jimnorwood

Hi My daughter has a Nikon FG and she says that when she's using it sometimes she depresses the shutter button and the photo is not taken immediately but a few seconds later. Sometimes she has to press the shutter button a few times before it takes the photo. I thought this might be a sticky mirror but I check the cushion and it is not at all sticky. I'm not familiar with this model and wondered if anyone might know what might cause this. I'm quite sure that when this first happened we replaced the battery.

I also have a filter on which the black paint is peeling off the inside of the ring. Can this be ignored, paint removed ? Or should I true to glue it back (it's like a thin thread of black paint that's peeled off but still attached).

Thanks a lot NHSN. Has anyone else experience the black coating peeling off the inside edges of the filters ?

Hi, I was lucky enough to find one of those gorgeous leather pouches housing a lens hood, UV and medium yellow filter for my 3.5F. I noticed that on the UV filter the black coating around the inside edge of the filter is peeling off so that a thread of the paint has separated from the edge. Has anyone had something similar and can I just pull this off without this causing problems ? I guess the inner edge was painted black to avoid reflections ? I understand that from feedback most users don't think it's necessary or advantageous to use the UV filter to protect the taking lens if you use a sun lens hood. However the medium yellow would be recommended for TRI-X ?

My budget is limited. Would the Sekonik L208 be suitable ?

Thanks John. Do you have a recommendation for me ? In fact I just spoke to the technician who is carrying out the CLA of my camera and the good news is it hasn't been butchered in previous services and all parts are original. Good news is the lens mark was hard to shift dirt and could be removed. It turns out that the focus was not accurate, the shutter speeds were off as well as the light meter reading. He wasn't at all surprised to hear about the results I had. Everything can be fixed and I'm looking forward to picking up the camera next weekend

Dear Jochen, Thanks for the reply. No offence taken but please remember what's obvious to you may not be as obvious to someone new to this like me. If the closed phone system declares to shoot at ISO 1.5 f-stops higher than it is for real, that is a "wow!"-feature of the phone. Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean here. You mean you're impressed that the app can be that accurate ? You mean don't use an App but a more accurate light meter ? If you overexpose your phone, highlights are washed out and lost. If you overexpose film they will get a little bit dense but information remains kind of recoverable. So I 'd declare the 1.5 stops exposure difference between both devices the no man's land of "better safe than sorry". I'm confused. The phone was suggesting a setting that resulted in underexposure rather than overexposure ? If it was underexposed, what do you expect? - I think I learned: "Overexposure of color negative film reduces grain"? Ok so the underexposure increases film grain and would explain the scans. So conclusion to avoid this would be buy a light meter ?

The 3.5F has a tiny tiny mark on the taking lens. So small that it's impossible to photograph. I'm probably worrying too much but I just noticed that the above picture has a white mark on the scan which is not visible at the same position on any of the other photos. It was lightly snowing that day so perhaps this is just water ?

Ok and here one that I am happy with. I wanted to check the focus was accurate. I was focused on the chain basket.

Here the tree on the right seems to be in focus rather than the bench.

This looks rather grainy ?

Hi I've been searching for a Rolleiflex for a long time and have benefitted from lots of good advice from this forum. A few weeks back I purchased a 2.8F which was offered locally for a great price. I noticed it had lens coating issues. I ran a film through it but returned it for a refund before receiving the results. At the same time I got an offer for a late issue 3.5F. I received it, ran a roll of film through it and sent it off for a CLA. The 2.8F light meter wasn't accurate so I used the iPhone app Pocket Light Meter. The 3.5F light meter was accurate and I double checked settings with the app. Today I received scans of the films and have the following questions : The company that developed the films said both had a tendency towards underexposure, 1-2 stops. They mentioned that originally the pictures had an extreme green tint. I wrote back to them mentioning that the films were shot with two different cameras and wanted to double check that both had exactly the same problem (which seems unlikely) and they confirmed they did. Could this be due to reading from the light meter app ? Or could this be due to the fact that neither camera had been serviced ? The film from the 2.8F included some stunning shots. The 3.5F I was a bit disappointed with. Ok the light was better when I shot with the 2.8F but there are some shots from the 3.5F roll that I think are no better than a good mobile phone shot ! I'm sure this is due to my technique rather than the camera so I'll post some examples below and perhaps you could suggest what I might have done wrong. Both were shot with Pro 400h. Most of the 3.5F shots at f/22.

Thanks. Perhaps I shouldn't have panicked and returned the camera. I checked with a well know repair service here in Germany and they said they are sure from the pictures that the marks couldn't be removed. I had to make a quick decision and for this amount of money I didn't want to take a risk. I did in fact run a test film through the camera and only received the results back today and all were perfect. Stunning in fact. Oh well ! I have now purchased a 3.5F late model which has been sent for CLA.

In fact I finally decided to send the camera back as I wasn't prepared to pay 800 Euro for a possibly damaged lens. Thanks for all the help.

Thanks to all. The first thing I will do is send the camera for a CLA and will ask the repairman to judge if he can remove the marks or if he thinks they will have a negative effect. I really hope that this isn't a serious issue as the camera itself is near mint and working perfectly.

The marks that I thought about trying to clean can be seen in the following pictures. I am afraid that they show mould/fungus or separation. They can only be seen at certain angles and appear to be on the surface.

Can anyone help here ? I'm itching to use this camera but don't want to take the risk with a cleaning solution that might damage it. Perhaps I'm being too cautious ? I'm sure I read ROR was ok to use ?

ROR is a lens cleaning solution that I picked up in the US. I believe it is quite well known. I've used it on my Nikon lenses and on my Rollei 35 lens. I don't want to take any risk with my Rolleiflex Planar lens but I'm itching to clean the thing and run a film through it. https://www.amazon.com/ROR-Optical-Cleaner-Spray-Bottle/dp/B0002HMRF2

Dear All I finally purchased a Rolleiflex 2.8F Planar from Ebay and have just received it. Oh happy day ! I've waited a long time ! I want to clean the lens as it appears to be quite dirty. Perhaps a stupid question. I wanted to ask about the best way to do this. Usually I use a q-tip dipped in ROR and then a clean q-tip afterwards to dry any excess fluid. Is it safe to use ROR on old Planar lenses ? Thanks Tim

Thanks so much for taking the time to reply and for your wise words. In the end I offered the seller three options I take the camera for 1200 and have the possibility to return it within the next week if there was something major wrong. I run a roll of film through the camera, get it developed and then purchase. I pay 1000 and take the camera as is and carry the risk. Unfortunately he didn't go for any of these options which leaves me suspicious that there was something not ok with the camera. Thanks again to everyone who replied. My search goes on and I know the info I received and the info I have recieved will still be useful.

Thanks again for the replies. Today I rang some companies about the repair to the pin. I ended up talking to a very reputable repair service here in Germany. I explained the two problems I had identified and they explained the pin isn't that essential as long as you are shooting from hand. They also mentioned that there might be resistance in the 1/8- 1/4 range. They suggested running a film through the camera to test. When I explained that I don't have the camera, can't put a roll of film through it before purchase and am thinking of buying it for 1200 Euro they strongly advised me against this. Their justification was that I would probably need around 600 Euro for repairs (CLA). Now I'm totally unsure what to do. On the one hand I've been looking for a 3.5F for well over a year and took the advice I have read here to wait until a good condition camera is offered locally. This has finally happened but it is a 2.8F with these minor problems. I know for sure a price of 1200 Euro seems to be average for what these cameras are selling for on Ebay. Still 1200 is a lot for me and I can't afford a further 600 Euro for CLA. John you mentioned "You know, I bet all that camera needs is a film in it." I'd love to think so. Do you think I'm being too cautious ? Before I spend this money should I insist in putting a roll of film through and getting it developed ? Slowly this all seems so complicated that I'm thinking of abandoning my Rolleiflex dream and sticking to my Yashica !!!

Many thanks for all the replies. I had a family emergency and once the dust had settled the camera had been sold. :( However.....tonight I found out that the other buyer has not paid and I might still have a chance to purchase. I wanted to ask about the faceplate being correctly aligned. As you can see from the photo above it looks like the camera has taken a knock at sometime which might have sheared the pin and left that minor dent on the bottom. When I go to see the camera what can I do to check that the faceplate is correctly aligned and flat ? I have asked at various repair shops here in Germany and it seems that there are no original parts to replace the pin but a replacement could be manufactured. As regards the stiff shutter speed dial this seems to be nothing to really worry about and I guess might improve with use or as the result of a CLA. Is there anything else you would suggest I check before purchase ? Should I load a film and test the winding etc ? I know that seems like a waste of a film but do you think this is necessary ?

Thanks a lot for the reply John, I went to see the camera last night and it appears to be in near perfect condition. Apart from the missing pin the only problem I found was that when turning the shutter speed dial in order to check the slower speeds it was stiff around 1/4. It could be set to the slower speeds but the transition needed more dial force. Not extreme but noticeable. Is there a reason that this might happen other than the camera needing a CLA ? I'm trying to find a reliable and recommended company for a CLA in Germany and not having much luck. I guess a CLA will cost about 200-300 Euro and pin repair 150 ?