Welta Perle Restoration

[chippy]

ah here it is! all these different forums, i often miss things lol

sometimes i wish there was just one for folders ..tho some people just use the 120RF folders forum regardless of whether it has a RF, tho i am sure many dont because of the title, with the low traffic there i don think it would hurt to include standard folders without RF. But i digress...this of course this is posted in a suitable place..repairs!

and what a top job! its a credit to your patience, foraging skills, research and attention to detail Charles. of course some people may question restoring a camera, prefering to leave it as is with 'war' marks and such and this can be fine in some cases. paticularly when it involves brassing or tarnishing of brass which we call patina to make it sound better (and doesnt look bad). but in this case the leather was stuffed! it was rusted and a non functional camera. there is not much pleasentness or fun in using or handling a rusted camera. this camera at best without your intervention was likely to be destined to either be stripped for parts, or sold and change hands a few more times on ebay until it was just thrown out!!which would of been a shame and a waste. these 1939 Welta Perle's with viewfinder are getting pretty scarce nowadays and were most likely not produced in large numbers anyway, considering by this time Welta had introduced the Weltax which was a success and took over the format and role the Perle performed, thus making it redundent. That model Perle is the last in a lineage begining in 1930 (weltas' first self erecting camera) that in one way or another contributed to the development of their other cameras including the superb Weltur and the Weltax.

cheers
Andrew

 

[FallisPhoto]

sometimes i wish there was just one for folders ..tho some people just use the 120RF folders forum regardless of whether it has a RF, tho i am sure many dont because of the title, with the low traffic there i don think it would hurt to include standard folders without RF. But i digress...this of course this is posted in a suitable place..repairs!

Well, most of them do take the trouble of sticking an accessory rangefinder on top of it. Some don't though and I agree it would be nice to have a forum for good plain old 120 folders. There's one for scale focusing 35mms.

and what a top job! its a credit to your patience, foraging skills, research and attention to detail Charles.

Aw, you're going to make me blush, Andrew.

of course some people may question restoring a camera, prefering to leave it as is with 'war' marks and such and this can be fine in some cases. paticularly when it involves brassing or tarnishing of brass which we call patina to make it sound better (and doesnt look bad).

Sometimes there is no need to restore a camera. I don't do them all. If it is rare or isn't in bad shape, I usually just clean it. There are some "conservators" who think even that is going too far, but I think they're nut jobs and I think (know for a fact) that they are damaging the cameras they are "conserving."

but in this case the leather was stuffed! it was rusted and a non functional camera. there is not much pleasentness or fun in using or handling a rusted camera. this camera at best without your intervention was likely to be destined to either be stripped for parts, or sold and change hands a few more times on ebay until it was just thrown out!!which would of been a shame and a waste. these 1939 Welta Perle's with viewfinder are getting pretty scarce nowadays and were most likely not produced in large numbers anyway, considering by this time Welta had introduced the Weltax which was a success and took over the format and role the Perle performed, thus making it redundent. That model Perle is the last in a lineage begining in 1930 (weltas' first self erecting camera) that in one way or another contributed to the development of their other cameras including the superb Weltur and the Weltax.

cheers
Andrew

Oh, I agree. I would never have done this if it had been in good shape. The cameras I get this far into are pretty much ruined and are on their way to the scrap heap. In particular, Ciroflexes and some of the Weltas, with steel bodies, are ... well, it is getting hard to find one that isn't a rust bucket. That Ciroflex in my gallery, for example, was put together from the remains of three rusted out cameras. ONe of the cameras ... well, the previous owner must have gotten frustrated with it when it wouldn't focus anymore and he beat the face plate in. Anyway, the Welta isn't quite original anymore, but it works now and it isn't sitting in a landfill. I'm glad I could save this one.

BTW, it isn't a folder, but I just bought another camera, a Canon A35 Datelux. Apparently they are fairly rare, since I've never seen one before, there is almost no info regarding them on the web and none of my posts here asking for info have been answered. As I understand it, it was one of the last of the Canon rangefinders with the "steel block" look of the Canonets and their first camera with a built-in flash. They never made many of them and this one (although it looks almost mint) was bought untested (yeah, I'm taking a risk on it). I'm still waiting for the batteries I ordered to arrive so I can find out if it works. If not, I'll have to go in and see what's wrong.

 

[chippy]

" BTW, it isn't a folder, but I just bought another camera, a Canon A35 Datelux. Apparently they are fairly rare, since I've never seen one before, there is almost no info regarding them on the web and none of my posts here asking for info have been answered. As I understand it, it was one of the last of the Canon rangefinders with the "steel block" look of the Canonets and their first camera with a built-in flash. They never made many of them and this one (although it looks almost mint) was bought untested (yeah, I'm taking a risk on it). I'm still waiting for the batteries I ordered to arrive so I can find out if it works. If not, I'll have to go in and see what's wrong."

i havn't had any experiance with them. back in those days i worked for a newspaper taking pics and would you beleive i began with an olympus trip LOL..hey it was all i could afford! but i got my pictures and they always published them hehe

but i would asume they take mercury batteries (about 1.35? volts i think they are)..what type of batteries are getting for them?...i thought you couldnt get them any more..i have still have my olympus OM gear and they use that type of battery from memory i think but the ones i have are still working so i havn't done anything about..not to mention i shoot not a lot of 35...but again from memory there is a kit that slips into the battery space and allows modern 1.5v to used..i keep meaning to get a couple and never get around to it

 

[FallisPhoto]

i havn't had any experiance with them. back in those days i worked for a newspaper taking pics and would you beleive i began with an olympus trip LOL..hey it was all i could afford! but i got my pictures and they always published them hehe

I started off doing book covers and used a Pentax K1000, my first "real" camera.

but i would asume they take mercury batteries (about 1.35? volts i think they are)..what type of batteries are getting for them?...i thought you couldnt get them any more..i have still have my olympus OM gear and they use that type of battery from memory i think but the ones i have are still working so i havn't done anything about..not to mention i shoot not a lot of 35...but again from memory there is a kit that slips into the battery space and allows modern 1.5v to used..i keep meaning to get a couple and never get around to it

Yes, they used PX625 batteries. I've ordered a couple of PX625A batteries (alkaline). When they get here, I plan to discharge them, dig the middles out of them, and use the shells as adapters for 675 zinc/air hearing aid batteries. The adapter you are talking about is a C.R.I.S. MR9, and it allows you to use a silver oxide battery in the camera. It can do this because it contains a schottky diode that lowers the voltage from 1.5 volts to 1.35 volts. The camera will run on the 1.5 volt battery, but the meter will be off.

Alternatives to the C.R.I.S. adapter are as follows:

1. Modify the camera itself. Solder a schottky diode in series with the battery compartment. This will allow you to use a silver oxide 1.5 volt battery using only an adapter for size. A rubber O-ring will work for this, provided you wrap a bit of aluminum foil around it to establish electrical contact.

2. The #625 Wein Cell. The Wein cell is a zinc/air battery that has the appropriate voltage of 1.35 volts and has a nice flat voltage curve, like mercury and silver oxide batteries do. Problem is that zinc/air batteries don't last long and Wein Cells are expensive.

3. #675 zinc/air hearing aid batteries. Unlike the Wein Cell, these are cheap (about $1 each). They only last about a month, at most, but at that price, who cares? Thing is, they are not available in 625 size, so you have to do the trick with the rubber O-ring to get them to fit.

4. Until recently, you could adjust your meter and use #625 silver oxide cells in your camera. However, they stopped making them and now the people who adjusted their meters are using 675 batteries with adapters, like the rest of us. Unfortunately, this was never a perfect solution; A Canonet's meter was never designed to run on 1.5 volts. Adjusting the meter gave you better meter readings, but not really correct ones.

All this is moot anyway. The A35 Datelux uses TWO 625 batteries. I can't use the C.R.I.S. MR9 adapter or any of the other schottky diode solutions. With two batteries, the schottkey diode solutions will leave me far enough off that it just isn't going to work. I have to use either Wein Cells or #675 hearing aid batteries. I've decided to go with the hearing aid batteries.

 

[FallisPhoto]

Okay, I finished it and these are the steps I took. First, the "before" photos:

 

[FallisPhoto]

Another "before" photo and then the next two steps:

 

[FallisPhoto]

And here are the next few steps:

 

[FallisPhoto]

More steps in the restoration of the Perle.

 

[FallisPhoto]

Two more steps and done!

 

[Muggins]

Looks like I've got a lot to do to get mine to be as smart as yours. Thanks for posting those - nice to see how it's done!

Adrian

 

[FallisPhoto]

Looks like I've got a lot to do to get mine to be as smart as yours. Thanks for posting those - nice to see how it's done!

Adrian

You're welcome. Are you working on one too?

 

[bcostin]

This has been an interesting thread. You've done a great job with this restoration. I have Perle I picked up a flea market last year for about $15. It's a bit different than yours, with a spring-loaded viewfinder and a Compur-Rapid shutter.

Cosmetically mine is in pretty good shape. The glass is clear, and the bellows sound. But after a test roll it was obvious that the focus was off; someone apparently removed the front cell of the lens and was careless with the reassembly. The shutter also needed a good cleaning, and it turned out that the metal film rollers had some rough spots sharp enough to scratch the film.

The shutter could still use some more attention but it works well enough for now. I'm working on getting the focus right and then I'll take it out for a spin.

 

[Muggins]

You're welcome. Are you working on one too?

"working on" would be pushing it a bit - you and chippy had a good look at it in February here: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56874&highlight=perle

One for a winter I think - it's in lovely nick inside, but looks rough when closed - obviously stored that way for a long time. I also need a spare shutter, as I think two blades are cracked and I don't want to disassemble it without spares in case I'm right and I can't get all the bits back again!

Looked at it again recently and what I thought was bloom on the lens has resolved itself nicely into a typical oil film - so a shutter stripdown is needed anyway, as there's still oil moving. But you've given me time-consuming ideas about the cosmetics... This may or not be a good thing!

Adrian

 

[oftheherd]

The guy did some kind of repair inside the camera -- and closed it. Within seconds, all his lenses had turned white and a minute later every spot in the camera with a fingerprint was showing them very well indeed. He tried to scrub it out with acetone nail polish remover and it softened and warped some of the plastic parts. He wound up stripping it for parts. After hearing about that, I decided to never use superglue anywhere around any of my cameras. I could probably get away with it, if I used a lot of ventillation, but I'm not sure how long it takes for that stuff to stop outgassing and why take a chance?

What a horrible thing that must have been to watch! I don't know myself how long it takes to outgas. I seem to recal we figured it would take a day or two, even with the gause pads and their solution. Of course, we didn't have the small area of the inside of a camera.

I have looked at your fix of the Welta Perle. What a beauty! Thanks for sharing that with us. It will help me with some of my old cameras.

 

[whitecat]

Really an informative post.

 

[FallisPhoto]

What a horrible thing that must have been to watch! I don't know myself how long it takes to outgas. I seem to recal we figured it would take a day or two, even with the gause pads and their solution. Of course, we didn't have the small area of the inside of a camera.

I'm not sure whether it is still there, because they have completely overhauled their website since then, but a complete account of the aforementioned disaster used to be posted on the Classic Camera Repair Forum.

I have looked at your fix of the Welta Perle. What a beauty! Thanks for sharing that with us. It will help me with some of my old cameras.

Good luck! I pretty much look for cameras that look like train wrecks but that still have good shutters, struts and linkages. This was the one I bid on next. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140239350223 I'm still having a hard time believing that someone actually outbid me for that.