Rolleiflex 2.8 Xenotar Coating Issues

<p>I bought a Rolleiflex 2.8 (think it's a 2.8C) for cheap. It has lots of tiny cleaning marks/scratches on the taking lens, along w/ lots of little spots. In sum, the coatings are shot. I was going to resell it because once I got the camera in the post yesterday the coating damage was worse than the seller had indicated, but went out today and ran a roll through it just to see what it would do. If you point it towards sun it will certainly flare, but then I didn't have a hood on it. What's surprising is how sharp it still is. Here's a couple of shots of the camera, and some samples from Tri-X developed in D76, w/o my usual yellow filter and hood, as I do not have anything in Bay III around the house. On the way home after I took the shots, I discovered that the front element wasn't snugged down all the way. Apparently the previous owner had taken it out to inspect it and never fully screwed it in all the way. I turned it at least 2 full turns, so it should take sharper photos than what's here now. It may be all right after all.</p><div></div>

<p>The Lens</p><div></div>

<p>The Lens 2</p><div></div>

<p>The Lens 3</p><div></div>

<p>Sample 1</p><div></div>

<p>Sample 2</p><div></div>

<p>Sample 3</p><div></div>

<p>Flare Shot</p><div></div>

<p>If it really is just the coating that is damaged then you shouldn't really see any problem at all... because the coating is still 90% there, right? Or 80%, point is that before WW2 lenses weren't coated at all. But more likely you have very light scratches on the front element as well... that came with the abrasions that damaged the coating. Still it shouldn't really affect the sharpness as much as the scratches catching ambient light and causing flare. As you point out, that affect can be nearly completely eliminated by using a lens hood and avoiding flare prone situations.<br>

The Xenotar is no slouch. It is every bit the lens a Planar is. An advantage to the Xentoar is that the front element is not cemented as is the Planar. So to send it in and get it recoated is less problem than the planar which first has to have the cement taken out and the element separated.<br>

Generally the Xenotar has a durable coating, more durable than the soft zeiss coating on the planar. It took some abuse to damage your lens. Your lens might have some haze as well.. My 2.8E2 with xenotar was very sharp and had beautiful tonality, I never knew it had slight haze till I got ready to sell it and was cleaning and inspecting it. I had bought a newer 2.8F white face with planar and found even with the xenotar's haze it had less flare than the planar. I sold that and bought an even newer 2.8F with the Xenotar. Cristal clear. Best ever.</p>

<p>Consider sending it to John Van Stelten, who polished and recoated the rear lens of my 2.8C to astonishing effect. Mine looked a lot worse then yours but it turned out that only the coating had been affected. Since it was the rear lens, it was a lot more difficult than your front lens will be to polish and recoat. Mine is an astonishing performer now.<br>

Since there were no other marks or blemishes other than dust between the lenses, I thought it was worth it: the camera is up for many more years of service.<br>

See Phocal point, at http://www.focalpointlens.com/fp_services.html#lens_polishing</p>

<p>Steve, I like your camera and the apparent clarity of your sample 1 and the others (Yes, I know that one can only tell so much from a small 72 dpi or even 90 to 100 dpi computer screen image...) and wonder if an expensive (presumably) recoating of the front element is going to improve things markedly (despite the fine reputation of the lens), with the exception of the photos taken against the sun or otherwise without a lens hood.</p>

<p>It is a great opportunity to have a camera that we can use anywhere without having to protect the lens by a resolution reducing UV filter and without worrying too much about doing damage to the camera. </p>

<p>That's true, although you need to be sure the fungus is not still active; leaving it too long can leave irreversible damage.</p>

I found this thread, if the original poster still has this Rolleiflex let me know if you got the lens restored or not.

I just received one myself and have the same problem with the front element scratches and haze maybe (funcus).

Still I wonder if I could use it or maybe get it restored.

Clark, I have a 2.8C which, like the original poster, I got for a song because of the condition of the front of the lens. I put a hood on it and shot a test roll and was blown away at the results. Sharp and contrasty and every bit the equal of my 3.5F Planar which has a perfect lens. Try it out with a hood.

Thank you for getting for the info, I decided to go into the first section and clean out the haze or whatever

it was and it cleaned up really nice, I have to go into the rear section now.

Just a update about the 2.8C, I finished cleaning the rear lens elements and put a new bellow's in

then put a roll of film in and the pictures came out really great clear, sharp and with great color. The coating

scratches on the front of the lens does not effect the picture quality at all. (see photo)