Rollei 6008 and 180/2.8 Tele Xenar continuing problems. Need urgent help!!

[bob_salomon]

Marflex has been loaning equipment for service loaners to

registered owners since 1986.

[vijay_nebhrajani]

This is getting a little off-topic, and I debated with myself if I should reply... and I thought I should.

 

> I don't believe I have met a US dealer yet that has done the same for me.

 

Means exactly that. Here are the equivalents.

 

Robert White = US Dealer

 

Prisma UK = Rollei USA

 

<Unknown> = Marflex Corp

 

I am only dealing with RW. I am not dealing with Prisma, and I don't even know who services Rollei in the UK. I did not imply that Marflex would not (future tense) do the same for registered owners. I meant that I do not believe that any *dealer* had done the same for me (past tense).

 

In other words, I did not mean to imply that Marflex or Rollei USA or a dealer would not do the same at some future time. BTW, there is an example of dealership that seems to have been forgotten in the USA. Whenever I order from B&H, I get a nicely printed card that lists all manufacturers' phone numbers. "Please contact the manufacturer directly if you have any problems" is the message I get (not exact words).

 

Does anyone remember those days when you ONLY dealt with the dealer (:p) and the dealer took care of the service and manufacturer. RW is doing precisely that, and may I point out that in other parts of the world, I expect that. I also do not expect to contact Ralph Lauren for a defective shirt bought from Macy's. (Does not imply anything, is just an example.)

 

We in the US consistently get bad service and low price or good service and high price. At RW I get good service and low price and that is a winning combination.

 

Regards,

[bob_salomon]

"We in the US consistently get bad service and low price or good

service and high price. At RW I get good service and low price

and that is a winning combination. "

 

And a problem lens.

[vijay_nebhrajani]

Dear Bob,

 

Sigh. What you say is true. I did get not one, but two problem lenses.

 

OK. That is out of the way. New let me see...

 

1. Rollei's lenses have a design fault, regardless of whether or not Martin or Rollei or anybody else admits it. We all understand in whose interest it is to deny potential design flaws...It is not merely the matter of their opinion vs. mine, if anybody knows a professional electronics engineer, please ask them.

 

2. If these lenses, which in my opinion have a design fault are imported into the US by Rollei US, and serviced by Marflex, they do not magically become perfect or more reliable. I can see that would be nice to propagate a myth that somehow "US stuff" is more reliable than non-US stuff. Neither are manufactured in the US, and AFAIK, Rollei US is not modifying the lenses before selling them. Thus, like it or not, it remains a fact that both US and non-US stuff has the same level of reliability, which is to say, not a lot.

 

3. Add to that the fact that Rollei US charges much more; and you are a number and not a person to the dealer and you see the greed machine in action. This greed machine feeds off disinformation, and I am not prepared to spread that. Based on the facts, tell me how would I have benefitted by buying from a US dealer? I could still have seen 2, 3 or N bad lenses and I would have had a considerably harder time fighting for a solution.

 

4. I can see why buying from outside the US irks Rollei/Mamiya. I am glad (gleeful chuckle) that there is the Internet. I am sure that local dealers will continue to lose business to dealers like RW if they don't change their attitudes soon.

 

5. I, as you can see clearly, do not care for the official importer - it does not matter where in the world I buy from - as long as that source cares and honors warranties etc. This thread is not about buying US vs. buying Gray. It is also not about buying from a US dealer vs. buying from a UK dealer. This thread is about a technical problem with a particular camera/lens, if others have seen similar problems, and if known resolution exists. And it is about sharing experiences. Tomorrow another buyer could face identical problems with a "US" camera, and then what would it be? An "isolated occurence"? After the information from this thread, it would be reinforcement to the belief that the design itself is at fault.

 

Thank you, I'll inform you of the goings on.

[tak_l._poon1]

Dear Vijay,

 

Let us concentrate on discussion on the lens. I think the wires, if they are tied down near the soldering ends then the design is workable. But of course this is an old technique/technology. And there is a defective batch of lens. So if you get a new lens from a batch without defect in manufacturing, you should be able to resume your photo business. I hope they are going to replace the lens soon.

 

I have one question to ask you for an engineer's view point. You have seen a picture of my bellow, in which the electric connections work. I do have a minor problem. If I use the bellow, the battery exhausts 3 times faster than if I use the lens directly connected to the camera. Is this also due to a bad design with the use of such wires?

 

Regards,

 

Tak

[vijay_nebhrajani]

Tak,

 

You are right, I tend to get a little carried away sometimes when we get discussing irrelevant issues.

 

Yes, there probably is a bad batch out there. However, that does not take away the fact that the design is inherently less reliable. Wires in a V shape (not U) even if tied down at the ends, are not quite as reliable. That is because of the knee; it is the place where maximum stress is placed. Your bellows are in a U-shape, and that puts less stress, since there is no sudden change in the curvature. (A V-shape, even at an obtuse angle has a sudden change of curvature at the bend.)

 

As for power consumption with your bellows unit, here are my views.

 

The wires in this case are most likely supposed to merely act as shorts from the camera to the lens. As such, they are probably designed as very low impedance connections. It is theoretically possible that the camera sees a higher impedance (with the same lens) when the bellows are attached... if this is the case, you may notice that the bellows wires warm up (or if they have really high impedance, heat up). If you do not notice that these wires are warmer than the rest of the system, then you can rule out this problem.

 

If you are so inclined, you can also take a multimeter (a cheap, basic analog one should suffice - available at any electronics store for a few dollars) and try to check the resistance of the wires... should be a few ohms at most. All contacts on one side should connect directly to the corresponding contact on the other side, and not to each other (on either side). You may try cleaning the contacts. Its OK to do so with nail-polish remover (acetone) as long as you do not get the acetone on plastic parts of the bellows. A q-tip/johnsons's bud is fine.

 

If this checks out fine too, then I do not know why the excess power consumption should exist. For the bellows, this design with a U shape is acceptable. I hope that the plastic insulation is in good condition, and is not cracking or has become soft and sticky.

 

It is also possible that with the bellows you actually spend more time with the camera ON... more careful focusing, moving around etc, stopping down the lens, mirror lock up etc. That could also explain, to some extent, greater power consumption. It is also conceivable that your style requires you to shoot bellows shots in different temperature conditions than other shots - macro indoors in an AC environment...

 

By the way, if you want to see what a good moving connection is like, you should remove the finder of your Rollei, and flip up the focusing screen. You will then see the flat, flexible PCB that connects the meter cells in the mirror to the body. An ideal connector for the bellows would look like a telephone handset cord - check out the bellows for the Contax 645.

 

Hope this helps,

 

Regards,

[tak_l._poon1]

Dear Vijay,

 

Perhaps the fact that the wires are physically long may also contribute to the rapid drainage of the battery.

 

Regards,

 

Tak

[vijay_nebhrajani]

Tak,

 

Well, we have gone off topic too, have we not? Nevertheless...

 

That would be unlikely - from an energy perspective, the wiring would have to be "eating" significant energy to be able to drain the battery that much. Since there is nothing in a wire except resistance that could drain that energy, you would notice heating of the wires. Consider this - a normal copper wire is used for powering the computer you are reading this on - it allows the transfer of kilowatt-hours of energy; and does not itself heat up noticeably... and its about 6 feet long.

 

No, the length of the bellows wires should have nothing to do with it.

 

UPDATE ON 180/2.8

 

The test roll with the 80/2.8 came back fine. Conclusion is that it is the 180/2.8 Xenar that is at fault. It goes back to RW today.

 

Regards,

[vijay_nebhrajani]

UPDATE as of August 16, 2001.

 

Hello all,

 

I thought I should update you on the status of what happened with this issue.

 

I received a new 180/2.8 lens as a replacement. This is the third lens I received; I am pleased to report that it seems to work fine. I also noticed some differences as compared to the two previous lenses and I thought I should report these to you too.

 

1. It seems as though the gap between the barrels between which the wires run is larger (earlier, this was about 3 or 3.5 mm, now it seems like 5mm or so). This allows for less obstructed movement of the wires, and I don't know if this is a good thing or not.

 

2. The cables (two wire sets, in flat rubber covers) seem to move lesser with focusing; as if the wires were fixed at the inner end (which is not visible from peering into the rear of the lens).

 

3. The wires enter the lens mount at a 90 degree angle, and this would probably stress the wires to a lesser degree; in the earlier lenses these wires entered at a slant, and I got the persistent feeling that the wires were tugged every time the lens was focused. I get this feeling lesser with this new lens.

 

4. The amount of dust inside the lens is considerably lesser.

 

While I am not convinced that even this "redesign" will result in a more reliable lens, I have to admit that the new lens feels more stable - the earlier lenses had "jumpy" displays, with this lens, the display does not flash or blink or change in any way when it is focused. Indicates better connection, at least for the moment.

 

I hope everybody else's lens is performing fine; it will give me some measure of confidence in Rollei's design.

 

Regards,

[tak_l._poon1]

Dear Vijay,

 

Best of luck this time and I sincerely hope that you finally are enjoying photography.

 

The Rollei is a fine camera, but there are times when things go wrong and there are places where things are not perfect. But I am so used to the camera that for me it is difficult to change now. I wish that the company after having swallowed back 4 to 5 defective lenses have learned to improve the quality and reliability of their products.

 

Incidentally the agent here is advertising the same lens. I wonder if it is from the 'improved' batch or not. :)

 

Regards,

 

Tak

[paul_schmid1]

Hello Vijay. Thank you for all the information regarding the Rollei 180/2.8. You mentioned a potential "bad batch" of these lenses available on the market. I am wondering if you recorded the serial number of the lens you returned to RW and the serial number of the one you are satisfied with. (just partial #'s to identify the series would be fine) I have an opportunity to buy one of these lenses and want to avoid any problems. Thank again.