Wayno
Well-known
Chris, I bought a screen from ebay a few years ago (seller from Hong Kong - "Redleica" or similar) and it was pretty good for the $25 I paid. Ric Oleson now sells similar screens, so you could email him too. These screens have a split image rangefinder spot and are very bright, but the fresnel grooves are fairly coarse. Great value for money though. The Mamiya screen would be superior if you can get one to cut down. I find that the original ground glass is actually not too bad for focusing (snaps in & out of focus nicely), but is very dim in the corners which hampers composition.
Another source of a mirror would be a specialist glass supplier, if you can track down a good one. There's at least one store here in Brisbane that sells first surface mirror, although it's thicker than most camera mirrors (so focus has to be adjusted). I got a couple of Rollei mirrors cut to the right shape for about $20.
The Rollei hoods fit on the outer bayonet and filters on the inner one, so no problem using them at the same time.
Same thing happened to me this morning - weird. I deleted the mystery attachments to my post.
Another source of a mirror would be a specialist glass supplier, if you can track down a good one. There's at least one store here in Brisbane that sells first surface mirror, although it's thicker than most camera mirrors (so focus has to be adjusted). I got a couple of Rollei mirrors cut to the right shape for about $20.
The Rollei hoods fit on the outer bayonet and filters on the inner one, so no problem using them at the same time.
Tarzak said:
Same thing happened to me this morning - weird. I deleted the mystery attachments to my post.
ChrisN
Striving
Wayno - thanks again for the lead to Rick Oleson. I've bookmarked his page, and will probably follow up on that once I've got a new mirror in place and can see just how good (or otherwise) the original screen is.
And just to prove it works, here's a few from that first roll. I went looking for compositions that worked with the square format. I find that very liberating, not having to decide between landscape and portrait. I'll admit to having to straighten one of these in photoshop.
And just to prove it works, here's a few from that first roll. I went looking for compositions that worked with the square format. I find that very liberating, not having to decide between landscape and portrait. I'll admit to having to straighten one of these in photoshop.
Attachments
ChrisN
Striving
Hi Dave - thanks. I guess the trick is to maintain the reflecting surface at the same height as the original, thus the tinfoil shim. I've also seen somewhere (been jumping to too many sites with any mention of Rolleiflexes!) that you can calibrate the viewing lens by loosening the screw(s) that lock the taking lens in place, and screw it in or out. I guess I'd need to set it up with some ground-glass across the film plane behind the taking lens, to check the taking lens is calibrated correctly, then set the viewing lens the same. A bit like calibrating a rangefinder!
spyder2000
Dim Bulb
There isn't a thing wrong with the photos you've posted. I think you're going to enjoy this camera.
You'll love the way the filters work with these. Note the internal bayonet on the lens? The filters go there while the hood latches onto the outside bayonet. The entire arrangement is very well engineered.
You'll love the way the filters work with these. Note the internal bayonet on the lens? The filters go there while the hood latches onto the outside bayonet. The entire arrangement is very well engineered.
Tarzak
Well-known
T
tedwhite
Guest
Memphis just got an Automat II (1939-1945), so you've got a buddy there. If you really want to transform the viewing/focusing experience with your Rollei, get a Maxwell screen. Pricey, but very much work it. Frank S. got one, as have several others in RFF.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I'm not sure if the screen on your model is user replaceable.
It may need to be shimmed, but I could be wrong.
Take a look at the Beattie screen. I have one in my 2.8F and it's excellent, even brighter than the screen in my Blad 503cx
It may need to be shimmed, but I could be wrong.
Take a look at the Beattie screen. I have one in my 2.8F and it's excellent, even brighter than the screen in my Blad 503cx
ChrisN
Striving
Spyder - thanks for the note on the filters - very clever!
Mark - what's the name of the file? I'll google for it.
Ted - that Maxwell screen is highly-regarded. One to consider.
Harry - the focusing screen is removable - four little screws to remove the top, then two tricky little spring clips holding the screen in place; no shims. The Beattie is another one for me to investigate.
Is there a trade-off in ease of focusing with the brighter screens?
Mark - what's the name of the file? I'll google for it.
Ted - that Maxwell screen is highly-regarded. One to consider.
Harry - the focusing screen is removable - four little screws to remove the top, then two tricky little spring clips holding the screen in place; no shims. The Beattie is another one for me to investigate.
Is there a trade-off in ease of focusing with the brighter screens?
FrankS
Registered User
Is there a trade-off in ease of focusing with the brighter screens?
Yes slightly. They are brighter and far more useable for composing than the original screen, but less contrasty. But then you can use the split image spot for focusing if your upgraded screen has one - recommended.
Yes slightly. They are brighter and far more useable for composing than the original screen, but less contrasty. But then you can use the split image spot for focusing if your upgraded screen has one - recommended.
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
FrankS said:
It's described here: http://www.panum.de/rolleiflex_screen.htm
This way lies danger, however. I've read somewhere else (can't remember where) that according to Rollei factory specifications, true focus for the taking lens is in fact a very small distance ahead of the pressure plate. This small offset takes into account film bowing, which is a common occurrence in MF. It seems to me that aligning focus precisely between the viewing and taking lenses isn't as simple as holding a second focusing screen behind the taking lens and comparing the two images--those of the taking and viewing lenses--for simultaneous sharpness. Such a method, which is described on the page whose link I've provided above, fails to take into account the tiny forward offset.
Yes, at f/8 imprecision is made up for through depth of field; however, it would be a shame if the camera were to be rendered unreliable for focusing at larger apertures.
My recommendation therefore: consult with a qualified Rollei repair person before deciding whether to take on a focusing screen change as a DYI project.
FrankS
Registered User
The focussing screen can be shimmed to provide accurate focus. Directions are included with Bill Maxwell's screen and is not too difficult - I did it. With that knowledge I then switched the screen I removed from my Rolleiflex 3.5E (which now has the Maxwell screen) and put it into an older Rolleicord with a much dimmer original screen.
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
Frank,
I too have a Rolleiflex E. Having done your own change, are you able to focus reliably using f/3.5?
Also, do you have the split-image version? I was thinking of going with that one especially if the split-image helps.
I too have a Rolleiflex E. Having done your own change, are you able to focus reliably using f/3.5?
Also, do you have the split-image version? I was thinking of going with that one especially if the split-image helps.
FrankS
Registered User
Yes, and yes.
The shims are placed or removed from between the camera body and the waist level frame which contains the focus screen. Measure 3ft or 1 meter depending on your scale and place a high contrast object that distance from the film plane with the camera on a tripod. (Use a Rolleifix.) Use the focus screen to focus on the object several different times, checking the focus scale to see if it agrees with the measured distance of 3ft. If not, try adding shims or taking shims out that were there, until it agrees.
This will get you sharp negs if the taking lens and focusing lens agree. This can be checked with a piece of developed blank film taped across the film plane. Check the image at the film plane with the focus screen image. This is tricky with the Rollei because you can't mount it on a tripod at the same time. Basically you need 3 or 4 hands. If the 2 lenses do not agree, then this is when I send the camera to a technician!
The shims are placed or removed from between the camera body and the waist level frame which contains the focus screen. Measure 3ft or 1 meter depending on your scale and place a high contrast object that distance from the film plane with the camera on a tripod. (Use a Rolleifix.) Use the focus screen to focus on the object several different times, checking the focus scale to see if it agrees with the measured distance of 3ft. If not, try adding shims or taking shims out that were there, until it agrees.
This will get you sharp negs if the taking lens and focusing lens agree. This can be checked with a piece of developed blank film taped across the film plane. Check the image at the film plane with the focus screen image. This is tricky with the Rollei because you can't mount it on a tripod at the same time. Basically you need 3 or 4 hands. If the 2 lenses do not agree, then this is when I send the camera to a technician!
Last edited:
Tarzak
Well-known
Chris,
rolleiflextlr.zip is the name of the file. If you have an ftp server I could upload it for you. I could try to reduce the PDF file 60mb is pretty silly. There are 478 pages so maybe not so silly.
I have Acrobat chugging away at it now. If successful, I'll let you know.
rolleiflextlr.zip is the name of the file. If you have an ftp server I could upload it for you. I could try to reduce the PDF file 60mb is pretty silly. There are 478 pages so maybe not so silly.
I have Acrobat chugging away at it now. If successful, I'll let you know.
Tarzak
Well-known
Woo hoo!
I got the file size down to 51.3Mb.
So good luck with your google search. If you fail to find it, let me know, I can always burn it to a disk and snail it to you.
I got the file size down to 51.3Mb.
So good luck with your google search. If you fail to find it, let me know, I can always burn it to a disk and snail it to you.
Tarzak
Well-known
Forget google.
I looked at the embedded info on my file and hey presto, there is an URL.
kyphoto.com/classics/manuals/rolleiflextlr.zip
I looked at the embedded info on my file and hey presto, there is an URL.
kyphoto.com/classics/manuals/rolleiflextlr.zip
Wayno
Well-known
J J Kapsberger said:
This has always worked for me and focus is accurate even wide open.
You can shim the WLF/screen to adjust focus but the "more correct" way is to turn the viewing lens in or out after loosening the locking screw or collar. This means removing the front fascia on most Rolleis. Ignore the instuctions on the Mamiya screen link about adjusting the mirror. Also, for later Rolleis with the clip on WLF, screen thickness doesn't affect focus.
The screen I got from ebay was exactly the same thickness as the original ground glass, so no adjustment was necessary for that particular camera. I believe those bright screens (and Ricks?) are for Seagull cameras.
Nice results from the test roll BTW Chris, I see happy times ahead.
Last edited:
T
tedwhite
Guest
My 2.8E does not have the slip-off hood, instead the type previously mentioned with four screws and, I assume, shims. As I am not mechanically inclined, I sent my Maxwell screen and the camera to Ross Yerkes in L.A., had him install it and do a CLA while it was there. The screen is amazing.
ChrisN
Striving
Franks and JJ - thanks for your further information. More grist for the mill.
Thanks Mark - I found the file!
Wayno - That's the approach to focusing I'd read, too.
Ted - I'm corresponding with Bill Maxwell at the moment about a screen. I've had mine apart for cleaning - it's tricky but not too bad. Glad to hear the screen is good!
Thanks Mark - I found the file!
Wayno - That's the approach to focusing I'd read, too.
Ted - I'm corresponding with Bill Maxwell at the moment about a screen. I've had mine apart for cleaning - it's tricky but not too bad. Glad to hear the screen is good!
FrankS
Registered User
Wayno said:
Wayno, I disagree with your "more corect" way of adjusting focus by turning the viewing lens in or out. When you do this, you are un-synching the viewing lens focus from the taking lens focus. Assuming that the viewing and taking lens are properly synched to begin with, focus on the new viewing screen should be adjusted to match the camera's focus scale using the shims as I described. Does this sound logical to you?
Last edited: