Bronica SQ-A problem, help!

[theoacworth]

Hey guys, first post here, hoping you can help out.

I just got some film back from a lab and it appears that my Bronica has been misbehaving (or I've been doing something silly and not realising...) On one of the rolls I have 3 or 4 shots that have come out fine (but were taken a few months earlier than the rest) and all the others have come out as seen in the photo below. This makes me think that the camera has been knocked, or I may have flicked some switch that I didn't know about... As far as I'm aware the multiple exposure switch hasn't been touched.

Has anyone had similar problems, or could give me a rough idea of what may be causing the issue? Thanks!

 

[DWThomas]

SQ-A owner here, but alas, folks out there keep coming up with new stuff to scare me!

It appears the shots are overlapping -- rather severely. I think it's the indexing screwed up, and that is primarily controlled by the back, although there is a mechanical interlock linked into the body that has a role in that. Now that assumes you didn't somehow reload an already exposed film (methinks that's pretty unlikely**, but the thought crossed what's left of my mind).

Do you have another back to try? In my experience, the backs are the Achilles heel of the SQ family (read: you should own at least two!) In a way, the fact that these are "system" cameras and very modular is good and bad. It means more complexity, which means more ways to go astray, but it also means you can swap various parts and see if a problem follows a particular component.

That and a few GAS attacks are why I now have enough components to put two and half SQ-As together. (If I ever resolve a problem in my original SQ-A body, I can field three! )

** You would have had to rewind the film, as only one end is taped to the backing paper and feeding a roll backwards would make a mess.

 

[theoacworth]

Thanks for your advice Dave. unfortunately I don't have another back to hand to test out immediately, but I'll try and get my hands on one to test out.

 

[Alex Muir]

I would check that the Time exposure switch on your lens hasn't been activated accidentally. I think it should show A for normal operation and (possibly) T when in use. This would cause over exposure, and the possibility of the space between shots being exposed. Was the last of the good frames perhaps an exposure of more than 8seconds and you haven't reset the T switch?
Alex

 

[DWThomas]

I would check that the Time exposure switch on your lens hasn't been activated accidentally. I think it should show A for normal operation and (possibly) T when in use. This would cause over exposure, and the possibility of the space between shots being exposed. Was the last of the good frames perhaps an exposure of more than 8seconds and you haven't reset the T switch?
Alex

Wow -- that's an interesting thought. (I use the 'T' mode so infrequently it's not part of my thought process!) My gut sense is there should be more smearing in the images, but that sort of thing can vary wildly depending on lighting and camera handling. I hope you're right for theoacworth's sake, as it would obviously be an easy fix. I don't have any 'S' lenses, but on the 'PS' series, getting into T mode is not likely to happen accidentally, one has to lift a sort of plunger to allow the slide to move from A to T. That would pretty much have to be intentional. (And yes, a white 'A' and a red 'T' are the designations.)

 

[Alex Muir]

It's the kind of thing I could do! If it's not that, then I would also suspect the back. Some of the backs I have seen are very worn, although I've never had one make overlaps. The T setting on an S lens just pulls out to allow the switch to slide. On the PS lens I have the plunger device has to be unscrewed. It would be more likely that the switch was used and then left in the 'on' position, rather than switched on inadvertently. I hope it is a simple fix as they are great cameras.
Alex.

 

[theoacworth]

None of the previous exposures were done using the Time switch, but I suppose it's possible that I switched it without realising. The shots felt normal when they were taken though, and even if the switch was flicked that presumably wouldn't explain the overlapped frames?

 

[DWThomas]

None of the previous exposures were done using the Time switch, but I suppose it's possible that I switched it without realising. The shots felt normal when they were taken though, and even if the switch was flicked that presumably wouldn't explain the overlapped frames?

Using the 'T' mode, once the shutter is opened, it stays open until you slide the "switch" back, which would mean you would be winding to the next frame with the shutter open. I think I'm seeing relatively distinct (but overlapped) frame outlines in your example. If one were advancing film with the shutter open I would expect much more pronounced smear -- and maybe an almost bulletproof level of exposure. But as with light leaks, the final results on the film can be quite variable, the speed you wind and whether you had a long time between frames, etc.

I still think there's something unhappy in the indexing of the back. You could look at the interlock pins, both back and body, and see if they are unbent and not caked with crud, but my guess would be it's internal and the back needs a clean and lube -- but that is a guess! My own back experience, other than light leaks, was the film winding all the way thru without stopping and the frame counter never advancing. That one I fixed by returning the back to the seller!

Edit: The slide for 'T' has a captive setscrew on 'S' lenses, and a plunger to lift on 'PS' models. (Alex got the S and PS descriptions reversed upthread.) If those are in the "normal" position; e.g, the plunger is down, or the setscrew tightened, the slider shouldn't move -- even by accident. But it could be the slide has been unlocked since you got the lens and you finally bumped it to 'T'. I guess the slide lock state is one other check item.

Challenging buggers, but working, they're great cameras!

 

[hsandler]

I think I'm seeing relatively distinct (but overlapped) frame outlines in your example. If one were advancing film with the shutter open I would expect much more pronounced smear -- and maybe an almost bulletproof level of exposure. But as with light leaks, the final results on the film can be quite variable, the speed you wind and whether you had a long time between frames

I think even with the shutter stuck open, one might see some indications of separate frames. As you wind on to the next frame, the mirror comes down and closes the light baffle to the film, so there is no exposure of the next frame of the film until the next time the mirror goes up.

I have problem with one of my lenses that produces similar looking negs. At slow speeds, sometimes the shutter sticks open. Strangely, this is cleared by shooting a frame with the multiple exposure lever engaged. I checked everything, battery, lens contacts, T switch, but I think it is the lens, because all my other lenses are fine, and the lens in question has a sticker indicating it was serviced in the past.

 

[DWThomas]

... I think even with the shutter stuck open, one might see some indications of separate frames. As you wind on to the next frame, the mirror comes down and closes the light baffle to the film, so there is no exposure of the next frame of the film until the next time the mirror goes up. ...

I suppose that's possible -- seems it depends on when the film starts to move versus when the mirror/baffle closes. Can't say I've ever done anything that would check that timing.

OK, you got me curious, but turns out I don't have enough hands! :confused: I loaded a roll of backing paper and then tried to do some stuff with the back open, but holding it in place. Alas, there is a magic tab on the bottom of the film insert near the winding tab portion that resets (or engages?) the frame counter. Couldn't get coordinated enough to try to make it think the back was closed and also turn the crank -- and keep the insert in position. With the back totally off and multi-exposure set, I note that after an "exposure" the little gear that meshes with its mate in the insert begins to turn as soon as I start to turn the crank. The crank goes about a third of a revolution before the baffle is fully closed. That could imply the film would have moved some distance before the baffle is closed ...

BUT THEN -- inspired thought #2306 -- after the exposure, in non-T mode, the shutter should be closed. That could take us back to the idea of the lens being in (or thinking it's in) 'T' mode --- OR -- the back just fails to advance the film sufficiently; the baffle and shutter working fine, but the film only advancing a third or so of a frame. Someone a few years back posted some pictures of the internals of those inserts. They are complex enough it's not hard to believe an overdose of crud or shortage of lubricant could produce some anomalous behavior

One wishes theoacworthhad some "spare parts" to try! A fascinating macchina fotografica (and so little around in the way of service manual type info, as far as I have been able to find).

(Meanwhile Yours Truly is slowly learning -- or trying to learn -- a bit about the dark slide light seals. :crazy: )