winfried_buechsenschuetz1

<p>I do not know whether I ever looked through the shutter when firing without battery but you find pretty often the information that the shutter runs at approx. 1/500 sec without battery. The solenoid does not help the shutter to open, just to STAY open. 1/500 sec is not clearly visible with the naked eye when watching the shutter blades from one side only, the movement is hardly visible but the shutter should open completely.</p>

<p>The "power" of a lens (or luminosity) is NOT affected by crop factor/frame size etc. A lens with a max. aperture of f/1.8 has the same light collecting power for all formats. The maximum opening of a lens is set by design and does not change when used for other purposes/formats etc. </p>

<p>I have done a few weird things with cameras but never managed to damage the advance gears. In most cases, if you hear strange sounds when advancing, this is due to film damage, the sprocket holes are destroyed by the sprocket wheels since there is too much tension on the film. I think this will be case here too. <br> Depending on the advance mechanism, it is normal that the film is advanced only when held down to the sprocket wheels.<br> The problem is that usually there is not too much tension on the film causing it to crack. Maybe the rewind crank has too much friction. It should turn quite loosely without a film. If you need some force to turn it, you may lubricate it with a very tiny droplet of thin oil on the shaft of the rewind crank. </p> <p> </p>

<p>I think so too. The galvanometers in cameras usually use a quite simple toe bearing system. In some cases you might be able to push back the movement axis into proper position but I found that in most cases a damaged galvanometer is beyond repair. (There are bearing systems for galvanometers which are much more shock resistant but they need more space and are more expensive to manufacture.)</p>

<p>As (probably not only) German mechanics say, "a little oil can do wonders". You may try to apply VERY LITTLE of gun oil with the tip of a needle to points where there is probably too much friction. Trying to move metal parts with even gentle force might easily cause "seizing", i.e. the jammed parts may stick together even more than before. </p>

<p>Probably not... 110lpm would be a very excellent value, and also it does not make sense to give one value only since lens resolution is not the same over the entire field of view and also varies with f setting. <br> Maybe this is just an internal number for printing orders or similar. </p>

<p>Concerning soviet lenses, they probably often suffer from inadequate repair attempts. The Jupiter f/2 85mm lens, for example, has three helicoids, and they all must be reassembled in proper position (they are all multiturn threads with several possible assembly positions) to get them working correctly. Also, at least one of the guide/stop blocks on this lens is positioned manually after assembly of the lens, so mixing parts from different items will yield malfunction or poor performance. If everything is assembled properly (and all parts are from the same item), they usually yield satisfactory results, given the age of the lens design were a resolution of 30lp/mm was a good results. </p>

<p>I have the Voigtlaender look-alike of the XF35. You can easily remove the viewfinder cover after unscrewing the advance lever (if the screw head has no "snakeeyes" holes use a piece of rubber to turn it, avoid using pliers - they will cause scratches) and a few screws around the metal cover. You will find a small galvanometer (i.e. a short piece of metal tube apporox. 1/2 inch or 15mm diameter) with a rotating coil inside. Anyhow, if the coil does not move freely anymore, very probably either the axis of the coil or the bearings are broken and this is beyond repair. </p>

<p>I have both a Leica IIIa from 1938 and one from one of the last Zorki I series. Concerning workmanship, they are on almost equal level. Anyhow, usually it is no problem telling Zorkis from Leicas. As far as I know, only very few Leica II (without slow speed dial) were ever sold to the German government, and it would be rather strange to find a government labeled genuine Leica without slow speeds. In other words, except for very very few items (that you would probably not find on ebay or in private collections) all government/military etc labeled "Leicas" without slow speed dial are fakes. </p>

<p>As mentioned, many rewind cranks are of similar design and can be swapped from one brand to another. Most have a metric M3 (3mm) or M2,5 (2,5mm) thread, a few also had M3,5 (3,5mm) threads (the latter dimension is not current but is also a standard thread). Actually maybe Yashica used one of the rewind cranks they had on their parts shelves for production of this camera.</p>

<p>Don't know how it is in US, but over here in Europe/Germany you can get sheets of dense foam rubber (called "Moosgummi" in German) in DIY/tinkerer shops in various thicknesses. The thinnest I found was 1.5 or 2.0mm but it always worked fine for camera seals. Some years ago I used several sheets and the seals cut out of them seem to last more than 10 years.<br> This kind of foam rubber is also available in industrial supply shops but these are not always selling to private persons. </p>

<p>While it is true that the east german remainder of the Balda works did not make too many new designs, there were quite advanced viewfinder/rangefinder cameras from other manufacturers. Remember the Werra line of cameras or the Altix/Altessa. <br> Years ago there was an extensive article about the Baldessa cameras in a german camera collectors magazine. There were also more advanced models, with integrated exposure meter and also auto-exposure. They could also be coupled to an electric motor drive. </p>

<p>On my sample, the outer part of the take up spool does not rotate either, but the sprocket wheels rotate when advancing. Concerning the dead meter, this is often a problem of the battery test switch. The contacts corrode easily and so the battery will have no contact to the meter circuit. Sometimes cleaning the contacts (underneath the bottom plate) helps, but usually you have to replace one of the contacts, I used a piece of galvanised sheet metal.</p>

<p>concerning viewfinders: I do not think that viewfinders are foggy by design but maybe some are rather prone to dirt and fog than others. I have cleaned quite a few viewinders from inside and outside and sometimes was amazed how crystal clear a +50yrs can be. Maybe a thorough cleaning (wiping the outer surfaces will not help too much) will help with the Nikonos viewfinder, too. <br> Actually, the idea for the Calypso came from the famous french diver Jacques-Yves Cousteau. The camera was manufactured by the French company ATOMS which so far had been manufacturing leaf shutters used by some other French cameras. Spirotechnique was rather manufacturing diving equipment (and of course were in close contact with Cousteau), they were an independent department of a still existing company, Air Liquide, producing compressed gas for industrial and diving purposes. This company took over sales of the Calypso. </p>

<p>Most triplet lenses are decent performers when stopped down one or two steps. Do not expect corner to corner sharpness wide open. There are a few bad ones like the French Manar (used on some Telka folders), there are many decent ones and also some very good ones, like the Meyer-Goerlitz Trioplan. </p>

<p>In your case, the double-wind lock does not work. Usually there is a mechanical catch which blocks the wind lever after one cycle. I had a similar issue with a rangefinder camera. In my case, it was a broken or dislocated spring which I had to replace. <br> On many cameras, this catch can be found under the bottom plate. Remove it (usually there are no parts falling off except for the cap of the rewind button) and check the parts which move when you actuate the wind lever. One of the rotating parts should have a notch which should be locked by a spring-loaded lever. (This lever is pushed back when pressing the shutter release, thus enabling winding after one shot.)</p>

<p>In cases like this (shutter not cocked but advance/cocking lever stuck), sometimes it's just the double wind lock which causes trouble. I do not know where this locking mechanism can be found on the Zenit 3, on some other cameras it can be found under the bottom plate, or somewhere near the film advance gears close to the advance lever. </p>

<p>Transmission of UV-light of a camera lens is not (only) a question of coating. <br> It is true that coatings are optimized for the visible light range and will not reduce reflections in UV light very efficiently. Anyhow, the rate of reflection per uncoated glass surface is about 5 p.c. and so the losses in the UV range would be in the range of 30...40% for a multi-element lens. <br> The transmission of the glass itself is more important. There are types of glass which will block UV more efficiently than others. So it is not possible to predict the transmission of UV light for a certain lens. I remember a camera test decades ago where they checked the standard lenses for UV transmission, too (all lenses were in the f/1.7 .... f/2.0 range and 50...55mm focal length and probably all 6- or 7-element lenses). The results were quite different between lenses. </p>

<p>BTW Kodak made a camera allowing for 100 pictures on a roll about 100 years ago....<br> Anyway, unfortunately the quality of pics does not improve the same way as the number of pics per media unit. </p>

<p>For those who are not familiar with the Narciss: it's a half-frame 18x24mm SLR, hence the mirror box and the lens register are much smaller than with full frame SLRs. Years ago I read an article about the Narciss in a German camera collectors magazine. IIRC it was mentioned that it was sold together with adaptor rings, maybe one of them was designed to mount LTM lenses (which were used on soviet Leica copies) on the Narciss.</p>

<p>I agree that some Petri cameras are not the highest quality ever and have a flimsy feel. However, there are some models which seem pretty solid, and the early Petri rangefinder are in the same ligue as their competitors back then. <br> On the other hand, I possessed two Taron rangefinders with auto-exposure. One of them suffered from earlier repair attempts by a blacksmith (I suppose), and I had to disassemble it almost completely to get it running again. The auto-exposure mechanism (needle trap mechanism) worked - but it was quite cheaply made. <br> I shot one or two rolls with my Petri C.C. super 1.9 (very similar to the Taron VR) and I was quite impressed with the results. The camera has a rock-solid feel and there is little to improve - except for the leathering which was bristle and came off and had to be replaced as shown in the photo </p> <p>http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00D/00DGw7-25249684.JPG</p> <p> </p>

<p>I never found any non-metric screws on german and japanese cameras. However, the threads might have "strange" diameters like 1.8 or 2.0 mm. There are standards for these dimensions, anyhow. <br> Sometimes you can find bags with "camera screws" on ebay or camera swaps - check whether they are metric. Also, at least in Germany, there are mail order companies selling watch and clock parts. I found quite a few screws to replace lost or worn ones in a set of "alarm clock screws" (they use somewhat bigger screws than wristwatches, of course). </p>

<p>AFAIK none of the Leicas sold to the public had ball-bearing shutters, only the military K models (K stands for "Kälte" = cold resistant) were equipped with ball bearings. Maybe you confused this with the slow speed escapement. Actually the Leica III was the first one to have this. Later versions were the Leica IIIa (with 1/1000 sec), b and c models. </p>

<p>According to many other sources, the M42 mount was introduced with the Praktiflex in 1948. The Contax S did not appear until 1949, anyhow the M42 thread was designed by the Contax S design group in 1946. <br> http://www.dresdner-kameras.de/contax/contax.html</p> <p>(sorry, this is available in German only)</p>

<p>There is no big difference in the performance of triplet lenses. I checked quite a few of them on 6x9 and 6x4,5 folders. There were two exceptions: the Meyer Goerlitz Trioplan (which comes close to a Tessar design) on the top end of the scale and a french triplet (do not remember the name) on a french 6x4,5 folder on the low end. All others were somewhere in between. Do not expect any of them sharp from edge to edge when fully open. <br> Also, there is not so much difference between coated and uncoated lenses. Except for backlighting situations or shots with distinct highlights, they perform very similar. Coating is much more important with lenses with many glass-to-air surfaces. </p>