Rolleiflex 2.8e aperture problem

[edinator]

Hi,

I'm wondering if anyone here has encountered this problem. When I set my aperture to 2.8 or 22 the aperture does not go wide open or stop down completely. I've taken the front off and the gears reach the maximum stopping point but the aperture lever can go further. For some reason the aperture lever range is wider than the front gear range so the camera can't select the max and min aperture.

Any idea why its doing this? Thought I would ask before taking it further apart.

Thanks,

Ed

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Hi,

I'm wondering if anyone here has encountered this problem. When I set my aperture to 2.8 or 22 the aperture does not go wide open or stop down completely. I've taken the front off and the gears reach the maximum stopping point but the aperture lever can go further. For some reason the aperture lever range is wider than the front gear range so the camera can't select the max and min aperture.

Any idea why its doing this? Thought I would ask before taking it further apart.

Thanks,

Ed

Could it be as simple as the EV coupling limiting the travel to the extreme aperture ranges until it is uncoupled? I assume now you have the front off, you can manually actuate the aperture blades across the full range of lens openings?
Cheers,
Brett

 

[Dan Daniel]

If I understand what you are describing, this seems pretty common. Apertures often have a little travel beyond the scales on large format lenses, also. Compur did not make internal aperture mechanisms that were specific to the lens that the shutter would be used on (up to a point; I know that Rollei had clout and got connections that it wanted, etc.).

For example, a #0 shutter sold for large-format use will have a removable aperture scale. You then buy scales for the specific lens you are going to install on the shutter, and the numbers will be in the correct lcoation for the lens in use. But it may not cover the full range of the mechanism? So a lens scale may stop at f/32 while the aperture lever and opening will continue moving. I don't know if this would be because the next full f/stop wasn't reached, diffraction limits were going to make a mess, or what.

I've found it very common for TLR apertures to go smaller than the scale travel. And there is often a bit extra on the wide side.

When your camera scale says '2.8,' are the aperture blades inside the overall opening of the lens? Fro example, on my 2.8C, I can just see the aperture blades in the elns opening, maybe 1/4mm or so. And I know on this particular lens that there is travel and reduction of opening size available after the dial stops me at f/22.

If you want to learn how to determine your own apertures and see if there is an f/32 opening available, and then want to grind away the stop on the lens shoud system, you might be able to have the only f/32 80mm Rollei! Of course you might then discover that an 80mm Planar or Xenotar looks like *** because of diffraction at f/32, and Rollei knew what they were doing by stopping at f/22.

 

[edinator]

Could it be as simple as the EV coupling limiting the travel to the extreme aperture ranges until it is uncoupled? I assume now you have the front off, you can manually actuate the aperture blades across the full range of lens openings?
Cheers,
Brett

I don't think it has to do with the coupling. I do have the front off and when I set it to 2.8 on the gear mechanism and take off the front, there is still room for the aperture to open further. The same is true for F22 although to a lesser extent.

@Dan
Strange that this would be a common issue in such a high end camera. But I think what I am describing might be a bit different. I am not that worried about F22 but it bothers me that it doesn't shoot wide open at F2.8. I am guessing at its widest, its around F4 right now which defeats the purpose of having this over a 3.5 Rolleiflex!

Anyways, to clarify, when I set the front wheel to 2.8, the aperture isn't completely open. But when I take the front off and move the aperture arm, it can go wide open.

When I was poking around the front shroud and gears last night, I'm pretty sure there isn't an issue there. The display gears line up perfectly with the movement of the lower shutter and aperture gears which leads me to believe there is something weird with the aperture arm itself. Why it would do this I have no clue. I might try to look over the front shroud again tonight.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I don't think it has to do with the coupling. I do have the front off and when I set it to 2.8 on the gear mechanism and take off the front, there is still room for the aperture to open further. The same is true for F22 although to a lesser extent.

@Dan
Strange that this would be a common issue in such a high end camera. But I think what I am describing might be a bit different. I am not that worried about F22 but it bothers me that it doesn't shoot wide open at F2.8. I am guessing at its widest, its around F4 right now which defeats the purpose of having this over a 3.5 Rolleiflex!

Anyways, to clarify, when I set the front wheel to 2.8, the aperture isn't completely open. But when I take the front off and move the aperture arm, it can go wide open.

When I was poking around the front shroud and gears last night, I'm pretty sure there isn't an issue there. The display gears line up perfectly with the movement of the lower shutter and aperture gears which leads me to believe there is something weird with the aperture arm itself. Why it would do this I have no clue. I might try to look over the front shroud again tonight.

So the aperture is obviously inside the lens opening at f/2.8? Not just a slight amount?

Any chance that somene took apart the shroud? Look over the relation of the upper and lower gears that drive the two dials. It is possible to disassemble this whole mess. Then you need to re-assemble al four drive gears at the proper position to get it to work properly and show the right numbers at the window. I don't have a shroud handy to look at; maybe the aperture gear got offset.

As to the excess movement, it's actually pretty common. It's easy to see on large format shutters. But hard to see on, say, 35mm lenses because the mount and aperture mechanism (including stops) are integrated tightly with the overall mechanism. The Rolleiflex hovers in between- separate mechanisms interacting but easily broken apart.

 

[edinator]

Yeah, I can take a picture of it tonight if it helps but I'm almost certain at F2.8 the aperture blades shouldn't show.

The strange thing is that the range allowed by the front shroud is limited by the stopping nub thing at F2.8 and F22 so it doesn't seem to be a misaligned gear issue. It just seems like the aperture arm range is too wide.

I might not have time to take the whole thing apart tonight but I've been taking pictures along the way so I can upload some.

 

[rick oleson]

This doesn't give you exact numbers, but since it seems to be coming short at both ends this might be useful: Remove the front lens cell and measure the diameter of the iris opening at its 2.8 and 22 indicated positions. The diameter at 2.8 should be about 8 times the diameter at 22. If it's stopping short at both ends of the range, the ratio will be less. If the difference does measure 8:1, then you do have the full range of aperture adjustment that the lens is intended to have, which would suggest that it's designed this way.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Dan's comments in his first post regarding additional free movement with the cover off agree with my own experience completely. Just because you can "overadjust" the aperture with the cover and control wheels removed, doesn't mean it's correct for the blades to move that far in normal use.

I can't compare Dan's measurements with my own 2.8C because it is loaded, however I've just had a look at my 2.8D, with it set to f/2.8, on Bulb, and portions of the aperture blades are still clearly visible through the front of the lens.

I reckon you're overthinking the issue. If the effective speed of the lens with it set to f/2.8 is f/2.8, who gives a damn if the aperture blades are still visible, or not? But if it will make you feel better, run a roll of transparency through the camera using the lens wide open and at f/4 & f/5.6. Ideally with the same EV. If you truly have an issue with the accurate calibration of the lens opening, this will show it. And Rick's suggestion is both very practical and helpful too.
Cheers,
Brett

 

[Dan Daniel]

I went through a few different large format lenses that I own. Nikkors, Fujis, Schneiders, Kodaks. With Copal and Compur and Kodak shutters. From 47mm to 250mm. On at least 2/3 of them (sample of 10) the aperture blades are visible when the aperture lever is set at the maximum aperture number on the scale. Ths visibility runs from 'a hair' to close to a full millimeter (this would be a 105 Fuji in a Copal shutter).

On maybe half of the lenses, the aperture lever can go past the maximum aperture number on the scale and the blades will open a bit more on those with visible blades at the scale maximum.

I'll tend to put a bit of blind faith in companies like Copal and Compur and Fuji and such over my impressions of where blades are sitting.

Both of my 2.8C lenses show a sliver of aperture at 2.8 with shroud in place.

For all of my talk about the sloppiness of the aperture mechanism on bare shutter blocks, I don't mean that Rolleiflexes have inaccurate or sloppy aperture systems. By the time they worked things out with Zeiss and Compur, an installed shutter mechanism with lens shroud would be pretty tight. This isn't to say that your camera isn't off somewhere, of course.

If by some chance you decide to remove the rear retaining rings in the lens shroud and play with the positioning of the dial mechanism gears and their intereaction with the indicator rings at the top, well, go slow and take photos. Remember to study the EV scale on the front, also to get it back in the right positin for assembly. And oh yeah, the filter rings have some amazingly small ball bearings and springs inside them. You can see the ball bearings on the lower filter lip from the front. Go slow; it won't explode but the parts drop before you even see them, it seems.

As an aside, if one is going to actually calculate f-stops, you should keep the front element in place and measure the aperture as it appears at the front surface of the lens, not the aperture with glass removed. This, of course, is not the same as determing overall ratios as Rick is suggesting.

 

[edinator]

Ah sorry I didn't get time to take a photo. I'll make that measurement. I just find it strange that the aperture blades are showing since this would result in not completely round bokeh which is pretty standard for most cameras. I'll check on my autocords but I'm pretty sure all my cameras don't show the aperture blades when wide open but maybe I just never closely scrutinized it like this Rolleiflex.

Thanks guys.

 

[rick oleson]

As an aside, if one is going to actually calculate f-stops, you should keep the front element in place and measure the aperture as it appears at the front surface of the lens, not the aperture with glass removed. This, of course, is not the same as determing overall ratios as Rick is suggesting.

This is true, but with or without the lens in place the ratio of one stop to the next is the same (1.414141414 per stop)... and it's really hard to get a caliper or a pin gauge through all that glass to get an accurate measurement.

 

[edinator]

Here are some pictures:

Where Wide Open is by Ed Tse, on Flickr

If you click the link, there is a bigger photo where you can see where the wide open aperture mark is. The current position of the lever is F2.8 according to the front shroud.

F22 by Ed Tse, on Flickr

F2.8? by Ed Tse, on Flickr

What do you guys think? This isn't a sliver of aperture blade, I feel that is is pretty substantial!

By the way, by the end of this endeavor I'll post some high quality photos of the internals that I have access to. I hate not being able to find good reference material.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Here are some pictures:

Where Wide Open is by Ed Tse, on Flickr

If you click the link, there is a bigger photo where you can see where the wide open aperture mark is. The current position of the lever is F2.8 according to the front shroud.

F22 by Ed Tse, on Flickr

F2.8? by Ed Tse, on Flickr

What do you guys think? This isn't a sliver of aperture blade, I feel that is is pretty substantial!

By the way, by the end of this endeavor I'll post some high quality photos of the internals that I have access to. I hate not being able to find good reference material.

You can find the National Camera Repair for the 2.8F online and it's not bad at all. It has actual photographs, and contains practical tips about what you have to watch out for to avoid problems stripping and re-assembling one. Not as comprehensively illustrated as the factory manual but the text is not as cryptic as that one can be, either.

The factory manual is also available for free download at KY Camera. The text is of somewhat limited help (specifications are useful, of course) but it is full of exploded diagrams of every part in the cameras which can sometimes be invaluable.

If you check Lindemanns in Germany, you should also be able to procure Klaus Prochnow's books (some of which are only in German). And Tomosy's repair manuals have some articles about both the Rolleiflex and Rolleicord models. Every decent public library had copies of his books at some point, so they're available from lots of different sources in good used nick.

eBay sellers can provide original Compur shutter repair manuals on CD, which detail lubrication and exploded diagrams of the many different variations of Synchro Compur shutters made by Deckel, including most of the later Rollei models, and it is not very expensive.

I have all the above documents myself, as when I knew I would be repairing some Rolleis I made a point of sourcing whatever information I could find. There is a lot of useful data right here at RFF too, either in the forum posts itself of the Classic Camera Repair archives that are hosted here. So there is really quite a lot of stuff out there, if you look for it.

The aperture blades as shown in the images, look fine to me. I could see quite a lot of the ones in my 2.8D when I checked it at f/2.8. I've just blown a perfectly good frame of Acros 100 checking my 2.8C (which is loaded) as well, and, despite having a different shutter, with the front lens group removed, there are also visible portions of the aperture blades protruding from the shutter housing (by eye, 2-2.5mm approx) with the control set to f/2.8. You're worrying over nothing. Now, put it back together and go and take some photographs with it, OK?
Cheers,
Brett

 

[Dan Daniel]

What do you guys think? This isn't a sliver of aperture blade, I feel that is is pretty substantial!

I took the front element of a 2.8 80mm Xenotar from a 2.8C Rolleiflex and installed it on a Synchro-Compur shutter. I closed down the aperture until the edges were just occluding the lens opening as seen from the front.

I then removed the front lens element from the shutter. And the aperture blades on the shutter looked pretty exactly like your photo- projecting into the opening of the shutter maybe 2mm all around?

Looking at the shutter block without the lens elements will be misleading. For example, the maximum physical iris opening on a #0 shutter is 24mm diameter. Yet to get f/2.8 on an 80mm lens, you need an opening of 28.5mm. And with the lens elements in place, a measurement of the opening across the front of the lens is... 28.5mm... how'd they do that???

I'll come back to where I started- the shutter block and internal aperture mechanism on the Compur series of shutter were not made exclusively for Rollei; the external attachment/interface mechanism were modified for Rollei. Extra travel beyond Rollei's needs is not something to worry about. Rollei knew what they were doing; Schneider knew what they were doing; Compur/Deckel knew what they were doing. Me?

http://xkcd.com/451/

 

[Dan Daniel]

This is true, but with or without the lens in place the ratio of one stop to the next is the same (1.414141414 per stop)... and it's really hard to get a caliper or a pin gauge through all that glass to get an accurate measurement.

You're not pushing hard enough!!

 

[edinator]

Haha thanks a lot guys! I'm glad I didn't proceed to take the whole thing apart. I'll also look for those resources mentioned.

I've been fixing up Autocords lately and they are fairly basic compared to this Rolleiflex!

One last question, what's the best way to lubricate the shutter mechanism. This was the original reason I took the Rolleiflex apart, the slow shutter speeds were sticking. I've cleaned it out with some isopropyl alcohol which has loosened things up but the speeds are still a bit slow. I've been reading the archives and I've heard mention of graphite powder, lighter fluid, etc.

Thanks again guys!

 

[Dan Daniel]

No graphite.

Take some naphtha and put very small drops on the shutter timer block pivot points. Study the coking ring and its spring/gear setup. Remove the cocking block and clean it off; light grease on the inner edge of the ring can be helpful. I'll also pull the gear and spring and clean them. A drop of oil on the gear axle is helpful. Some more naphtha around the flash sync area, etc. just small drops at obvious pivot points. Do not let either naphtha or oil drip down into the shutter blade and aperture area.

All of this assumes that you are comfortable taking these types of thing apart, can get the speed dial back in place with the appropriate levers in the proper slots, etc. And that you know what 'small amount' means. For me, for naphtha I use an architect's inking pen and have it set to drip maybe a 2mm by 1mm drop. For oil I use a #000 brush to apply a small film.

After doing naphtha drips, let the shutter sit for a day or more before closing things back up. Sometimes the fluid is enough to lube things back to wortking well, but once it evaporates the shutter goes back to not working. If a couple of rounds of naphtha won't get a shutter going, time for a full removal and overhaul. I've had most Rollei shutters come back nicely and keep going for years with the naphtha and a very little oil and grease.

Compur shutter manual http://www.scribd.com/doc/44503560/Compur-Shutter-Repair-Manual#scribd
If you go to the final fifth or so, you'll see all sorts of pretty colors on the mechanisms for lubing guidelines. It actually all makes sense but see if you can find a downloadable copy because having it open two or three times on screen is a great help.

 

[edinator]

Thanks again Dan! I'll study it carefully before I decide how to proceed! I'll report back once I get everything together. Any specific type of oil?

 

[rick oleson]

First concentrate on cleaning: Naphtha (cigarette lighter fuel) is an effective degreasing cleaner, alcohol is not.

Once you're certain that it's completely clean, if it doesn't run smoothly at 1 second, apply a very TINY drop of the thinnest oil you can get (watch oil, gun oil or "Ultra Light" oil from a model railroading shop work well) onto the shafts and teeth of the Pallet and the Star Wheel. It should not be necessary, and is not desirable, to put oil anywhere else in the escapement. If you can get it to run well completely dry, that's even better... but pretty often a tiny drop of oil is needed to smooth it up at the slowest speeds.

Never let any oil get onto the blades of the aperture diaphragm or the shutter; as mentioned above, even good oil creates a lot of adhesion between thin blades, and as it dries it turns into a powerful glue.

Good luck! Glad you got the mystery solved.

Rick

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Some people use NYOIL which apparently works. You do need something superfine which won't creep too much and that can be a problem because most very light viscosity oils flow very easily. So there is a degree of specialisation involved in the production of suitable lubricants. Microtools do list several appropriate types (if they are in stock, that is!). I use Moebius products, they are a Swiss specialist manufacturer of horological lubricants.
Cheers,
Brett