4x5 backs on an RB67 (for the RH50)

[MCB18]

Thanks for the pointers, I’ll look for folks locally and see what I can find.

As far as the STL, I can probably publish it, but it would be very niche. Grafloc XL wasn’t exactly widespread, and afaik the RH50 is the only back that seems to have the removable part that makes this adapter possible.

 

[reddesert]

Thanks for the pointers, I’ll look for folks locally and see what I can find.

As far as the STL, I can probably publish it, but it would be very niche. Grafloc XL wasn’t exactly widespread, and afaik the RH50 is the only back that seems to have the removable part that makes this adapter possible.

So, I think I understand a little more now what you intend to do. The original question was about an adapter for 4x5 backs/film holders to the RB67. Generically, that would be something like the picture Nokton48 posted of the adapter SK Grimes made for the Makiflex - essentially a 4x5 Graflok fitting that captures the edges of the film holder, which can hold cut film holders, roll film holders, etc. (A true mad scientist would put a reflex viewer onto it, creating a camera with two reflex viewers.)

But you intend to make something that doesn't stick out as far to the sides, projecting from the rear of the RB67-minus-rotating-back and fitting directly against the flat face of the RH50. Using the 4 screw holes that normally fasten the RH50-to-Graflex-XL-plate to the RH50. I do not recall if there is some kind of light trap between the plate and the flat face of the RH50, there may be a groove where you can put something.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Not saying these are common items, but wasn't the RH50 also made to fit a 2x3 Graflok mount? If so, that one would mount right on the RB67 rotating back...

 

[MCB18]

But you intend to make something that doesn't stick out as far to the sides, projecting from the rear of the RB67-minus-rotating-back and fitting directly against the flat face of the RH50. Using the 4 screw holes that normally fasten the RH50-to-Graflex-XL-plate to the RH50. I do not recall if there is some kind of light trap between the plate and the flat face of the RH50, there may be a groove where you can put something.

Yes, exactly.

Not saying these are common items, but wasn't the RH50 also made to fit a 2x3 Graflok mount? If so, that one would mount right on the RB67 rotating back...

No, they never did. The only graflok 23 back is for the RB67, and that is very expensive and also requires type 2 perfs, or a destructive modification to use non-perf film.

 

[choiliefan]

Graflex also made a 4X5 back for the XL camera.
These are rare but I've seen a couple on ebay in the past.
Identifiable by the four pins on the back.

 

[MCB18]

Graflex also made a 4X5 back for the XL camera.
These are rare but I've seen a couple on ebay in the past.
Identifiable by the four pins on the back.

All RH50 backs had the XL plate initially, in order to use them on normal 4x5 cameras you needed to remove the adapter plate using 4 screws. Some may not come with it because it was lost, this one does have it.

 

[Don_ih]

Can you adapt the Polaroid attachment for the RB67 to use regular film?

I use the polaroid holder on my RB67 all the time. But the film has to be in an empty polaroid film pack.

 

[Donald Qualls]

The only graflok 23 back is for the RB67

I think you mean 2x3 Graflok mount 70 mm back. I have several Graflex backs (22, 23, RH10/RH20) that fit my RB67 perfectly, and interchange to my Century Graphic (which also accepts my RB67 6x7 and 6x4.5 backs). The 70 mm backs were always specialty items, aimed at folks for whom 220 wasn't enough (NASA sent 70 mm long roll backs to the Moon on Hasselblad cameras modified for spacesuit use in vacuum).

 

[MCB18]

I think you mean 2x3 Graflok mount 70 mm back. I have several Graflex backs (22, 23, RH10/RH20)

Yes, correct.

The 70 mm backs were always specialty items, aimed at folks for whom 220 wasn't enough

And yeah, I know that. FWIW 70mm came out about 15 years before 220. From my vague understanding, 220 was an attempt to make a “drop-in” replacement for 120 that didn’t require camera makers to redesign the film transport system, mostly in response to 35mm, but I imagine that 70mm (which was gaining some popularity for stills use, there were a few dedicated cameras) was also a factor.

 

[Chuck1]

Graflex also made a 4X5 back for the XL camera.
These are rare but I've seen a couple on ebay in the past.
Identifiable by the four pins on the back.

These don't actually cover 4x5

 

[choiliefan]

^^ No but neither will the OP's solution.
I'd like to find one to shoot Instax-wide in my XL.

 

[epatsellis]

Betterlight made one, rare as hen's teeth. I made one out of aluminum channel, crude and focal plane is slightly off, but easily corrected using the focus function in the betterlight software.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I checked eBay for RB67 70mm backs, and there were several listed as of yesterday. A bit higher ($250-$450) than the 6x7 on 120 ProSD generation backs, but if you like 70mm they probably aren't that steep. I've also seen photos of an RH50 on 2x3 mount, which would be a direct plug-in for an RB67.

These are clearly of limited utility, however, given that developing reels to fit common tanks will only hold about 20 exposures worth of film length, even if modified to accept 70 mm film.

 

[MCB18]

I checked eBay for RB67 70mm backs, and there were several listed as of yesterday. A bit higher ($250-$450) than the 6x7 on 120 ProSD generation backs, but if you like 70mm they probably aren't that steep. I've also seen photos of an RH50 on 2x3 mount, which would be a direct plug-in for an RB67.

These are clearly of limited utility, however, given that developing reels to fit common tanks will only hold about 20 exposures worth of film length, even if modified to accept 70 mm film.

I got this RH50 for $10 so I’m perfectly fine with it. Plus, it takes non-perf film without any modifications.

My 3D printed Graflex XL to RB67 adapter should be here tomorrow according to USPS, so I’ll be able to make sure that it fits. Gotta go to Ace to pick up some screws though.

And I’m also getting a 70mm 15 ft reel 3D printed, I’ll just use it in the darkroom sort of like a dip-and-dunk.

So far the most expensive thing besides the film has been getting an extra set of cassettes, which @OrientPoint was gracious enough to sell to me along with the Techpan for $50.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I got this RH50 for $10 so I’m perfectly fine with it. Plus, it takes non-perf film without any modifications.

I'd presume the film tolerance would also apply to the 2x3 mount RH-50, but it's very hard to argue with that pricing. If I fell into one of those, I'd probably put it on my Speed Graphic...

 

[MCB18]

I'd presume the film tolerance would also apply to the 2x3 mount RH-50, but it's very hard to argue with that pricing. If I fell into one of those, I'd probably put it on my Speed Graphic...

I just looked because I was curious, and I can’t find any reference to a 2x3 version of the RH50, only 4x5. If it did exist it was either a custom mod or maybe a prototype/initial production run with a few units made that they didn’t bring to market (like the 6x6 back for the RB67). But it definitely wasn’t mass produced.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I saw a photo of a 2x3 RH-50 just the other day. I think I found it with a Google search for "RB-67 70mm". It's possible the mount had been modified, but if so, it was a professional quality job.

The RH-50 wasn't a common item, anyway, but I don't know any reason Graflex would have made a medium format roll holder for 4x5 only. It's even possible the shell was just transferred to the plate of a 2x3 mount RH10 or similar; all the Graflex roll backs have the same screw pattern.

 

[MCB18]

Unfortunately, the RH50 seems to have a plate that’s permanently attached to the back, seems riveted. Why they only made it for 4x5 I have no idea, but my guess is that it was meant as an attempt to promote the Graflex XL.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Might have been related to the intended market for the XL -- 70mm is more of a studio format, but then studios and wedding photographers sometimes didn't even want 220 because too many frames at risk in case of a lab error. I'm still trying to figure out why they'd make a 6x7/2x3 camera with a 4x5 Graflok mount, instead of a 4x5 camera that used 2x3 format reducing roll film holders (like every other 4x5 in the world).

 

[choiliefan]

The Graflex XL was a system camera.
Add a stack of their assorted "spacers" sized 1" through 3.750" for close-up or macro work or affix the 4X5 back and voila, you have an LF camera?
Not sure if any of the array of lenses offered for the system cover 4X5 though except possibly the 58mm Grandagon or the 47mm S Angulon. I have seen a couple blank lens barrels in my travels so its possible to mount more suitable LF lenses, but why not buy a cheap Calumet or Graphic View instead?

 

[Chuck1]

Unfortunately, the RH50 seems to have a plate that’s permanently attached to the back, seems riveted. Why they only made it for 4x5 I have no idea, but my guess is that it was meant as an attempt to promote the Graflex XL.

The plate is usually held with 4 screws(if it's for the xl)

 

[MCB18]

The plate is usually held with 4 screws(if it's for the xl)

Yeah that one I was able to take off, I was referring to the larger plate that interfaces with the normal 4x5 Graflock system.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Not sure if any of the array of lenses offered for the system cover 4X5 though

Don't forget that as you increase magnification (by focusing closer) you also increase lens coverage. Any lens that covers 6x7 will cover 4x5 at 2:1.

 

[Chuck1]

Unfortunately, the RH50 seems to have a plate that’s permanently attached to the back, seems riveted. Why they only made it for 4x5 I have no idea, but my guess is that it was meant as an attempt to promote the Graflex XL.

Maybe use a mamiya rb p adapter using the plate from the Polaroid pack bolted to the rh50

 

[MCB18]

I’m making a

Maybe use a mamiya rb p adapter using the plate from the Polaroid pack bolted to the rh50

I modeled an adapter, it’s currently in the mail, should be here tomorrow.