Rolleiflex 2.8F - weird artifact on negatives

[ediz7531]

Hi there,
I seem to be having bad luck with light-leak or light-leak-like artifacts on my cameras lately. This post is about my 2.8F.
This is now the second roll where I've had some strange curved band. On this roll, I had very similar looking artifacts on frames 1, 2, 3, and 6, in similar places on the negative.

Please see an example negative corresponding to frame 6, as well as the scan.
I note that the negative does not show light spilling out of the frame, so this seems to disfavor a light leak, at least one coming from the back, as the culprit. Has anyone seen something similar before?

 

[shutterfinger]

Take a close look at the left side of the camera. Does the back fit flush to the body, no gap? Is a screw missing from the takeup roller spindle?

 

[Dan Daniel]

Open the back, remove it if you know how. Extend lens to closest focus. Take a flashlight and look at the surround of the lens in the back. Many of them have a small clothe bellows as a light seal. Check for rips or a crack in this bellows.

See if there is a pattern in the leaks- was the sun always in one basic position relative to the camera? Where was the focus hood pointing? (light can come in from the focus hood, around the viewing lens which has no light trap, and then to the taking lens light trap).

That's a pretty distinct shape. Maybe someone here has seen it before. The way that it stops at the edge of the frame doesn't mean no light leak; it means that it is coming from the same area as the lens/shutter. Unless your camera has a poltergeist.

 

[NB23]

Looks like it’s your strap

 

[ic-racer]

If you don't have a strap, do you use a cable release?

 

[Dan Daniel]

Looks like it’s your strap

If you don't have a strap, do you use a cable release?

Wouldn't these leave unexposed shadows, not heavily exposed streaks?

 

[NB23]

Wouldn't these leave unexposed shadows, not heavily exposed streaks?

Yes. But looks to me like it’s an interference in front of the lens... with the very limited data we have, anything can be the cause.
In general, when these things happen to me I analyze the problem thoroughly myself. There is no internet forum that can help without a thorough self-investigation, first.

to think of it, that curve might be coming from the bottom of the back door, where the film curves... or who reallt knows?

 

[ediz7531]

Wouldn't these leave unexposed shadows, not heavily exposed streaks?

Precisely, this cannot be an obstruction. Thank you for your suggestions. I extended the lens out to minimum focus, and opened the back as you instructed. I do see what appears to be some light seal, and a small chunk missing at the 7 o'clock position, as seen from the back.
Please see my (bad) attempt at taking a photograph of what I'm talking about, with my phone.

This would correspond to the leak originating from the upper right on the scanned photograph. When I examine the negative, I do see a tiny bit of spillage on the upper right of the frame, so perhaps that is indeed where the leak starts (?).

 

[Dan Daniel]

Hard to see what is going on in the photo, but that is not your fault. Very hard thing to photograph. It does look as if there is a metal tube as the light trap attached to the back of the lens, not a clothe bellows. If so, the chunk missing would be from a felt light seal ring installed on the body, most likely.

The way to get to this felt trap is to remove the lens board. Which on an F is a messy operation, with a bunch of interlocking systems for the shutter, aperture, depth of field, meter, etc.

Was the camera worked on recently and this was the first roll after the work? I wonder how the felt got displaced.

 

[ediz7531]

Hard to see what is going on in the photo, but that is not your fault. Very hard thing to photograph. It does look as if there is a metal tube as the light trap attached to the back of the lens, not a clothe bellows. If so, the chunk missing would be from a felt light seal ring installed on the body, most likely.

The way to get to this felt trap is to remove the lens board. Which on an F is a messy operation, with a bunch of interlocking systems for the shutter, aperture, depth of field, meter, etc.

Was the camera worked on recently and this was the first roll after the work? I wonder how the felt got displaced.

I’ve had the camera for some 5 months or so. It’s the second roll when this happened. Shot 20 rolls with it or so. It was overhauled before I purchased it. I’m inclined to send it to Mr. Fleenor at this point as the camera is too valuable for me to try to fix it myself.

 

[shutterfinger]

The way to get to this felt trap is to remove the lens board. Which on an F is a messy operation, with a bunch of interlocking systems for the shutter, aperture, depth of field, meter, etc.

 

[NB23]

In a totally dark room, you open the back and you stick your eye inside the chamber with yournface well smudged. You flash your phone flashlight in front of the taking lens and you wait a minute or two. There should be a light appearing in there...

 

[ediz7531]

In a totally dark room, you open the back and you stick your eye inside the chamber with yournface well smudged. You flash your phone flashlight in front of the taking lens and you wait a minute or two. There should be a light appearing in there...

I was able to do this just now. I do see what I believe is light seeping through at the 7 o'clock position, as seen from the back.

 

[gone]

I had this problem on a Rolleiflex once. It was an intermittent thing. Turned out that the rear door was not fully closing. It looked closed, but it wasn't quite catching the latch all the way every time. I put in new light seals (single strands of Walmart black yarn) and it worked great after that.

 

[ediz7531]

Hard to see what is going on in the photo, but that is not your fault. Very hard thing to photograph. It does look as if there is a metal tube as the light trap attached to the back of the lens, not a clothe bellows. If so, the chunk missing would be from a felt light seal ring installed on the body, most likely.

The way to get to this felt trap is to remove the lens board. Which on an F is a messy operation, with a bunch of interlocking systems for the shutter, aperture, depth of field, meter, etc.

Was the camera worked on recently and this was the first roll after the work? I wonder how the felt got displaced.

What I'm puzzled by is that assuming this is the issue, wouldn't this happen only at MFD? I'm pretty sure in one of the shots where this happened i was focused at infinity.

 

[BAC1967]

What I'm puzzled by is that assuming this is the issue, wouldn't this happen only at MFD? I'm pretty sure in one of the shots where this happened i was focused at infinity.

Didn’t have to be when you took the shot. Maybe the shot before was focused in a way that let the light in and you didn't change it until after advancing the film and pointing it at the sun just right.

 

[shutterfinger]

In older models of Rolleiflex the light seal is black velvet bonded on a heavy card stock/thin cardboard that fits into a recess with no play. The velvet deteriorates, can become loose from the backing or if not installed with no tension on it from the rear lens cone it will roll up creating a hole in the seal from normal focusing. Sometimes this seal can be repaired and reinstalled other times it has to be replaced. Your camera has a similar type of light seal that has rolled up/torn at the indicated position, the cause will not be known until it has been removed.
Bonding a strip of regular black yarn around the lens cone opening so the yarn is pressing against the cone will likely fix the leak without any disassembly nor will it cause unrepairable damage to the camera.
Black yarn was used for light seals in cameras for years.

 

[Dan Daniel]

What I'm puzzled by is that assuming this is the issue, wouldn't this happen only at MFD? I'm pretty sure in one of the shots where this happened i was focused at infinity.

First, maybe you see it after a few minutes in a dark room at minimum focus, but that doesn't mean that it isn't leaking at other distances. Eyes take 15-30 minutes for full dark adaptation and most likely you get some bleed from your flashlight to kill sensitivity, etc. while testing, so you may just not see it.

Second, as someone mentioned, it can depend on how the camera is focused and moved between shots, angle of sun, maybe you tilted the camera while carrying it, etc. The leak doesn't happen only at exposure time. And another source of light is the focus hood. There is no seal on the back of the viewing lens, so light from the hood area will be finding its way behind the lens board. Focus distance, hood exposure to sunlight, etc.

I think shutterfinger has an approach worth looking into. Most likely the metal tube attached to the back of the lens leaves no side exposed at closest focus? Maybe a piece of black paper or thin plastic wrapped around the tube and slid in between the tube and the existing seal? Well, hard to know without seeing the thing in operation. As best as my limited understanding of optics allows, that tube might have room for extension without vignetting, giving you a little room for a lip or trap?

Light leaks suck. Tricky little monsters. I had one in a Rollieflex that, best as I could tell, went through the focus screen, through the cocking rack opening in the side, to the Automat mechanism, and then off the silver tab in the feed spool chamber. The solution was a plastic ring around the back of the viewing lens so light couldn't find its way behind the lens board in the first place. And I am still not certain if that was a real solution or something else happened to solve the problem.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Looks like it’s your strap

That is my first thought. It is not a light leak.

 

[ediz7531]

Didn’t have to be when you took the shot. Maybe the shot before was focused in a way that let the light in and you didn't change it until after advancing the film and pointing it at the sun just right.

Thank you, makes sense.

First, maybe you see it after a few minutes in a dark room at minimum focus, but that doesn't mean that it isn't leaking at other distances. Eyes take 15-30 minutes for full dark adaptation and most likely you get some bleed from your flashlight to kill sensitivity, etc. while testing, so you may just not see it.

Second, as someone mentioned, it can depend on how the camera is focused and moved between shots, angle of sun, maybe you tilted the camera while carrying it, etc. The leak doesn't happen only at exposure time. And another source of light is the focus hood. There is no seal on the back of the viewing lens, so light from the hood area will be finding its way behind the lens board. Focus distance, hood exposure to sunlight, etc.

I think shutterfinger has an approach worth looking into. Most likely the metal tube attached to the back of the lens leaves no side exposed at closest focus? Maybe a piece of black paper or thin plastic wrapped around the tube and slid in between the tube and the existing seal? Well, hard to know without seeing the thing in operation. As best as my limited understanding of optics allows, that tube might have room for extension without vignetting, giving you a little room for a lip or trap?

Light leaks suck. Tricky little monsters. I had one in a Rollieflex that, best as I could tell, went through the focus screen, through the cocking rack opening in the side, to the Automat mechanism, and then off the silver tab in the feed spool chamber. The solution was a plastic ring around the back of the viewing lens so light couldn't find its way behind the lens board in the first place. And I am still not certain if that was a real solution or something else happened to solve the problem.

You've been immensely helpful. I've learned a lot about what goes on in these cameras on this thread.

That is my first thought. It is not a light leak.

I'm really genuinely puzzled about this suggestion. Could you explain how an object, e.g., a strap, blocking light from entering the taking lens could lead to an overexposed band? Even if I entertain that thought, the light in this particular scene was backlit (see the shadows in the rock). So you have backlit light hitting a hypothetical strap placed in front of the taking lens - so the strap would block that from entering the taking lens. Anyway, to be as thorough as possible, I tried putting the camera around my neck with the strap on. It's a peak design one, with anchors. There is no way that it can possibly block the taking lens. The way the anchors curve is such that the strap goes around the sides and back of the camera, nowhere near the taking lens.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thank you, makes sense.



You've been immensely helpful. I've learned a lot about what goes on in these cameras on this thread.



I'm really genuinely puzzled about this suggestion. Could you explain how an object, e.g., a strap, blocking light from entering the taking lens could lead to an overexposed band? Even if I entertain that thought, the light in this particular scene was backlit (see the shadows in the rock). So you have backlit light hitting a hypothetical strap placed in front of the taking lens - so the strap would block that from entering the taking lens. Anyway, to be as thorough as possible, I tried putting the camera around my neck with the strap on. It's a peak design one, with anchors. There is no way that it can possibly block the taking lens. The way the anchors curve is such that the strap goes around the sides and back of the camera, nowhere near the taking lens.

On occasion I have done it. Keep the strap around your neck.

 

[250swb]

I'm really genuinely puzzled about this suggestion. Could you explain how an object, e.g., a strap, blocking light from entering the taking lens could lead to an overexposed band? Even if I entertain that thought, the light in this particular scene was backlit (see the shadows in the rock). So you have backlit light hitting a hypothetical strap placed in front of the taking lens - so the strap would block that from entering the taking lens. Anyway, to be as thorough as possible, I tried putting the camera around my neck with the strap on. It's a peak design one, with anchors. There is no way that it can possibly block the taking lens. The way the anchors curve is such that the strap goes around the sides and back of the camera, nowhere near the taking lens.

At first I thought 'cable release' but the strap is equally valid. Just because it's black and in front of the lens it doesn't mean it can't reflect more light than the background subject. Black webbing can be very shiny tilted at the right angle, or the wrong angle in your case. I think we could turn to Sherlock Holmes and say 'when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth'. My guess would be you bunched the camera strap up in your hand.

 

[Dan Daniel]

'Fess up, ediz751- you have boxes of light sticks left over from your Rave days and tie them to the tail of your dog when you go out shooting and the dog stands in front of you when you stop to take a photo, and sometimes his glowing tail flashes across the frame, yes? Admit it!

 

[Sirius Glass]

'Fess up, ediz751- you have boxes of light sticks left over from your Rave days and tie them to the tail of your dog when you go out shooting and the dog stands in front of you when you stop to take a photo, and sometimes his glowing tail flashes across the frame, yes? Admit it!

 

[ediz7531]

At first I thought 'cable release' but the strap is equally valid. Just because it's black and in front of the lens it doesn't mean it can't reflect more light than the background subject. Black webbing can be very shiny tilted at the right angle, or the wrong angle in your case. I think we could turn to Sherlock Holmes and say 'when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth'. My guess would be you bunched the camera strap up in your hand.

I would respectfully claim that having found a gap at the 7 o’clock position in that cloth seal around the back of the lens, which corresponds to the 1 o’clock spot on the negative, seems like a more likely root of the problem than your hypothesis.

What is more, I went back and found an instance when this same pattern happened when I didn’t have any strap on me (I hand hold without a strap when I shoot indoors at home).