Argenticien
Dave
Part I: The Family
So I've seen many stories of handed-down cameras with sentimental value. I never thought I'd have such a story myself. Now I've stumbled into one. A few weeks ago, my father-in-law was diagnosed with cancer. Last week we flew up to where he lives to be with him for his surgery, and some time together before it. On the day before the surgery, despite our efforts to keep him optimistic instead of thinking "I'm dying," he went into bequeathal mode with a few things. To that end, out he walked with a TLR, knowing my interest in old cameras. I knew he had a Rollei Magic, but I had never expressed interest, as I've read they're the dog in the Rollei TLR line (auto only + reliant on selenium meter = brick). Great was my surprise, then, when he handed me a Rolleiflex, and I immediately recognized the larger glass of a 2.8, not a 3.5. Some later serial number research revealed that it is a 2.8E. Dad then goes on to inform me that it was handed down to him long ago by his uncle, who was this immigrant family's first beachhead in USA. Dad's uncle is still living, having finally last year, in his 90s, shuttered his business that provided for so many in the family (including my father-in-law) as they came over.
Not knowing whether I should accept the camera at all (given that could imply "yes, then I do think you're dying") or accept it but offer him the 500 to 800 USD that it's worth (as my in-laws are not in great financial situation), I conferred with my wife. She said rather firmly that if her dad handed it to me outright, then he wants me to have it, and I ought not question him.
The good news is, the surgery the next day went seemingly well. We won't hear a pathology report for awhile, but the tumour is out, no obvious metastasis was found, and Dad is recovering, though slowly, and of course is not enjoying the pain from a large incision. But if things stand as they are, apparently he has been lucky. And the family have made a very strong showing of support--to an extent that has impressed the hospital staff--with numerous people going quite out of their way to visit Dad in hospital.
So home I went with a 2.8E, with a mix of awe (about the camera) and sadness (at how I came into it). I'm definitely going to cherish the family Rolleiflex and hope to hand it down to a nibling on the wife's side (as we do not have kids). I definitely feel like a caretaker of it, not its owner. I'm thinking Priority One for the camera should be to make some portraits for Dad, of his daughters and grandchildren. I know I can't possibly do all the travelling needed to photograph them all in time for Dad to have the portraits as a "what you have to live for" inspiration while he's still recovering, but it seems like the right kind of "thank you," no matter when I can do it.
Still to come: Part II (The Camera -- Wherein The Author Poses Technical Questions To the Erudite RFF Community) and Part III (The Test Roll).
--Dave
So I've seen many stories of handed-down cameras with sentimental value. I never thought I'd have such a story myself. Now I've stumbled into one. A few weeks ago, my father-in-law was diagnosed with cancer. Last week we flew up to where he lives to be with him for his surgery, and some time together before it. On the day before the surgery, despite our efforts to keep him optimistic instead of thinking "I'm dying," he went into bequeathal mode with a few things. To that end, out he walked with a TLR, knowing my interest in old cameras. I knew he had a Rollei Magic, but I had never expressed interest, as I've read they're the dog in the Rollei TLR line (auto only + reliant on selenium meter = brick). Great was my surprise, then, when he handed me a Rolleiflex, and I immediately recognized the larger glass of a 2.8, not a 3.5. Some later serial number research revealed that it is a 2.8E. Dad then goes on to inform me that it was handed down to him long ago by his uncle, who was this immigrant family's first beachhead in USA. Dad's uncle is still living, having finally last year, in his 90s, shuttered his business that provided for so many in the family (including my father-in-law) as they came over.
Not knowing whether I should accept the camera at all (given that could imply "yes, then I do think you're dying") or accept it but offer him the 500 to 800 USD that it's worth (as my in-laws are not in great financial situation), I conferred with my wife. She said rather firmly that if her dad handed it to me outright, then he wants me to have it, and I ought not question him.
The good news is, the surgery the next day went seemingly well. We won't hear a pathology report for awhile, but the tumour is out, no obvious metastasis was found, and Dad is recovering, though slowly, and of course is not enjoying the pain from a large incision. But if things stand as they are, apparently he has been lucky. And the family have made a very strong showing of support--to an extent that has impressed the hospital staff--with numerous people going quite out of their way to visit Dad in hospital.
So home I went with a 2.8E, with a mix of awe (about the camera) and sadness (at how I came into it). I'm definitely going to cherish the family Rolleiflex and hope to hand it down to a nibling on the wife's side (as we do not have kids). I definitely feel like a caretaker of it, not its owner. I'm thinking Priority One for the camera should be to make some portraits for Dad, of his daughters and grandchildren. I know I can't possibly do all the travelling needed to photograph them all in time for Dad to have the portraits as a "what you have to live for" inspiration while he's still recovering, but it seems like the right kind of "thank you," no matter when I can do it.
Still to come: Part II (The Camera -- Wherein The Author Poses Technical Questions To the Erudite RFF Community) and Part III (The Test Roll).
--Dave
tuanvinh2000
Well-known
Very touching story. I wish your in laws the best and bring him some great pictures that show him how capable the camera is in the right hand.
Spanik
Well-known
Great story. Don't forget to include some pictures of your father-in-law for his family. Make him happy with you using the camera, show him you're worthy of the legacy. And don't forget to have fun with it.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
That.
He gave you the camera so that you would use it, I suspect. This one comes with a real obligation. Honor it.
emraphoto
Veteran
Is the a better way to get a Rollei?
Relish in the knowing that all though they look rather antiquated, the rollei's, with a good screen, are about as close to shooting perfection as you will find. Surprisingly fast, super quiet and lots of angels the user can use to interact.
Genius machines
Relish in the knowing that all though they look rather antiquated, the rollei's, with a good screen, are about as close to shooting perfection as you will find. Surprisingly fast, super quiet and lots of angels the user can use to interact.
Genius machines
emraphoto
Veteran
My friend Mike Berube (google him, super talented) works on a Rollei. Shoots assignment work
Gumby
Veteran
A buddy of mine gave me his father's old camera (Nikon FE), complete with a partially shot roll of film. I returned the film to my buddy and have been using the camera ever since. I think of my buddy's father every time... even though I never met him. I, too, believe in honoring that kind of obligation.
robbeiflex
Well-known
Take it. I have a similar story although thankfully not involving illness. I was given mine by my Mom's partner of many years, and he is in great health. He simply wasn't using it as he had no source for film and nowhere to develop. I am enjoying it a lot and can see that this also gives him great joy. I can't wait until he visits and I can give him a few rolls and he can use my dark room as he wishes. I also feel like more of a caretaker than an owner of this camera. It is the one that I will never sell, no matter what. It will be handed down in the family as well.
Cheers,
Rob
Cheers,
Rob
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
This struck a chord with me too. The last thing my dad bequeathed me in life was his cameras. None of them a Rolleiflex, but none the less cameras I will be keeping for as long as I live. But the last pictures I took of him were with a 2.8E3. He passed away a few weeks ago.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Sorry for your loss, Ezzie.
My father in law is in the hospital fighting for his life. Has caught pneumonia after seven weeks of radiation therapy to beat skin cancer inflicted by 17 years of heart transplant medicines.
My wife and in laws aren't too keen on pictures now. I keep telling them that any shots should be taken now and discarded later if they still feel the same about it, not the other way 'round. They agree once I remind them, and I have taken the Rolleiflex to hospital several times.
Even though hiding behind a lens brings a certain kind of detachment, it's hard to deal with.
To the OP: take as many shots as you can from your loved ones. No matter how trivial. Someday they will be valuable.
My motto: Tomorrows memories are photographed today!
Argenticien
Dave
Part II: The Camera
Part II: The Camera
Wherein The Author Poses Technical Questions To the Erudite RFF Community
Thanks for the kind words, all, and the general concurrence on my accepting the camera. Apparently these get handed down frequently. And my wishes go out to Ezzie and Buzzardkid as well. These situations make the cameras have greater sentimental value, but we'd of course all rather have our dads (et al.) still healthy and using their own gear.
So here is the camera:
Rolleiflex alone by Argenticien, on Flickr
Being a 2.8E, that would seem to make it from between 1956 and 1959 (per Rolleiclub). My father-in-law thought maybe his uncle brought the camera with him when he came from China, which sounded fishy because they were essentially economic refugees (from a poor village) and these cameras were never cheap. I believe I've heard that this uncle came earlier than 1956, so this casts additional doubt. My bet is on him having got it in USA (maybe secondhand) after he started to have some business success here.
Anyway, I had never even held a Rolleiflex before. I had no idea how enormous my C330 is (even with 80mm normal lens) by comparison until now.
Rolleiflex and C330 by Argenticien, on Flickr
Looks good, right? It is in good shape generally, but I did find a few problems and hope the Rolleiflex experts of RFF can offer some suggestions. First, the meter. Clearly the camera has had some sort of impact that the meter took the brunt of. The window is cracked, and in fact the black circular base of the meter is splitting away from the knob (see second picture below). The meter responds to light sometimes (if jiggled just right) but gives seemingly nonsensical readings. I should point out that this camera has no case (although was stored in a dark closet, we think) so the selenium cell may be bad as well. Anyone think this is fixable (even by Harry Fleenor or Krikor Maralian) or a total loss? I've heard of having the meter knob replaced with a non-meter one; might that be the wisest route here?
Destroyed meter - 1 by Argenticien, on Flickr
Destroyed meter - 2 by Argenticien, on Flickr
Now we come to the pins. The door hinge seems to have only one functioning pin, on the left end. (See left/first picture below.) It has none, or a sunken one, on the right end. (See right/second picture below.) Thus whenever the door latch is released, the door comes off.
<Left ... Right>
The flyaway door problem is made worse by the pin for the door latch also being sunken or missing:
Missing door pin by Argenticien, on Flickr
The door stays shut by friction, but I'm a little wary of that approach, especially for tripod use. I fear if I should ever clumsily knock into the camera while it's mounted, I'll end up with the door sitting on the tripod and the rest of the camera flying off onto the pavement. Has anyone any experience in how these various pins can be fixed by the layman, or is this clearly into expert territory?
Finally, the Fresnel screen:
Fresnel screen by Argenticien, on Flickr
It and the ground glass and the mirror were terribly dirty when Dad gave me the camera. I gave them all a quick cleaning and they are now serviceable, although I think this screen is not long for the world. Bits continue to crumble off the heavily damaged lower-right corner. Curiously, the ground glass (which is the grid kind) is perfectly fine. Maybe someone had the Fresnel out before, and fumbled it (not over carpet) while cleaning. Anyone recognize what kind this is? (I'm thinking Rollei standard as it's not especially bright; but I've never seen a Maxwell or Beattie screen for comparison so don't really know what I'm talking about.)
In addition to all the above, the winding action is a bit stiff and the shutter a bit slow at the long speeds, so I'm leaning toward sending this machine off for CLA and repair anyway. I don't relish the cost of that, but it would be consistent with the intent to have the camera usable for a long time by me and whoever is next in the family. I guess that with the camera's long history come also the infirmities of old age. Since I am lucky enough to be the next user, it's only fair that the cost of maintenance lands with me.
--Dave
Part II: The Camera
Wherein The Author Poses Technical Questions To the Erudite RFF Community
Thanks for the kind words, all, and the general concurrence on my accepting the camera. Apparently these get handed down frequently. And my wishes go out to Ezzie and Buzzardkid as well. These situations make the cameras have greater sentimental value, but we'd of course all rather have our dads (et al.) still healthy and using their own gear.
So here is the camera:
Rolleiflex alone by Argenticien, on Flickr
Being a 2.8E, that would seem to make it from between 1956 and 1959 (per Rolleiclub). My father-in-law thought maybe his uncle brought the camera with him when he came from China, which sounded fishy because they were essentially economic refugees (from a poor village) and these cameras were never cheap. I believe I've heard that this uncle came earlier than 1956, so this casts additional doubt. My bet is on him having got it in USA (maybe secondhand) after he started to have some business success here.
Anyway, I had never even held a Rolleiflex before. I had no idea how enormous my C330 is (even with 80mm normal lens) by comparison until now.
Rolleiflex and C330 by Argenticien, on Flickr
Looks good, right? It is in good shape generally, but I did find a few problems and hope the Rolleiflex experts of RFF can offer some suggestions. First, the meter. Clearly the camera has had some sort of impact that the meter took the brunt of. The window is cracked, and in fact the black circular base of the meter is splitting away from the knob (see second picture below). The meter responds to light sometimes (if jiggled just right) but gives seemingly nonsensical readings. I should point out that this camera has no case (although was stored in a dark closet, we think) so the selenium cell may be bad as well. Anyone think this is fixable (even by Harry Fleenor or Krikor Maralian) or a total loss? I've heard of having the meter knob replaced with a non-meter one; might that be the wisest route here?
Destroyed meter - 1 by Argenticien, on Flickr
Destroyed meter - 2 by Argenticien, on Flickr
Now we come to the pins. The door hinge seems to have only one functioning pin, on the left end. (See left/first picture below.) It has none, or a sunken one, on the right end. (See right/second picture below.) Thus whenever the door latch is released, the door comes off.
<Left ... Right>The flyaway door problem is made worse by the pin for the door latch also being sunken or missing:
Missing door pin by Argenticien, on Flickr
The door stays shut by friction, but I'm a little wary of that approach, especially for tripod use. I fear if I should ever clumsily knock into the camera while it's mounted, I'll end up with the door sitting on the tripod and the rest of the camera flying off onto the pavement. Has anyone any experience in how these various pins can be fixed by the layman, or is this clearly into expert territory?
Finally, the Fresnel screen:
Fresnel screen by Argenticien, on Flickr
It and the ground glass and the mirror were terribly dirty when Dad gave me the camera. I gave them all a quick cleaning and they are now serviceable, although I think this screen is not long for the world. Bits continue to crumble off the heavily damaged lower-right corner. Curiously, the ground glass (which is the grid kind) is perfectly fine. Maybe someone had the Fresnel out before, and fumbled it (not over carpet) while cleaning. Anyone recognize what kind this is? (I'm thinking Rollei standard as it's not especially bright; but I've never seen a Maxwell or Beattie screen for comparison so don't really know what I'm talking about.)
In addition to all the above, the winding action is a bit stiff and the shutter a bit slow at the long speeds, so I'm leaning toward sending this machine off for CLA and repair anyway. I don't relish the cost of that, but it would be consistent with the intent to have the camera usable for a long time by me and whoever is next in the family. I guess that with the camera's long history come also the infirmities of old age. Since I am lucky enough to be the next user, it's only fair that the cost of maintenance lands with me.
--Dave
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Seems that camera is up for an overhaul. Although it has several issues, there's nothing (to my layman eye) that cannot be fixed by a competent repairman like the fine fellows you mentioned before.
It might cost you some but the camera will be a true joy to use once it's back and you likely will be happy you've taken the trouble to preserve that family heirloom. And of course your girlfriend / bride will be thankful for you putting the effort and cash in
I've had a Mamiya C330 twice, once swore by them and now that I have crossed over to the Rolleiflex I still find the Mamiya an impressive piece of work, but I have no longing for another one anymore.
It might cost you some but the camera will be a true joy to use once it's back and you likely will be happy you've taken the trouble to preserve that family heirloom. And of course your girlfriend / bride will be thankful for you putting the effort and cash in
I've had a Mamiya C330 twice, once swore by them and now that I have crossed over to the Rolleiflex I still find the Mamiya an impressive piece of work, but I have no longing for another one anymore.
raid
Dad Photographer
Good luck to your in-law, and enjoy the camera.
I would spend some money to restore the Rolleiflex.
I would spend some money to restore the Rolleiflex.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Thank you for your kind thoughts. I do hope your father in law pulls through. In my father's case there was no hope, no cure. He was sick when I took the last pictures if him, but I felt rather uncomfortable taking them. I am however glad I did. He still looked very much like my dad.
@Dave. I concur, get it fixed. The issues are but minor. A good working 2.8 is a gem of a camera. A pleasue to use, and even if I have 6 other competent 6x6 cameras, there's no mistaking the negatives that come of Rolleiflex. They shine.
@Dave. I concur, get it fixed. The issues are but minor. A good working 2.8 is a gem of a camera. A pleasue to use, and even if I have 6 other competent 6x6 cameras, there's no mistaking the negatives that come of Rolleiflex. They shine.
Argenticien
Dave
Part III: The Test Roll
Part III: The Test Roll
Before I start, actually: I learned today that Dad is out of hospital (slightly sooner than expected), and the pathology report is complete (much sooner than expected). It shows the tumour was contained. Dad is further improving in eating and moving about. This continues to look like a really lucky outcome, as if he has dodged a bullet (a large one -- the tumor was 7 cm). So thanks again for your kind wishes.
On to the camera: As I was starting to lean toward already, and as Raid and Buzzardkid have concurred, some CLA/repair seems to make sense. But I don't usually send a camera in for CLA until I put a test roll through it. In many cases, frankly, it's in hopes of the test proving that I don't need to spend for the CLA after all. No matter what, one should always do a test roll at least to have a baseline or "before" to compare with the "after," post-CLA. I ran two rolls through Dad's Rolleiflex. A couple of highlights are below; full set here on Flickr.
I have to say, for pretty quickly composed test shots, and using an as-yet unfamiliar camera, these came out not a total waste of silver. The Rolleiflex makes things awfully easy. Probably even easier after the door is fixed and the film advance made smoother. I think I'm going to really dig this camera.
I did ruin a film by loading it, cranking, wondering why the counter was not advancing, opening the back thinking the leader had not caught, and finding that it had caught and the film was mid-roll and the counter wasn't turning because I omitted to run the leader under the roller. And so the film was ruined. :bang: Well, better that than ruin an exposed roll. I've only worked with ruby-window folders and "line up the 'Start' arrow" film backs so the auto-feeler-roller thing is new to me.
Thanks for all your advice and kind words, and any other suggestions anyone reading this later may have.
--Dave
Pipe with NoDa sticker by Argenticien, on Flickr
Mail slot by Argenticien, on Flickr
Part III: The Test Roll
Before I start, actually: I learned today that Dad is out of hospital (slightly sooner than expected), and the pathology report is complete (much sooner than expected). It shows the tumour was contained. Dad is further improving in eating and moving about. This continues to look like a really lucky outcome, as if he has dodged a bullet (a large one -- the tumor was 7 cm). So thanks again for your kind wishes.
On to the camera: As I was starting to lean toward already, and as Raid and Buzzardkid have concurred, some CLA/repair seems to make sense. But I don't usually send a camera in for CLA until I put a test roll through it. In many cases, frankly, it's in hopes of the test proving that I don't need to spend for the CLA after all. No matter what, one should always do a test roll at least to have a baseline or "before" to compare with the "after," post-CLA. I ran two rolls through Dad's Rolleiflex. A couple of highlights are below; full set here on Flickr.
I have to say, for pretty quickly composed test shots, and using an as-yet unfamiliar camera, these came out not a total waste of silver. The Rolleiflex makes things awfully easy. Probably even easier after the door is fixed and the film advance made smoother. I think I'm going to really dig this camera.
I did ruin a film by loading it, cranking, wondering why the counter was not advancing, opening the back thinking the leader had not caught, and finding that it had caught and the film was mid-roll and the counter wasn't turning because I omitted to run the leader under the roller. And so the film was ruined. :bang: Well, better that than ruin an exposed roll. I've only worked with ruby-window folders and "line up the 'Start' arrow" film backs so the auto-feeler-roller thing is new to me.
Thanks for all your advice and kind words, and any other suggestions anyone reading this later may have.
--Dave
Pipe with NoDa sticker by Argenticien, on Flickr
Mail slot by Argenticien, on Flickr
Dan Daniel
Well-known
Yeah, those lenses do make things too easy in ways. Looks like it's doing ok and is in good hands. Nice shots.
The meter, I would have it removed. The cover breaking seems to be pretty common. Not sure if it is under some sort of stress or if it simply gets knocked sticking out like it does.
I don't know about the door pin. In general it looks like the kind of part that would be one rod going all the way across, but then you would expect it to be sticking out too far on one side.
The door latch pin has notches for installation with a spanner wrench. I assume that Rollei made spares and that there are ways to clear any broken studs out of the hole. If you are going to shoot more with the camera as is, check inside the back to see if there could be a small pinhole light leak form that missing pin.
The fresnel was an add-on, called a rolleigrid. It makes no difference on focus accuracy or such, only meant to even out and brighten the screen. If you go for an overhaul, get a Maxwell screen.
The meter, I would have it removed. The cover breaking seems to be pretty common. Not sure if it is under some sort of stress or if it simply gets knocked sticking out like it does.
I don't know about the door pin. In general it looks like the kind of part that would be one rod going all the way across, but then you would expect it to be sticking out too far on one side.
The door latch pin has notches for installation with a spanner wrench. I assume that Rollei made spares and that there are ways to clear any broken studs out of the hole. If you are going to shoot more with the camera as is, check inside the back to see if there could be a small pinhole light leak form that missing pin.
The fresnel was an add-on, called a rolleigrid. It makes no difference on focus accuracy or such, only meant to even out and brighten the screen. If you go for an overhaul, get a Maxwell screen.
Argenticien
Dave
Thanks Dan. That is exactly what I had expected too, but at the left end it sticks out to what appears to be the correct length, and as far as I can tell the right pin's end is rounded (not rough) which makes me think it's sunk in, not sheared off. So I guess it's not one long rod. I'm surprised that they went to all this trouble to make the door removable. Even in 1956, were people really going to shoot plates?! They were quite obsolete already.
I was expecting there could be light leaks due to these missing pins making the door a bit looser -- actually I thought more likely at the door hinge. But on the two rolls I shot, I see no evidence of any leaks. That had me pleasantly surprised.
--Dave
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Nice shots indeed. I always love the OOF rendering and the progression from sharp to OOF.
Would not have the meter removed. Mine is fully functional and it is spot-on compared to: iPhone app, a Nikon D3100, a Gossen Lunasix 3 and two Nikkormat FTn meters.
Sometimes a selenium meter is a waste to repair but these meter cells actually were sealed real good, no moisture in there means it'll still be accurate and you can often leave a handheld meter at home or in the bag when going out shooting.
Would not have the meter removed. Mine is fully functional and it is spot-on compared to: iPhone app, a Nikon D3100, a Gossen Lunasix 3 and two Nikkormat FTn meters.
Sometimes a selenium meter is a waste to repair but these meter cells actually were sealed real good, no moisture in there means it'll still be accurate and you can often leave a handheld meter at home or in the bag when going out shooting.
Argenticien
Dave
Thanks Johan. I will probably ask Essex to try to determine if the selenium cell is still working, and if so, could they make the meter serviceable for a somewhat reasonable cost. Given the existing knob is somewhat smashed, I think it's unavoidably going to require scarce replacement parts.
I consider the meter "nice to have," not essential, so will have limited appetite to sink extra money into fixing it (above the cost of the necessary aspects of the CLA/repairs). --Dave
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Other suggestions for repair: a guy named Krikor (?) who apparently is real good and stateside, or Quality Metric in Hollywood who are skilled when it comes to Leica and Weston meter rebuilds, so they might be able to do something useful to it as well.