roy_faverty

<p>Frank, I still come back to this old site because it is interesting to read every ones experience and opinions about the Rollei SL family. One of my Rollei SL 35s fell 35 to 50 feet down the face of a coarse rock waste dump at a mine up in Montana. I bought it while in graduate school in Berkeley and was so fondly attached to it I scrambled down the face of the dump to retrieve it. Dump faces are unstable for many years so it was dangerous. The camera was badly damaged, including the penta-prism and the shutter and quiet old by then. Neither Rollei USA or Marflex would repair it and both told me to just buy a use one. So it sat on the shelf for 15 years. About ten years ago I met Dave Fenny a senior technician from Rollei USA and Marflex, he had lots of part, he pounded out the dents and dings on the top plate, repaired or replace the pentaprism, shutter and counter for a fair price. It took about three month to repair as the old glues and lubricants hand to be remove and the shutter curtain's flexability had to be restore as it had been frozen in a half cocked place for the 15 years. However, when he was finished the camera felt better than a when it was new, I acquired an unused Rollei SL 35 from Germany of about the same age. They are in fact very durable. I think the best lens is the Planar f1.4 made in Germany. The Rollei SL35 E is great little camera, but the earliest products need to be clean and re-lubiricated early in their life. I did not know that at the time I own one and gave it to a friend. She loved the camera after she had it serviced. <br>

I now use the lenses on a Lumix GX7, they work well together, but my Leica lenses made for the Lumix bodies are better in terms of resolution, as to be expect of a lens designed for M4/3 sensors. None the less, I love the feel of Zeiss and Schneider lenses on the Lumix cameras.<br>

Cheers<br>

Roy</p>

<p>Craig, I am sure you have solved this problem by now, but just in case I will till you my solution to scanning my 35mm glass mounted diapositives and negatives. The glass surface is detected by the scanner and the resulting scan is soft, way to soft with contrast lost. I just remounted them in very snug glassless Gepe and Wess slide mounts. They are held very flat and scan beautifully when placed in the slide holder. <br>

The main value of glass mounts is for projection of slides and negative when teaching as they appear evenly sharp from edge to edge. Who does that anymore?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Peter Roberts, your writing totally out of school. Neither Nikon, Leica, Zeiss nor Olympus rely totally on cameras for their primary business. They are all major players in microscopy, surveying, medical equipment and many other optical dependent industries. Panasonic is a major partner with Leica in developing sensors and camera systems. I am primarily a MF and LF photographer, but I own a Lumix G1 I bought on the gray market. Its a fine camera and lots of fun to use. Micro 4/3 is a great alternative to lugging my Nikon system around and the Leica lenses developed for it are superb.</p>

<p>Dave Feely, of Key Camera, Longmont Colorado, tele 303 772 7690 is well know for his expertise in the repair and maintenance of European cameras and has a sizeable collection of Exakta cameras. I don't own or use Exakta cameras, but I have been tempted by his collection. Give him a call, it is worth the effort. He is not in or taking calls on Wednesday. He is a longterm professional serviceman and services the professionals and camera shops in the region.</p>

<p>I do not have experience with TV lenses, but John Van Stelten of "Focal Point, Inc." is set up and experienced in the repair of TV/Video cameras lenses. Lens repair is a vary specialized profession. His tele is 303 665 6640 and email is <a href="mailto:john@focalpointlens.com">john@focalpointlens.com</a> . also see <a href="http://www.focalpointlens.com">www.focalpointlens.com</a> . He has cleaned and repaired a number of LF lenses for me over a period of 30 years. His work is excellent and I am sure he is experienced in repairing video and TV lenses as I have seen his bench and equipment for just such lenses. Give him a call, its worth the effort. <br>

Roy</p>

<p>Raid, I have been doing similar by using the Rollei lenses on my micro 4/3rd Lumix G1. Keep in mind that with sensors smaller than 35 mm equivalence we are using only the sweet spot or optical center area of the lens where performance is best, so it is no wonder that both you and I are pleased. These Zeiss and Schneiders are fine lenses, I miss using film, but the digital camera is so much easier. I have been particularly pleased with the Schneider 35 mm Angulon and an old polarizor from the 1980s. It almost feels like using an 85 mm Sonnar on a Rollei SL 35. I am starting to get attached to this idea of Zeiss and Schneider lens with the Lumix</p>

<p>One other item to consider is that in the 1970s Rollei and Zeiss had a vested interest in each other. Essentially Zeiss was underwriting Rollie. The lens production whether labeled Zeiss or Rollei were tightly controlled. Also, keep in mind all the designs and lens patents were null and void after the war, but companies like Rollei and Zeiss worked hard together to restore Germany's camera and optic industries. Many of the lenses had Zeiss manufactured element groups assembled into the lens barrel and mount at a Rollei plant. Whether made in Sinapore or Germany the Rollei lenses were made with Schott glass and to Zeiss specs. Early Rollei SL 35 lenses had the Zeiss Transparent Coating labeled T on Zeiss lens or not at all as this was developed before the war, later the T* coating labed HFT (High Fidelity Transfer) on Rollei was standard on Rollei lens. Mainly it was a hard multicoating with less propensity to scratch when cleaning. I have owned lenses with each of these coating designations and cannot tell any difference in performance except in high glare situations The T* (HFT) perform better under these severe situation.s A good lens hood and shading can make up for the difference. With this said regarding Zeiss, all theSchneider lenses made for Rollei were made in Germany and are excellent. I prefer the Schneider 135 mm over the Zeiss 135 mm, also the Schneider Angulon and Curtagon are just supperb. These lenses are gems that easily fit the Lumix G 1 and Canon SLR cameras.</p>

<p>One other item to consider is that in the 1970s Rollei and Zeiss had a vested interest in each other. Essentially Zeiss was underwriting Rollie. The lens production whether labeled Zeiss or Rollei were tightly controlled. Also, keep in mind all the designs and lens patents were null and void after the war, but companies like Rollei and Zeiss worked hard together to restore Germany's camera and optic industries. Many of the lenses had Zeiss manufactured element groups assembled into the lens barrel and mount at a Rollei plant. Whether made in Sinapore or Germany the Rollei lenses were made with Schott glass and to Zeiss specs. Early Rollei SL 35 lenses had the Zeiss Transparent Coating labeled T on Zeiss lens or not at all as this was developed before the war, later the T* coating labed HFT (High Fidelity Transfer) on Rollei was standard on Rollei lens. Mainly it was a hard multicoating with less propensity to scratch when cleaning. I have owned lenses with each of these coating designations and cannot tell any difference in performance except in high glare situations The T* (HFT) perform better under these severe situation.s A good lens hood and shading can make up for the difference. With this said regarding Zeiss, all theSchneider lenses made for Rollei were made in Germany and are excellent. I prefer the Schneider 135 mm over the Zeiss 135 mm, also the Schneider Angulon and Curtagon are just supperb. These lenses are gems that easily fit the Lumix G 1 and Canon SLR cameras.</p>

<p>Rick, its great to see all the images from the Jupiter 11. Its hard to let such a fine lens go, but it looks absolutely beautiful on the Zenit. I have two others of the narrow design and they seem every bit as sharp. I regularly shoot with Sonars on the Rollei and the Hasselblad. During the war the government forced Zeiss to make these lenses with M39 mounts for use on the Leica as at that time they were clearly superior to Leica lenses. These Sonnar M39 mounts are rare as hens teeth, so to put the Jupiter on the Leica or Voigtlander should be a very good combination. I used that lens on my Rollei SL35, it was impressive. I have used these on the Lumix G1 and found them very easy to focus, fairly bright for their age. Modern fixed focal lenses have a slight edge, but it is barely perceptable in normal photography. I love all this old junk, it is what I was raised with and undertand. Well with your help I have managed to kick the collecting habit, I have one more camera to get rid of. Have a great summer in your new residence, let us see your garden.</p>

<p>Frank, I have been in and out of surgery, physical therapy and a ton of other medical work the last six years and have failed to responsed or even keep track of my comments. I have the Zeiss Tessar 200mm, S&K Xenar 135 mm, Zeiss Sonnar 85mm, several Zeiss Planars 50mm, Zeiss Distagon 1,4/35mm and last both my worst and favorite at once my S&k Angulon 35mm. I have had a number of other Rollinars, most of which were excellent. I matched my lenses to my Hasselblad system so that the 35mm images would have a similar image quality. I have four bodies, 3 chrome and 1 black. These cameras have travelled all over N. America from one dirty mine site to the next, bouncing along in the back of my jeep and trucks for 40 years. They still work well and still have clean glass and smooth helicoids.<br>

Cheers<br>

Roy</p>

<p>There are conventions in the photographic industry regarding lens designation, say for example as given above, if you are producing a 135 mm lens and its true measuremets might between 133mm and 137 mm then it is designated a 135 mm lens for the market place. This kind of rounding off has been inplace in the west for a very long time. The Soviets worked in an insular environment, with a captive market. To satisfy these citizens an emphasis was placed on the notion that the science and and industry of the state is precise (we meet this attitude in the US when we meet with the IRS). If the lens measures a focal length of 133 mm then it must be presented as such. Interestingly, most of my 135 mm lenses when measured are actually 133 mm. So it is not a typo, but an effort to present the truth. We see this further in the evolution of the Industar N61 which has at times been 52 mm or 55 mm focal length. As they became more atune to the world market place they standardized their focal length designation to western conventions. Hard currencies trump accurate designations.</p>

<p>Eric, call Dave Feely at (303) 772 7690, he was a top Rollei repair technician for Rollei USA for many years and later for Marflex when it had the contract for all Rollei USA service. He is knowledgeable, he communicates well and he can repair just about anyting Rollei has made, as he inherited a vast array of Rollei parts when Marflex shut down. I have a large Rollei collection and he has refurbished all my cameras, not just the Rolleis.</p>

<p>Great images, just shows the greatness of Rolleiflex. The Ilford film developed in Rodinal at 1:37 will yield a lot more contrast and edge from the negatives, you might want to consider such a method, These Zeiss lenses have a lot of potential. I still shoot a Rolleicord with S&K Xenar (Tessar design) and it produces great images. I like the content of the photos</p>

<p>It appears to be a Nicca 3L base plate or close to that model of Nicca, that three prong seems odd, so I think earlier model than 3L.</p>

<p>The front element of the taking lens is protruding too far, when set properly it will be clearly recessed below the chrome bayonet. Some one has re-assembed this lens without the proper tools or knowledge. If all the parts are present it is a rather straight foreward job to re-assemble the lens correctly. Depending where you are located there are a number of ex-Rollei techs and other professional camera repair persons that can fix this camera to its original conditions. These are extremely sharp cameras when in good repair. Key Camera in Longmont Colorado repairs all my camera and he is ex-Rollei USA tech and he has lots of new parts for all the Rolleiflex cameras.</p>

<p>Copy lenses like the G-Glaron and Ronars are superb for repro work but also will out perform most tele lenses at infinity. Since apochromatic glass has been available since before WW II it lost most of it marketing significance until the 1980 and later when apo-lenses once again became all the rage. German repro lenses have been carefully balanced in the three primary colors since the 1960s, so even though they may not say apochromatic they are. These are superb for color work and B&W. <br>

Rodenstock during the 1970s to early 1990s tested as most accurate in this matter, but the differences with Schneider were minimal. Where color accuracy was the issue Sinar and Linhof would promote Rodenstock, but to be fair these differences were academic. I always observed in the dark room that negs made with Rodenstock had better separation in the shadows and were easier to print and that was what mattered to me. If you can afford the G-Glaron buy it, you wont be disappointed. Now that I have grown old I shoot infrequently, but I still love my 240mm Apo Ronar.<br>

When I was younger I was into really rigid cameras and shot with a professional Sinar, it was heavy and cumbersome in the field. Later I bought a metal Wista, a relatively rigid field camera, I was so impressed I eventually abandoned the Sinar even in the office. The Wista had tremendous bellows draw and when combined with a lens extension tube a normal bellows would function with all my long lenses. Even an old Linhof Rodenstock Rotelar 270mm which is a very heavy old lens work well . <br>

Some years ago I picked up a Yamasaki Commercial Congo 300mm on #3 board, with the extender I can use it with the normal bellows. This large heavy lens required a very rigid camera and the Wista worked fine under difficult field conditions and the Congo exceed my expectations. I recommend you consider a metal field camera for stability.<br>

If you go to Yellowstone consider also the Bear Tooth Mountains form Cook City to Red Lodge, MT, wonderful Alpine and Subalpine landscapes far exceeding those found in Yellowstone (and less crowded). Just a small detour after you shoot Yellowstone.</p>

<p>A light seal is damaged. An old Rollei USA technician told me about these when I had my original German Rollei SL 35 repaired after a severe fall of 50 feet down a waste dump face at a mine in Montana. It took me 15 years to find a technician who would repair the camera, so it sat in a drawer with the shutter jammed in place, a partially shattered pentaprism and the light seals possibly damaged. Surprisingly, the technician set up shop in my town after leaving Rollei USA and Marflex with hughe cache of new Rollei parts. Its now rebuilt and works as well or better than when I first got it in about 1970. I have three others all in excellent condition. One was built in Singapore and it seems and functions identical to the the German made cameras. I like it for its optics and fuctionality. I do use Nikons and Hasselblads, but I really like the Rollei SL35, they have served me well and taken a fair bit of abuse in the field. They are good cameras, but maintenace every 10 years or 15000 frames is critical in my opinion.</p>

<p>I had a Rollei SL35M and like the SL35 it had Zeiss lenses which were excellent, but the Rollei SL35M camera body had no relation to the oringinal SL35. The Rollei SL35M was junk designed by Zeiss and sold to Rollei. It was unreliable and unrepairable. My two original Rollei SL35 cameras have 40 years of hard use and one has taken at least 40,000 shots and the second one about 20,000. These cameras saw service at mining and oil development sites from the Sonoran desert to the Arctic. Eventually I moved on to Nikons for the speed of automated cameras in the field, now that I am old I use the Rollei cameras again as the Zeiss lenses produce an image closer to what I get from my Hasselblad Zeiss lenses. I recently bought a Rollei SL35 (made in German) for $40 on Ebay and shortly thereafter a black Rollei SL35 (German) for $100, both needed a cla. These cameras are excellent value for the user. My Nikons are great too, but German optic produce a subtle B&W image that i prefer.</p>

<p>Ryan,<br>

Let us all know how your Zorki 6 works out, I am one of those old guy that has a cla done on all cameras about every 10 years or 20,000 frames, just to prevent taking a bunch of poor images. My zorki 6 shows minimal wear with some scuffing where the leather case rubbed the back of it. When I first got it the camera sounded and functioned fairly well given it might have 49 years since last serviced, but the curtain showed that it had sat cocked for a few years. On the bench test the 1/30th was the only speed reasonably accurate, as an old photographer this was unacceptable. I struggled with having a cla done on such an old, low priced camera, but in the end I knew I would never use it until it had accurate shutter speeds. Locally, we have two repairmen who are nationally known for there service of European cameras and other cameras of all types. $90 and a month later it was a smooth accurate camera. I have a number of FSU cameras and the Zorki 6 and the FED 2 type F are my favorites, the FED 3 is also nice and the Zorki 4k is okay but a bit clumsy to handle. FED 4b and FED 5b(v) are a bit bulky but when they arrived they were both reasonably accurated. Last, the Kiev 4am is a very nice Contax camera and focuses easily, it too is in the shop as the lubricants were just too dry and the movements felt sluggish. Also, of the shutter speeds only 1/30th, 1/50th, 1/250th were accurate. The Kiev 2 - 4 cameras are essentially Ukranian made Zeiss cameras and lenses, the difference being a cheapening of materials where aluminum replaced the brass in many parts making the camera lighter and proned to warping of the back gate and front covers, but all in all it functions like the German Zeiss. The Zorki/FED cameras have a better shutter and and stronger casing. I think you have approached this purchase with a lot of thought and good advise. However, I would advise a cla on any FSU camera older than 15 years, it helps reduce the possibility of sudden failure and wasting film, plus if you put the money into a cla you will value your functional antique more. I would like to see your images from the Z6.<br>

Cheers<br>

Roy</p>

<p>These Russian tessars are really sharp, especially stopped down. <br>

I got a similar Zorki 4k, it was not assembled correctly and all shutter speeds were about 1/30. Not being very well built it sat in San Diego a few decades before I got it. It was in mint condition except it didn't work. Had it rebuilt and now its really smooth. I have not developed any of the film yet, but your beautiful images of India are pushing me to get them developed.<br>

Seems there should have been a Jupiter 8 on the camera, that is what came with mine. Some of the later N-26, I have been told by Ukranians, had lanthanium glass which shows an Amber coloring. I got one N61 that had the amber coloring but was not labeled lanthanium.<br>

<strong>Subbarayan</strong>, when you shoot these pictures they all seem sharp, no evidence of shaking, are you using a tripod or are these hand held and what ISO film are you using. Are you adjusting exposure index at all? Most my work is MF or LF and I am experimenting with hand held shooting. I bought these old camera for that purpose, something small I could hand hold. I may be too shaky.</p>

 

<p>I bought a FED 2 type E or F some while back, it is still precise, clean and fully functional. A smaller camera than most FED/Zorkis and I thnk it represents one of several high points in Soviet camera development.</p>

<p>You images are really good, what film was used? Was a filter used, on some of my early Jupiter lenses the coatings were bluish causing images to look slightly orthocromatic, I compensated using a stronger (Y12) yellow filter, effecting more contrast and a sense of greater sharpness. Both the FED 4 and the FED 5 are turning out to be really cameras for mechanical shooters.<br>

I have not noticed a curtain gap in any of my FED/Zorkis, however I have noticed that during rewind as the curtain is tensioned that the ends blades of the curtains shift abouit 3mm towards a tighter position, but I have not detected any light leaks between the 1st and 2nd curtain blades. Gapping usually occurs when the camera's lubricants are dried to a thick paste. Cleaning with napha or acetone will remove all of this, and new very fine oil lubricants will correct the problem. If a slight light leak is occuring the images will loose some contrast from the pre-exposure as you cocked the shutter. I have four FED (2type F, 3, 4, 5B) and three Zorkis (4, 4k and 6). All present the same possible problem of the curtain blades moving towards separation. I have had three of these cameras worked on by a European trained professional repairman. The problem still presents.<br>

If I saw this occuring in one of my Rolleiflex cameras I would anticipate a problem developing as there is little forgiveness in the design, but in seven Russian cameras that share the same shutter design there is considerable forgiveness designed into the curtain's operation. Just comparing any of these FED/Zorki shutters to a a Leica or Rollei cloth shutter the first thing that is noticed is the shutters in the German cameras are very tight and precise operations. This taunt precision is not found in the Russian shutters, non-the-less they deliver precise exposures comparable to the Leica or Rolleiflex shutters. My German cameras require a full overhaul every 15000-20000 exposures or every 10-25 years. None my FED/Zorki cameras had that when they arrive. All were 50 to 40 years old and still functioned reasonably well on arrival. After they had a full CLA they general met their specification. They are really nice cameras designed for the Soviet population, they are similar to the USA cameras made by Kodak etc for the American population during the 1950 and 1960s with one difference, the Russians were way ahead in design, concepts and innovations that took a Leica design into an affordable and good camera for the masses like me. I am impressed with Soviet innovation to transform an elegant and elite Leica design into an afordable camera.<br>

The lenses are sharp, but the focusing collar that pushes the rangefinder arm in the shutter box are not alway ground as precisely as necessary for shooting wide open at infinity, so often people complain that the lens is soft wide open. Of the seven standard lenses I have at least two are slightly off, one is too long and the other is too short. Other minor problems in lens barrel constructions effect the wide open infinity. Usually stopping down one stop will solve this problem. Correcting problems after the fact is almost impossible. If you notice these problems the lenses are inexpensive, buy several and you will probably get one that works perfectly.<br>

Anyway, we all have the same issues, more or less, but these cameras as you have demonstreated here perform well.</p>

<p>I have this camera, it is FED 2 type E, it is evolutionary between FED 2 type D and the FED 2 type G which has the film/shutter lever. What is important about this camera is that it retains the wider rangefinder so that focusing is much easier. It also has a smooth metal body covered with cloth, this can be replaced with leather. I am now getting ready to do this, I saw one that had a really professional leather covering and it was just superb looking. I like the feel of leather. At about 1961 the Zorli 6 was produced with this basic design, but a lever was included. A very modern design that appears to be a hybrid of the Zorki 5 and the FED 2 type E. I had it dissembled cleaned and rebuilt recently and it is also a fine camera with a Industar 2,8/55 N-61 lanthanium lens. Also, I recently read that the Industar 26 of this vintage FED 2 type E had lanthium infused optics making them Apo-chromatic. The Russians did a lot of advance work on the use of rare earths in lens development and these lens benefited from that work. <br>

I really like how you finished the camera by stripping the paint off, very unique, mine is almost mint so I am leaving the paint as is, but the fabric, its gotta go. Also, you may want to coat the stripped area with clear lacquer (finger nail polish) or it will turn black. All the silver barrelled Russian lens are alumimium and lacquered with a hard clear coat, where it wears off it darkens, just a thought, I clean mine with alcohol.</p>

<p>I have atleast three lenses that fit with in my Wista when folded, they all have a copal 0 shutter: a Nikon 150mm, a Rodenstock 135mm, and an S&K Xenar 150mm. <br>

There are some lens with the filter attached that have to be placed in backward, making sure the lens doesn't pop through the ground glass. Small, shallow lenses often fit, just take care. I even leave the shutter release cable attached. Adjusting the sliding trays is also important with the Nikon.</p>

I have a bunch of Agfa APX 100 35mm, similar in contrast range to agfa 25, but more grain. If you and other students want to test it I will send it to you. I have used Agfa 25 most of my career developed with rodinal 1:37, 20C, 8 mins, constant agitation in jobo or similar. Give normal exposure with excellent zone control. Rodinal with Tmax 100 gives similar results between Agfa 25 and Agfa 100. This film has been frozen for ever in my freezer and still is good. I will send if you want to try, I might find some 25 also. contact Roy at rlfaverty@comcast.net. I am old and geting rid of film. It is the rodinal that makes the difference, makes even ordinary film sparkle.