Fed 3 Focusing problem, help!

[wolves3012]

I've really not gotten involved in these sort of threads over the merits of FSU and East German cameras before, but I think I've had enough direct experience with them to comment with some authority. (And by the way to the previous poster, no slight intended, I'm just tying to enjoy a spirited debate. By cultist I mean in the sense of a devoted hobbyist, obviously not like a cult member in a religious sense - this is an expression in English.)

A spirited debate has a bit more reason to it than that. By your own admission you've film-tested "several" FSUs. You may count in my signature how many I own currently. All but two came randomly from the auction site. None of them have or had light-leaks. I won't dispute that some leak light. Pinholed curtains on 3 of mine needed replacement. Not bad for the age of them really.

Here's the one thing that really gets me about so many of these cameras I've seen. I can recall only one FSU camera that I film tested (and I've film tested several) that did not at least on some occasion leak light. Either I've had the most remarkable lack of bad luck, or most of them leak light to a greater or lessor extent. It's not that Leica's or Canon's don't ever leak light, its just much less common. The ability of a camera design to be inherently light-tight is really very, very fundamental!

You've had bad luck. Kievs are known for leaks, as are their related Contaxes. The FEDs and Zorkis usually don't unless abused. For the early Zorki/FED models, a leak is nigh-on impossible except through curtains or missing screws.

I think a lot of the desire for FSU owners to hold their cameras up as something special comes from a certain angst about the cost of Leica and other prestigious brands. They view this expense as sort of an unnecessary consequence of elitist collectors (etc.). There is certainly some truth to this, but the fact is that most of this cost is the actual cost of functionality and usability. They also take a lot of pride in having overcome the often extensive problems of acquiring and getting their body and lens kits onto working condition, and so of course become sensitive to criticism.

Firstly, I think no-one here has held them up as something special. They appeal to a certain type of person (not a cultist either). As you can see, I do own one Leica, it cost more than twice the price of my dearest FSU, for a body alone. At a reasonable cost (in time spent "tinkering" or in money spent on servicing) they'e as capable at picture-taking as a Leica, Canon, etc. Look through some of the galleries.

As to the original poster, here is some practical and specific advice of interchangeable lens rangefinders I could recommend that are reasonably priced for what they are. They are typically found in working condition:

Canon 7, P, L, L3, IV-L, Vt (and similar models)
Canon III or II series (make sure the shutter and curtains are good before purchase)
Leica II, III series (ditto regarding shutter curtains)
Bessa R, R2, R2M, R3M
Leica M2, M3, M4-P

There are a few others I've probably missed.

I somehow don't think you can find the likes of a Leica M2, M3 or M4-P at the price of an FSU and the M-mount lenses are somewhat high in price too, good though they may be. As for the other models - surely they're immune to curtain defects - no? The same caveats apply to any old camera! Some of us don't want or need such high-price gear and are happy with less. Horses for courses.

 

[David Murphy]

wolves3012, yes well I agree the M2 and M3 are on the pricey side for newcomers, but I had to add them to my list as they are the "gold-standard" in my view. In all fairness many people I know spend far more than that on DSLRs these days. They have been coming down in price lately however -- probably the economy. I've seen a few working M3 DS's for as little as $400 lately -- really low-priced for the Leica world.

 

[wolves3012]

wolves3012, yes well I agree the M2 and M3 are on the pricey side for newcomers, but I had to add them to my list as they are the "gold-standard" in my view. In all fairness many people I know spend far more than that on DSLRs these days. They have been coming down in price lately however -- probably the economy. I've seen a few working M3 DS's for as little as $400 lately -- really low-priced for the Leica world.

Throw in the price of the inevitable CLA and a couple of lenses and you won't get much change from $1000, hardly in the range of a decent FSU setup and rather pricey for a newcomer.

 

[David Murphy]

Throw in the price of the inevitable CLA and a couple of lenses and you won't get much change from $1000, hardly in the range of a decent FSU setup and rather pricey for a newcomer.

Well yes of course, but the lenses don't have to cost that much. A Canon 50/1.8 and a cloned Leica adapter for instance can be found for around $150 total in good shape - a fantastic lens on any camera body. There are plenty of other modestly priced screw mount lenses or lower-priced M lenses around, even some from Leica (Elmar, Summitar, Collapsible Cron, Summaron). There have been working M3's and lenses listed right here in the last few weeks that could make a $500 or so paired setup (and a lifetime of shooting excellence). Naturally a Canon 7 or Bessa R would save considerable money though, yet deliver very high quality and ease of use too.

The trick to getting a reasonably priced CLA is to find a local expert. The national camera repair places are too expensive for me and so is shipping. I pay about $120 to CLA an M3 - new curtains (usually NOT necessary) cost a a little more. I will use DAG however if it's a Leica problem that's really tough and the camera or lens is worth it (he's really great).

 

[batterytypehah!]

You strike me as very aggressive and angry that's for sure. You seem determined to find offense in anything I say.

That's what you get for hurling "ridiculous" at me first thing. Further, I refer you to other participants in this thread saying much the same about you.

Now, you strike me as someone who doesn't give a damn about a brand new forum member's first question. You jump right in and tell her, roughly, "It's your own fault, shoulda bought German, now go spend some real money and leave us serious photographers alone."

No wonder she hasn't posted since.

 

[David Murphy]

Oh I'm really glad to hear you are the decider of what's said and not said here -- thanks for controlling my speech. You are obviously so caring.

 

[David Murphy]

Also, I stand completely by my advice to Julia. To suggest she acquire another FSU camera or spend more money on repairs is bad advice.

 

[batterytypehah!]

You know what David, I have just about had it with your snobby attitude and thinly veiled bigotry. People like you give RFF a bad (namely, elitist) name. You are now on my Ignore list.

 

[Keith]

Well the OP's probaly hiding after the way this thread has gone and with a user name like juliagillard I'd suspect an Oz location as the Australian deputy PM's name is in fact 'Julia Gillard!' 😀

Do we have a tonyabbot or a kevinrudd out there? :angel:

 

[payasam]

I do not see the bigotry as veiled in the least, batterytypehah!, leave alone thinly. And I see that you have been called names for no logical or defensible reason. However, the ignore list is an imperfect solution. You cannot follow a conversation among many people if you cannot hear all of them. I understand, of course, that you may be averse to foul odours.

 

[payasam]

back on track

back on track

Come back, Julia. We're here to help. I have a FED-2, which is in relevant respects no different from the FED-3. Shall I take and post a couple of pictures to explain what people have been saying?

 

[David Murphy]

Well I've been on the forum for five years now and never had to use an "ignore list", but now I've these two co-conspirators on it. Just proves my point about the FSU "thing".

 

[julio1fer]

If the OP is still around, needing photos of the camera or further instructions for troubleshooting, please let us know, I'd be glad to post on the OT. I've been helped here, and would be happy to help others.

Now this is a FED 3B with Jupiter-12 lens. Does your camera look like this? What do you read on your lens front?



Nothing against free speech but please let's get this thread back on track, dear members. There is value for everybody in keeping more or less OT.

 

[pakeha]

originally posted by David Murphy

I think a lot

does`nt look like it from here.

the desire for FSU owners to hold their cameras up as something special comes from a certain angst about the cost of Leica and other prestigious brands. They view this expense as sort of an unnecessary consequence of elitist collectors

So you also know the fiscal situation of others . Guess i better follow your advice and spend what you think i should, me being mortage free with NO other debt. Business is great etc, etc. I should buy a Leica, but here is the thing,like some others i`m just not interested, don`t have a reason other than- not me. Might get a fancy bag instead.

speaking of debt, hows the economy in California?

 

[Keith]

speaking of debt, hows the economy in California?

Not terminal I've heard but who can tell until judgement day comes! :angel:

 

[David Murphy]

originally posted by David Murphy

I think a lot

does`nt look like it from here.

the desire for FSU owners to hold their cameras up as something special comes from a certain angst about the cost of Leica and other prestigious brands. They view this expense as sort of an unnecessary consequence of elitist collectors

So you also know the fiscal situation of others . Guess i better follow your advice and spend what you think i should, me being mortage free with NO other debt. Business is great etc, etc. I should buy a Leica, but here is the thing,like some others i`m just not interested, don`t have a reason other than- not me. Might get a fancy bag instead.

speaking of debt, hows the economy in California?

I'm not sure what the fiscal mismanagement of the California budget has to do with this (please ask the Governor), but it hardly changes the fact that a reliable high-quality interchangeable lens rangefinder with a basic lens is still going to cost $250 or so and up.
I can't help this and I wish it wasn't so. If you can't afford it or don't want it that's obviously your business. However It would be a disservice for me to tell anyone interested in interchangeable lens rangefinders anything else, in fact I'd be misrepresenting the truth as I see it - can't do that.

By the way, just in the last few hours here there was a nice Canon 7 and a beautiful Canon 50/1.8 for sale here for about the price of a couple of broken Feds or Zorkis, a CLA that didn't work, and a lot of shipping costs from Russia. Canon gear is a good example of the sort of solid, serious camera equipment I'm talking about (hardly "elitist" Leica gear) and I think this proves my point pretty well.

 

[Armoured]

Back on topic, specific suggestion

Back on topic, specific suggestion

Julia,

I understood you to say that the prism/rangefinder patch does not move at all.

1) First, remove the lens by unscrewing it counter-clockwise. At the top of the lens mount but inside, there will be (or should be) a little metal tab, roughly pie shaped if you look at it from the bottom. This is the rangefinder cam or arm - the lens when focussing moves the cam in and out. Gently touch it with your finger to see if it moves and springs back when you let go. If the cam doesn't move or spring back, there's your problem; I don't think this is an easy fix.

2) You can focus the rangefinder without the lens on. Try it - look through the rangefinder viewer and look at something closer than infinity you can focus on. It should be double-imaged like with any rangefinder. While looking through, gently push the rangefinder cam in and out. The rangefinder patch should go in and out of focus. If all of this is working, the problem is with the lens.

3) With the lens off, turn focus in and out. There is an inner barrel that moves in and out (perpendicular to the camera) that moves the cam. This inner barrel and the cam are the link between the focus distance of the lens and the camera. If this doesn't move or there isn't one, it obviously is a lens issue (you may have a lens with no rangefinder coupling, but apart from that, this should be pretty rare). Try it with a different lens?

4) If these basics are working but the distances don't match, sounds like the rangefinder cam (or possibly the lens) is out of adjustment. The cam is not hard to adjust (search for instructions on the web or here) but fiddly, and not to everyone's taste. (Adjusting the horizontal patch - rangefinder distance focus - is a lot easier than vertical offset, which may be out if it was knocked about or because it's old).

Unrelated, and I don't know this specific camera, a lot of the feds and zorkis have diopter adjustment (lever) next to the rewind dial on upper left. I find it's very easy to have this diopter adjustment out of whack (it moves very easily) which makes the viewfinder very blurry and impossible to see through. I'm embarrassed to admit, but I had one I thought was just junk until I fiddled with this - and then I played with this and boom! viewfinder was clear and sharp.

Hope this helps.

 

[Nickfed]

Well dear Julia, after you have plowed though all the offhand and dismissive claptrap above, you might like to have a more practical review of the problem. It could be quite obvious and it may be simple to fix, and if nothing else, you might be able to talk intelligently with the seller.

It costs nothing to look, so it can't be bad advice.

First unscrew the lens, and have a look at the top of the opening revealed. You should see the little teardrop-shaped piece as ringed in red below. Not only should you see it, but it should be in the position as shown, partially covering the lens mount thread. This is the cam follower that is moved by the lens when you focus, and it operates the rangefinder.

If it is missing, that is your problem, it's missing.

If you see it in the position shown, it is OK but there is something disconnected inside the rangefinder gear and deeper surgery is required. The first thing to do is push on it. It should move down 5mm or so and spring back when you let go. If it does that, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the follower itself.

If you can see it but it is obviously not in the same position as shown i.e. it is a few mm down and clear of the lens mount thread, then that is probably your problem. It's simply stuck, and the cause may be nothing more than sitting for years with the lens in the infinity position. Put your finger behind the shiny tear drop and gently try to pull it forward. You may find that is all you need to do. If so, try working it back and forth, and see if it will free up.

Then you can get back to fixing our schools and take nice pictures on the job.

Don't worry about the pic being a FED-1, they are all much the same.

 

[Armoured]

Nickfed's instructions helpful

Nickfed's instructions helpful

Julia, to underline a point made by Nickfed above - he is quite right to point out that the rangefinder cam, if it's a few mm higher or lower than it should be, may simply be stuck or not registering properly with the movement of the lens mechanism.

My point about the lens and looking at it above - it really is very unlikely that it's a problem with the lens, but I find it helpful to look at the workings of the lens and imagine how it lines up with the rangefinder cam. If they're not hitting at the right register or getting caught, it won't work.

Also helps to understand the mechanism to piece together how/why sometimes getting the lens back on is tricky - and why forcing it has potential to cause problems. (Answer: focus at right extreme and inner barrel is not pushing on the rangefinder cam while mounting).

 

[David Hughes]

From memory, there were other 39mm lens made without the extended barrel for the range-finder cam; made for early Zenit SLR's. Easy to say, but I think they had the same names as the RF ones but were version 2. So the name would be "Industar 50 - 2" or some variation. It's been a while since I saw one.

And, without the extended barrel the lens would move entirely within itself when being focused but the RF version would have the barrel move outside the 39mm screw thread when on the infinity setting.

Of course, if you've two of the things then swapping the lenses might cure the problem and give you another.

Good luck.

Regards, David