The Wildest Question About A Rolleiflex Yet (Maybe)

[clark_roberts]

<p>Hi all,<br>

Well this is it, I have two Rolleiflex's a 3.5E serial #2276829 with a planer lens and a 3.5F serial #1760211 <br>

with a Schneider Xenotar lens, so can the lenses be switch or will the focusing be off. I just wanted to know <br>

because the 3.5F has a bit more scratches on the front element. I'm going to finish the roll in the 3.5F <br>

tomorrow and get them processed, to see if there's any ill affect, the camera is working good, but will see.<br>

Next I saw online a gentlemen who has parts or repair's the selenium meter cell was I seeing or those day's <br>

are gone, besides I can't find the website again.</p>

<p>Thanks <br>

Clark</p>

 

[SCL]

<p>Sorry - can't answer your question. But just wanted to comment that often minor cleaning marks or scratches on the front element of a lens have little if any effect on the image, unless light hits them directly or obliquely and bounces around. That's the main reason I often use a lens hood on older glass. Back in the day, photographers who had a light scratch or two on the front element often just filled it in with a black marking pen to prevent unwanted reflections .</p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>If (which I don't know) the lenses are interchangeable I am pretty sure they 'll need different shimming or such to be properly aligned with the viewing lens. So I'd be pretty reluctant to have somebody butchering my cameras if that person doesn't have the best imaginable reputation and tools beyond a piece of ground glass in the film window.<br>

I believe I'm recalling Kelly Flanagan mentioning Rolleis that only deliver sharp pictures at f8 due to exchanged lenses a couple of years ago.</p>

[SCL]

<p>A Rolleiflex repairperson who gets a lot of favorable comment is Harry Fleenor at http://www.rolleirepairs.com/.<br>

You might contact him for a definitive answer and a quote on doing the job if feasible.</p>

[al_derickson]

<p>For your own photos I'd say don't worry the scratches will have negligible effect. If you are worried about resale value then switching lenses will have far more negative effect than scratches.<br>

Al</p>

 

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>The view lens and taking lens on <em><strong>any</strong> </em>TLR are matched for foal length. Lens are rarely their marked nominal focal length. Most are within 3 millimeters of the marked focal length either side of the nominal (marked) focal length. Change them in pairs only then recalibrate the focus dial for the new lens combo. If you change just the taking lens the focus error will not be apparent at distances greater than 50 feet wide open (same marked focal length) but will be very apparent at 10 feet or closer wide open. The greater the difference in focal length the greater the focus error. <br>

As others have said in the previous posts minor scratches on the front lens element will not affect image quality, may cause flare if they are deep enough or there are many. Chips and be filled with flat black paint to minimize or eliminate flare. Scratches on the rear are more critical but may not affect image quality unless deep or there are many.</p>

[John Seaman]

<p>Aren't the Planar and Xenotar designs somewhat different anyway? I bet the Planar images come out fine.</p>

<p>Don't you just wish that people were more careful cleaning lenses in the past? I think the end of a tie was often used.</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<blockquote>

<p>Aren't the Planar and Xenotar designs somewhat different anyway?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Planar is a trade name for Zeiss lens based on a Gauss design.<br /> Xenotar is a trade name for Schneider based on a Gauss design.<br /> According to A Lens Collector Vade Mecum the Planar used in Rolleiflex cameras was a 6 element design and some may be a 7 element design. The Xenotar is a 5 element design and there may have been a 6 element design. From The Vade:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Xenotar f3.5 75mm This seems to be for Rolleiflex and is not listed in the 1960 catalogue.<br />It was used from about October 1956, when the 3.5E was launched with choice of Planar or Xenotar.<br />Incidentally, reviews have consistently stated the two were closely matched in performance. (see B.J.A. 1957,<br />p240) and note the f3.5 Xenotar seems to have been fitted on non-exposure meter 3.5 Rolleis.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Light travels the direction of the arrow in the attached lens diagrams. Expect the viewing lens to be a lesser design such as a triplet.</p><div></div>

[Colin O]

You have your serial numbers interchanged.

 

For the meter, I wouldn't bother with trying to fix the original selenium meter. My advice would be to buy a new Gossen Digisix. Of course it won't be coupled, but it will be more accurate.

[robert_bowring]

<p>OUCH! These are both beautiful cameras so do yourself a favor and leave them alone and just use them. Please do not butcher them. Unless the lens is really trashed it should be fine. Zeiss or Schneider does not make a difference. They are both really good lenses. These are among the best film cameras ever made.</p>

[clark_roberts]

<p>Thank you all for the responses, I'm finishing the roll in the 3.5F today and getting it processed<br /> as well, here's hoping all goes well and the pictures come out good at least. I'll keep you guy's<br /> informed on how it turns out, and Robert above said it right about not butchering the camera's.<br /> Clark</p>

[dan_fromm2]

<p>Charles, Planar is a Zeiss trade name. It covers a broad range of 6 elements in 4 groups double Gauss type lenses and derivatives. Rolleiflex TLRs' Planars have 5 elements in 4 groups and are similar to reversed versions of the Xenotar whose cross-section you posted.</p>

<p>For a fuller explanation of Zeiss Oberkochen's Planars for medium and large format, see <a href="http://www.arnecroell.com/publications">http://www.arnecroell.com/publications</a></p>

[clark_roberts]

<p>Hi all,<br>

Well I got my film back from the Rollei yesterday and I don't see any problems <br>

with the marks on the front element. It does have a back focus issue, I focused on to ladies <br>

at a park and they were blurry but the background was sharper, well like I did with the 3.5E <br>

I adjusted the viewing lens to get it right.</p>

<p>Clark</p>

[clark_roberts]

<p>Nope it's not the viewing lens issue, I put a ground glass screen at the film plane and checked <br>

with a loupe and the infinity focus is off a bit, so I guess if I keep the camera I have to get <br>

it adjusted by a pro, I didn't pay much for it and the background is tack sharp, unless I adjust <br>

the viewing lens to match the taking lens for now.</p>

<p>Clark</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>With the camera on a sturdy tripod, a piece of ground glass at the film plane focus the taking lens with the aperture wide open on a target at least 5000 feet away. Now adjust the view screen to match the taking lens focus. Do not reposition the view lens, return it to its original position if you have moved it. Once you have the view and taking lens agreeing at infinity check them at 25 feet, 15 feet, 8 feet, 6 feet or the closest marked distance on the focus scale. If the viewing and taking lens do not match at all distances then someone before you has changed a lens.</p>

[clark_roberts]

<p>The problem is not the viewing lens, with the ground glass on the film plane and a loupe and the focusing<br>

dial (I just love the sound of that) set at infinity the infinity focus is off I have to set it at about 60ft mark<br>

on the dial and then it's sharp and clear. </p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>The view screen is the <strong>only</strong> adjustable part of the system. View screens may have had shims under them that have deteriorated. Some cameras have adjustment screws on the view screen. The view screen is adjusted so that it coincides with the taking lens at the film plane. This is how all cameras are set up. The distance moved from infinity to 50 feet is around .020 inch or less for most lens.</p>

<p>If you send it out to a repair shop they will adjust the view screen once they have verified that the lens are correctly seated in the camera.</p>

[clark_roberts]

<p>Hi all,<br>

Just a update I'm finishing the 3.5F today, I adjusted the focusing knob and fix the problem <br>

with the taking lens, I used a old 6008 split image focusing screen and with a loupe laying it <br>

on the film plane and adjusting at infinity the taking lens till it was sharp, next was the viewing lens<br>

and adjust the lens and screen till sharp. Now I know what your saying (arrrg!) but I'm giving <br>

it a go will let you know how I make out when I put a roll a film thru it.</p>

<p>Clark</p>

 

[brett_rogers]

<p>You've done the correct thing by the sound of it Clark. The taking lens, before all else, should have good infinity at the stop. It is the master adjustment, the viewing lens must always be adjusted to the taking lens and not vice-versa. So when the taking lens shows sharp infinity with the focus knob at the stop, this is the first step to achieving good adjustment. If that is correct, the other distances <strong>should</strong> fall in also (should, if all is in factory condition). The next task is to dial the viewing lens in to match the taking lens. The correct way to do this to a Rollei TLR is to adjust the viewing lens in its threads, until its focus matches that of the taking lens. As Charles suggested, once this is done focus should be re-checked, both at infinity and also at closer distances. If your close focus and infinity both look good with the lenses agreeing, you are good to go. </p>

[clark_roberts]

<p>Thanks Brett, I just did a little cleaning and lubing to the transport side and wow the grease was <br /> dried out in some areas, I relubed those areas only and I feel the difference now when cranking<br />the film advance.</p>

[clark_roberts]

<p>I did mess up another camera, I wanted to clean the shutter but the back of it and the only <br>

way back there was to take out the rear element, so this was on a 3.5f model one and when <br>

I turned which thinking was the way to get the rear element off it was in turn the cloth light <br>

baffle which went plop inside the camera and that's it, besides it needs a bit more help so <br>

it's off to a repair unless there's away to get it reattach??</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>I strongly suggest downloading the service manual linked in this recent post http://www.photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00dtSw . Once you have it download the Rolleiflex service manual at http://www.kyphoto.com/classics/repairmanuals.html .<br>

Now if the model you are working on is not listed then look closely at the diagrams and find one close to what you have. You will find the build similar between models making it easier to service what you have.</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>Both links are the same manual with the first link the cleanest copy.</p>

[clark_roberts]

<p>This isn't good I picked up the Rolleiflex 3.5F model 1 and crank her up and nothing the shutter <br>

does nothing now, odd isn't it. Does the model 1 have more of problems with it's shutter than <br>

the later ones, I mean more prone to failure?<br>

Clark </p>