bessa 66, heliar, unsharp pictures

[wupdigoj]

Hello. I have a very old story with this camera. I bought it very cheap because it was in a terrible state, but after fixing the shutter, etc, all works as it should, including the counting frames device. The lens is clean, and it is a real heliar (all the reflexions are there). The lens standard is solid. I have checked and rechecked the infinity. I can not get a sharp roll from it. I suspect it has something to do with shake and/or film flatness. I have tried the lens in a 35 mm SLR (only the central part) and it is extremely sharp from 5.6 to 16, and well acceptable wide open, at all distances. But in the bessa, I typically obtain 10 to 12 terrible frames (which can not be enlarged to 5x7) and, usually 0, 1 or 2 sharp ones. I usually shoot at 1/100 and 1/250. I usually get sharp negatives with other cameras at 1/25 (retina, iskra). I have tried to change my technique, disconnect the counting, use a tripod, put some rubber under the pressure plate, nothing seems to help in a significant way. I do want a portable 6x6 with a sharp lens, so I am thinking about purchasing another folder to change the lens (and possibly the shutter) with the heliar (75 f3.5). Could you advice me about a good candidate, portable, cheap, solid, simple, with a good film flatness and not shaky (I like 6x6 but 6x4.5 could do also).

Thanks in advance

Javier

 

[fidget]

Sorry to hear of your problems with this cam.
I'm sure that you've tried all the sensible things, but you don't mention using a cable release. A cam of mine some time ago had (probably) sloppy standard/lens plate fixings, the shutter lever took a little pressure to trip and the whole lens assembly jerked as it shot (perhaps I should rephrase that?).
Trying it with a cable release cured most of this, a service of the shutter may also have helped. I sold it eventually and now have the same model which is just fine on the internal shutter button.

Dave...

 

[oftheherd]

Well shake and film flatness could be a problem. How smooth is the shutter release? I have seen shutters that let go suddenly causing shake. Sometimes they can be partially depressed past the hard part first. Have you checked the front standard to ensure it is always well locked in a vertical position? Are you certain there aren't multiple light leaks? That doesn't usually render oof photos, but could. That bad would usually also cause exposure problems though. Hopefully some of the members here who have more experience can chime in with a more certain solution to your problem. Folders are fun to use.

 

[Solinar]

Have you checked the front standard to ensure it is always well locked in a vertical position?

This can be a problem with Voigtlander folders and is worth checking.

Also, if the the lens has been taken apart for cleaning - was it properly collimated at infinity after reassembly.

If the camera has the shutter release on the outward folding platform, try shooting some close in shots using a tripod and use a tape measure to set the focus.

 

[FallisPhoto]

I have checked and rechecked the infinity.

How did you go about doing this? This is how it should be done: http://www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk/focadj.html Only thing is, if possible, instead of using tracing paper, waxed paper or tape, use ground glass -- it's a lot more accurate. Also, use the moon on a dark clear night, not "an object 1/2 mile away."

 

[chippy]

sounds like Javier has (or insists he has) tried everything and i would agree it sounds like film flatness if everything else is ruled out, although even this sounds like it should be alright. however the fact that you said it was in terrible shape to begin with leaves a miriad of questionable posibilities

as for a sugestion for a different 6x6 you could try a perkeo (in keeping with the voightlanda brand), they seem to have no problem with film flatness or shake. i dont know if the lens will fit easy or not (i tend to think it will) but anyone that can test fit a helliar from a bessa 66 to a 35mm SLR will surely have no problems.

 

[wupdigoj]

Thank you for all your kind answers. I have had this camera for several years, and now and then I try something new, expecting a sharp roll, but always with bad results. The infinity focus is correctly set. I use a film with a hole in the back paper (instead of a ground glass) and use the red window in the back for this. It is a very accurate method, because it use a real film and the real back of the camera and has worked great for me in other cameras (like iskra).
I think the problem is mainly due to camera shake. The shutter release is hard, and also actuate a mechanism to count the frames. But this not explain everything, because I obtained very bad results using a tripod and a cable release (in the shutter, not in the body). Comparing the frames took with the heliar and the SLR (pin sharp!!), and with the bessa, soft and blurry, it is hard to believe the lens is the same. I will try tomorrow to post some examples. The lens standard "seems" solid, but I am not sure about this.

All in all, I am tired with this camera, and want to try another one (using the lens). I am afraid a perkeo is out of my budget, and I think also that the lens is 80 mm, not 75.

Tnak you again

 

[chippy]

if you want cheap then likely you are going to have to go to some sort of effort. what is your budget? maybe a ziess nettar, welta weltax or pearl...the list goes on, ,,a perkeo w/vaskar is a 75mm. it wouldnt be worth buying a perkeo with scopar just to take it out

 

[Windscale]

If the lens can take sharp pictures in your 35mm SLR, it shouold take sharp pics in the Bessa. It is probably your adjustments I hate to say. Try the old way using ground glass. And make sure your camera and lens are level. You may need a few little spirit levels to do this.

It may not be the best idea to plant the lens on another folder. It is not easy. And, other 80mm lenses may actually not be exactly 80mm and you will need a lot of tuning.

Easiest is to get an Agfa Isolette III, replace the bellows and adjust the lens and rangefinder and you will have a good time. Sell the Heliar if it has been so much trouble for you!

 

[chippy]

Sell the Heliar if it has been so much trouble for you!

have to say i agree...

its not even my camera but its enough to drive me to distraction!! Javier says everything is properly and perfectly aligned and shutter linkgages have been bypassed for testing and yet the lens is still not sharp..but he says the lens is sharp when he somehow got it to work in his 35mm!! so everything should be good eh

sounds easy to transfer the lens to another folder but it often isnt as easy as that...but if he did then he could tell us which camera the heliar fitted into and we could all try it and have agood time 😉😀

 

[wupdigoj]

O.K folks, I think I will give up. Perkeos (and any other classic camera) in my place are very expensive. I paid about 25 euros ( 35 $) for the bessa, only because it was in a horrible cosmetic condition, and the shutter and counter were stuck (a simple fix), but when I saw the magic "Heliar" name in the lens, I bought it. I don't want to pay much more than that for another folder. If I find a cheap one I will try, but I am not going to give the bessa another try.

Nevertheless, if someone own a bessa 66 (any lens), I would like to know how it performs.

Thanks

Javier

 

[chippy]

a quick look in the completed listings for ebay shows reasonable Z/nettars selling for 9-10eur

 

[Muggins]

IIRC, the Nettar is often found with a Novar lens. "Only" a triplet, but very well spoken of round here. Certainly mine (on a 35mm Contina, admittedly) surprised me with its sharpness and contrast. Knocked spots off an Agfa with an Agnar, which you'd expect to be comparable...

Adrian

 

[FallisPhoto]

It is a very accurate method, because it use a real film and the real back of the camera and has worked great for me in other cameras (like iskra).

I'll have to disagree with you there. The only two methods I have ever found to be both accurate and reliable were using ground glass as a focusing screen or backsighting with another camera. The reason is that you just can't see the image clearly enough through tracing paper, waxed paper, tape or film to tell when it is in really sharp focus; you can with ground glass.

 

[wupdigoj]

I'll have to disagree with you there. The only two methods I have ever found to be both accurate and reliable were using ground glass as a focusing screen or backsighting with another camera. The reason is that you just can't see the image clearly enough through tracing paper, waxed paper, tape or film to tell when it is in really sharp focus; you can with ground glass.

I didn't explain myself. I use a blank film with some tiny scratches in it, and holes in the backing paper in the position of the red window. For checking the focus I use a 35 mm SLR with a 200 mm tele. Using a powerful light, it is very easy to check if the scratches are in focus in the viewfinder of the SLR. I have found this method to be more accurate than the ground glass, because you are using the real film in real conditions (eventually, the film is not exactly located in the plane of the ground glass). You can also check for consistency between frames, the effect of opening the camera before feeding film, and so on . Obviously it can only be used in cameras with ruby windows.

Javier

 

[Windscale]

Well wupdigoj, you do have the most unconventional ways at checking focuses. I am not saying you are not right. But have you tried the more conventional way (Ground Glass)? Also it may help if you can post some of your out of focus shots (stating your intended points of focus), then we may be able to tell where the problem was.

 

[wupdigoj]

Well wupdigoj, you do have the most unconventional ways at checking focuses. I am not saying you are not right. But have you tried the more conventional way (Ground Glass)?

Yes I have. Not very different, just a little but mine more accurate (at least in other cameras: iskra, a TLR and severeral kodak folders). I think it is better?? explained in this thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55230

Also it may help if you can post some of your out of focus shots (stating your intended points of focus), then we may be able to tell where the problem was.

I will, when I make my negatives scanned.

Javier

 

[FallisPhoto]

Well wupdigoj, you do have the most unconventional ways at checking focuses. I am not saying you are not right. But have you tried the more conventional way (Ground Glass)?

Yes I have. Not very different, just a little but mine more accurate (at least in other cameras: iskra, a TLR and severeral kodak folders). I think it is better?? explained in this thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55230

Also it may help if you can post some of your out of focus shots (stating your intended points of focus), then we may be able to tell where the problem was.

I will, when I make my negatives scanned.

Javier

It sounds like you are using the backsighting method, but if so, you are not doing it correctly: http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-123.html

 

[wupdigoj]

[/quote]It sounds like you are using the backsighting method, but if so, you are not doing it correctly: http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-123.html[/quote]

I didn't know its name (backsighting). Yes, I use this method, and yes, I use it as in the referred page, but using scratched film and a hole in the backpaper instead of a piece of tape and glass.

 

[FallisPhoto]

It sounds like you are using the backsighting method, but if so, you are not doing it correctly: http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-123.html[/quote]

I didn't know its name (backsighting). Yes, I use this method, and yes, I use it as in the referred page, but using scratched film and a hole in the backpaper instead of a piece of tape and glass.[/quote]

The cuts in the tape are what give you something to focus on; sanded film doesn't.