kmac

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.

Use a hand-held meter If it is a selenium meter, the adjustment at the back of the camera won't be for light adjustment, but for zeroing the needle, or for adjusting the needle's delicate spring tension to bring it back to factory specs. The problem with your meter, as I perceive it, is probably a faulty electrical component that controls the voltage from the selenium cell, a worn out resister perhaps. It's not impossible to fix selenium meters, but it requires skills beyond most of us. Your selenium cell seems to be still high voltage, and that's in your favor, so you should be more concerned about how that voltage is controlled before it gets to the motor (the actual armature that has the needle attached to it).

Hi, The camera needs cleaning to remove old gunk and pollution, and then lubricating by rubbing an oil soaked tooth pick over the various parts.

Ironically, that shop sells films

Rick, apparently Tom only has the photos, not the camera at hand to be able to open it.

From the three views in the OP, it looks a lot like a non-autographic Vest Pocket Kodak Model B ... early model perhaps.

Hi Dave, It could be an out-dated software problem. Old scanners generally need a computer and software of the same era as the scanner.

It appears to be in the same class as Kodak ColorPlus by the look of it, the images look the same and it will probably sell for a similar price. It certainly needs improving.

Here's a link that might be of assistance to you .... https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?93166-developing-4x5-with-the-yankee-daylight-development-tank

I'd say there is something amiss with your system if clicking on "Quick Look" fails to respond. Great that the eyeball icon works, but since it is linked to "Quick Look", there must be a glitch in there that maybe an up-date or an up-grade can fix. Try this also, "Command Y", it is linked to "Quick Look" and it works for me. If it doesn't work for you, then you're only left with the eyeball icon, and hope that it doesn't glitch out as well.

I got the same problem until I highlighted the images. Drag your cursor over a row of images then right click on one then click on "Quick Look"

Hold your cursor over your icon ("T" in purple circle). Click on "Find Content" in the small panel that appears. You'll get 1-23 pages. https://www.photo.net/profile/663224-tony-evans/content/

Yes it's the fluorescent light. You'll need a frosted filament bulb or LED as digitaldog suggested. With the set up you have there now, if you remove the negative, you should see flickering on your camera's screen. Alternatively, hold the camera up to a bare fluorescent light bulb and you'll see more intense flickering.

Pretty much box speed if the ambient temperatures were cool to cold for that 10 years of storage. If they were subject to room heater temps in the winter time, well that might cause problems. Generally, unfrozen expired films of that age or older give a mixed bag of results from lack of sharpness, in colour films, with daggy colours and colour shifts to noticeable colour casts. The XP2, I'm not sure about, never tried it, but being B&W, it might be good at box speed. If I was to give those films any extra exposure, it would be only 1/2 stop. Accurate times and temps in the C41 processing is warranted with expired films, using twiddle stick agitation. Good processing means that if there are any problems, they will be within the expired film itself. Here's a shot from an expired (2013) Superia Xtra 400, also 10 years old, but frozen for 7 of that 10. Colours still quite vivid

The 531 doesn't have a mask, it's a 4.5x6 camera to start with. The two red windows on the rear of a 531 are for films with backing papers that only had 6x9 numbers. When later backing papers included the extra frame numbers for 6x6 and 4.5x6, as well as the 6x9, the 531 with two red windows still had to use the 6x9 numbers because they were the only numbers the red windows would line up with, which was pretty obvious since the cameras were already configured that way.

The 520 has no rangefinder, so if the camera you're getting has a rangefinder, then it's a 531 There's currently eight 531s with twin red windows for sale on eBay at the moment, so obviously some were made, yours included. Happy shooting with it.

Wiki says 120 film http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Super_Ikonta_530/2

Yes it's a "Trap needle" or "Grab the needle" meter, very ingenious indeed. One thing to remember is that the camera, if worn through lots of use, an Auto exposure image may vary from a manual exposure image on the same EV. I did a test shot on Auto with my well used 7S and noted the EV number, them took a shot of the same scene, using the same EV number, and there was about 1 1/2 stop difference. I went on ebay and bought three 7S's, hoping one would be good, and one was, so I use that one now. It wasn't the meter itself, it was good. Apparently it was the worn mechanical workings that came out of sync with the aperture and shutter. I suspect lack of lubrication may be the cause of the problem.

I can't be certain, but you may need an extra privilege obtainable by paying a higher fee. I'm charged no fee at all and all I'm able do is post messages and images in the forums. Perhaps by contacting a moderator, you may get the information you need about privileges and uploading images.