Rolleiflex 3.5 (late version) TLR Lens Cap / Lens Spacing

[jchabalk]

I'm hunting for a lens cap and keep coming up with the wrong one. I recently acquired a late 3.5e Rolleiflex (Planar) from a forum member, the camera's fantastic and i'm looking for a proper lens cap for it.

I've purchased 2 Bay II lens camera - each slightly different in appearance but each is just a bit too long for my camera. I understand now from looking around that the spacing between the viewing and taking lens changed slightly with the 3.5f. It seems like it's affected some subset of the late 3.5e cameras as well - and i've got one of those.

Is there any way to differentiate the lens caps? I'm looking for an original one but if i can't find one something 3rd party that will protect the lens will suffice.

 

[Dan Daniel]

42mm or 45mm- these are the two spacings. Find similar points on both 'circles' of a lens cap and measure the distance between them. Do the same thing on your camera. That's your answer.

I doubt that this will be visible in a listing. You'll need to ask the seller to measure. Or deal with an experienced seller who understands the issue.

(John, if this is for Bruce's camera, it is an early E as I recall. No removable hood, yes? If so, that's a 42mm spacing.)

 

[jchabalk]

Thanks Dan, yes, it is for Bruce's camera. You're right, per the serial number it lines up as an early 3.5e (S/N:1749xxx) and yes, the hood is not removable.

The thing i haven't been able to figure out is whether i need to seek out a 3.5f lens cap, or a 3.5e (or older) lens cap. The spacing on my camera must be 42mm as the caps i've purchased are both long by about 3mm. I had one seller measure the cap and he measured it at ~2.5mm shorter. When it arrived it turned out that he measured the overall length of the whole thing - which was 2.5mm shorter than the "long" one i had - the lens spacing it supported was the same 45mm spread. It must have just been from a different run of lens caps that were cut a little bit differently.

So now i'm thinking i've just been unlucky.

I have a hood waiting for me in my mailbox at work tomorrow which will make me feel a little more comfortable. Both lenses on that camera are in great shape and i want to keep it that way.

 

[Dan Daniel]

When it comes to measuring the caps, it is the backside dimensions that count. For example, on this ebay listing-
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-metal-L...734631?hash=item28205e2ce7:g:OMEAAOSwr7ZW6rsy

Scroll down the photo that shows the backside. There is a raised ring on both sections. One section- left in this image- has three tabs on this ring for the bayonet mount. The other side has no tabs (you install the cap on the upper lens, rotate it down, and the other half covers the taking lens, with the ring doing a press fit into the opening).

The measurement can be taken at the top center point of each ring, for example. Since the rings are concentric with the lens centers, it will give the same dimension. On a late E/F lens cap, this will be 45mm. On an earlier E, it will be 42mm. Same idea can be used to measure your actual camera.

I imagine that Rollei changed both design and suppliers over the years. And then the newer Chinese knockoffs will have their own answer to overall dimensions. All of this is cosmetics, and it is the backside rings that matter for actually fitting your camera.

 

[chromacomaphoto]

I found this interesting, I have a late model 3.5f whiteface and I had assumed it was the same size cap as my previous earlier versions but now I think that it is actually slightly different in size. I had never been aware of that before. Love getting into all the minutia of geek info about Rollies but when owning and using multiple Rolleiflexes, the different size for accessories can sometimes be a PITA.

 

[jchabalk]

I just got a chance to measure, you're dead on dan. The lens caps that i have measure 45mm and the camera measured 42mm.

At least now i can return these with confidence (and know what i'm talking about)

Now(!) on to find the right one