jaroslav_ilnytskyi

<p>

<i>

Any tip on how to replace the whole shutter unit ? is it very difficult ?

</i>

</p>

 

<p>

If the new shutter is of the same size and got all the controls at the same places - not difficult at all. What you should do is to open camera back and to find a ring screw with 2 notches around the shutter rear element mounting. This should be unscrewed. The best is to use appropriate spanner, the alternative - long-arm pliers (passatiges ?) I got a couple of these in a modelling shop. At the end hold the front of the shutter to avoid dropping it down. Some bellows folds tightly just near this ring screw - better not to rub off the fabric on these - the bellows folds can be protected by paper cylinder, etc when unscrewing. Then screw a new shutter back. If you use a shutter from another model sometimes the shutter release or cocking lever (aor aperture lever) are located/bended/shaped differently, a quick check is helpful. The threads size on the shutters for 6x6 folders are pretty standard, but this is easy to check before replacing the lens elements anyway.

</p>

 

<p>

Good luck!

</p>

I compared slides (Provia 100F) and b/w negs (Delta 100) done with Konica Auto S2, Olympus RD and Pentax SMC-M 50mm f1.7 viewing with 16x loupe. As for me, Konica is a touch ahead of other two, not really much, though. Excellent craftmanship, precise mechanics, a joy to use indeed!

Don,

 

The pros are quite well known and already mentioned in previous posts. That is really a great camera.

 

Some cons, as for my likings:

 

1. RF spot is rather small and dim.

 

2. T exposure is very unconvenient to use. (Besides unconviniency there is also some shake given to the lens just before the exposure. This has nothing to do with shutter itself - this is part of T exposure mechanics. I found - either use a tripod or use a self timer when handholding, it can be set to 1/2 or 1/3 of full move which gives a couple of seconds before the shot).

 

3. The shutter and aperture rings on a lens are rattling. The lens elements are not but the filter mounted will. Just feel not solidly built after you hold 35mm rangefinders such as Yashica or Konica Auto S2, etc.

 

4. The shutter is not well sealed against dust, better to keep camera in a case, other wise a dust gathers on the lens elements adjacent to the shutter and aperture blades.

 

Well, that's enough. The point is that I love this camera! Just complaining that it doesn't feels in hands like Super Ikonta or Kodak duo!

 

Jaroslav.

Thanks, Rick, that's a very good link indeed. By a naked eye it looks like it might just go, will know for sure when the camera arrive (won one ob eBay yesterday).

I recall reading somewhere on the net that the prisms should be displaced one against another to help with vertical alignment (sort of take out and reinsert one tooth further). But on my Moskva-4 the prisms were mounted not straight on the toothwheels but on some sort of rings with two notches and then the rings were mounted on the toothwheels. That helped a lot to correct the vertical displacement by just turning the inside rings! Not sure whether the same applies to Moskva-5, but well could be and is easy to check. After correcting a vertical displacement one should realign the horizontal alignment, as usually.

<p>

Thanks very much, Mike, that is really helpful!

</p>

 

<p>

<i>

On my IIa, the rear lens element protrudes clear past the helicoid into the camera body. Perhaps it is different on other models.

</i>

</p>

 

<p>

The helicoids I've seen so far (on Kodak duo and Balda 35mm) got a flat front with the central opening to mount Compur/Prontor. The rear side is in the form of cylinder with the threads. The rear lens elements of the lens are within the cylinder and move forward/backward when you focus (together with the shutter). Now, here the problem is. When using another lens either the rear element can be too large to get inside the helicoid cylinder or the cylinder is too long and will cause the light fall-off in the corners (my lens are wide-angle for 6x7). So, that, effectively, I need to bother with only two specified dimensions - the internal diameter of the helicoid cylinder and it's depth from where the shutter is mounted to the end of the cylinder.

</p>

 

<p>

From your description, Mike, looks like that in your Retina the helicoid is on the front and the rear of it is flat (hence, the rear lens element is protruding far inside the camera) if I understood that correctly. It might be even better for my purpose in case the shutter will go into the front.

</p>

 

<p>

<i>

I think you will get a much better answer from Rick Oleson on this if he happens to have some Retinas opened up. If not, I could take a picture of mine if that would be of any use.

</i>

</p>

 

<p>

Rick, do you happen to have any opened?

</p>

 

<p>

Thanks for the reply!

</p>

<i> It would require cutting a hole in the back of the camera, fitting another frame shutter and possibly ruby window,...

</i>

 

With most films it is perfectly possible to live with only one window for 645. All Fuji slide films have a series of black circles before the frame number, the first one coinsides very well with the half frame for 6x9! So, after frame 1 watch the first circle for frame 2, then the next number and so on. The same applies to Ilford films with star-like circles (more difficult to see, though). Sacrificing one film and measuring the distances on the backing paper may reveal some corrections are required (say, wind until the circle is slightly before or after the center of the red window, etc).

 

If the mask is scratchy then one of the options is to make a mask of thin black carton and put it inbetween the filmgate and the bellows. The size should be individually adjusted for the camera. The corners of the mask can be rounded a bit. This works and normally mask is not moving around and is just pressed when the camera is folded.

The models I've seen on sale are Retina 1b and retina 3 with selenium meter.

I am working on super-wide-angle 6x7 camera which involves mounting

47mm lens with appropriate coverage on older 6x9 folder (I've got

Ensign Ranger II). I did the similar combo before, with 65mm Angulon

and Baldalux camera and am very pleased with the results. The lens is

already mounted in Prontor shutter (from some 6x6 folder). The only

missing link is the helicoid which I hope to strip off some other

camera.

 

I just thought that many of our forum members are owning different

Kodak Retinas and I might try to ask a favour to measure the helicoid

dimensions. Some of the models (especially not working ones) are

quite cheap on eBay.

 

I am interested in knowing the internal diameter of the rear side of

the helicoid (whether my the rear element will go there or not) and

the depth of the helicoid (measured from the rear lens element to the

edge of the helicoid's cylinder). Unlike Super-Angulon the rear group

of my lens is cylindrical so that the chances are it may just fit. I

know it will go into Kodak duo helicoid but these are more rare and

expensive to get.

 

I would really appreciate a great help very much!

 

Regards,

Jaroslav

Congratulations, Donald, on your purchase and good luck with it! Another possible thing to look for which is not mentioned by you is the possibly quite strong spring in Moment shutter. It may kick the lens assembly quite a bit (I had this in Moskva-4). It might be related to the rigidness of the front standard as well, as you mentioned. Another possible source of lens shake is the linkage between the top shutter release and the one on the shutter. I would recommend to try both. Sometimes, what people might thing is the lens softness can be just a lens shake. Other obvious thing to check is the infinity focus, but if the camera was serviced before the sale this should be OK.

This certainly looks as a post-war model to me, and this is one of the cheaper Franka models.

I had this is Kiev-60. Even worse, the overlap was OK at the start of winding and then gradually decreased to the end. If in your camera the edges has a metal bar inside then it's possible that these are bend a bit and that's why a gap is not light tight. May be, slight bending can cure the problem? Otherwise, just a guess, perhaps a velvet strips glued on both edges might help, but before doing this I would think twice and ask people around.

The computer-assisted lens design might be also what makes a difference in modern lens-making technology, especially for many-elements zooms.

Additional plate with a circular hole in the middle might be one of the solutions. Can be made of metal/plastic + rubber surface or just of hard rubber. It will rest upon the camera body giving more support.

Thanks for the replies very much. It is definitely not a film issue (Provia 400F vs Velvia etc.) as I have plenty of wonderfully sharp chromes on this film with Flektogon 50mm and Vega-3B (on Kiev-60). Neither, I think this is a camera shake (I know how these looks like with double lines, etc, got these sometimes on other cameras as well). The unsharp frames were with 1/125s mainly and these definitely looks as bad focusing. The ground glass checked infinity looks alright (illuminated pattern on ground glass viewed through the taking lens by SLR with telephoto, thanks to R.Oleson's webpage). RF focused mid-range images on XP2 looks perfectly sharp as well. I suspect that must be either bad film loading or, another option - film+paper on provia 400F is thinner and it rests on the pressure plate further than required. This might be a bit strange as far I always thought that colour film must be thicker (perhaps XP2 paper is thicker).

 

Perhaps, just need more films to try. Still - had anyone tried 120 chrome film with 220 setting for the pressure plate?

Depends on the condition of Tessar as well (cleaned, no haze, no fungus, no scratches). All things being equal and both lens stopped down, the main difference should be in the corners mainly.

I would think that if looking for perspective buyers among photo.net community Yuri can place an advert on photo.net auction http://www.photo.net/gc/domain-multi which will be the right thing to do, isn't it?

Two films exposed in my newly acquired and fixed Fuji GS645S and a

bit confusing results. First one - Ilford XP2 400 - perfectly sharp,

second one - Fuji Provia 400F - and here I can clearly see focusing

problems (especially on infinity shots).

 

Checked focus with the ground glass - perfectly OK. The pressure

plate was on 120 setting in both. I don't have a manual, but when I

loaded I first wound tight a couple of wraps on take-up spool, then

put it in place, advanced to the arrow, when closing the back - made

some tension on film turning advanced lever a bit, closed the back.

 

Am I missing something when loading? Os this is something to do with

film/paper thickness? The pressure plate makes sort of "tunnel gate"

for a film, the exact film position may depend on the film+paper

thickness (perhaps thinner bw film stays closer to the pressure

plate)? Did anyone tried to use 220 setting for a pressure plate with

120 film to press it harder. The only danger I can see is more

tension on the film transport gears (just fixed :-) )

 

I would be really happy to know opinions from more experienced users

of this camera. Thanks!

I have Voigtlander baby Bessa 66 with collapsible frame-viewfinder, perhaps one of smallest 6x6 cameras made. It's quite light and got really well corrected 3-element Voigtar (better than some of 4-element lens I have). The camera fits into a pocket really nicely and is pleasant to use, indeed.

I got nice Fuji GS645S recently and am very pleased with the results.

The camera feels especially user-friendly after I've been mostly

using older folders from 30s-50s for a while. The infinity focus is a

bit out, though. Does anyone have any idea how to readjust it?

 

I know, many people would rather suggest sending it to the pro

repairman but I feel rather to do it myself (did quite many repairs

on folding cameras before and also fixed the transport problem in

this GS645S already).

 

Would appreciate your comments, thanks!

>>

Okay, light bouncing around inside the camera from the red window, I can believe -- though in that case, I'm not certain how you'd ever tell that was where it came from

>>

 

Because that was on colour slide film and a light leak was red :-)

I had a red window light leak onto the film in one camera only (paradoxically, in Bessa RF 6x9, the best one in a lot in my previous message above). That happened because the pressure plate is not coming tight to the red window and the light strikes the inside of the camera throught the red window at some angle. To cure this one can glue a velvet ring around the red window opening inside the camera (as in pre-war Super Ikonta 645) or a ring cut of some soft porous media (e.g. mouse-pad). It shouldn't be too thick to avoid pressure plate bending. You may need to sacrifice the slide cover for the red window but if the ring works there will be no need in that.

Of the all 6x9 folding camera I owned and tried (Agfa Record III w Apotar 105/f4.5, Ikonta Nettar w Tessar 105/f4.5, Moskva-4 w Industar 110/f4.5, Bessa w Skopar 105/f4.5, Baldalux w Radionar 105/f4.5, Bessa RF w Skopar 105/f3.5) I liked the results from Bessa RF w Skopar 105/f3.5 the most. This model got coupled rengefinder, moving whole lens/shutter assembly, excellent (uncoated) lens and is moderately priced ($100-150 on eBay, probably more in the shop). It is a predecessor of Bessa II model. The whole moving lens/shutter assembly (in contrary to front element focusing models, all the rest in the list) in my opinion do make a difference in picture quality for closer shots given the RF is adjusted. I did both BW and chromes and the colour rendering is really good (lens hood is a must). The same must be true for Bessa II as well and with even better results from coated Skopar/Heliar, but essentially more to pay for this model. Concerning Agfa Record III - the holding and controls are very pleasant to use, the rangefinder is nice (but beware of poor quality bellows and frozen front element sometimes). I didn't liked the results from mine with Apotar 105/f4.5, perhaps Solinar equipped models are better. I wasn't satisfied with both resolution, abberations and colours especially away of 3-5m settings, but I might just had a bad example. I didn't liked the results from Moskva-4 as well, particularly for uncorrected abberations. Some other users quite like theirs, though.

 

Good luck,

Thanks for the responses very much! Now I have a couple of options, will give it a thought. From what I've read on graflex webpage you can't use trimmed 120 roll in 620 filmback (not quite understand why, I did used trimmed 120 in a couple of cameras, with extra inserts to have a firm grip for transport and better centering on the axes), may be just of the roll length. I've got already Rada rollfilm back which I use with older Welta 6x9 folding view camera, may be the camera back could be modified somehow to accept this one.

 

Regards,

Andrew,

 

Kodak duo 620 RF also got automatic film transport and moving whole lens assembly via helicoidal thread. Film transport module should not be linked to RF anyhow (it might be more tricky to take the cover off, though). Now, in Kodak first I set the infty focus of the lens by ground glass (forget about a RF for a while). One way is to take lens off and to put/take off more paper rings between the lens assembly and the moving plate. Another way - by finding another thread in helicoid. To remove helicoid I set the lens to closest focus, then removed 2 metal pins (rods?) from the back of the camera (when helicoid moves it slides on these, they were fixed by 2 tiny screws each). After that I rotated helicoid on front to free it up completely from the thread (actually, to rotate it I was forced to take off the shutter release lever on the shutter by taking shutter cover and spped selection ring out, then pute these back). After many trials I was able to find the right helicoidal thread to achieve good infty focus (there was a possibility for some fine tuning as well by adjusting the thread itself, held by a couple of screws but that wasn't needed). Put the shutter release back, screw the aligning rods back. Well, in Super Isolette it might be different.

 

Then, after correct infty focus one should adjust the RF. It is absolutely the same as in uncoupled RF cameras, but there is some linkage coming from the lens assembly. Just by viewing you should be able to figure out the screw for vertical alighnment (notmally adjusts the mirror axis vertically) and the one for the horizontal one.

 

Obviously, I am not biasing towards selfrepair, it depends on camera complexity and/or cost, just sharing my experience. I just thought, the design might be similar and you might find my comments useful if you decide to give a try.

 

Best wishes,