Conclusion

           The Naturalists’ Graflex is an extraordinary and fascinating camera. It was designed in 1907 with the special needs of the then pioneer naturalist photographer in mind. That is, the field-going photographer needed a portable, hand-held camera that would be self-contained and yet versatile enough to not only allow up-to-the–moment-of-exposure focusing, full image viewing on a ground glass, and shutter speeds of up to 1/1000th second to catch quick movement, but which would also accommodate telephoto and long-focus lenses so that the photographer could secure detailed images of birds and other wildlife, or similarly unapproachable subjects, from a distance. The long-focus lenses also proved to be useful for producing distortion-free images such as were valuable for scientists and commercial photographers. This camera for-shadowed the development of later long-focus cameras such as the Big Bertha.

           Being a large and somewhat unwieldly, and expensive, camera probably kept it from being more widely appreciated, but it was well designed for the narrow purpose for which it was intended. Sales were never high, and this plus the loss of the ability of Bausch and Lomb to continue to manufacture the Protar Ser. VIIa lenses, for which the camera appears to have been designed, probably led to the camera being discontinued.

           Today, a hundred years after the Naturalist Graflex was discontinued, it is hard to imagine hauling so much camera around while on safari, exploring the swamps of Florida, mountain climbing, or just walking down to the local park. The quality and unimaginable quantity of telephoto and zoom lenses now available for small cameras that produce high resolution images at the touch of a button have removed the need for packing such a large camera, but they have not removed the fascination.

U.S. Army Signal Corps during WWI with a Naturalists' Graflex among other cameras, curtesy of De Miollis Laurent.

 Bausch & Lomb Optical Company, 1920 Photographic Lenses. (Pages 37, 58)

Benham, Al. 2017. Rural Life Photographer. Graflex Journal, Issue 1, 2017. (Page 4) (5x7 Naturalists’ Graflex) Available here: https://journal.graflex.org/journal-2017-01.pdf

Campbell, Douglas E. 2014. Flight, Action, Camera, History of U. S. Naval Aviation Photography and Photo-Reconnaissance. Lulu.com (page 59.)

Chapman, Frank M. 1903 Bird Studies with a Camera, with introductory chapters on the outfit and methods of the bird photographer. D. Appleton and Company, New York.

Chapman, Frank M. 1908. Camps and Cruises of an Ornithologist. D. Appleton and Company, New York.

Chapman, Frank M. 1908. Bird Lore Volume X, No. 2. D. Appleton & Company, Harrisburg, PA, New York, NY.

Chapman, Frank M. 1933. Autobiography of a Bird Lover. D. Appleton – Century Co., New York, London.

Dugmore, Arthur Radclyffe. 1902. Nature and the Camera. Doubleday, Page & Co. New York. (Pages 4, 7)

Dugmore, Arthur Radclyffe. 1912. Wild Life and the Camera. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia, William Heinemann, London. (Page 21)

Graflex and Graphic Cameras, 1907. Folmer & Schwing Co. Rochester New York.

Graflex and Graphic Cameras, 1917. Folmer & Schwing Department, Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester New York.

Graflex and Graphic Cameras, 1919. Folmer & Schwing Department, Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester New York.

Anonymous, (Todd Gustavson?) 2014. The Mystery 5x7 Naturalists’ Graflex, Graflex Historic Quarterly, Volume 19, Issue 2, Second Quarter 2014. (Page 4) Available here: https://ghq.graflex.org/GHQ-19-2.pdf

Hanemann, Mike. 2001. The Graflex Naturalist Camera, Graflex Historic Quarterly, Volume 6, Issue 1, First Quarter 2001. (Page 1).

Harvard University, Collection of Historical Scientific Instruments,

Triple Alliance: Zeiss - Bausch & Lomb – Saegmuller 1908 1915.

http://waywiser.fas.harvard.edu/people/7108/triple-alliance--zeiss--bausch--lomb--saegmuller?fbclid=IwAR07OQmicaoaXid-2tisH839zB1CdIgLh9ROwmMOyufgNKuGo8C2P4RHmGA

Theodore Roosevelt Digital Library TR Center - Print Image (theodorerooseveltcenter.org)

Tuttle, Ronn. 2004. Special Find. Graflex Historic Quarterly, Volume 9, Issue 4, 2004. (Page 4)(The Long Focus Graphic)

Tuttle, Ron. 2015. Two Naturalists’ Cameras. Graflex Journal, Issue 3, 2015. (Page 1) Available here: https://journal.graflex.org/journal-2015-03.pdf

Wikipedia Frank Chapman, Ornithologist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Chapman_(ornithologist)

Wilson’s Photographic Magazine, 1913, Volume 50, page 316

Published in the Graflex Journal, Issue 3, 2022

5x7” RB Cycle Graphic, with f6.8, 8 ¼” Goerz Dagor lens.

           I recently received a 5x7” RB Cycle Graphic outfit, which included several very interesting lenses, including an f:6.8, 8 ¼ –inch Goerz Dagor, a wide-angle 6 ½ x 8 ½” Bausch & Lomb Zeiss Protar V, with a Supplemental wide-angle bed, and an early Goerz telephotographic tube with a 3 ½-inch Goerz tele-negative lens installed.

The Cycle Graphic was first introduced in 1900, with a reversible back, in five formats from 3 ¼ x 4 ¼” to 8x10”. An accessory focal plane shutter was made available for each format in 1902. The design was made sturdier in 1904, and included front shift and a double-swinging back, and a dropping bed, in both 5x7” and 6 ½ x 8 ½” formats. The Revolving Back Cycle Graphic was introduced in 1907, in four formats from 4x5” to 8x10”, and was made through 1922. The 8x10” model was only available with the reversible back, and it and the 4x5” model were discontinued in 1920. The 6 ½ x 8 ½ RB Cycle Graphic was used as the basic camera in the panoramic Cirkut No. 8 outfit.

          5x7 RB Cycle Graphic with B&L Zeiss Protar Series V wide-angle lens and supplementary WA bed.

           The Cycle Graphic Supplemental wide-angle bed was introduced in 1912, and, with consideration of the low serial number on the camera, 1912 or 1913 are good, educated guesses for the year of manufacture. This RB Cycle Graphic also came with a revolving back Graflex focal plane shutter, which facilitates the use of barrel lenses, such as the Protar Series V. 

5x7” Folmer & Schwing Auto Graflex Focal Plane Shutter attachment for revolving back.

           The 1913 Graflex Catalog described the RB Cycle Graphic as being the foremost camera of its type:

           “For the technical worker the Revolving Back Cycle Graphic is particularly valuable, as its ridged construction and accurate adjustment make it indispensable for those engaged in scientific research, involving the application of photography. … the rigidity of the Graphic – due to the most careful, accurate and thorough construction ever incorporated in photographic apparatus – is still a Graphic feature which will bear particular emphasis, and is one of the features which has given the Graphic its prestige with scientific and advanced photographic workers.”

           “To allow the use of long focus lenses, ample bellows capacity is provided. The front runs out on telescopic framed tracks, reinforced by angle-brass guides with milled head binding screws, which lock the bed rigidly in place. The extension tracks being in the form of frames allow extra large lens space when closed. The construction of these tracks affords a wider base for the lens support and prevents any lateral or oscillating movement, thus rendering the Cycle Graphic particularly adaptable for tele-photo and other extremely accurate work.”

           Such description of the Cycle Graphic may well have influenced the photographer who originally purchased this outfit, as they were clearly interested in good optics, and wide-angle and telephoto photography.

5x7 RB Cycle Graphic with Goerz 8 ¼” Dagor and Goerz Xa Tele-tube and tele-negative lens.

Telephotography

           I have read some about the early designs of telephoto lenses, which combined a negative lens of the photographer’s choice at the rear of the ‘tele-tube’, and used the photographer’s preferred ‘ordinary’ taking lens at the front of the tube. This is the first time that I have actually seen one of these, and have been able to experiment with it, so I will be concentrating on this telephoto. This tube came with two adapting rings that screw onto the front of the tube, to receive the positive lens. One of these rings, marked “Compound” fits the Compound shutter of the Dagor lens. The other ring is marked “Barrel” and must have been meant for a barrel lens, perhaps a faster lens, which is no longer present. I tried several barrel lenses in this ring, and found a Kodak Anastigmat #31, 5 ½-inch lens fits, but this focal length seems to be too short to combine effectively with the 3 ½-inch negative lens. The rule-of-thumb appears to have been that the focal length of the negative lens should be about half, or less than half, of the focal length of the positive lens.

           The idea of using a negative component at the rear of a tube to magnify the image produced by a positive component in front has long been used in telescopes, and both Galileo Galilei, in 1610, and Johannes Kepler, in 1611, developed refracting or dioptric telescopes based on this principle. In 1834, Peter Barlow designed a diverging rear lens component for telescopes which is still in wide use today. However, it was not until the end of the nineteenth century that this principle was applied to photography.

T. R. Dallmeyer Telephoto lens of the 1890s

           In 1891, Thomas R. Dallmeyer of England, A. Duboscq of France, and Dr. Miethe of Germany developed telephoto lenses for photography. The designs by Dallmeyer and Miethe were nearly identical, but, communicating through the British Journal of Photography, they could not establish who had primacy, and so no patent was granted. Dallmeyer introduced an improved version, the Simple Telephoto Lens, in 1892, and was granted a patent. By 1896, the design had been improved to include a well-corrected positive lens, and a better-corrected negative lens made up of a pair of doublets. It was recognized early-on that magnifying the image also magnified the positive lens’s optical aberrations. It was eventually recognized that it was very difficult to correct a negative lens for use with a wide range of different positive lenses, and by 1899 Dallmeyer had introduced the Adon Telephoto lens, which had a dedicated set of lenses, so that the aberrations could be fairly well balanced throughout the system. This lens still allowed the separation to be adjusted, and this adjustment away from an optimally corrected position introduced increasing aberrations.

           However, the telephoto attachment for an ordinary positive taking lens remained popular among photographers, because of its great versatility. Because the separation between the positive and negative lens could be adjusted, when used on a camera with generous bellows extension, it was possible for the photographer to adjust the lens to provide the image magnification and field of coverage desired. That is, decreasing the separation between the lenses increases the focal length and magnification of the image. This also required increasing the bellows extension to bring the new image into focus. The photographer could also increase the image magnification by swapping-out the negative lens with one of a shorter focal length, thus increasing the ratio between the two lenses, and so increasing the power of the telephoto, also thereby increasing the image scale, but at a shorter bellows extension. The field of coverage can be increased by extending the bellows, and then re-focusing the image by adjusting the separation between the positive and negative lenses.

           In theory, if the telephoto lens allows for sufficient adjustment, and the camera allows for sufficient bellows extension, any magnification up to ‘infinity’ can be reached. Small changes in the separation result in large differences in the focal length of the telephoto lens, and larger differences bellows extension. The brightness of the image diminishes by the square of the distance (extension), and so the length of exposure soon becomes inconvenient.

           In practice, especially after the introduction of well-corrected anastigmatic lenses during the first decade of the 1900s, some photographers were able to produce successful images with magnifications up to 40 times the size of the image produced by using the ordinary taking lens alone. Telephotographs made of mountain peaks twelve miles away or more could show such details as rocky ridges and snow patches not visible to the naked eye at that distance.

           This capacity for magnification also proved useful for studio portraiture, providing images with better perspective, and without the disproportionate size of hands and legs caused by using a normal lens close to the sitter. And the telephoto lens also proved useful for taking close-up, one-to-one or greater macro images of near objects, such as flowers, insects or birds.

The Telephotographic Attachment in Use.

           Early authors of telephotography how-to books clearly put a lot of thought into how to use the telephoto lens. Here are some of their helpful hints.

           It is important to use a long lens hood in order to reduce internal reflections in the lens, and thus reduce flare and fogging, which can veil the image in a dull gray. This was a major source of disappointment in the early years.

           When the separation between the positive and negative lenses is equal to the focal length of the positive lens, then the image produced is the same size as that produced by the positive lens alone. As the separation is decreased, the magnification is increased, in theory to infinity. The minimum ‘useful’ separation is found by subtracting the focal length of the negative from the focal length of the positive. That is, for a telephoto system made up of an 8 ¼ inch positive and 3 ½ inch negative, 4 ¾ inches is the minimum separation at which, in theory, an image can be formed. In reality, dealing with very large magnifications is impractical, due to the rapid loss of the intensity of the light.

           The magnification of a set-up can be calculated by dividing the camera bellows extension by the focal length of the negative lens, and adding 1. Some early authors measured the bellows extension from the ground glass to the face of the lens mounting flange, while others measured from GG to the rear surface of the negative lens, so this is at best an estimation.

           When the separation between the positive and negative lens has been adjusted to produce the desired magnification, the equivalent focal length of the telephoto system can be found by multiplying the focal length of the positive lens by the magnification.

           To find the effective aperture of a telephoto system, multiply the aperture (f stop) set on the positive lens by the magnification. That is, if the positive lens is set to f/11, and one is working at a magnification of 4 diameters, the effective aperture of the telephoto system is f/44.

           The above recommendation about exposure can be compared to the recommendation that the telephotographic exposure can be calculated by multiplying the exposure that would be given with the positive lens alone by the square of the magnification. That is, if the positive-lens exposure called for is 1 second at f/11, and the telephoto is set to produce 4 diameters of magnification, the photographer would square the magnification of 4 (4x4 = 16) and multiply the exposure by the product: 16 x 1 second = 16 seconds. An exposure of 1 second at f/11 is a very close equivalent to 16 seconds at f/45.

           The authors writing during the early part of the 20th century were using plates and films that were overly sensitive to ultra violet and blue light, and so, when using a telephoto lens on a hazy day, they cautioned against overexposure due to the inherent luminosity of the atmosphere. Yellow filters were recommended, such as the Wratten K2, K3 and G filters.

           Whether a specific telephoto lens set-up will cover your film depends on the focal lengths of the positive and negative lenses, the aperture of the positive lens (because the positive lens diaphragm is in front, stopping down can cause vignetting), the magnification, and the clear diameter of the negative lens. The circle of illumination is smaller at lower magnifications, and quickly increases as the magnification increases. Generally speaking, to cover a 4x5-inch film with a magnification of 3 diameters, a negative lens of 3-inches focal length would be needed, and at 4 or 5 magnifications, a negative of 2 ½-inches should work. To cover 5x7-inch format at a magnification of 3 diameters, a negative lens of 3 ½” inches would be needed.

 Conclusion

           One can see how the ambitious photographers of the 1890s and 1910s would have been intrigued by the idea that they could use their cameras to reach out into the distance, and bring in fine detail not otherwise available to the eye. And one can see how the actual results might not have measured up to the expectations. The surprising versatility of a lens that could be configured to provide a lens of the local length and magnification desired, without excessive bellows extension or the large mass of a non-telephoto long lens, is attractive. The calculations needed, the careful measurements, the rigorous set-up on a stout tripod, the issues with haze, flare, and camera vibrations during long exposures, and so forth, no doubt led to many disappointments. Before the relatively well-corrected anastigmat lenses, such as the Goerz Dagor, were commonly available, the lenses used were likely to be the fairly fast Rapid Rectilinear and a Petzval type portrait lens, and the negative lenses would magnify their uncorrected aberrations as well as their images. As lens correction improved, and as the telephoto lens was simplified to the fixed-focal-length type, telephotography may have become less intriguing, but it has certainly become easier, and more widely appreciated.

 References.

Dallmeyer, Thomas. R. 1899. Telephotography, an Elementary Treatise on the Construction and Application of the Telephotographic Lens. William Heinemann, London. Reprinted by Scholar Select.

Early Photography, Telephotography http://www.earlyphotography.co.uk/site/entry_L72.html

Kinglake, Rudolph. 1951. Lenses in Photography, The Practical Guide to Optics for Photographers. Case-Hoyt Corporation, for Garden City Books, Garden City, New York.

Kingslake, Rudolph.1989. A History of the Photographic lens. Academic Press Inc., Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers, Boston, San Diego, New York, Berkeley, London, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto.

Kinglake, Rudolph, 1992. Optics in Photography. SPIE Optical Engineering Press, Bellingham, Washington, USA.

Lan-Davis, Cyril E. 1912. Telephotography. George Routledge & Sons Limited, London. E. P. Dutton & Co., New York.

Lockett, Arthur. 1925, 1947. Camera Lenses. Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, LTD. London. [Pages 68 – 82.]

Marriage, Ernest. 1901. Elementary Telephotography, Iliffe & Sons, London

Pierce Vaubel RB Cycle Graphic Revolving Back Cycle Graphic, Folmer & Schwing Mfg. Co. (piercevaubel.com)

Schriever, J. B. editor, 1909. Complete Self-Instructing Library of practical Photography. Volume VI At-Home Portraiture, Flashlight, Interiors, Lenses. American School of Art and Photography, Scranton, PA. [Volume VI, Chapter XLII Telephotography.]

Wheeler, Captain Owen, 1910. Modern Telephotography, A Practical Manual of Working Methods and Applications. Ross LTD., Optical Works, Clapham Common, London.

Wikipedia, History of Photographic lens Design

In her 2015 book, Indecent Exposure: Eadweard Muybridge’s Animal Locomotion Nudes, Sarah Gordon examines Muybridge’s profound and continuing influence on Art, Science and Photography.

In 1872, Leland Stanford (California Governor, Central Pacific RR tycoon, Stanford University namesake) hired Eadweard Muybridge to photograph his horse, Occident, at a trot. Stanford wanted to prove that during a trot all four hooves of a horse simultaneously left the ground. Muybridge famously achieved this, producing a series of photographs, taken 1/25th second apart, at an unprecedented 1/2000th of a second exposure time. (Wet plate collodion).

In 1884, this led the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, to commission Muybridge to produce a large series (over 23,000 negatives, this time on Dry Plate) examining Animal Locomotion. A book of this name was published in 1888, containing over 700 photographic plates, each showing a series of actions, usually photographed simultaneously from three angles. These included men, women, children (all usually nude) birds and quadrupeds. The publication of thousands of images of nude human beings during the height of Victorian anti-vice crusades was probably only possible because this work was commissioned by a prestigious University, and directed by a distinguished group of select professors and art professionals.  In the 1880s, the Realist Movement in fine art painting encouraged artists to rely less on convention and the Ideal, and more on direct observation of contemporary scenes. Muybridge’s Animal Locomotion photographs proved to be an unprecedented revelation, showing a previously unseen reality of human and animal movement. This accelerated a decades-old controversy about the representation of movement in Art. Some artists, such as Realist Thomas Eakins (who was on the Muybridge Commission) embraced the new truths revealed by the instantaneous photographs, while others, such as Eugene Veron, argued that reality should be represented ‘as it presents itself to our visual sense’ and not ‘as it is’. August Rodin rejected the frozen-in-time depictions, saying ‘…time does not stop’. The mechanically produced image was argued to be science, while Art must come from the human impression of movement. “It is not the Artist’s business to represent what no human eye can detect, but the general impression produced by a series of motions” and “The artist should aim for expression, not report”. (Philadelphia Public Ledger’, Talcott Williams?) Thomas Eakins was criticized for his ‘mechanical experiments’ being ‘artistically false’, and that he made the mistake of supplementing his keen visual scrutiny of the scene with scientific investigation of the subject.  A new truth can be difficult to accept.

In 1877, the book, "Street Life In London" was published, with photographs by John Thompson and text by Adolphe Smith. Each photo was paired with a few pages that told the story of those pictured or their profession. Some here may find this account of an itinerant photographer interesting.

"...The place is especially attractive to itinerant photographers. During the season they flock to the Common; though the demand for the class of portrait they produce is of so constant a character, that one photographer at least has found it worth his while to remain in the neighbourhood even during the winter. This faithful frequenter of Clapham Common will be recognized in the accompanying illustration, and he is there represented engaged with the class of subject which generally proves most profitable. Nurses with babies and perambulators are easily lured within the charmed focus of the camera. They are particularly fond of taking home to their mistresses a photograph of the child entrusted to their care; and the portrait rarely fails to excite the interest of the parents. Nor does the matter rest here. The parents are often so satisfied that the nurse is commissioned to obtain one or more likenesses on her next visit to the common. Thus practically she becomes an advertising medium, and the photographer generally relies on receiving more orders when he has once secured the custom of a nurse-girl. It need scarcely be remarked that at Clapham Common there are not only a large number of nurses and children, but these are generally of a class which can well afford the shilling charged for taking their likeness.

by Thomas Evans, May 25, 2020.

           Graflex single-lens-reflex cameras with a fast, long-range or telephoto lens attached, have come to be known as Big Bertha cameras. The most common camera adapted to this use has been the 5x7 inch Home Portrait Graflex, with revolving back for both horizontal and vertical images. The most common lens used appears to have been a 70cm, (28-inch) f5.0, Carl Zeiss Jena Triplet, originally made for aerial photography from ‘aeroplanes’ and balloons by the German military during World War One. Zeiss also made f5.0 50cm and 70cm Tessars, an f4.8 50cm Triplet, and an f7.0 120cm Triplet for aerial photography. According to the Lens Collector’s Vade Mecum, these aerial surveillance lenses have been associated with Zeiss lens designer August Sonnefeld, who worked on ‘deformed’ (aspheric) Triplet designs, as seen in US Patents 1,616,765 and 1,825,828. He thinned the outer edges of the rear elements to improve sharpness.

 Lenses

           Other lenses used include the 40-inch, f5.6 Dallmeyer telephoto, and at least one instance of a 60-inch f/5.6 Dallmeyer lens fitted to a Big Bertha for the Associated Press. The latter lens was specially made by Dallmeyer, and was said to have taken a year to make, requiring multiple re-casting of the large, up to 8 ½ inch diameter lens elements to get them right. Because of the weight of the lens, focusing on this camera is made by moving the camera body back and forth. Interestingly, the 40-inch telephoto requires less extension than the 28-inch Triplet, resulting in an over-all shorter camera. The Zeiss Triplet, however, was valued for being relatively light-weight. Even though the Triplet has just three lens elements, it had very good definition.

 Joseph A. Sprague

           The single-lens-reflex Graflex cameras lend themselves to use with telephoto lenses, and the 4x5” Naturalist Graflex was sometimes fitted with long lenses of 24 to 32 inches. William Kuenzel, the first staff photographer for the Detroit News, used a 5x7” Press Graflex with a long-range lens to photograph sports events. The Press Graflex was modified with the addition of a wooden extension in front to accommodate the long lens, much like the Naturalist Graflex has. However, Joseph A. Sprague, then an engineer at the Ackley Machine Shop in New York City, is credited with assembling the first ‘Big Bertha’. In 1937, he had the idea of adding a long-range lens to a standard 5x7-inch Home Portrait Graflex, connecting them with a Duraluminum tube, and mounting all on a solid platform to maintain alignment. He is also credited, along with the New York Daily News engineer George Schmidt, with the idea of adding a ‘gear shift’ focusing lever, with adjustable, pre-focus stops. With this lever, locations, such as the bases on a baseball field, can be pre-focused, facilitating rapid shift of focus during the action. The Home Portrait Graflex and f:5.0, 28-inch Zeiss Triplet proved to be very popular. By 1940, Joseph Sprague was working for the Folmer Graflex Corporation as Chief Engineer, making Big Bertha cameras on order for major newspapers.

 Shutter speed plate on 1/1000th model of the Home Portrait Graflex.

Home Portrait Graflex

           The standard Home Portrait Graflex focal plane shutter is capable of shutter speeds up to 1/500th second. Graflex also made a ‘professional’ version with shutter speeds up to 1/1000th second. The latter was usually the version used for Big Berthas. Another unique feature of the HPG was that it could be set to expose through two or more curtain apertures, combining the set speeds for slower instantaneous speeds. The 1/1000th shutter can be set to provide six speeds between 1/8th to 1 second, and then by combining the ‘Open’ and ‘2’ (inch) apertures, these speeds are each made 25% longer.

 Photojournalism

           “Well equipped newspapers” used these cameras on a daily basis during the 1940s and 1950s to make detailed shots of football and baseball players in action, suitable for three or four column spreads in their sports sections. The cameraman had assistants to handle the camera, and could have messengers who could take the first exposed films and rush it by motorcycle back to the newspaper, to be processed and printed wet to make a quick deadline for the next edition. The newspapers were set up for quick processing of large format films, and it took a while for this to change to accommodate smaller format films.

Big Bertha cameras set up in a Press Box, c. 1956.

           The battery of Big Bertha cameras to cover sporting events were usually set up in a press box, centered some 50 feet above the playing field and 100 to 400 feet from the action. The 28-inch lens could produce an image of the players at 100 feet that was large enough, about six times as large as a comparable, smaller format camera, to be clear and detailed when printed in the paper.

           Other uses included close-up views of otherwise hard to get close to events, such as flag-pole sitters and people threatening to jump from window ledges (which could be taken from adjacent buildings), speeches given to large crowds, launching of naval ships, horse races, and plays and operas taken from back balconies.

William C. Eckenberg

           William C. Eckenberg, staff photographer for the New York Times, and William Freese, Manager of the New York Times Studio, photographed 25 operas at the Metropolitan Opera House by 1941. During a performance any distracting sound was considered to be a disaster, and so Mr. Eckenberg developed techniques to keep his Graflex from making noise during operation, such as avoiding the loud click as the mirror is snapped into place by pressing down the mirror release lever until it was fully in position. The actors were cooperative and would hold position at pre-determined moments to facilitate a planned exposure, and one Stage Manager was an ‘ardent camera enthusiast’, and would have the lighting adjusted to aid in the photography.

 James Frezzolini

           James Frezzolini, as an electrician at the New York Daily Mirror, built several Big Bertha Cameras for the paper, with an emphasis on streamlining the cameras and reducing the weight. Early on, by substituting Duraluminum for steel and brass parts, he was able to reduce a 120 pound Big Bertha with a 48 inch lens down to 65 pounds. His design uses a large tube within which the lens moves for focusing, and a dial on top of the tube near the camera body which will adjust the aperture setting, as well as the gear-shift focusing with adjustable pre-focus stops. The front half of the camera body is essentially armor plated, to strengthen the connection with the large tube, thus eliminating the need for a large and heavy platform under all. His version of the Big Bertha with a 28-inch Zeiss Triplet lens, weighs about 35 pounds. He later became the head of the General Research Laboratories in New York City, which made Big Bertha cameras well into the 1950s. Customers could bring in their own Home Portrait Graflex to be fitted with the lens and tube assembly.

 Making Photographs

  Home Portrait Graflex converted to a Big Bertha by James Frezzolini in the 1950s.

             The Big Bertha pictured here is based on a Home portrait Graflex that was made in 1916, and is fitted with a 70cm, f:5.0 Carl Zeiss Jena Triplet made in 1914. It does not have the James Frezzolini identification plate, but it is his design, and so it was probably assembled as a Big Bertha in the 1950s. The camera and lens together weigh about 35 pounds, and this relatively light weight is due to the light, three-element Zeiss Triplet, and the use of aluminum parts. The ‘gear-shift’ can be used to focus on pre-focused locations, set by the four adjustable stops. The camera originally had a sportsfinder frame on the front of the lens tube, so with pre-focus locations set, the lid could be closed and the camera sighted with the sportsfinder. The gear-shift can also be released (small knob at its base), and the camera focused with the large aluminum knob, which provides a greater range of focus. The closest focus distance is about 20 feet, but the over-all design seems to favor 100 to 400 feet.

Frezzolini design aperture adjustment dial. The pegs seen in the background are for pre-setting focus locations.

           The dial on top of the lens tube is used to adjust the lens aperture, with a range of f5.0 to f12.5. The home Portrait Graflex has a revolving back, so that vertical as well as horizontal images can be made. Due to the long distance from the lens to the film, when the back is in the vertical position, about one half inch is vignetted from the top of the image. This is due to the cross bar inside the camera to which the mirror latches. The 700mm lens produces an image size about 3 ½ times that of the ‘normal’ No. 34 Kodak Anastigmat, 8 ½” (216mm) lens usually found on the 5x7” Graflex.

  View made with the Big Bertha with 70cm lens.         

Same view with 5x7” Graflex B with KA 34, 8 ½” lens.

           This World War One vintage Zeiss Triplet has very good definition. The 700mm (28 inch) lens is listed by Zeiss as covering a 9x7 inch format, less than might be expected, and this may be due to only the center of the field of view being well-corrected. The un-coated lens is prone to flare. The front of the lens tube serves as a lens shade, but pointing the lens anywhere near the direction of the sun will produce enough flare to obscure the image. Due to the narrow angle of view, it would be possible to extend the lens shade a foot or more, which should reduce flare.

  Zeiss Triplet flare when pointed near the direction of the sun.

 Conclusion.

           In 1940, when 4x5 inch and 5x7 inch format cameras were the norm for newspapers, Joseph Sprague described the advantages of using a large format camera with a long-range lens from the grand stand: “Better and more negatives can be made by a photographer located in a choice position with a perfect view of the entire field of action than can be made by a man working on the field, trying to guess where the next play will take place. Shooting from a distance avoids possible interference with the game and annoyance to spectators, as well as the actual danger of personal injury involved.” He also addressed the question of using a more portable, smaller format camera rather than using the 5x7-inch Big Bertha: “When it is considered that newsmen have deadlines to meet, and rapid development and wet printing is the rule; and when one remembers that the picture editor frequently calls for a sharp “blow-up” to run about four columns or more, with characters 4 ½ inches or more in height; then it will be appreciated by those who have tried both that a large negative image in the first place is desirable if not essential.” While a camera with a 5 inch (127mm) lens, used at a distance of 200 feet, would produce a 1/8th-inch high image of a six-foot man on the negative, the Big Bertha with a 28-inch (700mm) lens would produce an image of the same man as ¾-inch high on the negative. He noted, too, that the fact that the larger cameras used individual film holders, rather than roll film, was an important advantage, as the first shots made at the beginning of a game could be rushed by messenger to the newspaper and used in the next edition.

           The films used in the 1940s and 1950s were gaining in sensitivity, and this faster film speed allowed the use of action-stopping shutter speeds with lenses with the relatively fast aperture of f5.0. Such films as Super Panchro-Press and Super XX then in use had the “fast” speeds of 125 and 100 ASA, and Tri-X had the “super-fast” speed of 200 ASA.

           As film and cameras and lenses improved, the images produced by them became more acceptable to news editors, and more common. By the 1960s, very good results could be achieved by using smaller and more portable cameras fitted with telephoto lenses, and the era of the Big Berthas came to an end. For some twenty years they benefitted from considerable improvement, and served their purpose better than any other camera. They continue to be examples of photographic inventiveness and ingenuity.

70cm, 1:5, Carl Zeiss Jena Triplet

References:

Adams, John. 2017. Graflex Journal, Issue 3, 2017, John Adams Letter to Tim Holden. [about the Big Bertha and Joe Sprague]

Berliner, Geoffrey. 2016. Graflex Journal, Issue 2 2016, Shooting the Big Bertha.

Chasse, Jim, 1996. Graflex Historic Quarterly, Volume 1, Issue 3. Big Berthas. Graflex Historic Quarterly.

Eckenberg, William C., Willard D. Morgan, General Editor. 1941. The Complete Photographer, A Complete Guide To Amateur And Professional Photography, Issue 7, Volume 2, News Photography. National Educational Alliance, Chicago, New York. Page 415.

Eckenberg, William C., Willard D. Morgan General Editor. 1942, 1943, 1949. The Encyclopedia of Photography, A Complete Guide To Amateur And Professional Photography, Volume II, Big Bertha Cameras. National Educational Alliance, INC. New York. Page 415.

Hanemann, Mike. 1998. Graflex Historic Quarterly, Volume 3, Issue 4. Graflex’s Original Big Bertha. Graflex Historic Quarterly.

Metcalf, Ken. 2016. Graflex Journal, Issue 2 2016. The Big Bertha Camera.

Michigan History, William Kuenzel of The Detroit News, accessed May 9, 2020. http://blogs.detroitnews.com/history/1996/02/04/william-a-kuenzel-detroit-news-photographer/

Morgan, Willard D. & Henry M. Lester J. 1950 Graphic Graflex Photography, Eighth Edition, fourth printing. Morgan & Lester Publishers, New York New York. Page 413.

Price, Jack. 1937. News Pictures. Round Table Press, New York. Pages 98, 108, 148.

Ross, Kip A.R.P.S. 1941. Press Photography for the Freelance, Little Technical Library Volume 27. Special Sports Cameras. Ziff Davis Publishing Company, Chicago, New York. Pages 43 - 50.

Sprague, Joseph A., Editors Willard D. Morgan & Henry M. Lester J. 1940 Graphic Graflex Photography, First Edition, first printing. Morgan & Lester Publishers, New York New York. Page 279.

Tuttle, Ron, William C. Eckenberg. 2012. Graflex Historic Quarterly, Volume 17, Issue 2. Big Bertha Cameras. Graflex Historic Quarterly.

Wilkinson, Matthew, Editor: Dr. Alex Neill Wright. 1998, 1999. A Lens Collector’s Vade Mecum, 2nd Edition. David Matthews Associates, Old Mill Cottage, Penhalvean, Redruth, Cornwall, England. Pages 349, 351.

1940 – 1946 3 ¼ x 4 ¼” & 4x5”

Horizontal Graphic or Graflex back. Interchangeable lensboard. Shutter Speeds: 1/10 – 1/100th, Time.

By Thomas Evans

           Although the general appearance and dimensions of the Anniversary Speed graphic indicated a continuation pf the basic body of its predecessors, there were many new refinements. The rising and shifting lens standard was now metal, although the wood lensboard remained. A drop-bed of metal and dual focusing knobs were added. A now linked track facilitated focusing with wide-angle lenses. For the first time, no gray metal was exposed, only satin black with chrome trim. An internally-coupled rangefinder with encircling flash bracket, solenoid and flash gun were usually ordered with the outfit at an additional cost of about $50.

           During the war, all black models of the 4x5 were manufactured, probably due to the general shortage of chrome for other than essential use.

           It is the considered opinion of most photographers and collectors that the Anniversary models represented the climax of Speed graphic workmanship. Although new conveniences and refinements evolved in subsequent models, the pride that produced this quality was never again equaled.

3 ¼ x 4 ¼”      $117.00

4x5”                 $132.00

Bodies were not listed separately – the price given includes f4.5 Carl Zeiss Tessar, which was favored at the time. None other lenses were available for the 3 ¼ x 4 ¼, and eight for the 4x5. Several wide angle and telephoto lenses were also available. 

Text from Richard P. Paine’s 1981 “The All-American Cameras, a review of Graflex.”

The Camera Corp of America, of Chicago, started in 1938 as the Candid Camera Corp. of America. From 1949 to 1950, they made the Cee-Ay 35, a 35mm camera equipped with an f4.5 or f3.5 Wollensak Anastigmat. 

They sold their design and tools to Ciro Cameras Inc. sometime in 1949. Ciro Cameras made minor changes to the Cee-Ay 35 and rebranded it the Ciro 35. The Ciro 35R was fitted with an f4.5 Anastigmat, and the Ciro 35S was fitted with an f3.5 lens.

Graflex continued the production of the Ciro 35 after purchasing its design and tools in 1950. The Ciro 35T, with an f2.8 Anastigmat, appears to have been added to production after the move to Rochester, NY. The Ciro 35 camera would continue to be made by Graflex until September 1954. It was then substantially redesigned to become the Graphic 35 camera.

I believe that this is a condenser lens for an early enlarger. They were made up to 8x10 inch format, and were often lit with sunlight rather than artificial light. 

The best way to determine cost is to look on ebay for what the cameras have actually sold for. Mint-in-the-box increases the value, but only to collectors.

I’m trying to figure out what this is

                                        1. Ciro-flex Model E    

 By Thomas Evans 

In October of 1951, Graflex Inc. acquired the tools, dies, inventory and rights to manufacture the Ciro 35 and Ciro-flex cameras from Ciro Cameras Inc., of Delaware Ohio. Graflex did not buy the company, which continued to operate as a small manufacturing company working on castings and stampings, and so forth. Graflex was aware of the popularity of 35mm and twin-lens reflex cameras, and saw this as a quick way to enter the growing amateur market. Cameras continued to be shipped from Ohio, under the Graflex name, while production facilities in Rochester were prepared.

 Ciro Cameras Inc.

Ciro Cameras had been making the Ciro-flex twin-lens reflex camera since 1941, first in Detroit, Michigan, and, from 1947, in Delaware, Ohio. This camera has a simple design and is sturdy, the body being constructed of welded steel sheeting.

The Ohio History Connection - Ohio’s Camera website provides this information: “Ciro Cameras was founded in 1941 by a former Ford engineer and French immigrant, Rodolphe Stahl, in Detroit, Michigan. The new company was approached by Sears and Roebuck to create a TLR camera for sale in their stores. Stahl produced the Marvel-flex for Sears and simultaneously released the nearly identical Ciro-flex through his own company. Dubbed the “working man’s Rolleiflex,” the Ciro-flex benefited from US production during WWII, affordability, and aesthetic simplicity. If not for the stuttering flow of exportation from Germany during and after the war Ciro-flex may never have existed.”

“Ciro Cameras relocated to Delaware, Ohio, in 1947. This move was prompted by Stahl because he felt that the rural atmosphere and the nearby college made Delaware, OH an ideal place to live. The camera company moved into a former chicken processing warehouse at 425 S. Sandusky, and continued its growth. At the company’s peak, Ciro Cameras employed 136 Ohioans and produced 100 cameras per day.”

The Camera Wiki website provides this information about the first Ciro-flex: “The earliest model A's were built in Detroit, Michigan, (the factory was at 112 E. Atwater) and ‘ciro-flex’ appears uncapitalized on the nameplate. Post-WWII production resumed with the models B (with an Alphax shutter) and C (Rapax shutter).”

Ciro Cameras made six models, designated A through F, equipped with differing taking lenses and shutters. The viewing lens of each model was a coated 85mm f3.2 Wollensak Anastigmat. The 1946 Instruction Manual stated that the taking lens used was the Wollensak Velostigmat, while the 1948 Instruction Manual stated that the taking lens was the Wollensak Anastigmat, and so it appears that a switch was made during 1947 or 1948 (somewhere between serial numbers 55827 and 82966.)

Model A was discontinued when the move was made from Michigan to Ohio. Models B and C were added in 1942 with some mechanical improvements Model B had a self-cocking, Alphax shutter with limited range of shutter speeds, and Model C had the more capable Rapax shutter The first models that incorporated flash synchronization, D (Alphax Synchromatic shutter) and E (Rapax Synchromatic shutter), were added to production in 1948. Model F, with the Fully Synchromatic Rapax shutter, was added in 1950.

2. Figures from US Patent 2,495,355, awarded to Rodolphe Stahl on January 24, 1950.

Stahl Rodolphe applied for an U. S. patent on an improved focusing device for twin-lens reflex cameras on August 30, 1946, and Patent Number 2495355 was granted on January 24, 1950.

Accessories for the Ciro-flex included the Ciro-flash gun, Ciro-pod tripod, a genuine cowhide Everready case, Ciro cable releases in 7 and 12 inch lengths, and a very nice pressed-steel dual lens cap, which sported the ‘Ciro-flex’ name. A compact sunshade and filter holder was designed to use Series V filters, and the lenses accepted other 32mm diameter slip-on filter adapters and lens shades.

  3. Ciro-flex Everready Case                 

4. Ciro-flex E with Lens Cap.

 Ciro-Flex Models, Ciro Cameras, 1941 – 1950.

Model             Lens                                        Shutter

A                     85mm  f3.5      Velostigmat     Automatic Alphax, 1/10th to 1/200thsecond, T & B.

B                      85mm  f3.5      Velostigmat     Automatic Alphax, 1/10th to 1/200thsecond, T & B.

C                      85mm  f3.5      Velostigmat     Set & Release Rapax, 1 to 1/400thsecond, T & B.

D                     85mm  f3.5      Anastigmat      Alphax Synchromatic, 1/10th to 1/200th, T & B. With M-F

E                     85mm  f3.5      Anastigmat      Rapax Synchromatic No.1, 1 to 1/400th, T & B, With M-F

F                      83mm  f3.2      Raptar              Rapax Synchromatic, 1 to 1/400th, T & B. With M-M-FX.

 Automatic Alphax shutters, with a more limited range of shutter speeds, were cocked and released in one motion of the single lever. The Rapax shutters, with shutter speeds from one second to 1/400th second, were set with one lever and released with another. The Ciro-flex never had a body-mounted shutter release.

Models A, B, and C were not fitted with built-in flash synchronization, while Models D, E and F were. Models A, B and C could be used with a flash, either using the B (Bulb) setting (Opening the shutter, setting off the flash, closing the shutter) or by fitting a solenoid to release the shutter while at the same time triggering the flash.

Models D, E and F had an ASA bayonet flash sync connector fitted to the left side of the camera body. The Alphax and Rapax Synchromatic shutters, designated M-F, permitted the use of Class F flashbulbs (5 millisecond delay) in synchronization with all shutter speeds, while restricting the use of Class M flash bulbs (20 millisecond delay) with the shutter speed of 1/25th or slower. As a reminder of this restriction, shutter speeds 1/25th and slower are marked with red on the shutter.

 5. Fully Synchromatic Rapax Shutter on a Ciro-flex F. A second, PC, flash sync has been added to this camera.

 The Rapax Fully Synchromatic Rapax shutter on the Model F was adjustable to fire Class F, Class M and electronic flash units at any shutter speed. In 1950, Ciro Cameras promoted the Ciro-flex Model F as the only twin-lens reflex on the market that could be used interchangeably with flash bulbs and ‘speedlight’ electronic flash, without the use of accessory synchronizers. Synchronization adjustments were made with a simple lever (Time Delay Indicator) to select the proper time delay. Class M flash bulbs (20 ms) were synchronized with the quicker shutter speeds (1/100th, 1/200th and 1/400th, marked in black) by selecting the white M. To synchronize Class M bulbs at other shutter speeds (marked in red), the red M was selected. Class F bulbs (5ms) were synchronized by selecting the red F. To synchronize electronic flash, the X setting was used. There was also an OFF setting for disconnecting the flash sync circuit.

  6. Ciro-flash mounted on a Ciro-flex F.

Ciro Cameras made the Ciro-flash gun for use with the Ciro-flex, Models D, E or F, which had a unique fitting to attach it to the camera. The Ciro-flash came with an adapter so that it could be used with either the medium Edison screw-mount or smaller bayonet-mount flash bulbs. The Ciro-flash held three D-Cell batteries, and had an outlet for an extension flash unit.

  7. Ciro 35 S with Graflash, Original Box and Everready Case.

 Ciro 35

The Camera Corp of America, of Chicago, started in 1938 as the Candid Camera Corp. of America. From 1949 to 1950, they made the Cee-Ay 35, a 35mm camera equipped with an f4.5 or f3.5 Wollensak Anastigmat. They sold their design and tools to Ciro Cameras Inc. sometime in 1949. Ciro Cameras made minor changes to the Cee-Ay 35 and rebranded it the Ciro 35. The Ciro 35R was fitted with an f4.5 Anastigmat, and the Ciro 35S was fitted with an f3.5 lens.

Graflex continued the production of the Ciro 35 after purchasing its design and tools in 1950. The Ciro 35T, with an f2.8 Anastigmat, appears to have been added to production after the move to Rochester, NY. The Ciro 35 camera would continue to be made by Graflex until September 1954. It was substantially redesigned to become the Graphic 35 camera.

  8. 1938 Rolleicord II and c.1942 Ciro-flex C

 Franke and Heidecke - Rolleiflex

Many camera manufacturing companies noticed the success that Rolleiflex was having with their innovative twin lens reflex cameras, and developed their own versions. Rolleiflex had developed the TLR in 1929 as an evolution from the Rolleidoscop Stereo Camera, which used roll film rather than glass plates or sheet film, and which had a third lens between the stereo pair that projected the image onto a ground glass on the top of the camera by reflecting the image from a 45-degree mirror. 300,000 Rolleiflex TLR cameras had been sold by 1938.

In 1933, Franke and Heidecke introduced the Rolleicord camera, a TLR that was simpler in construction than the increasingly more sophisticated Rolleiflex, and so could be sold at a lower price. The Ciro-flex TLR appears to have been modeled after the Rolleicord of 1937 – 1938, as these cameras share many features. Film advance was by knob rather than by the rapid winding crank of the Rolleiflex Automat. The fold-up viewing hood could be converted into an eye-level, direct-view frame-finder. A depth-of-field scale was mounted over each camera’s focusing knob. The shutter of both had rim-set shutter speeds, and were released by lever, or by release cable screwed into the shutter body. Both had f3.5 triplet (three-element) taking lenses, the Zeiss Triotar on the Rolleicord and the Wollensak Velostigmat on the Ciro-flex. The Triotar had a 75 mm focal length, while the Velostigmat was 85 mm, and this would have allowed the Velostigmat to perform well even if it were cheaper to manufacture, since the image was formed by a more central area of the lens’s coverage. Originally, neither shutter was provided with flash synchronization. In 1941, the Rolleicord sold for $76.00 (model I) - $98.50 (model II), while the Ciro-flex Model A sold for $42.50. The Rolleiflex Automat sold for $175.00 in 1941.

 Graflex Inc.

Graflex Inc. purchased Ciro Cameras Inc., in October 1950, and “sponsored” the Ciro-flex camera from 1951 to 1952. The camera was then redesigned and became the Graflex 22, which was in production beginning November 1952. The Graflex Ciro-flex cameras were made in several models, as before, but the models were eventually equipped with different lenses and shutters than were used by Ciro Cameras. The camera itself was essentially the same as the original Ciro-flex.

The Ciro-flex cameras made before the company was purchased by Graflex were equipped with a Wollensak 85mm, f3.5 Velostigmat or Anastigmat lens (coated, at least by 1946) in Alphax or Rapax shutters. According to the July 1952, Ninth Edition of Graphic Graflex Photography, Graflex installed Graftar or Optar lenses in Century or Graphex shutters on the Ciro-flex, although I have yet to see a Ciro-flex camera with any of these lenses or shutters. In an April 1952 brochure, Graflex states that the Models D and E Ciro-flex were fitted with the Wollensak Anastigmat, and not the Graftar, and it appears that the Anastigmat actually continued to be utilized. The Graftar and Optar lenses in Century and Graphex shutters did make their appearance with the Graflex 22 camera in November 1952. All of these lenses and shutters were still made by Wollensak.

Ciro-flex D with Wollensak Anastigmat in Alphax Synchromatic Shutter.

Perhaps the best way to understand this list is that it represents what Graflex intended to do with the Ciro-flex line in 1951, and what they actually accomplished with the Graflex 22 the next year.

 Ciro-Flex Models made under Graflex Inc., October 1951 – October 1952.

As of the 1952 Ninth Edition of Graphic Graflex Photography:

Model             Lens                                        Shutter

B                      85mm  f3.5      Graftar             Century, 1/10th to 1/200th second, T & B.

C                      85mm  f3.5      Graftar             Graphex 1 to 1/400thsecond, T & B.

D                     85mm  3.5       Graftar             Century, 1/10th to 1/200th, T & B. With M & F Sync,

E                     85mm  f3.5      Graftar             Graphex, 1 to 1/400th, T & B. With M & F Sync.

F                      83mm  f3.2      Optar               Graphex, 1 to 1/400th, T & B. With M-F-X sync.

 The M & F automatic flash synchronization would synchronize Class F (SM and SF) flash bulbs at all shutter speeds, and Class M (GE 5, 11, 22; Sylvania 25, 0 & 40) at 1/25th second or slower (Shutter speed marking in red).

The Graphex Full Synchromatic M-F-X shutter synchronization was adjustable for all classes of flash bulbs and electronic flash, at all shutter speeds, by selecting the appropriate setting.

The Graflex serial number book does not list the Ciro-flex or Ciro 35 cameras, and so it seems reasonable to think that they continued to be made at the facility in Delaware, Ohio.

 .

9. Graflex 22 Model 400

 Graflex 22

The Graflex 22 was manufactured in Rochester, New York, and was available to the public in November 1952.

The Graflex 22 serial numbers are listed in the Graflex serial number book, beginning with 600,001, lot number 48121 of 5000 cameras, dated August 29, 1952. The last Graflex 22 listed is number 629,600, in a lot of 200 cameras, dated September 4, 1956. It appears from the listing that 29,600 Graflex 22 cameras were made, in three models.

Model 200 had an 85mm, f3.5 Graftar lens in the self-cocking Century shutter, which had shutter speeds from 1/10th to 1/200th second, plus Time and Bulb. The Model 400 used the same taking lens, in the more capable Graphex shutter, which had shutter speed from one second to 1/400th second, plus Time and Bulb. And the Model 400F had the slightly faster 83mm, f3.2 Optar lens, in the Graphex Full Synchromatic shutter, which could be adjusted to synchronize Class F, Class M, and electronic flash at any shutter speed.

The Graflex 22 was essentially the same camera as the Ciro-flex, now available in a ‘Silver Gray’ or black finish, with the addition of an Ektalite (Fresnel) field lens under the viewing screen. Another significant addition was the hot-shoe ‘wired accessory clip’ to the left side of the camera. The hot-shoe was designed to be used with the Graflash flash gun, which could be simply slid into position without needing to deal with sync cords. The BC Graflash incorporated a condenser inside, and used the compact 22 ½ volt battery (Eveready No. 412) to charge the condenser. The PL Graflash had no condenser and used two ordinary, penlight AA batteries. Both Graflash units accepted bayonet-based midget flash bulbs such as the GE #5.

The Graflex 22 could also be used with the standard Graflite flash guns, and so gain a great deal of flexibility in choice of flash bulbs, and the ability to use multiple flash guns. A sync cord (the ‘Universal Shoe Cord’ or, ‘Cat #2723 Unicord’) was available that slid into the hot-shoe and could be plugged into the Graflite.

Beside the Graflash units, accessories included a specialized lens shade that would accept Series V filters, the gray leather Eveready case, and a choice of two, ‘All Metal’ tripods (Senior and Junior sized). The pressed-steel dual lens cap was also continued, now sporting the ‘Graflex 22’ name.

  10. Graflex 22 Model 200 with lens shade and Graflash.        

11. Graflex 22 lens cap.

 Graflex 22 Cameras, in production from November 1952 to November 1956

Model             Lens                                        Shutter

200                  85mm  3.5       Graftar             Century, 1/10th to 1/200th, T & B. With X-F-M Sync,

400                  85mm  f3.5      Graftar             Graphex, 1 to 1/400th, T & B. With X-F-M Sync.

400F                83mm  f3.2      Optar               Graphex, 1 to 1/400th, T & B. With M-M-F-X sync.

 The Century and Graphex X-F-M shutters synchronized zero delay electronic flash when the black-colored shutter speed were set, 5 millisecond delay Class F SM and SF flashbulbs when the green-colored shutter speed were set, and 20 millisecond delay Class M flashbulbs with the red-colored shutter speeds.

The Graphex Full Synchromatic shutter on Model 400F could be set to properly synchronize with various flash sources. When the shutter was set at ‘F-X’, electronic flash could be used at any shutter speed, and Class F flash bulbs would synchronize at the red-colored shutter speeds. Class F bulbs could be used at the faster shutter speeds by setting the edge of the indicator lever just touching the red-colored M. Class M flash bulbs would synchronize with the slower red-colored shutter speeds when the indicator lever was set at the red M, and with the faster black-colored shutter speeds when the lever was set at the black M. Intermediate delays could be set. The lever could also be set at the ‘Off’ position, disconnecting the flash sync, however, if this were done with a bulb in place the bulb would fire. Also, it was necessary to move the lever from Off to a sync setting prior to cocking the shutter. The Graflex 22 400F was discontinued in 1954 due to insufficient sales.

Graflex 22 Model 200 with fitted case, CAT 8013, and lens hood.

By the middle of the decade, Japanese-made twin-lens reflex cameras were available in the U. S., had more features, and were less expensive than the Ciro-flex. It appears that Graflex recognized that they had been out-competed, and discontinued production of the Graflex 22 in 1956.

By 1958, Graflex was selling the Japanese-made Kalloflex Automat K-2, which was described as: “A top quality twin-lens reflex. Features unique coaxial winding and focusing arrangement for lightning-fast shots. Makes standard 2 ¼ x 2 ¼ pictures on 120 roll film. Accessory mask for framing super slides (42mm x 42mm). all controls visible from above… click stops on diaphragm… XFM shutter to 1/500 second… outstanding Prominar 75mm f3.5 lens.”  The shutter synchronized with electronic flash, Class F and Class M flash bulbs at any shutter speed. The Kalloflex also had some Rolleiflex-like features, such as a winding crank to advance the film and cock the shutter, automatically spacing the exposures on the film, and preventing double exposures, and the lenses were fitted with bayonet mounts to accept filters.

  References:

Camera Appareils (French), accessed January 22, 2016: http://www.collection-appareils.fr/x/html/appareil-1581-Ciro_Ciro-Flex%20E.html

Camera Collecting and Restoration, accessed January 22, 2016: http://pheugo.com/cameras/index.php?page=ciroflex

Camera Wiki, accessed January 22, 2016: http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Ciro-flex

Carroll, John S. 1954. Photography with the Graflex 22. Morgan and Lester, New York.

Ciro-flex Instruction Manual. 1946. Ciro Cameras, Inc., 425 South Sandusky St., Delaware, Ohio.

Downs, Bruce. 1950. Photography with the Ciro-flex. Photo Imex, Inc., New York.

Evans, Arthur. 1986. A Collector’s Guide to Rollei Cameras. Centennial Photo Service, Grantsburg, Wisconsin.

Graflex Inc. 1951 and 1952 Ciro-flex brochures.

Holden, Tim T. 1997 Ciro and Ciroflex. Graflex Historic Quarterly, Volume 2, Issue 2.

Inman, William E. 2004. Ciro-flex to Graflex 22. Graflex Historic Quarterly. Volume 9, Issue 2.

Mannheim, L. A. 1951 – 1965. The Rollei Way; The Rolleiflex and Rolleicord Photographer’s Companion, Eighth Edition. Focal Press, London, New York.

Ohio History Connection, Ohio’s Camera, accessed January 22. 2016: https://ohiohistory.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/ohios-camera/

Oleson, Rick. American TLR, accessed January 22, 2016: http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-76.html

McKeown, James M. and Joan McKeown. 1996. McKeown’s Price Guide to Antique & Classic Cameras. 1997/1998. Centennial Photo Service, Grantsburg, Wisconsin.

Morgan, Willard D., Henry M. Lester. 1952 Graphic Graflex Photography: The Master Book for the Larger Camera. Ninth Edition. Morgan & Lester Publishers, New York, New York. P390.

Morgan, Willard D., Henry M. Lester. 1958 Graphic Graflex Photography: The Master Book for the Larger Camera. Eleventh Edition. Morgan & Lester Publishers, New York, New York.

 Thomas Evans, March 6, 2016.