What should I look out for?

[Bighilt]

On the weekend I shot a set of portraits for an uncle and aunt as gift for their 50th wedding anniversary. The conversation got round to the topic of cameras and he told me he has a Kodak Retina my aunt gave him as a wedding present. He said he has not used it for years, but it is pristine and asked if I wanted it. Is the Pope Catholic?!!
I have to go around and fetch it this week and can hardly wait. It will be a fine companion for my similarly-aged Voigtlander Prominent. I have no experience with the Retina, in fact have only seen one "in the flesh" once before. Over the past few days I have read everything I can about Retinas and it seems it will be great fun and capable of very good images. I do not know what model it is but considering it was bought new in 1959 I am assuming it is not a Ia or similar.
I will be using a hand-held meter in any case so, if it is a model with a light-meter that does not work, that will pose no problem at all.
Before I start using it I would like to know if there are any aspects, possible potential problems in the operation of the camera I should be aware of. I will be downloading a manual from Mike Butkus's site but would be grateful for any tips, warnings, hints etc. Thanks in advance for your help.

 

[FallisPhoto]

Before I start using it I would like to know if there are any aspects, possible potential problems in the operation of the camera I should be aware of. I will be downloading a manual from Mike Butkus's site but would be grateful for any tips, warnings, hints etc. Thanks in advance for your help.

One problem that is very common with Retina rangefinders is that the viewfinder will need cleaning. I don't know what they used in there but, more often than not, everything will look brown through the viewfinder. It is pretty straightforward to clean it out, but be careful with the semitransparent mirror (the one directly in front of the viewfinder); it scratches easily.

Edit: for other common problems,along with their likely causes and cures, look here: http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~Srawhiti/KodakRetinaRepair.html

 

[Bighilt]

Thanks very much for your reply. I collected the camera yesterday and it turns out it is a Retina Reflex slr. The shutter leaves were somehat reluctant but seem to have come right after a dousing of lighter fuel. Took some pictures today and am looking forward to seeing how they come out,

 

[JonR]

Good luck!
My father had a Retina Ia when I was young and most of the photos of me being a small child is taken with that one.... He probably got rid of it when he moved on to SLR´s in the 70-ties but I have recently bought a couple of Retina Ia´s on an auction site and enjoyed playing with it!
Jon

 

[oftheherd]

I seem to remember the Retinas were quite popular in the late 40's and 50's. I have vague memories of members drooling over other members Retinas when my father would take me to camera club meetings.

Members of RFF who use them seem to love them as well. I had forgotten Retinal had as SLR. Please keep us informed and show photos.

 

[FallisPhoto]

Thanks very much for your reply. I collected the camera yesterday and it turns out it is a Retina Reflex slr. The shutter leaves were somehat reluctant but seem to have come right after a dousing of lighter fuel. Took some pictures today and am looking forward to seeing how they come out,

I was assuming it was a rangefinder -- one of the I, II or II series. I had forgotten that, after Kodak took over, they also produced an SLR. I wouldn't know what to tell you about their SLRs.

 

[ZeissFan]

First off, you'll need to find out what model, because that makes a big difference. There were SLRs, rangefinders, folding cameras, zone focus and even a model that took 126 Instamatic film.

There were something like 32 "official" folding Retinas with numerous variations and some that were made for specific markets.

In general, the Retinas were very good cameras. You generally can say that the cameras got larger each year, culminating with the Retina Reflex IV. There also were a couple of final Retinas, and you could make the case that the Kodak Instamatic 500 should have been badged as a Retina, as it came from the Kodak AG operation.

So, first step is to find out what model of Retina you have.

 

[ZeissFan]

Well, to add to what I said, I see that you have a Retina Reflex SLR. Next step: Which model?

There was the original Retina Reflex, which shares interchangeable front elements with the Retina IIc/IIC/IIIc/IIIC.

Then there was the Retina Reflex S, III and IV, which share most lenses with the Retina IIIS rangefinder.

All of these models are bears to service. I hope that you got a good one!

 

[Bighilt]

Once again, thanks for all the replies. The camera is the first series Retina and from the serial number would appear to have been made in 1958.
I have now run a roll of HP5+ through it using the built-in light meter as a reference but adjusting according to the exposure I want. That all seems fine. I really want this to be my favourite camera -- it is a joy to hold and operate -- but I am quite disappointed with the results. Wide open it is very soft, not nearly in the same league as my Voigtlander Prominent and miles behind a Leica I once owned (and foolishly sold) that had a 50mm Cannon lens. At smaller apertures the images look okay but certainly don't knock my socks off. Perhaps I took the "poor man's Leica" blurb too literally!
However, I must add, some of the fault may lie with the scans I had done at a local lab. In truth, the negs look much better than the scans which are grainy and have high contrast. When viewed through a 10x loupe, the negs don't look that way.
My plan now is to run some C41 colour neg through the camera, as I figure the lab may be a lot better equipped to handle that.
Ideally I should shoot a roll of tranny but, down here in the wild colonies, finding someone who still stocks slide film and then a lab that can do E6 processing is a major mission.
I will post some pics of the camera and results in the next few days -- either here or on my blog. Thanks again for your input.

 

[Spider67]

The IIIS was known as the "Stuttgart Leica". Congrats to that gift!
Please tell about the results. Most of my Retinas have great lenses, but some have been scarred by fungus.
Des

 

[FallisPhoto]

Perhaps I took the "poor man's Leica" blurb too literally!

... and whoever wrote that misapplied it too, since the phrase refers to the Kodak/Nagle rangefinders. I've also heard it used in reference to the best of the Yashica rangefinders, the Karats, a couple of FSU cameras, and to a couple of the early Nikon and Canon rangefinders.

 

[FallisPhoto]

BTW, I have a couple of Retinas that have rangefinders that look a lot browner than the normal beige tint you see in most. Does anyone know if they made them that way or if something is on the mirror? I don't want to clean off the gold coating.

 

[Bighilt]

Okay I have now run two rolls of film through the Retina. The first was a roll of HP5+. The developed negs look fine but the scans, done at a local lab are absolutely horrible. They look as though the pics were shot with a Holga that has a sand-papered lens! However I am convinced the problem lies with the lack of ability to scan b&W film rather than the Schneider lens.
I then ran a roll of consumer-grade Fuji 400 neg film through the camera. Much better although initially I wasn't all that impressed. However, the more I look at the images the more I like them. They have a feel all of their own that grows on you.
You can read my full impressions and see image examples here. I think this is going to be something akin to gradually falling in love with the girl next door rather than being smitten by a super-model!