Help needed to identify fault of lens

[ghwilliam1903]

Hi everyone. I have recently acquired a Rolleiflex Automat Model K4B.

After talking a few rolls of pictures with this camera, it has come to my notice that direct SIM light or regions saturated by light spread into the darker regions. For example, in picture on the left below, the person's face is sharp, but partially affected by light from the window. However, pictures that are overall dimmer are unaffected by this phenomenon.

Upon inspection to the phtographic lens, some dusy was found on the lenses. Moreover, some build ups can be observed around the edge of one of the lenses.

Would anyone be able to advise me on what has caused the blurring of light in the brighter pictures? And what might be the cause of the build ups around the lens? And finally, does this camera worth servicing?

Since the mechanics of this camera is fully functional, it would be a shame if it only works in a limited (low light) environment. Hence, if someone can advise on whether it is fixable or serviceable, it would be great.

Thank you very much and wish you all a great day and be able to capture great pictures.

 

[Dan Daniel]

First, the overall camera is a fine camera and worth using.

The 7.5cm marking on the lens makes me think that the lens is uncoated. It there a red T among the writing around the taking lens?

Most likely a good cleaning and dehazing of the lens will improve things. If the lens is uncoated, it will always be prone to flare and having shadows show some 'fog' if a light source is in or nearly in the scene coming towards the lens. The image of the man at a desk strikes me as pretty typical for an uncoated Tessar in such lighting. If it is a coated Tessar, them most likely haze is the issue.

Welcome to Photrio.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

The flare you see is to be expected with a lens of this age. The solution is to not have bright lights in the image and to use a lens hood.

The lens looks OK. There is no reason to clean it. Most lens damage is due to overzealous cleaning; a little bit of dust does no harm.

Older cameras just need to be used differently.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hi everyone. I have recently acquired a Rolleiflex Automat Model K4B.

After talking a few rolls of pictures with this camera, it has come to my notice that direct SIM light or regions saturated by light spread into the darker regions. For example, in picture on the left below, the person's face is sharp, but partially affected by light from the window. However, pictures that are overall dimmer are unaffected by this phenomenon.
View attachment 382981 View attachment 382983
Upon inspection to the phtographic lens, some dusy was found on the lenses. Moreover, some build ups can be observed around the edge of one of the lenses.
View attachment 382986 View attachment 382987
Would anyone be able to advise me on what has caused the blurring of light in the brighter pictures? And what might be the cause of the build ups around the lens? And finally, does this camera worth servicing?

Since the mechanics of this camera is fully functional, it would be a shame if it only works in a limited (low light) environment. Hence, if someone can advise on whether it is fixable or serviceable, it would be great.

Thank you very much and wish you all a great day and be able to capture great pictures.

I think what you see here is the result of flare caused by a dirty lens. All it needs is a proper cleaning and you're off to the races again; well worth it.

 

[Romanko]

Would anyone be able to advise me on what has caused the blurring of light in the brighter pictures? And what might be the cause of the build ups around the lens? And finally, does this camera worth servicing?

Haze is produced by depositing of dust and chemicals from grease/lubricants inside the lens. It can be cleaned without a trace.
Your camera is worth servicing. Rolleiflexes are exceptionally well designed and built to last. They don't make cameras like this any more.

 

[JPD]

I've used many Rolleis with uncoated lenses, and I think this Tessar could perform better after cleaning, but not as good as a coated one when you shoot against bright light sources. I like uncoated lenses for black and white, but not so much for colour.

 

[ghwilliam1903]

Thank everyone for your kind advices on the flare present in the pictures.

The "T" mentioned by Dan Daniel is actually reflection of the lamp and it is not scratches on the lens itself. I am sorry for not mentioning in my post.

I have decided to purchase a lens hood for my camera, and observe whether the problem persists. If it does, I will have the camera serviced before any further uses.

A big thanks to everyone one once again.

 

[ic-racer]

Some people pay $350 for that effect...

 

[Dan Daniel]

The "T" mentioned by Dan Daniel is actually reflection of the lamp and it is not scratches on the lens itself. I am sorry for not mentioning in my post.

Actually, I was referring to something not seen in your photo of the lens front. Lens coating were developed just before World War II. After the war, when they started selling cameras with coated lenses, manufacturers would add a mark or letter to the information around the lens. For Zeiss, the indicator for a coated lens was a red T. For Schneider, it was a red triangle. Kodak used an L in a circle... etc. Since I cannot see all the writing around the lens in your photo, I was simply asking if there was a T in the dark area. You'll get flaring and fogging with both coated and uncoated lenses, but the uncoated lenses are more prone to it and will show it stronger.

Generally I would consider a K4B to have coated lenses, but the '7.5cm' marking, rather than '75mm.' makes me think your lens might be an old stock uncoated lens. Maybe swapped in later.

 

[JPD]

Generally I would consider a K4B to have coated lenses, but the '7.5cm' marking, rather than '75mm.' makes me think your lens might be an old stock uncoated lens. Maybe swapped in later.

It has a 1938 serial number too.

 

[Dan Daniel]

It has a 1938 serial number too.

I see that this link has 'K4B' as a name for a pre-war Automat: "Rolleiflex Automat 6x6 - Model 2 = K4B" And then K4B for what I usually see called MX-EVS- "Rolleiflex Automat 6x6 - Model K4B"

https://www.rolleiclub.com/cameras/tlr/info/all_TLR.shtml

I hate Rolleiflex naming.

 

[JPD]

I see that this link has 'K4B' as a name for a pre-war Automat: "Rolleiflex Automat 6x6 - Model 2 = K4B" And then K4B for what I usually see called MX-EVS- "Rolleiflex Automat 6x6 - Model K4B"

https://www.rolleiclub.com/cameras/tlr/info/all_TLR.shtml

I hate Rolleiflex naming.

Yes, it's confusing. A photo often says more than a model name from a collector's site or book.

 

[bernard_L]

I have decided to purchase a lens hood for my camera, and observe whether the problem persists. If it does, I will have the camera serviced before any further uses.

A lens hood will not help for pictures like the first one you display. The window, just outside the field of view on the right, would not be shielded by a lens hood. A hood will only shield the lens from light coming in at a fairly large angle away from on-axis. This might, in principle, give some improvement, but I have never seen a true A/B comparison to demonstrate that.

When I do contre-jour (backlighted) pictures, with light source close, but outside the field of view, I arrange to shield the lens from that light. Either a helpful assistant extending his/her hand, or myself with the camera on a tripod.

 

[ghwilliam1903]

The model number of this camera is Rolleiflex Automat Model 2 K4B, which I believe belongs to models made between 1939 to 1945 (after checking it's serial number).


Since I am relatively new to medium format film photography compared many people with excellent expertee on this forum, I was truly fascinated by how robust the mechanics in this camera are. Considering the age of the camera, it is truly fascinating that the there are no drags when operating this camera.

 

[Kino]

I was truly fascinated by how robust the mechanics in this camera are. Considering the age of the camera, it is truly fascinating that the there are no drags when operating this camera.

Yes, they are very robust, well designed cameras. Considering it cost about $153 USD ($3500 USD when adjusted for inflation from 1940), they were not inexpensive cameras.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I was truly fascinated by how robust the mechanics in this camera are. Considering the age of the camera, it is truly fascinating that the there are no drags when operating this camera.

Also the basic mechanisms of your camera are the same as the last of the F series Rolleiflexes made 40 years later. There were additions made such as meters and removable hoods. And small refinements to the mechanics. But the core mechanics did not change- focus cams and rails, winding system, film sensor for the Automat system, etc.

 

[jimjm]

The model number of this camera is Rolleiflex Automat Model 2 K4B, which I believe belongs to models made between 1939 to 1945 (after checking it's serial number).


Since I am relatively new to medium format film photography compared many people with excellent expertee on this forum, I was truly fascinated by how robust the mechanics in this camera are. Considering the age of the camera, it is truly fascinating that the there are no drags when operating this camera.

The factory designation "K.4B" belongs to the Automat MX-EVS, made from 1954 to 1956. It came with a Carl Zeiss Tessar or Schneider Xenar (all coated). Jena Tessar lenses had been out of use. S/N would be 1,428,000 or higher.
Previous model would be the Automat MX (K.4A) made from 1951-1954. Taking lens was either a Jena Tessar, Opton Tessar or Xenar (all coated). Your s/n would be between 1,200,000 and 1,427,999.
Next earliest was the Automat X (K.4) made from 1949-1951. Also came with a Jena Tessar, Opton Tessar or Xenar (all coated). S/N falls between 1,100,000 and 1,169,000.
There was a Rolleiflex "New Standard" (K.6) made from 1939-1941, but very rare. Only about 8000 made. Came with an uncoated Jena Tessar.
Then there was the Automat (K.4 model 632) made from 1939-1949. Also came with a Jena Tessar, Opton Tessar or Xenar. The Jena Tessar was uncoated before 1947. S/N range is 805,000 to 1,096,425.
Lastly, the first Automat (K.4 model 631) made from 1937-1939. Only came with an uncoated Jena Tessar. The s/n ranged from 568,516 to 804,999.
If these serial numbers don't match with what you have, it's possible the taking lens was swapped out at some point.
All this info was taken from John Phillips' excellent book, "The Classic Rollei".

 

[JPD]

Then there was the Automat (K.4 model 632) made from 1939-1949. Also came with a Jena Tessar, Opton Tessar or Xenar. The Jena Tessar was uncoated before 1947. S/N range is 805,000 to 1,096,425.

There are at least two "subtypes" within that range. The pre-war with grey speed/aperture wheels, and the later with black. Both types have bayonets on both lenses. The earlier one had a bayonet on the taking lens only.

 

[ghwilliam1903]

After comparing the serial number on my camera and the ones on www.rolleiclub.com/cameras/tlr/info/all_TLR.shtml and the difficulty for finding a suitable Rolleikin adapter for 35mm photography, I can confirm that my camera is indeed a wartime Rolleiflex Automat 6x6 - Model 2 = K4B. However, I cannot rule out that the lenses have been replaced before I acquired this camera.

On another note, would anyone be able to suggest me on a store for lenses servicing for TLR cameras in the UK. While most people recommended me Newton Ellis & Company at Liverpool, they are closing around mid December and suggested me that they might not be able to service mine before their end date. I have also contacted Camera City based in London, where they told me they were 50 50 on whether they can service the camera and it is actually outsourced to someone else (if I have heard the conversation correctly). Hence, please suggest me a place for servicing TLR cameras. Thank you.

 

[JPD]

After comparing the serial number on my camera and the ones on www.rolleiclub.com/cameras/tlr/info/all_TLR.shtml and the difficulty for finding a suitable Rolleikin adapter for 35mm photography, I can confirm that my camera is indeed a wartime Rolleiflex Automat 6x6 - Model 2 = K4B. However, I cannot rule out that the lenses have been replaced before I acquired this camera.

On another note, would anyone be able to suggest me on a store for lenses servicing for TLR cameras in the UK. While most people recommended me Newton Ellis & Company at Liverpool, they are closing around mid December and suggested me that they might not be able to service mine before their end date. I have also contacted Camera City based in London, where they told me they were 50 50 on whether they can service the camera and it is actually outsourced to someone else (if I have heard the conversation correctly). Hence, please suggest me a place for servicing TLR cameras. Thank you.

The Tessar has a 1938 serial number which is normal for this camera. Any camera repair service should be able to clean the Tessar. You just unscrew the front group with your fingers or with a friction tool, and the back lens group with a spanner wrench, or clean it in place with a cotton tip with the shutter open after the front group has been unscrewed.

The front lens group consists of two elements mounted in brass or bronze parts that you can screw apart with your fingers, so it's easy to clean.

Don't try to unscrew the viewing lens, though! You would upset the focus if you manage to turn it.