Am I expecting to much?

[Tr6Greig]

Hi All

I’ve been making my way up the twin lens quality gradient over the last few year, starting with a very nice Yashica 124G that I liked a lot, then moved on to a first class Rolleicord Vb which I still have. Last week I went for my personal final camera in this progression, a 1959 3.5e no light meter Rolleiflex with the Xenotor 75mm lens.

The camera is in good shape and the lenses are clear, no visual issue with either. The shutter works well at a speeds and the film transport mechanism is working correctly.

First thing I did was run Kodak TX400 B/W film through the camera at various shutter speeds and focal lengths and in different light situations to see how it performed. The results initially looked good, however on closer examination and after scanning I was rather disappointed with the sharpness of the images .This applied to all the imaged at all focal lengths, they all appear softer than I was expecting, in fact
not as sharp as those from the Yashica using the same film.
I ran another film, this time an Agfa Acros 100 , same results.

Is this likely to be a problem that could be sorted with a service, or could it be that this example just has a soft lens? I can still return this camera and find another, I’m just concerned that I’m maybe expecting to much from this camera, because to be honest if that’s the situation I would much rather carry around my Vb while traveling, much lighter and in my opinion a very good camera.

Regards

Cameron

 

[ruby.monkey]

You should get results at least as sharp as those from the Rolleicord. Could be that the Rolleiflex has taken a knock at some point and that the lens board is out of alignment (seems to be a weak point with the Rollei TLRs).

 

[Drago]

It should be on par with your Rolleicord at the center. So if it's soft all over, it maybe need a CLA

 

[mfogiel]

The Rolleiflex 3.5 with a Planar or Xenotar is the sharpest version. It should be already very sharp in the centre wide open, go figure if you stop down to f 8.0. The issue could be caused by the board misalignment, less likely by focusing screen misalignment, or if the sharpness loss is mainly at the borders, by incorrect setting for the Rolleikin inside the camera. You could set up a focus test close up to see if there is a major focus dissonacnce between what you see sharp and what actually is sharp on the negative.

 

[Kate-the-Great]

Seems the focus calibration can drift with these over time if they're heavily used and/or not well taken care of. I briefly owned a beater Rolleiflex Automat 3.5 a few years ago that improved greatly after synchronization between the focusing and taking lenses. I don't remember the exact procedure, but it was fairly simple. I didn't have any ground glass handy at the time so I fixed pieces of matte scotch tape (the "invisible tape" kind) tightly across the film gate and adjusted the lenses based on instructions I found somewhere around the 'net. Sharpness was much better after that.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

No you are not expecting too much. The Rolleicord Vb is an excellent camera with a Xenar lens capable of really good sharpness, a 75mm Xenotar should actually surpass this if you look carefully enough at big prints (not to overstate the difference). But a Rolleicord that is in good repair with a plumb lens board and correctly calibrated lenses will easily perform better than a tired Xenotar with lenses that are not tracking together or a board that is wonky. Comparisons aren't valid unless the cameras being compared are both in good repair.

There are some good discussions on this site about what happens when the alignment of a Rolleis lenses goes off, either through divergence between the viewing and taking lenses or maladjustment of the lens board (due to wear or impact damage, or both). There is a learning curve involved in skilling up to check and adjust these things yourself.

I'd recommend comparing the focus of the viewing lens to the taking lens and, assuming your focusing technique is good and that you are not the problem, if you do not get improvement after verifying both lenses track together, it is probably time to send it off to someone competent for servicing. If you wish to know more about why wear or damage can give rise to focus discrepancies, there are plenty of good conversations on this site as these questions have been raised previously, and much good information is readily available.
Cheers,
Brett

 

[FrankS]

Set up a focus checking scene. It could simply be a tape measure shot at a 45 degree angle at closest focus distance, wide open aperture.

 

[Joe Vitessa]

Yeah, sounds like the 'Flex is ready for a service. I love my Rolleicord III with its Xenar lens, but my Rolleiflex 3.5e2 is decently sharper and has a beautiful 3-D rendering at most apertures--particularly when it's open wide. I assume you've checked that the Xenotar lens on your camera is clean and clear?

 

[Tr6Greig]

Thanks for all the replies,it does appear I am not comparing like with like.The Vb has just returned from a service and the 3.5e if obviously in need of one.The problem is the seller is not prepared to entertain paying or contributing to a service so it is being returned for a refund.It was sold as being in perfect working condition :bang:

So I'll continue looking for a good example of a 3.5E or F.

Thanks

 

[FrankS]

Thanks for all the replies,it does appear I am not comparing like with like.The Vb has just returned from a service and the 3.5e if obviously in need of one.The problem is the seller is not prepared to entertain paying or contributing to a service so it is being returned for a refund.It was sold as being in perfect working condition :bang:

So I'll continue looking for a good example of a 3.5E or F.

Thanks

Best solution! Good luck with your search.
(From a very satisfied 3.5E owner)

 

[Robert Lai]

I've had two 3.5F cameras. One had obvious wear, and even some corrosion on it. After service with Harry Fleenor, the images from its 6 -element Planar were spectacular. Fleenor says that it is VERY COMMON for the lens board not to be true, due to prior impact damage. He has to straighten out a high percentage of the lens boards that come his way, and synchronize the focus of both lenses once more.

The second 3.5 F camera is a "White Face" model that looks like it has been pampered all its life. Another 6-element Planar. This one serviced by Krimar. Looking at the pictures taken by the two cameras, actually scans at 100%, it was clear that the latter camera was just slightly sharper than the first. However, this is probably due to individual lens variation at this point. Both are perfectly suitable even for professional use.

If the camera was advertised as being in "perfect" condition, it obviously isn't. The best solution is your solution - return it. Find one in much better condition to start with.