Bessa 1- film/lens not parallel

[tom williams]

Greetings. I've just received a Voightlander Bessa1 in very nice shape, with a Color-Skopar 105mm f4.5 lens in a Prontor SVS shutter. The shutter is stuck, but I figure Carol Miller can fix that for me. However, once the bellows is fully extended, the optical axis of the lens isn't perpendicular to the film plane. Another way of saying the same thing: the mechanism that
delivers the shutter out to full extension does not position the shutter base plate parallel to the film plane. I haven't tried to muscle the shutter unit into parallel - more than light pressure is required to bring the shutter/film planes into parallel. Is this a problem familiar to anyone? Or am I missing something simple here?
cheers
Tom

 

[blee1996]

Recently I got a Bessa I with Color Skopar just like yours, and I had exactly the same problem. The front lens standard is not parallel to the film plane. I can wiggle it back to parallel, but that is only temporary. And worse, the front standard can tilt by a few degrees. So I guess it is a common problem for this model?

I used to have an older Bessa RF with uncoated Skopar, which did not have this problem. After looking at photos, it seems Bessa RF, Bessa I and Bessa II all have different folding and strut mechanisms. Since i am evaluating 6x9 folders, I have six different make/model now and only this Bessa I has the front lens standard problem. All the others, even much cheaper ones, have solid front lens standard which is parallel to the film plane.

In my case, I'm in the process of returning the Bessa I.

 

[awty]

Hi mine is square on and I can't see any reason it wouldn't be. There is no play once bracket is snapped in.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

My guess is that someone dropped the camera. Things either got bent or rivets/screws got loose. If it is bent then it is going to take force to bend things back into alignment (and doing so without rivets/screws getting loose or flying across the room) (I always work on a large fluffy white towel to catch flying springs and things).

 

[ic-racer]

Yes, dropped.

 

[tom williams]

Hi mine is square on and I can't see any reason it wouldn't be. There is no play once bracket is snapped in.
View attachment 318892

Awty, when fully extended, the curved black strut that attaches to the outermost part of the cover and to the shutter frame houses a bracket and lever (pictured in the attached photo). There is a bracket-lever pair on each side of the extension mechanism, apparently operating to lock the bracket against the strut upon full extension, thus freezing the shutter in its unfolded position (the top of the bracket seems to match the curve of the strut. As the lens is extended, the bracket rises into the strut body, and presumably makes contact with the inside of the top of the strut. The lever also rises toward the bracket as the lens is extended, and engages the 'tongue' on the bracket upon full extenson, presumably 'locking' the bracket against the strut). In this camera, the bracket on one side appears worn (pictured), and the lever has freedom of motion where the other side does not. I don't see that correcting this would bring about parallelism - but it may be a sign that some deformation occurred. Otherwise, the struts seem firm and appear to lock tightly, but the shutter can be wiggled back and forth a bit - actually all the way to a bit past parallel. But I don't see any deformity in the visible support mechanism, aside from the bracket-lever pair on one side (pictured).

 

[tom williams]

My guess is that someone dropped the camera. Things either got bent or rivets/screws got loose. If it is bent then it is going to take force to bend things back into alignment (and doing so without rivets/screws getting loose or flying across the room) (I always work on a large fluffy white towel to catch flying springs and things).

Dropped seems likely to me now.

 

[gone]

The arms and bed look in good shape, so you have that going for you. Something may be bent on the very front where the lens pivots, there should be something that snaps into place and keeps it in one place. Sometimes just slowly opening and closing the camera while closely studying what's happening on the front standard will give you a clue.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

Greetings. I've just received a Voightlander Bessa1 in very nice shape, with a Color-Skopar 105mm f4.5 lens in a Prontor SVS shutter. The shutter is stuck, but I figure Carol Miller can fix that for me. However, once the bellows is fully extended, the optical axis of the lens isn't perpendicular to the film plane. Another way of saying the same thing: the mechanism that
delivers the shutter out to full extension does not position the shutter base plate parallel to the film plane. I haven't tried to muscle the shutter unit into parallel - more than light pressure is required to bring the shutter/film planes into parallel. Is this a problem familiar to anyone? Or am I missing something simple here?
cheers
Tom

View attachment 318880

I'm holding one of my pristine Bessa 1's here in my hand next to your image on the screen. The black arm at the top that connects to the lens and the cover is angled down slightly more than mine is when fully opened. Also it looks like the prop that pops out so that it can sit vertical on a flat surface is stilling out more than mine. I would agree with what others have said that it looks like it may have been dropped. Is there a dent or any deformity on the outside of the cover portion?

The other possibility is that there is some sort of obstruction on the inside of one of the black arms that's preventing them from sitting properly fully extended. They are open on the backside and basically hit the mount bracket on the inside when fully open. If there is an obstruction in there in one of them it could cause this issue even though the camera fully opens and locks into place.

Jeremy

 

[tom williams]

I'm holding one of my pristine Bessa 1's here in my hand next to your image on the screen. The black arm at the top that connects to the lens and the cover is angled down slightly more than mine is when fully opened. Also it looks like the prop that pops out so that it can sit vertical on a flat surface is stilling out more than mine. I would agree with what others have said that it looks like it may have been dropped. Is there a dent or any deformity on the outside of the cover portion?

The other possibility is that there is some sort of obstruction on the inside of one of the black arms that's preventing them from sitting properly fully extended. They are open on the backside and basically hit the mount bracket on the inside when fully open. If there is an obstruction in there in one of them it could cause this issue even though the camera fully opens and locks into place.

Jeremy

Jeremy, thanks. I checked the inside of the black arms, as you suggested, with a paper clip, dental mirror and gooseneck light, but didn't feel or see an obstruction. The mechanism on both arms looks the same, as far as I can tell, except for obvious wear on the end of one of the brackets that fold into the arm. I think that wear is a symptom and not a cause of the misaligned shutter.

I don't find evidence of a drop or impact - no dents or scuffs. No parts are obviously deformed. The arms are solid, and when fully extended, the extension mechanism seems solid. Only the shutter moves, and then with some difficulty, in rotation around the two pins that hold it to the black support arms. If the difficulty were solely in the shutter attachment, I don't see how that would result in the wear I see on one of the brackets.

I measured the distance between the end of the support arms and the camera body, and those differed by 1.4mm when the bellows was fully extended - less than the apparent parallelism misalignment, I would say, but significant.

All things considered, I think I'll return this camera. Drat!
cheers
Tom