kmac

Welcome "The best camera is the one you have with you when you need to take a photograph"

It may be finished, corrosion has a way of doing that.

Humphrey Bogart ?

Yes, I take photos of shutter parts as I disassemble them, so by studying the photos I can see which way things go back. Without posting a pic of my Minolta 7S, I can say the aperture opening at f16 is very small, as is the one in the OP, but for a 40mm lens, the f16 opening will be slightly smaller than that of the 45mm 7S lens, but not by much. For some of my larger cameras, I could easily stick a pencil through the f16 aperture opening. Longer focal lengths need more light.

The aperture blades look ok, you can't really make a mistake reassembling them, as long as their pins are set in their positions correctly. The aperture opening on yours looks the same as my Minolta 7S, which is 45mm focal length, but f16 is still pretty small.

Excellent post orsetto, and as usual from you, very informative and useful. It's prompted me to retrieve my 50mm 6.3 from my cabinet to see if there is actually a niche suitable and large enough for feeding drops of oil onto the very end of the helical. It turns out there is, without disassembling any parts (see photo). The red arrow points to a slot, through which the helical is accessible so tiny drops of oil can be placed on the end of it and allowed to run down, but the focus ring must first be turned to a position to expose the helical .. that position is "1m" or "3.5ft". A toothpick is too large in diam for the job, which is what I generally use, so a piece of thin wire, slightly bent will work - is my message to the OP. Using a mini torch, the shiny threads of the helical can just be seen through that slot, but they're off to one side, the outer side, so the lens will need to be angled at 45 degrees while drops of oil are placed in there, one per hour for three or four hours perhaps, and then left over night, after which the focus ring should be turned to start working the oil around. It may take quite some time to achieve easy smooth turning of the focus ring, given that only a tiny drop of oil will be allowed each time, to prevent any from finding it's way to places it doesn't need to be.

There's a small resistor added to the adaptor to drain some voltage from the 1.55v battery.

Very nice but I think the scene needs to be shot again so that the rails etc, look less like clutter, or not shown at all. The bright light on the floor in the lower right is distracting and indiscernible from a pool of flood water. The lens flare "dots" (if that's what they are) below the stairs need to be spotted out. I agree the shadows are too deep and there's no detail in them to make them good, you're stuck with those dark shadows the way they are. Good attempt though IMO. Perhaps a few bracketed shots at a few different aperture settings, and positions, would have given you a better chance for success.

Had a go at correcting it Mike, in "Preview", which is the standard editor in Apple's M1 computer Ventura's software.

You can down-size in a photo editor by clicking on "Adjust size" under "Tools". Adjust to 1,000 pixels for the horizontal size.

I don't own one but the LCD would probably drain more battery power than the meter itself, so to save battery power, the LCD turns off, but leaves the meter ready for instant use when needed during your session. And of course the LCD would also light up again when you activate the meter for your next reading.

Let me explain that in more detail. When you go past the last frame, the handle free wheels in relation to the counter and film indexing mechanism, they disengage because they are not needed for winding the tail of the backing paper through. But, while the handle feels like it is free wheeling, it's still engaged to the winding gears that turn the take-up spool, hence why you can wind the tail through and complete the winding of the roll. And yes, there should be a minimum of resistance at the handle. So those winding gear are in play, contrary to my assertion that "no other mechanisms come into play" When you finally get to check for tension after "12" without a film in the camera, be reminded that the winding gears will turn via the handle, constantly with the handle being wound, and they should be very easy to turn. If there is as much tension on the handle as you described, maybe it would be wise to remove the film in a change bag or a very dark room after you expose No12. You can of course try the handle sooner if you felt like it. You can remove the film in the dark, roll it up, and replace it after you've tried the handle tension. It's only a matter of remembering the frame you're up to, and wind it back to that frame later. However, if the handle tension is tight without the film, I wouldn't put the film back in, I'd get the camera fixed first, you might do more damage otherwise.

Are you close to the repairer where you got the CLA done ? I'm thinking that maybe you could leave the film in the camera after the last frame is exposed and get the repairer to feel the tension on the winding handle. I'm also thinking that the repairer, while fixing the "lumpy wind on", something else went amiss during that process, and is causing the tightness in winding handle. Normally, after the last frame, the counter disengages and the winding handle free wheels, I just checked on my C3. Your 3.5F should do the same. With a film in the camera, and after the last frame, the handle free wheels, but pulls the tail of the backing paper through, with no other mechanism coming into play, no counter, and no resistance from any other mechanism. So it appears that your handle is meeting an abnormal resistance from within the winding mechanism itself, or it could have something to do with the counter, possibly it's not disengaging properly and getting jammed. That is if it's proved that the film is not binding in the film chambers. Can you remember if there was tension on the handle when no film was in the camera ? Checking this will solve where the problem will be. Without a film in the camera, check the handle tension after 12, (or is it 11). I take it you will have to do this after you finish your current Portra film.

Just click on the row of dots in the upper right corner of your post and then click on "Edit"

Great shot of the sunset James ... Were you in a plane or parked on a high road?

Another thing to consider is the diameters of the two rolls. If the backing paper is slightly thicker on one roll, the diameters will be different. The extra thickness multiplied by the number of turns on one roll may mean a significant difference to the diameter, of about 0.5mm - 0.75mm, than the other roll. Also the thickness of the films may be different. So if one of your rolls has both thicker backing paper and thicker film, there could be more pressure on the spring tensioner after the last frame, or the spring tensioner has bottomed out.

I have a 105mm f4.5 Tominon attached to an old 2A Kodak folder. I'm not sure if that qualifies as large format, but I've exposed both 70mm and 6x9 film with pleasing results, for me at least. The shutter has a top speed of 125sec and cable release only. I don't know what number shutter it is, it doesn't say. The seller had bargain prices on his items, so I snapped this Tominon up to experiment with, it was listed as covering 4x5. The 70mm negs from the old Kodak are 4 3/8" x 2 1/2" by rule measurement. The film flatness appears to be pretty good, but I usually shoot at f8 or smaller aperture opening. The sharpness on the edges and corners seem good on this expired 70mm film, if you can appreciate that I get a gross lack of quality after resizing and transferring to Photo.net, it looks terrible, but not so full size on my computer screen, I was very happy with it's sharpness right across the image, I couldn't see anything that looked soft or blurred in the extremities, I'm pleased to say. The smaller 6x9 shots on fresh film from the same lens and camera were even more magical, less coverage, which I guess would suit larger aperture openings such as f4.5, but I haven't tried that yet. The experimenting goes on. 70mm image, unedited except for spotting. Please excuse the lack of quality due to uploading to Photo.net, I've yet to get that problem sorted out.

Oh OK. Not having any pets, I've never noticed chewy cameras before. I see ebay has cuddly ones, made of soft and furry materials.

I think it's a toy camera. I've never seen a lens barrel overlap part of the self-timer lever before. The icon looks to be some kind of bird. The viewfinder "glass" looks suspicious, and the film re-wind is on the right side.

I've got one here and I'd be hesitant to disassemble any part of it at all. The helicoil is a little stiff and uneven and it needs lubricating but it will have to stay the way it is, rather than risking harm to the unit. The only remedy I can suggest is to heat it up for a prolonged period. Let it sit in the warm sunlight for a day, working the focus ring now and then. If you do try disassembly, make use of a digital camera to take photos from all different angles of everything as you go, with strong lighting to give adequate depth of field so that all parts and screws etc are in focus. Personally I wouldn't do it though, if everything else on the lens is working satisfactorily, just struggle with the focus ring ... or get a trusted professional tech to work on it.

Good write up John, I appreciate reading about odd brand cameras. It's a pity it has no pressure plate, perhaps you could find one that goes close and attach it somehow. For running a roll of film through to test the camera, you may be able to temporarily use some sheet sponge rubber between the inside of the door and the film. Just a thought.

I would imagine the translucent object would be metered first up, then meter the other parts of the scene to check for exposure range over the whole scene. If the exposure range is more than two stops, you might need to do some burning and/or dodging. The general rule for backlit subjects is to open up the aperture one stop to one and a half stops from the average meter reading of the whole scene, but with something translucent, it might be advisable to meter the more "solid" or darker bits of the translucent object and expose for them. This is my 2cents worth, I'm only going by instinct, I've shot backlit scenes before, but nothing that involved translucent subjects. Experienced members would know more than I do, fortunately.

Here's a link that may be helpful ... https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/rolleiflex-3-5f-winding-crank.140524/

Tight winding seems to be a common problem with f3.5s judging by what I'm reading on the internet. Returning it to the repairer is probably the best idea. Other than that, make sure the film is correctly fitted to the camera. Some owners have been running the film under the rollers, and some under only one roller. This makes little sense to me, but I don't own a Rolleiflex so I suppose it's essential to follow the instructions on how to load the film correctly for that particular camera. If your camera is working "perfectly otherwise", as you say, I would check the backing paper for noticeably extreme scuff marks caused by the spring tensioner. There may be too much tension on the film the more it winds on to the spool, or the tensioner is perhaps catching the backing paper and wants to bite into it.