DH73
Member
A few weeks ago, I bought a 1957 (Mk2) Moscow 4 medium format 6x9 folder from a well-known eBay seller in Ukraine. When it arrived, it looked in fabulous condition, so I loaded it up and went out to shoot a roll with it. My joy was short-lived, when that moment of truth came as I lifted the film out of the developing tank. Almost all of the 8 frames were partly or completely fogged out, like this (which was actually the only usable frame; the others were much worse):

So I contacted the seller, who without hesitation, agreed to replace the faulty camera. Using a torch, as suggested by the seller, I discovered a large-ish hole in the bellows around where the flip-up part of the rf coupler stows.
A little while later, a supposedly freshly serviced 1956 (so Mk1) Moscow 4 arrived from Ukraine. I put another roll of FP4+ in, and shot my 8 frames. It took a little longer, as I was in the throes of a respiratory infection. I noticed that the replacement camera (of the earlier style of M4) and fitted with the hinged back, the 6x9 frame counter blind wouldn't shut fully. To reduce any risks of stray light, I covered the never-to-be-needed 6x6 blind with black tape and made a flap over the 6x9 blind for extra protection. Anyway, I finished the film and developed it in the usual way. When I lifted it out of the tank, I was horrified to see that it was partially fogged to a lesser or greater extent on each frame, see below:

I have contacted the seller again, who assures me he personally checked the camera and that it was tested with a film before it was sent to me. I have sent the camera back to him (he has a UK address as well) and am now asking for a refund.
Can anyone on here suggest a source of the second camera's light leak? I could not see any leak in the bellows, although I did note that the camera has sustained a heavy blow at some point, enough to bend the lower folding mechanism, rendering the rf gear useless.
I have no wish to 'name and shame' the seller, at this stage anyway. I'm just curious to know other folks thoughts on it. It has left me very disappointed, as I really wanted a 6x9 camera to use alongside my Mamiya C220 and Kiev 6C 6x6 cameras, both of which are amazingly good, but the square format is limiting at times.
Thanks, David.

So I contacted the seller, who without hesitation, agreed to replace the faulty camera. Using a torch, as suggested by the seller, I discovered a large-ish hole in the bellows around where the flip-up part of the rf coupler stows.
A little while later, a supposedly freshly serviced 1956 (so Mk1) Moscow 4 arrived from Ukraine. I put another roll of FP4+ in, and shot my 8 frames. It took a little longer, as I was in the throes of a respiratory infection. I noticed that the replacement camera (of the earlier style of M4) and fitted with the hinged back, the 6x9 frame counter blind wouldn't shut fully. To reduce any risks of stray light, I covered the never-to-be-needed 6x6 blind with black tape and made a flap over the 6x9 blind for extra protection. Anyway, I finished the film and developed it in the usual way. When I lifted it out of the tank, I was horrified to see that it was partially fogged to a lesser or greater extent on each frame, see below:

I have contacted the seller again, who assures me he personally checked the camera and that it was tested with a film before it was sent to me. I have sent the camera back to him (he has a UK address as well) and am now asking for a refund.
Can anyone on here suggest a source of the second camera's light leak? I could not see any leak in the bellows, although I did note that the camera has sustained a heavy blow at some point, enough to bend the lower folding mechanism, rendering the rf gear useless.
I have no wish to 'name and shame' the seller, at this stage anyway. I'm just curious to know other folks thoughts on it. It has left me very disappointed, as I really wanted a 6x9 camera to use alongside my Mamiya C220 and Kiev 6C 6x6 cameras, both of which are amazingly good, but the square format is limiting at times.
Thanks, David.