mechs

Wow, thanks everyone. This is some next-level expert stuff, at least for me. Anyway, the camera focuses well and there are no problems with the developed rolls. Very enjoyable camera to shoot, that's for sure!

Hi everyone, You may remember my post from a few months ago when I was looking to acquire a Rolleiflex. After many attempts, I finally found one that belongs to a friend of a friend. He is selling his 2.8F and kindly allowed me to borrow and test it for a week before I make my decision. I have put a couple of rolls through this camera and everything works fine and the photos are good. The camera was recently serviced as well so I've decided to purchase it. But I noticed a rather peculiar thing when inspecting the camera closely. This is something I've seen on other Rolleis as well so I wanted your opinion. The camera, when I look at it head on, appears to be slightly misaligned, where there is more of the silver border showing on the right than on the left. I've attached images on closest focusing distance and when the shroud in back into the body, circling the silver line. It's like the shroud sits not in the middle but slightly to the left, therefore showing more of the silver border on the right than on the left. However when it comes to focusing or taking images, everything works fine. Focusing and image quality are all excellent. So is this a potential sign of damage or just the way these cameras are? Thanks

I actually looked at that link a few days ago. The cameras look incredibly nice but the prices are out of my range unfortunately.

Hi All, I am contemplating buying a Rolleiflex 2.8 (leaning towards an E but F would be ideal) and need some advice. I have been looking at reputable seller listings on the bay and am trying to determine what cosmetic imperfections I should and shouldn't worry about when I'm ready to buy. I have attached a couple of photos from listings for your consideration as examples. In the first example, the camera is listed as "Mint -" and 94%, the optics are clean, and the camera loosely matches Dan Colluci‘s advice about examining the original paint on the crank side of the camera as a visual test of its general wear. That said, look at small dent in the highlighted area. Are little dents and dings like these potential signs of trouble with the optics or overall performance of the camera? Are they considered normal wear and tear for an item marked as excellent or mint? When looking at the ding like this, is it assumed that the camera has at some point been dropped or smashed against a hard object and had an overhaul? The next example has a serious dent in the bottom right. For those of you who own a Rolleiflex, which one of the above is a deal breaker when purchasing these cameras? Would you have any problem buying a camera like the above two examples if the glass, shutter, viewfinder, and the operation were otherwise mechanically in excellent shape? And, realistically, what are the odds of finding a 2.8E or F with almost no cosmetic issues?

Hi All, I just got my hands on a beautiful Canonet QL17 and noticed that the rewind knob moves around freely as I move my hand while holding the camera. I loaded a test roll and checked the rewind crank and film advance mechanisms and all seem to be working properly--the film loads and advances as it should, there is no slack and the movement of the crank doesn't seem to do anything to the film. The frame counter works as it should and I am able to rewind the film fully and without any issues. However, turning the knob to tighten the slack after initially loading a fresh roll of film, I noticed that the rewind knob spins back after I tighten it. I also noticed the fork (part of the rewind mechanism in contact with the canister) is a bit loose. I unscrewed/screwed back on the assembly but that didn't seem to fix the issue. My question is: is this something that needs fixing or normal for this camera? None of my other film cameras behave this way, the rewind knob will usually stay in place after tightening the film tension initially. PS: I haven't had a chance to develop my first roll of film shot on this camera yet.

Well, it looks like you have yourself a fully functional camera. I'm not seeing any issues with sharpness but then I am all about that grain. Let us know when you make a decision!

Good to hear you had a blast using the camera. I recently sold a Nikon FE but love my Nikon FM, which is my favorite. I will never sell it. I'll echo what SCL said above and say that most of those little things can be taken care of with a CLA. I'm not an expert on viewfinder optics but it could just be that the inside of the front element needs a good wipe. As far as the image not being in perfect focus at infinity, again I'm no expert but, it could be because the Elmar lens isn't properly calibrated. Did you try another lens? Also, bear in mind that true infinity is probably at least a mile or two so if you focused on a building across the street, that would probably look a bit out of focus. I first bought a Voigtlander 35mm Color Skopar which is a fantastic lens at around 300-400 euros . I later returned it and got a used Summicron 35mm ASPH (the above photos were taken with this). Honestly, if I hadn't sold a bunch of other stuff and didn't have the cash on hand, I would never buy the Summicron. The Voigtlander is about 90% the lens at roughly 1/5th of the price. For a 50mm, you can try the Zeiss 50mm Sonnar or a similar Voigtlander for around 700-800 euros, or probably cheaper. I wear glasses and have astigmatism too so the 35mm framelines are barely visible to me. That said, I am a strictly 35mm shooter and spent some years shooting rock and metal shows in pitch black environments. Not seeing the edges doesn't bother me one bit, but your milage may vary. I should also mention that my M2 has the famous Canadian balsam bubbling around the edge of the prism--supposedly a sign of trouble that could kill the viewfinder one day. From what I've heard from most owners, their cameras have had the same issue for decades and they are fine. My point is, these are old cameras and they all have little things that could go wrong at some point. If the images turn out okay and the price is reasonable, and most importantly you aren't the anxious type who loses sleep over these things, I'd say send it in for a proper CLA after you get it. That way, you will have peace of mind. There are also those who don't believe in preventative maintenance/CLAs. You could just shoot with it until something goes wrong and then get it CLAd. PS: I also didn't rewind my first roll properly and opened the back plate in broad daylight. Luckily, only 4-5 frames were affected and the rest were okay. I just make sure to rewind for a bit longer just in case--hasn't happened again! PPS: I don't know where I read this, but someone said something to the effect of: "if the camera looks clean on the outside, it is probably clean on the inside" or something like that. Probably not always true but if you've shot film before (which you have) I bet you already have a good idea about the condition of the camera. Go with your gut feeling. Again, the six month warranty is a big plus so make sure you get it in writing. Keep us posted on how things go.

Hi Jim, Here is my experience and I hope you will find it useful. I did a lot of research before buying my M2. I learned that there is considerable variation among existing M2s as far as viewfinders and other things are concerned. The viewfinder in mine has a blue tint, is a bit dimmer than other models, has a contrasty and bright focusing patch, and clear and bright framelines. The gear noises you hear are more pronounced in the slower shutter speeds and the shutter is very smooth and relatively quiet yet with a nice and firm click. I actually called Youxin Ye and asked him about the viewfinder and other things I thought were issues on mine and he reassured me that the dimness or blue tint were not an issue. He also said there is pretty much nothing that can't be fixed on these models so as long as the camera is in working condition and there are no obvious signs of trouble, I would feel confident proceeding. Also note that it is more difficult to focus in darker environments and with things like leaves in a bush--that's just how it is when you start out with a rangefinder. If the price is good (or the budget is there) and the seller is offering a six month warranty, I would have no problem buying it. You could also try what I did: take a roll of film with you to the camera shop or the person selling it, take properly exposed images in or just outside the shop at slow and fast speeds (especially 250-1000s) and really work the focusing patch. Take notes on each exposure (shutter speed, focusing point, frame number). Get the film rush developed and if everything turns as expected, the camera is good to go. If not, then you can either haggle on the price or move on. Also be sure to test whether the infinity focus is accurate on a good and properly calibrated lens. Maybe ask the shop to fit the camera with a Summicron 35mm if they have one. Also, make sure you look at this Leica buying checklist: Leica M Buyer's Checklist. I have since bought a Leica M6 but am already considering selling it because the M2 is just magical. It is the single greatest piece of photographic gear I have owned. Here are a few photos:

Thanks. I actually found out that the bubbles were not oxidation but rather hardened air bubbles. I did end up making an X mark on one of the bubbles with a blade and was able to push the excess air out. I did manage to put a couple of scratches on the metal frame underneath (my signature!). Seeing there is no oxidation, I've decided to leave it alone and enjoy the camera instead. It truly is a magnificent camera. I paired it with a Summicron 35mm asph version 1 and all is running smoothly.

This begs the question: have any of you actually seen a Leica M with Zeiss bumps before? And would putting on a new leatherette cover from Aki-Asahi require any specific set of tools, other than a scraper to clean the oxidation, some thinner/acetone, and q-tips?

Yep, poorly done as well. Not a collector but those bumps are ugly and I wonder if the metal surface underneath was damaged at all during the process. I've read that the original vulcanite is extremely difficult to scrape off.

Thanks. I got the self-timer to work as well!

Thanks, everyone. I went ahead and inspected the camera. Cosmetically, it is in very good shape with minor scratches on the top and bottom plates and some bubbling of the vulcanite near the self-timer and frame selector levers. Nothing drastic or urgently in need of fixing. In terms of mechanics, the shutter and film advance lever are buttery smooth, the focusing patch is very bright and contrasty with no bubbling or any other imperfections. The viewfinder itself is clean but a shade darker than my M4-2, and seems to have a bit of a blue tint/cool quality to it. I shone a light through the viewfinder both ways and looked into it from the front to back and didn't notice anything unusual. I tested all shutter speeds and listened to the 1 sec in particular and can hear the roaring and whining of the gears. It all sounds pretty similar to my M4-2. The rewind knob is smooth in operation and otherwise solid when locked down. The bottom plate locks on pretty tight and the vulcanite is in very good shape (not sure if it's original) except for the bubbling issue. The film speed indicator in the back is pretty awesome and turns perfectly well. The self-timer lever/function doesn't seem to be working, unless I am not operating it properly. I put a roll of Kodak 200 color film and am getting it developed as we speak. The only problem today was me; I didn't rewind the film enough and, like an idiot, opened the bottom plate mid-roll. I'll probably lose a good 50% of the frames on that roll but the rest should be enough to tell me if there is a problem with the shutter. I loaded a new b&w roll into it today and will shoot that over the weekend. I have 7 days to return the camera and confirmed with the shop that the three-month warranty includes everything minus drops and cosmetic stuff. Here is a pic of the camera. [ATTACH=full]1376703[/ATTACH]

Tha Thanks, Barry. I've heard conflicting reports on balsam separation. Is that something that one could detect early signs of? For instance, I've heard that some bubbling along the left margin of the rf patch is not unusual or unexpected, but short of a pitch-black viewfinder, is there anything else I should look out for? Or is separation something that only ever happens if the camera is dropped?

Hi All, I recently moved a lot of photography and musical gear I no longer use to make room for some new (to me) photographic gear. The first purchase was a Leica M4-2 which I love (and started a thread about). Yesterday, an opportunity came up to inspect and possibly purchase a Leica M2 in good condition. The camera is at a brick-and-mortar store with years of reputation so I am comfortable purchasing there. They mentioned that the camera had had its last service two years ago and everything on it is buttery smooth. It would come with a three-month warranty. I've read several Leica buyer guides and am generally comfortable buying used gear. However, I wanted to ask for your collective wisdom (especially those who own an M2) for any tips as to what to look for during the inspection. I've heard horror stories about balsam separation but don't really know what the early warning signs of it are. Any specific and descriptive signs of potential issues would be appreciated. Thanks!