daryl_jorud1

Thanks Nicolas and Andrew for your helpful responses. As with any older camera, condition is everything. But, the voices of experience supercede that. For the past 25+ years, my Rollei experience has been with the TLR's. It's time that I became familiar with the 35 firsthand.

Thanks Mike and Nicolas for clarifying. I'm off to find a 35S. Some years ago, I had the occasion to handle a freshly serviced 35S. As I recall, the shutter release had a stiff detent to overcome before tripping, and that deterred me at the time from purchasing the camera. Is the stiff detent I encountered typical of the 35S shutter release, or is this atypical? If so, is this something that can be adjusted/tweaked by a competent service person so as to reduce the amount of force required to release the shutter?

Thanks for your responses. Sounds like 35S has the advantage(s) over the 35SE. Out of curiosity, what is the exposure rangein EV of both meters? Seems peculiar that the SE's meter would be less sensitive to low light than the S's meter......

Which of these two cameras, Rollei 35S and Rollei 35SE, offers the

most convenient and reliable light metering arrangement, and why?

Which camera is preferable for those who wear eyeglasses? Thank you

for sharing your experiences.

Mark, the early Vivitar Series 1 lenses have quite a following of

diehard enthusiasts. Others you may wish to try someday

include a 135/f2.3, a 200/f3, a 35-85 varifocal, and the rather

ubiquitous 70-210 macro zoom. They were high quality and felt

like it too, with silky smooth focus. My 90/f2.5 in M42 thread

mount is permanently affixed to a Chinon Memotron II. For

macro photography, I find the combination hard to beat.

If you can secure a Chinon CE-II Memotron, you will have the capability of using most any M42 screw mount lens and have auto-exposure capability with it. Nice for the older Takumars and Super Taks that don't have automatic stop down apertures, not to mention the plethora of other fine m42 lenses that can be used with it. IMO, one of THE most user friendly M42 body/any lens combination that ever was.

This is probably a mildew odor. I have treated this condition successfully on

several cameras using the following procedure: 1. wipe the camera

thoroughly clean (do the best you can) with a soft cloth containing an

antifungal such as Lysol. I don't use antifungal on the lens, but instead use a

microfiber cloth with a couple of drops of optical lens cleaner in it. 2. allow

the camera to dry over night in a well ventilated location. 3. carefully wrap

the camera in a porous, soft cotton cloth. 4. place the cloth covered camera

into a cardboard box which has dimensions at least 10-15 cm longer, wider,

and deeper than the camera, i.e. with sufficient space between the camera

and box to allow for the descenting media which will surround the camera. 5.

here's the descenting step.....fill the box with a strong cinnamon/eucalyptus

scented potpourri, surrounding the cloth covered camera entirely until the box

is full. this potourri is readily available at craft stores and other stores selling

ornaments/decorations. let your nose decide which scent you can tolerate. 6.

here is the step that is absolutely essential and requires your

patience........close the cover of the box and set it aside for 3 to 6 months until

the foul odor is completely eradicated. If you intend to keep the camera, this

lengthy process works. It also is effective on cameras and cases that reek of

tobacco odor, as from cigar or pipe smoke.

Thanks Jon. Just today, I found that Essex Camera in New

Jersey can do the repair. I tried clicking on your name, but

couldn't access your email. Due to shipping costs, it is probably

best not to send it half way around the world. But, I'd still be

interested in contacting your man about it. If he has lots of

experience with these, location doesn't matter.

I am looking for a recommendation on who to send my Kodak

Retina IIIS rangefinder camera for repair and overhaul. Do you

know of anyone who specializes in these cameras? Thanks very

much.

Would anyone care to comment on the pros and cons of the

Yashica Minister D rangefinder camera? Actual user

commentaries about this camera are few and far between.

Thanks for sharing your experiences.

Ed,

 

Perhaps one of the list viewers who can read Japanese

characters can provide some more details on this one. Re the

Rolleiflex, you are correct, some of the later E3s had 6 element

lenses. I have one with a 6 element Xenotar. None of the 2.8

Rolleis had 6 element versions. After writing my earlier

response, I recalled that there was a version of the Olympusflex

that came with 6 element lens.....so it certainly could be that

Kalloflex had one as well.

Ed, I have the owner's manual for K2. It describes the 4 element

Tessar-type lens, with a depiction showing it to consist of a

single element in front, another single behind it, and a cemented

doublet in the rear. I have a brochure for the Kalloflex Automat

which also mentions the 4 element Prominar lens. My K2

brochure likewise refers to the same 4 element lens. No

mention of a six element lens, at least in the English versions of

the literature. Perhaps a 6 element lens was released for the

Japanese market? If you are able to get a good scan of the

advertisement, maybe it could be pasted into one of the online

translators. That might help you to interpret the claims made in

the ad. If this camera actually does exist, afaik it would be the

only 6 element standard lens ever to appear on a

non-interchangeable twin lens reflex camera, other than the late

model 3.5F Rolleis.

The Ricohflex is one of my favorites. It has a great 3 element

coated lens (thanks for the photos Gene). It was available in

quite a few different models, all similar except for shutter.

Models III, IIII, IV, VI, VII, VIIM, VIIS, Holiday, Million, and Super

Ricohflex, and maybe one or two other VII variations. Most came

with shutters having 1/100 or 1/200 top speed. However, some

of the more scarce later examples had tops speeds of 1/300 or

1/500 (seikosha) and even a hot shoe. While the simple

red-window advancement method works OK, there was an

accessory available called an Auto Stop that provided a more

convenient method of advancing the film. You could also shoot

35mm film with these using a special insert. Most require

servicing as the green grease Riken used on the focusing

helixes has become stiff or frozen over time. Once properly

CLA'd, they are smooth as silk.

 

If you want a more "Rollei" like camera, try one of the later

Ricohflexes which used a moving front panel configuration for

focusing. The last incarnations were called Diacords and

Ricohmatic 225. Their lineup of tlr cameras closely followed that

of Rollei (even to the autoexposure models, including 4X4

format). These later cameras were equipped with very fine 4

element lenses.

 

Here is a website which offers quite a lot of information on these

cameras: http://www.angelfire.com/ca/erker/ricohflex.html

At the top of the front door is a small rectangular "button". Slide it

in the direction of the viewfinder and the door will flop down and

open. Once you succeed in opening it, you will begin to

appreciate one of the nicer folders ever made. Enjoy!

You may want to try and locate an Ensign Autorange 16-20. It has the

features you are seeking. Size is about the same as a Perkeo. Superb Ross

Xpres 75mm lens, too. Only limitation might be top shutter speed of only 1/

200 second. For slightly more money, and perhaps easier to locate would be

the Super Ikonta A with Zeiss Tessar lens. All the features you want as well,

but with higher speed shutter. Both cameras highly desireable to collectors,

so nice examples command good prices.

Benny, I have both cameras. The top deck meter indicator is a

nice feature of the 14...advantage 14. The meter of the 14E, with

internal LEDs is probably more rugged...advantage 14E. 14

calls for PX625 mercury cell, while 14E calls for PX640 mercury

cell. Adapters like CRIS MR9 (others available too) allow use of

the 14 with easy to find hearing aid batteries. PX640A cells

(alkaline, 1.5v) are currently available through Radio

Shack....expensive and who knows how much longer they will be

available. Adapters are available for this battery, but are spendy

if you get the best. Battery advantage arguably goes to the 14 .

Service for both cameras is available from Mark Hama, who

knows these cameras better than anyone else. He replaced the

degraded mirrors in the rangefinder of both of my cameras, and

also the mirror for the internal meter indicator on the 14. Both

cameras now functon like NEW! These are heavy beasts, so be

prepared to buy a nice Op-Tech strap if you intend to tote them

around for any length of time. I like both models. In twilight

conditions, I use he 14E due to the LEDs. Otherwise, I like the

needle indicator of the 14 as it seems more precise when

making over/under exposures. Lest I forget, they are truly

awesome picture-takers, too!

Harry, you will not regret adding a Contarex to your collection. It is the one slr

camera that I have deepest remorse over having let mine go about 15 years

ago. Prior to selling my outfit, it was serviced by W.W. Umbach, who was one

of the few technicians at the time who would/could perform any service or

repair on the camera. Today he may be the only person in the USA who is

truly competent to do any such servicing. There may be others, but I am

unaware of them. The Contarex body is highly complex and should not be

tampered with by anyone who doesn't know exactly what to do in

disassembling/assembling it. What's to like about the Contarex? First and

foremost are the lenses. To this day, I have had no other lenses which I can

say can compare. The heft and silkiness of each was a joy to experience.

The quality of images produced is of the highest order. I had 5 lenses: 25,

35, 50, 85, and 135. All superb. I must not fail to mention another quality of

the Contarex: the sound. That beautiful whirring of the shutter mechanism.

Music to my ear. I would call Contarex the Deusenberg of cameras. Which

Contarex will I purchase, when I do so again.....the Special.

 

OK, what else to consider? If it is a rangefinder you desire.....the M3 without

question, or a Contax IIa. Both full classics.

 

If an SLR, you may wish to also take a close look at the Topcon Super D,

series 71. Timeless design with lenses very reminiscent of Contarex. Fit and

finish of these camera/lens outfits is of the first order. Or, if you want a more

compact unit, the Pentax Spotmatics with the redoubtable s.m.c. Takumar

lenses will give you much pleasure.

 

Just somebody elses 2 cents....

Ed,

The knobs on the Titan are pressed on, rather than screwed. Removing them

will require a specialty tool, maybe a tiny puller. After that, a tiny drill to

remove rivets. The top of the camera certainly appears to be riveted to the

body, with 3 rivets beneath each knob. One of the rivets on each side

actually protrudes through to the inside of the camera body. You can see the

clinched end of the rivet as it is silver in color. As tightly as the top fits on the

camera body, it doesn't seem likely that any fold-over tabs are used to affix the

top firmly to the body either. Having pondered the exact same issue myself

when I obtained my first Titan, I concluded that Ansco must have felt that the

best way to insure structural integrity to this odd duck was to rivet it together

with no easy way to disassemble it again. Or if there is a way, it is the best

concealed secret in cameradom I have found. Had Ansco realized that they

had built such an attractive beast for future generations to admire, they may

have found an easier way for disassembling it again. As you point out, they

do have a very high level of finish to them. The body covering is tough as

nails, and looks/feels great too. Maybe that's why I have 3 Titans. The

viewfinder clarity of each varies. I use the clearest one and am fastidiious

about making sure that the exterior surfaces of the finders are clean. If the

camera was ever exposed to prolonged damp/humid conditions, the

viewfinders may have become fogged over time. The shutters on each are

reasonably accurate and the lens is quite commendable, producing extra nice

images beginning at mid apertures. At a half century in age, the bellows on

these cameras are often in fragile, sticky condition. . The Titan strikes me as

kind of a "Timex" among folding cameras, made to take a licking and keep on

ticking. One of the more attractively styled folders, too.

I recently acquired a 1958 Mamiya 6 Automat II folder. It has a Mamiya-Sekor

lens. What type of filter mount does this camera use? There are no threads

surrounding the lens. I could probably improvise using a generic push-on

filter, but I am assuming that this camera came with an optional filter/lenshood

accessory. Anybody have one of these or would care to offer a suggestion on

how to equip this neat old camera with filters? I have looked for a manual for

it, but to no avail thus far.

RJ, you confirmed my suspicion. The knob I have is the earlier one without the

distance scale. It must be different from the later knob. The manual, as you pointed

out, shows the DSF-2 or DSM-2 accessory knobs fitting the F camera. Must be

that the F has larger focusing knobs as standard than does the non-F. I have a

DSM-2 enroute as I write this, so when it arrives, the mystery will be over.

 

As to the Rolleiflex accessory knob, I have one of them on an MX. It fits absolutely

tight and makes the MX the silkiest operating Rollei I have ever used. When

compared against my 3.5F, the MX with accessory large knob, is easier to focus than

the F, and has a better feel to it as well. After adding a Maxwell Hi-Lux screen, this

MX type 2 with a razor sharp xenar lens has become my favorite Rolleiflex. Light

weight, all controls velvety smooth and delivers superb images to boot!

I recently purchased the large focusing knob accessory for Mamiya TLR. My

camera is a 220 Professional F, one of the last cameras in the series. I find that I

can't get the knob to fit. The opening in the large knob seems too small to fit over the

focusing knob on the Pro F. Are the focusing knobs on the 220 Pro F cameras

larger than the earllier 220 cameras, preventing the accessory large focusing knob

from fitting? Thanks for any help on this.

Recently I acquired two Kodak Monitor 620 cameras equipped with 101mm Kodak

Anastigmat Special lenses. This seems to be a very well built camera. I would be

most appreciative to those of you who would care to share your opinions regarding

the capability of this lens to produce sharp and contrasty prints. If you have used

the following cameras, how would you compare this Kodak lens to those found on

some other 6X9 cameras, such as the Super Ikonta with Tessar, Bessa with

Color-Skopar, or the Ensign 820 with Ross Xpres?Any other comments about this

camera that you'd care to offer I would also very much look forward to reading.

Thanks very much!

As a matter of fact, that is exactly what was done to my camera. There is a bit

more to it than grinding out the excess material, however. It is also necessary to

replace the "key" at the end of the short shaft underneath the winding knob. This

"key" must fit into the end of the 120 film spool rather well to allow for smooth

advancement of the film to the next frames. My camera had a new piece machined

out and then silver soldered into place to accommodate the 120 spools with the larger

key on the end. This requires utilizing the services of someone with a mini-lathe. The

important thing to remember when doing the conversion is to be neat in performing

the changes. The small rotary grinders are great, but one has to use care so as not

to slip up and accidentally mar nearby internal parts. Anyway, after the conversion is

done, you will have a very serviceable camera capable of providing great photos.

The anastar is a front cell focusing len that is capable of doing a very respectable

job. According the some information I found on the net about Kodak lenses, the

Anastar was capable of producing results practically up to the Ektar on the Medalist

series. (The Medalist, btw, is known to have one of the sharpest lenses ever!) I

would assume that this is at mid aperture settings as the Medalist Ektar is not a front

cell focus design. Critics of front cell focusing lenses point out that resolution at the

periphery of the image circle is degraded somewhat, especially when focusing at

close range. This may or may not be a disadvantage to the user, depending on the

application. If you can find a Tourist with Anastar lens, go for it! You will be

impressed.

Todd, here is some information you might find helpful. In a May, 1966 ad in Modern

Photography, Minolta advertises 3 models of the Autocord. As listed: "Minolta

Autocord" with 12 exposure capability but no meter, "Minolta Autocord III" with 12/24

capability but no meter, and "Minolta Autocord CdS" with 12/24 capability and meter.

The first two are identical cameras with the exception of the III having the 12/24

provision. Both have the strange strap lugs.

 

Jeff, in respone to your question about the focusing knob, always remember to

station the knob at the 6 o'clock position when closing the ever-ready case, or just

carrying it around for that matter. In this position, it has the camera body squarely

behind it, so it will not bend or break off as easily if accidentally bumped as it could if

positioned at 4 o'clock or 8 o'clock. If accidentally bumped, these focusing levers will

bend backward somewhat without breaking off. DO NOT try to bend them back. If

you do, they are likely to break off in your fingers. :-( Leave it alone to be safe.

Paul,

just a point of information on the Rolleifix accessory. Be aware that not all MX

cameras can utilize the Rolleifix. The type 1 MX will not, while the type 2 MX will.

Look at the base plate on the bottom of your camera that accepts the tripod. It

must have a groove around it so that the Rolleifix has something upon which to grip.

If it doesn't have the groove, the Rolleifix won't work for you. All MX type 2 cameras

and later Rolleiflexes have the grooved baseplate. IMO, the Rolleifix is invaluable as it

allows for fast mounting of the Rolleiflex on a tripod and can provide a little extra

weight distribution and support to the sheet metal cover to which the baseplate is

attached, especially important if you are tilting the camera downward quite a bit. And

even more so if you have a flash attached which would make the camera assembly

even heavier. I use a ballhead underneath the Rolleifix which makes the whole outfit

very easy to manipulate. As to a Maxwell screen, I have one in my MX. Without a

doubt, it makes this camera a complete joy to use. Mine has the ultra fine grain and

4 grid lines. I prefer this model to the split image model that I have in another camera.

Another accessory you may wish to find which provides for easier use is the larger

knob that Rollei made which simply snaps on over the small focusing knob on the MX.

This accessory makes for much easier focusing. These 3 accessories make the MX

my favorite Rollei. The MX is noticeably lighter than later models and has the better

finder cover too. You don't have to squeeze in the side panels of the finder when

closing it as you do on the later removeable ones (Ts and Fs), so it's less fiddly. For

me, there is yet another plus for the MX as opposed to the later MX-EVS and E

series Rolleis. I find the shutter and aperature controlling finger wheels to be easier

turning on the MXes than on the later cameras because there isn't the resistance

producing linkage connecting the two as required by the EVS system. The EVS and

E cameras originated larger finger wheels to partially compensate for the increased

internal resistance created by the linkage. Once you get your MX customized to suit

your wishes, you'll have no regrets.