Robot Royal 36 problem.

[FUJINON]

Hello Tom,
On another RFF thread I learned that you had experience using Robot Royal cameras.Could I ask you if you know anything about Robot Royal NR take-up spools which I don't like because of the velvet light traps.
Could you tell me if there is another alternative to using the Robot NR take-up spool.
I have just been watching a short video on You Tube about loading and unloading a Robot Royal 36 camera but the person is using a different spool and not the normal Robot NR take-up spool but he doesn't say what type it is that he is using.
Can you throw any light on what take-up spool he is using or is there a take-up spool for the Robot Royal 36 that hasn't got velvet light traps that I could use?
Many Thanks,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmLcL_Y8qRc
__________________

 

[randomm]

Sorry to step in here, just happen to be a Royal 36 owner myself.

I would not remove the velvet, as that protects the film from scratches. What is exact problem that you're having?

I replaced the velvet in my Robot II's take up cassette to ones sourced from regular film cassettes, however, this added friction in the winding process and towards the end of the film the clockwork mechanism was not able to pull the film as normal, but I had to help by turning the knob on the camera. So I'm not sure if I can wholeheartedly recommend this method.

Is the velvet leaking light or what is the issue you're having with them?

 

[randomm]

Ah, only watched the video now. I think what he's trying to say is that the spool he is using is from inside the cassette. My cassettes come apart so, like he is, you can just use the spool without using the "clams" or the two light-tight halves.

Why don't you give it a go?

 

[FUJINON]

Hello randomm,
Thanks for your interest.My problem is that I don't like velvet light traps, they scratch the film emulsion if dust gets caught in the velvet and they seem to make it very awkward to load when used outside compared with the normal film take-up spools in other cameras.
The person in the You Tube video is using a non-velvet take-up spool and I would like to use one in my Robot Royal 36.

 

[FUJINON]

I did try to load just the inside spool but without it's outer two shells it is too loose in the film chamber and the motor drive doesn't connect to the slot at the top of the inside spool.

 

[Tom A]

I have not had a problem with scrtached film on either the Royal 36 or the Robot III. I think the cassette opens wide enough to allow the film to slip through easily. It is a bit of a pain to load though! The biggest problem is to get the drive to engage in another style of cassette.
OK, it gives me an incentive to take the Robot's out for a run anyway.

 

[FUJINON]

Thanks,Tom
It looks like I will have to persevere with the NR cassettes until I find the very rare plain (non-velvet) take-up spool that Edward C Zimmermann told me about on the "Other Rangefinder" RFF forum that Robot seems to have made for the late models but not catalogued and probably made only in limited quantities.

 

[Edward C. Zimmermann]

I have not had a problem with scrtached film on either the Royal 36 or the Robot III.

The N/T/NR/TR cartridges don't scratch film. That's the point of the design. Nagel cassettes (aka Kodak) can.

I think the cassette opens wide enough to allow the film to slip through easily.

That's the design. The felt-- which are also replaceable--- on the Robot cassettes is just to make them completely light tight. The design also puts much less strain on the spring motor so the cameras runs smoother.

It is a bit of a pain to load though!

On the T/TR side is easy. One can just pull out the spool from a 35mm cassette and insert it--- of course in the dark--- or one can just stick in a length of film rolled up (without even the spool).
On the N/NR side its also easy. Slip in the film, shift right and pull back. It should engage and hold the sprocket.

The biggest problem is to get the drive to engage in another style of cassette.

Don't understand. Pull up on the right and turn slightly and insert the NR, resp. N, cartridge. On the left the cartridge just slips-in. Now turn the take-up knob--- right hand side--- a little bit and it slips down and meets the slot in cartridge. On some of the older models it can sometimes be a little difficult to pull out due to old lubricants and dirt--- a little cleaning tends to solve the problem.

OK, it gives me an incentive to take the Robot's out for a run anyway.

Personally I think they are nicer--- clearly better built--- than the Wetlzar cult objects. The main downside of a Royal to an M3 is the availability of rangefinder objectives. The Royal 36, for example, can only take 24mm, 35mm, 45mm, 50mm and 75mm objectives--- the 24x24 Royal models had a larger selection including 24mm, 30mm, 35mm, 38mm, 40mm, 45mm, 50mm, 75mm, 90mm, 135mm and 200mm objective with rangefinder mounts. That said the standard Robot rangefinder objectives were all very good.
Leica cameras are known for their accessories but the Robot cameras got, from a functional view, I think the most interesting ones: bulk film magazines (10m, 30m or longer), booster motors (spring and electrical), extremely reliable electrical release and mounting hardware (these were, after all, sold mainly as scientific, instrumentation and registration cameras than as amateur photo cameras).

 

[FUJINON]

Thanks Edward,
Now you have explained the workings of the Robot NR cassette I will not worry about about the cassettes scratching the film.I will try your loading tips.It is very nice to have these things explained by someone with expert knowledge of these fine precision cameras.Many Thanks.
It's a great pity that we can't have a separate forum section for Robot cameras rather than being lost in "Other Rangefinders".

 

[Edward C. Zimmermann]

Thanks Edward,
Now you have explained the workings of the Robot NR cassette I will not worry about about the cassettes scratching the film.

Robot cameras were deployed in the battlefield, in aircraft--- among others by the German, Swedish and British--- and widely used as spy cameras--- more widely used in espionage than any Minox--- in extremely rough conditions. The success of the cameras and why they ended upon in banks, police cars and in scientific instrumentation is their quality and low rate of failure. The cameras were not cheap. In 1982, for example, according to my price lists a Robot Recorder--- this is like the Royal but without rangefinder, viewfinder --- body with rewind and 1/500 option sold for over 3000 DM + VAT--- that was no less than $1200 USD. A Leica MD-2 was much cheaper.
Espionage: Robot cameras were so well respected that even the East Germans (German Democratic Republic) despite a well established photo industry purchased large numbers of Robot Star models for their spies and secret police.
We talking here about the NR and TR cassettes. What did a common cartridge of 35mm film from Agfa, Kodak or Ilford cost? Maybe 5 DM (or less)? What did the NR and TR cassettes cost? They are listed in 1982 as selling for resp. 49 and 52 DM + VAT. That's in 1982 USD over $20 each--- and I'd expect that Karl Heinz, the US importer, charged more than the exchange rate and I'd also doubt if they sold for less than 20 GBP in the UK.
The cartridges are quite well made and fully repairable. Robot used to even sell replacement parts--- felt (narrow and wide) and clips.

 

[Tom A]

Thanks Edward for the Robot Information. I like my 36 and III- though they are a bit heavy to drag around. Build quality is second to none. The 36 breach lock/interrupted thread is a case for engineering overkill!
One of the lenses that I have is a 50f1.9 Xenon (came on the III from China - never seen one before - the 40f1.9 is fairly common, but the 50 was novelty to me)
The Danish Airforce used to do stereo shots from jets. Two Robots (probably Recorders) attached to the wingtips and set up for stereo image from 3000 meter!
My favorite "spy" Robot was the one that was mounted inside a Jerry Can - facing out through the side. You pushed the lock on the top of the can and the camera would fire as you walked casually across the tarmac!
The lack of strap-lugs are probably beneficial as dangling a Royal 36 with a 50f2 or 50f1.9 probably will cut off the bloodflow to the brain and make you get more Robots!

 

[FUJINON]

Thanks also from me, Edward, for this information.It's very interesting and much appreciated.

 

[Edward C. Zimmermann]

Thanks Edward for the Robot Information. I like my 36 and III- though they are a bit heavy to drag around.

Consider it weight training 🙂 But seriously.. yes they are heavy: steel, zinc and brass instead of plastic and composites. They were made with reliability and robustness as priority rather than cost and weight. Alone a Royal mount Tele-Xenar 1:3,8/75mm weights more than many P&S cameras.

Build quality is second to none. The 36 breach lock/interrupted thread is a case for engineering overkill!

And some later Royal models got even a lock to the breech lock--- but scientific versions of that series did not get them to not interfere with mounting hardware.

One of the lenses that I have is a 50f1.9 Xenon (came on the III from China - never seen one before - the 40f1.9 is fairly common,

While on the whole the 1:1,9/50mm Xenon is very common--- much more so than 40mm--- it is somewhat rarer among Robots. Listed in the catalogs its price in 1982 was 890 DM (plus tax). The most popular standard objective for 24x36 was the 45mm Xenar (price was 660 DM)--- and there was, of course, the 50mm Zeiss Sonnar (which was only available until 1963 or so due to a marketing dispute with Oberkochen). Most Robots sold, however, were 24x24mm format and not 24x36mm--- today with finer grained and higher resolution film I feel the 24x24 format makes even more sense than ever. The 1:1,9/40mm Xenon is unique to Robot 24x24 (made in Robot screw, bayonet and rangefinder mounts) and traditionally considered the "premium" objective.

Since the Royal was long discontinued objectives from the early 1980s on were no longer sold with rangefinder curves but used instead a new modular design that allowed for the interchange--- a few screws hold the male mating bits on--- between Star (screw) and Record (bayonet) mounts. Cost and weight was cut significantly.
Does your 50mm have a 2nd "cam" (cut-out) for use on the 36? Does it have a curve?

The Danish Airforce used to do stereo shots from jets. Two Robots (probably Recorders)

The Danish Air-force purchased quite a few Recorders.

My favorite "spy" Robot was the one that was mounted inside a Jerry Can - facing out through the side. You pushed the lock on the top of the can and the camera would fire as you walked casually across the tarmac!

Cans, suitcases,... Robot Star models even got built into other cameras.
http://www.robot-camera.de/ROBOT_GEHEIM/robot_geheim.html
shows a nice selection of applications that were used in the GDR (East Germany).

The lack of strap-lugs are probably beneficial as dangling a Royal 36 with a 50f2 or 50f1.9 probably will cut off the bloodflow to the brain and make you get more Robots!

The standard Royal ever-ready case--- of course made of quality leather and not vinyl--- was an excellent design that allowed for the top half to be quickly removed. I tend to use mine as half-cases. A useful accessory is also a hand chain or strap to screw into the tripod mount. It makes the 24x24 with its square format, low inertia, fast spring motor and color coded focusing zones, the fastest street shooter around--- followed by their 24x36 models.

 

[Tom A]

My 50f1.9 Xenon has the second cut-out for the Royal 36. It is not the sharpest lens, the old Xenon formula favored "soft" look rather than the biting edge sharpness. The 45f2.8 is probably the sharpest of them. On my Royal III I tend to use the 30mm Xenogon - nice coverage for 24x24.
Only mechanical problem I have had has been on the III. If you wind it up all the way (until it stops) - it can "lock up". There is a small disc in the base that can jam. Trick is to wind it up just enough that you get the frames you need - rather than wind it too tight.
I also use the half-case for the Royal 36 - the III has straplugs attached, though not very well as they interfer with the single shot/continious lever.
The 24x24 is a nice format - except for filing negatives (never has the frame exactly where you want it) and it is driving the scanner nuts. It cant decide what is a frame-line and what is a tree/power pole. Keeps shunting the negs back and forth. At least with the Vuescan program you can adjust it easily.

 

[Edward C. Zimmermann]

The 45f2.8 is probably the sharpest of them.

I should one day perhaps do a test.

On my Royal III I tend to use the 30mm Xenogon - nice coverage for 24x24.

I've found the Xenagan to be quite nice. I also have the 35mm Xenogon--- its 24x36.

Only mechanical problem I have had has been on the III. If you wind it up all the way (until it stops) - it can "lock up". There is a small disc in the base that can jam.

Is perhaps the key loose--- the two prongs?

I also use the half-case for the Royal 36 - the III has straplugs attached, though not very well as they interfer with the single shot/continious lever.

Interestingly none of my Robots have lugs.

The 24x24 is a nice format - except for filing negatives (never has the frame exactly where you want it) and it is driving the scanner nuts.

I don't scan negatives but it should be solvable. One just needs an alignment frame and from there its just a fixed offset to the next. The frame spacing on these cameras is very good. The half-frame Motor Recorder 18 CS (24x18mm) even is spec'd to +- 0.02mm (which represents the tolerance of film perforations). Standard spring motor Royal and Recorder models were not that much worse.

 

[FUJINON]

Hello Edward and Tom,
A great deal of interesting information on this thread for a newbie Robot camera user like myself.
Can I ask you both if you have used a 50mm f2 Sonnar lens, and if you have ,what is your opinion of this lens as compared to the Schneider Xenon/Xenar options.

 

[Tom A]

I dont have the Sonnar 50f2. This is the one lens I am looking for for my Robot's. Supposedly it is very good. My Xenar 45 works as my "really sharp" Robot lens and the Xenon 50f1.9 as my "moody" lens.
Maybe it is time to figure out how to do a RFf site, dedicated to Robot Cameras?

 

[Edward C. Zimmermann]

50mm f2 Sonnar with the late model lens locking facility.Can I ask you both if you have used this lens, and if you have ,what is your opinion of this lens as compared to the Schneider Xenon/Xenar options.

I have both the 50mm Royal Sonnar and 45mm Xenar--- I don't have the 50mm Xenon. I frankly have never done A/B comparisons as there are too many variables. They are both very nice and have slightly different looks. I've not found one superior to the other. For generic street shooting I may select the Xenar slightly more often than the Sonnar.. In 24x24mm between the 38mm Xenar and 40mm Xenon I think I tend to nearly always grab for the Xenon.. but I also grab sometimes for the Xenar.. stopped down its very sharp and contrasty. I don't see camera glass as scientific instruments but as artistic "paint brushes". I choose whichever the moment, the light, the film I plan on using and the envisioned motives call into my intuition or gut feelings.. and then not look back..

 

[_goodtimez]

On another thread I asked if someone could indicate what the filter thread was for the Sonnar 50mm f2.
Someone said it could be 38mm. I measured the ID of the female thread on the lens and it is exactly 37.10mm.
What filter sizes do you guys use ?