fwstutterheim

https://www.dw-photo.eu/service.html Rolleiflex 6000 factory service.

Rolleiflex Repair shops at Rolleigraphy

Jim, There is nothing wrong with the Xenotar lenses. Most of the later F's are fitted with Xenotars. Quite some people prefer the Xenotar lens. Best regards and good luck with finding a nice 3.5 F, Ferdi.

Orestto, you were right! It may be harmless but it still looks ugly for UKP 760.

No bids! All you need to know.

My first camera was a Praktica Super TL. The camera was fine but I had the lens replaced because one of the aperture blades was unreliable. The replacement was a more expensive lens labeled 'auss Jena' so it was a Carl Zeiss Jena lens. I have used the camera for about 5 years and purchased a used Rolleicord Va. I still own both cameras. The Praktica broke down eventually, the Cord is OK but is more or less retired.

... and it makes three: Smith, Wesson and you.

Was there any filter, hood or something else possibly interfering with focus movement?

Hi Paul, First of all let me say I put you on wrong track with my pressure plate story. I took a closer look at the Va today and the back is exactly like your V. I also checked a III and that one is also like yours. My mistake. Thank you, the picture is fine. I wonder if your tab goes in far enough. That would explain the closing problem and the bulging back when closed. The camera back has no seals to keep out light. It uses a light trap or labyrinth to keep the light out. You can see the double rims at the edge of the back. The arrow in your picture points to the inner rim (assuming that is the right word for it). From the picture it looks like the inner rim is slightly bent outward. Can you see that in real life? In that case the tab may miss the raised portion and go down in the space between the inner rim and the pressure plate. That would bring the tab somewhat out of position and may prevent it from being pushed in all the way. Resulting in the bulged back when you manage to close it anyway. Could that be the case? Then bending the rim inward at the raised position would be the solution. Just a tiny bit! Normally I would not advise bending things in a Rolleiflex but here we have a real problem and the back was bent before, probably causing the problem. You are right. I deleted an earlier message. Thinking it over I felt it was a bit early to start bending things. I hope we can find the problem. Otherwise permanently switching backs between IV and V will probably work because the tabs seem to be in the same place. My fear that the counter would not be working is over. Ferdi.

deleted.

Hi Paul, Im in Holland, we have UTC+1 (GMT+1 for the Brits). My Va is fitted out to take both 120 size film and 135 (24x36 mm) size film. It has a pressure plate that can be adjusted for those two sizes of film and the plate has two positions to mate with the tab. Your camera takes 120 size only so there is no need for the one raised position to be on the pressure plate. So nothing is wrong when the raised position is on the back between the pressure plate and the rim of the back. I guess you are right about the dent and there still being some damage to the back. Your image shows a bulged back when closed. The raised part seems to miss the top of the tab or there is some other problem. I assume your camera still has the right back and that it was not swapped for one that does not fit properly. Could you take a picture that shows the raised position, part of the pressure plate and the rim of the back? There must be something wrong in that area. Ferdi.

I own a Va but not a IV or V. The tab in image 2 is the trigger for the exposure counter. It should be pushed in by fully closing the back. You can operate the tab with your finger and it should move in easily. It is spring loaded. Maybe you mean the same thing with "pushing it to one side" but you should not bend it out of the way.The back is fitted out with a raised position to touch the top of the tab. In the Va it is part of the dual position pressure plate. If that tab is stuck you cannot close the back. I do not know the IV. If it has no tab at all or a tab in a different place the "wrong" back may close on both cameras but then I worry about the exposure counter working. Best look closely for touching parts in the tab area while closing. Anyway if the tab cannot be pushed in easily you will have to get that sorted out. A CLA of the film transport and counting mechanism is due. I hope this helps. /Ferdi.

Repair shops

I use a Heliopan polariser with numbers on the rim. I do not mount it on to the viewing lens but just look through the filter and turn it to the desired effect. Then I look which number is on top and mount the filter on to the taking lens and turn it until the right number is up. Works faster then switching from one lens to the next.

While visiting the factory many years ago I was told that for the FW the Distagon was replaced by the Super-Angulon because it needed a type of glass that was no longer manufactured. A reason for choosing the modern FW or FT would be the modern light meter. The Selenium cells of the classic cameras are often unreliable. The classic Wide Angle as an additional Newton finder, the FW has not. The new ones do not have the automatic film transport, you have to align the film against a mark just like that Swedish camera. Also some cog wheels are made of steel instead of brass and the feel is less smooth. The release is less smooth partly because it activates the light meter switch. I own the classic Tele and Wide and a 'modern' GX. Ferdi.