Salt Frozen Shutter - Zeiss Contaflex Super B

[louarnold]

Had this camera overhauled some 20 years ago. That summer it worked great until the whale splashed water onto it. The water hit only on the right-hand-side of the camera. I ignored it until now. Its frozen. Here are the details:
1- Shutter / mirror is frozen; the shutter release can be pressed, but does not release the shutter. The mirror can be wiggled slightly.
2-The film advance lever works as long as the shutter release is kept depressed. At the very last twist, the release descends a fraction of an inch.
3- The front lens is removable.
4- The shutter speed ring, moves well, but is difficult from high to low speeds.
5- The aperture ring rotates smoothly throughout.
6- The focus ring is stiff, but move smoothly.
7- The frame counter moves well.
8- The rewind button and aperture quick adjust work fine.
9- The delay timer slide was moved (cocked), but is now also fixed.

What I have done just now:
a - Removed the lens, the back and the film roller, and immersed the camera in tap water for 8 hours. No improvement.
b - Immersed in a solution of tap water and baking soda (2-3 tsp). Then immerse and rinse in tap water again. No change.
c - Spray with 91% solution of alcohol, let stand for several hours. Immerse and rinse again with tap water.
d- Spray with eyeglass cleaning fluid for a few hours. Immerse and rinse again.
e - I have a screwdriver and hammer, but haven't used it yet.
Of interest: After immersion the water turns a clear pale yellow.
The shutter on this camera is the between-the-lens leaf type. An overhaul will likely cost $600 (http://zeisscamera.com/services_slr.shtml).
The problem is likely with encrusted salt in the shutter and the other mechanisms.
So I need to ask...what else can I do at home to get this fixed? Can I get the entire lens/shutter out of the camera without a microscope and bottle of scotch?

 

[Svenedin]

The problem is not salt encrustation it is corrosion. It is likely there are parts rusted solid. I don't mean to be rude but I just can't imagine why you thought it was a good idea to put the camera in water. Is this a joke?

 

[louarnold]

To Svenedin.
No, its not a joke. Look on the web about salt in cameras and you'll see that water immersion is recommended, among other solutions, and particularly when the camera has fallen into salt water. Note that I did not immerse it at the time of the event; only yesterday and today. I just don't know if several hours of immersion will dissolve an encrustation.

But I think you are correct, the yellow coloring is likely from rust, but it might also be the fine oil I dropped into the body.
To all:
Still, I've gone this far, so getting the lens/shutter assembly out of the body might prove things one way or the other. Ideas??

 

[Svenedin]

I can see the logic: immerse in fresh water in an attempt to wash out all of the salt water. The problem is water will still be trapped in the camera and it will still corrode. The only way to have saved that camera was for it to have been taken apart and cleaned of all contamination at the time of the event. Now every steel part, every cog and spring is likely rusted to a mess.

These cameras are not that expensive or rare. You should be able to find a replacement.

 

[louarnold]

I can see the logic: immerse in fresh water in an attempt to wash out all of the salt water. The problem is water will still be trapped in the camera and it will still corrode. The only way to have saved that camera was for it to have been taken apart and cleaned of all contamination at the time of the event. Now every steel part, every cog and spring is likely rusted to a mess.

These cameras are not that expensive or rare. You should be able to find a replacement.

Well, you could be correct, but we're both guessing. Once I can get it open, I'll know for sure. If immersion works, then embedding the camera (closed) in rice will dry it out in time; kinda like keeping salt dry in your salt shaker. That or a putting it in the wind of a fan. Replacement isn't an option; I'm simply not spending the money on a film camera. Recovering this camera will be bonus... a "lark" as they say. Remember, its already quite dead, so there is nothing more to lose, unless someone wants to buy it as is? The question is: if I take it apart, can I put it back together again. The web does have instructions to do that, but Murphy is ever present.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

There's no end to the rubbish that can be read on the net.
That camera, after sitting 20 years post salt water wetting, is toast. Give it a decent burial.

Btw, I'm not guessing. I've worked on an out board engine that sat for less than a week after a dunking, the power head was corroded beyond economical repair, despite the fact that engines have oil in them. Dissimilar metals plus salt water equals electrolysis, not just rust.

 

[louarnold]

There's no end to the rubbish that can be read on the net.
That camera, after sitting 20 years post salt water wetting, is toast. Give it a decent burial.

Btw, I'm not guessing. I've worked on an out board engine that sat for less than a week after a dunking, the power head was corroded beyond economical repair, despite the fact that engines have oil in them. Dissimilar metals plus salt water equals electrolysis, not just rust.

LOL, but that's an outboard engine. You didn't take it to bed and cuddle it like I did with this fine old instrument that I got for my birthday from my late father when I was 16, some 50 years ago. You....you didn't cuddle it, did you? lmao.

 

[Brett Rogers]

Immersing a camera that has been badly contaminated with salt water is actually a good idea, the idea being to try to rinse the salty water from the internals. Think about it: if it has been dunked--it's already wet, but fresh water is far less injurious than salt. But it has to be done ASAP (ideally, immediately) after contamination, and the camera promptly fully stripped, cleaned, and dried. It won't achieve anything constructive so many years later. In your case you've said the camera wasn't immersed completely anyway, on this basis it seems likely the left side of the camera may have been less affected, originally, so, as well as achieving nothing positive by immersing it in water so many years later, you've probably caused further damage to other parts of it (Eg the metering). It would have been better to simply dismantle the camera to assess the damage. Such a long time after exposure to salt water corrosion will have severely damaged the internals. By all means, strip the camera down (if you can, without it breaking seized parts as you go, which is most unlikely in itself) but it would take a miracle for it to be saveable now. If it wasn't stuffed originally it will be, now.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

LOL, but that's an outboard engine. You didn't take it to bed and cuddle it like I did with this fine old instrument that I got for my birthday from my late father when I was 16, some 50 years ago. You....you didn't cuddle it, did you? lmao.

What you should have done immeditely was immerse the camera in distilled water and ran, not walked to the nearest camera tech. After 20 years, it's pointless.

 

[louarnold]

Yes, yes, you have all made the same point and you are correct, but immediate attention would have meant another $350 for no guaranteed outcome and a postponed vacation with the family in tow. I was driving out west on the 2nd day of a 3-week vacation. It was a Friday afternoon in the summer and I would have needed an expensive hotel room to get back to Toronto for Monday morning and that would have been just to submit the camera to the repair center. And then... would you ask your wife to cradle a bucket with water and camera, or trust your 8 year old in the back seat, not t spill it as I drove on the highway...and I didn't have a bucket.

So look, I have nothing to lose by trying. Why not think positively and suggest possible solutions???

 

[summicron1]

i think, at this stage, it is a project of discovery -- see how many screws are in it. How many levers. How many widgets and whoosits, gimgaws and gookcracks.

Mount them all on a board and show people "this is how complex my camera was."

The Contaflex sLR shutter is so complex that it is hard to find a repairman who will even look at one -- it has to close down the shutter blades, flip the mirror up, then open and close the shutter blades again. I don't look for them for my collection because the few times I did they never worked. If this one was to be salvaged, it was right after it got splashed by Monstro, and I suspect you know that and are now having fun.

Which is wise.

 

[Brett Rogers]

i think, at this stage, it is a project of discovery -- see how many screws are in it. How many levers. How many widgets and whoosits, gimgaws and gookcracks.

Mount them all on a board and show people "this is how complex my camera was."

The Contaflex sLR shutter is so complex that it is hard to find a repairman who will even look at one -- it has to close down the shutter blades, flip the mirror up, then open and close the shutter blades again. I don't look for them for my collection because the few times I did they never worked. If this one was to be salvaged, it was right after it got splashed by Monstro, and I suspect you know that and are now having fun.

Which is wise.

Yes, you're quite right, they do have a reputation for being hard to work on but they're really not all that bad. Well, if they haven't been immersed in salt water, that is. The reflex version of the shutter does need an extra spring and another lever or two to keep the blades open when the camera is wound for viewing, but the remainder of the parts are standard Synchro Compur common to many other non-reflex SC shutters in the same size. The shutter has a little extra complexity but it's not prone to be troublesome. When their shutters malfunction they're just playing up for the same reason most leaf shutters do: evaporated lubricant residue from the shutter itself (or lens focusing helical grease depending on the particular installation involved). The only difference with the Contaflex is that the blades have the opportunty to stick when the camera is wound open, and the aperture blades can also suffer the same issue and may not stop down quickly enough. In 90% of cases cleaning the shutter will get one running pretty much as good as new with no replacement parts, they were exceptionally well-made and long lasting. Later models have a drive system that limits how far down the aperture will close according to the meter setting but again, it's not a complex system with the minimum of parts and not given to playing up.

Even getting to the shutters isn't anywhere near as bad as people think. I love Voigtlander's Bessamatic, but it's quite a bit more time consuming to remove the shutter from those than a Contaflex. Popular opinion tends to suggest that the first couple of models (45mm Tessar lens, front cell focus) are easier to work on than later unit focus versions. Indeed Jon Goodman (well-named as he is) has opined as much on more than one occasion. I'm likely in the minority but I find the way Zeiss hid the mounting screws for the focus ring beneath and behind the distance scale ring is a pain in the proverbial. Not only are the set screws tiny with about a one mm head, but they can sometimes corrode in place, and you're expected to deal with removing these by first extracting the lock screw for the distance scale ring and then inserting your driver through it's hole and feeling for the slot on the focus ring set screws and removing them blind. Personally, I'd rather work on a unit focus version, whether that's an earlier less complex type such as the IV or more sophisticated shutter priority version such as the Super B or BC. But I have serviced more later models so perhaps some of my feelings about the ease of working on them stems from the fact I'm simply more used to them.

In any case the unit focus ones are pretty straightforward to reach the shutters of. You pop out the interchangeable front component, remove 3 x screws for the front finish plate (usually engraved with "Contaflex" on it), then, 4 x slot screws will see the lens bayonet plate beneath it come off. The middle lens cell must be extracted before the front of the shutter can be opened up. In the case of the III this first entails removing a small locking screw that locates the cell in the correct rotational position, and secures it. The Rapid and first Super model typically use a small stake with an eccentric head that locks into a machined recess in the cell mount. Usually a toothpick can rotate the head out of the way before the stake is pulled free with tweezers, permitting the cell to be unscrewed from the shutter. Later models from the Super New to the BC/S dispensed with the stake, these simply need to be unfastened, they may be almost finger tight or (insert pejorative) tight, a collet wrench is best applied to avoid damage to the soft mounting cup.

Removing the entire shutter assembly from the body is straighforward, three screws inside the camera, accessed via the film gate fix the shutter/lens to the body. The focus needs to be set to infinity (and left there, until the shutter is re-installed and fastened) and after removal of the screws the shutter is simply withdrawn straight out of the body (clean the mirror before you re-install it). The drive coupling for the shutter (a splined male/female pair on Super and Rapid, dog type couplng on later versions) will disconnect for you as the shutter is extracted. If the model features shutter priority, the drive from the meter is a simple flat blade lever that unslips from a slotted drive key in the body, that alters the degree to which the aperture blades stop down on release, according to how far the meter drive keyway rotates the blade attached to the shutter

All the complicated stuff in the camera that makes the shutter priority work are contained within the body itself. You can actually vary the EV of a light source shining at Eg Super B meter cell, and see the key rotating various amounts as the light level alters without the shutter installed.

Anyway, in nearly every case cleaning and lubricating the shutter and re-installing it in the body will see a Contaflex running well for years to come. OK there are one or two other things worth noting. Mirror damping foam may be crumbling to dust in some cases: remove evidence of this and replace. You don't want to rotate the focus ring with the shutter out of the body--that will likely upset the infinity focus adjustment of the lens if the relative position of the helicals alters. It's easily sidestepped. Carefully mark the helicals for correct replacement if you wish to remove them for cleaning and re-greasing (not a bad idea, unit focus Contaflexes sometimes manifest a little play in the lens/shutter, this is usually nothing more than a need for some fresh grease to pack the threads out with to take up the play). Or you can take a precision measurement of the installed height of the inner helical surface, for accurate replication on re-assembly.

I've seen the odd example with good lens focus that has viewfinder focus a little off. Sorting this entails nothing more than removing the camera back and a small cap screw that seals the adjuster for the mirror stop post. You'll want a slotted driver head to get over the adjuster locknut with which to rotate the peg in or out on its threads, otherwise it's easily reached and fine tuned.

One point that most neophytes overlook is to very slowly and gradually wind on the camera to inspect the relationship between the lens shutter and rear capping plate. The front cell focus models had timing that was so conservative, the only way you could possibly fog the film by having both shutters partially open would be if the body drive was broken. But unit focus versions run pretty close with just a few degrees rotation of the main shaft between full seating of the capping plate and the shutter blades beginning to separate. I've seen a couple of examples that had just enough wear in the drivetrain for pinhole separation of the lens blades to commence before that rear plate has finished seating. Granted, you would probably have to have the lens pointed at the sun before you'd get much if any fogging of your film, but there should be no overlap whatsoever--the only time both shutters should ever be open at the same time is during the actual exposure process. Rectifying the fault is straighforward, there is an eccentric adjuster and lockscrew on the crescent rack inside the mirror box, a little adjustment of this will delay the lens shutter just enough to ensure the capping plate is fully seated, before the leaf shutter blades part.

I suppose the above is quite a list of things to note. But not all examples manifest all these issues, and, if they do, they're neither complex nor time consuming to remedy. Within the body proper the drive gearing is superbly machined and, whilst failures are not unheard of, they are quite unusual. In most cases, the camera will return to proper operation by simply cleaning the shutter and re-installing it. I've done a couple of dozen, perhaps? Other than the occasional faulty meter cell (early Supers seem to be the worst for this), I haven't had many examples I couldn't save without too much effort.
Cheers
Brett

 

[Svenedin]

I also collect old mechanical watches. Immediate immersion in fresh water is a valid way of dealing with a watch that has got wet with sea water BUT the watch must be immediately taken/sent overnight shipping to a watchmaker who can take it apart for cleaning on receipt. The same may be true of cameras but if they contain any electronics then these will be ruined by immersion in water even if they weren't already ruined by the wetting from salt water. So in essence, if it makes the OP feel any better, his camera may have been terminal almost immediately whatever he did but he did not give the camera a chance. I accept he was on a trip at the time but he could have made some phone calls and priority shipped the camera for repair and then he could continue his trip with no more inconvenience than finding a branch of FedEx or whatever. These cameras may be cheap now but clearly it is of great sentimental value to him. If it were me I would keep it as is, not butcher it, and buy another example to use. I am sure his father would be pleased that he was using his gift as intended when the accident happened and any reasonable person knows accidents happen. I remember as a small child crying after I dropped and smashed one of my grandmother's plates. She said "don't be silly dear, if nobody ever broke anything nobody would have any jobs making things".

 

[bernard_L]

So look, I have nothing to lose by trying. Why not think positively and suggest possible solutions???

The problem is water will still be trapped in the camera and it will still corrode.

So, you have a faint hope of resurrecting your Contaflex, but this will require a more complete dis-assembly, to (a) remove any corrosion; (b) thoroughly dry and re-lubricate sparingly and as appropriate. With my own success rate of order of 50% in shutter repair, I won't dare to give detailed technical advice.
But: consider your camera is dead anyway, and that you are doing an autopsy for your education rather than attempt therapeutic surgery: in this mindset, you won't be disappointed.
Last June, I bought a 2nd Super B at a photo fair, as a backup, for 35€. This will protect my investment in pro-tessars, proxars, and those nice Zeiss filters.
@ Brett Rogers: interesting information, thank you. When will you write a comprehensive, illustrated, and definitive guide to Contaflex repair?

 

[louarnold]

@Brett Rogers: Thank you for your kind response.
Well, here is the story so far.
After immersions in several rust removal solutions....no change, still frozen. I probably extracted all the lubricants.
Ah, yes,...the meter display (top left) now has an air bubble in it and so can double as a level indicator...neat!
I have found a repair manual on Ebay (Zeiss Contaflex Super B, Contaflex Super Service & Repair Manual) of 74 pages, but parts are said to be illegible. At CDN $46 for the book and shipping, its too risky. Maybe someone has a manual that they can send for free?
I wonder, how does one take the top half off...the part with the shutter release and prism? The salt water hit that above all and the frozen parts may only be in there. Anyone know?

 

[Svenedin]

I saw this vessel on a recent visit........a bit off topic but relevant (sort of). The pictures below are of the Royal Navy's first commissioned submarine, HMS Holland 1. She was launched in 1901 and sank in 1913 whilst being towed for scrap. She was so obsolete by 1913 that the RN sold her with all her fittings (usually these would be stripped out). She was recovered from the sea bed in 1982 and treated with anti-corrosion chemicals. However, it became clear that she was still corroding and so she had to be placed in a tank of sodium carbonate solution for 4 years to remove chloride ions. 4 years! So it isn't that simple.....

HMS Holland 1 Submarine (1901) #2 (looking forward)

• Svenedin
• Oct 7, 2017
• 4

HMS Holland 1 Submarine (1901) #1 (looking aft)

• Svenedin
• Oct 7, 2017

The Royal Navy's first commissioned submarine. Petro-electric. Sank in 1913 whilst being towed...

HMS Holland 1 Submarine (1901) #3 (propulsion)

• Svenedin
• Oct 7, 2017
• 3

Electric motors. Mice in a cage above to give early warning of a toxic atmosphere (petrol fumes...

HMS Holland 1 Submarine (1901) #4 (propulsion)

• Svenedin
• Oct 7, 2017

Detail of the 160 hp Otto petrol engine. What a terrifying idea to have a petrol engine working...

 

[louarnold]

Wonderful story and great pictures. Your suggestion for sodium carbonate was something I already tried - well, OK, baking soda, in solution for a few hours. No luck, I'm afraid. Its a a fragment more evidence that the shutter is intact and the winding mechanism is in fact the frozen part.

I managed to remove a couple of items off the camera - the shutter release button itself and the number plate that is right under that. The button came off with a simple CCW turn using a piece of inner tube (something thin, flexible and not slippery). That suggestion came from here (http://camarasclassicas.blogspot.ca/2011/02/contaflex-iv-repair.html) and here (https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133318). See the posts by Brett Rogers.

 

[louarnold]

Just a short report....
I tried several paths to dismantling the camera, but came to a dead end each time. I noted that some ferrous metals were definitely rusted and copper parts were blackened. Some aluminum parts certainly were roughened by corrosion. I lost springs and screws several times, but retrieved them using a magnetic pickup. That took up a lot of time.

I got tired and carefully replaced what I had layed out, but it would have been good to video the removal process to make re-assembly easier. Some parts of the shutter assembly came off suddenly and quickly, and re-alignment became a guess. Only proper instructions would solve that. Sadly, some controls became even tighter after re-assembly. I'm reluctant to tackle it again.

Its clear that one needs a good work space. I would almost recommend a box closed on 4 sides to work in, but for a lack of light. The work surface should be soft and dull (not shiny) so you can see small pieces. Arrange for some covering that doesn't allow things to bounce. That applies to the floor as well. Keep away from open containers or the small things will fall or bounce into them and wind up under the contents. Some screws are very small and must be handled by tweezers. If your grip is poor, your eyesight is poor, or your hands jitter, don't try this.

 

[Ces1um]

Just a short report....
I tried several paths to dismantling the camera, but came to a dead end each time. I noted that some ferrous metals were definitely rusted and copper parts were blackened. Some aluminum parts certainly were roughened by corrosion. I lost springs and screws several times, but retrieved them using a magnetic pickup. That took up a lot of time.

I got tired and carefully replaced what I had layed out, but it would have been good to video the removal process to make re-assembly easier. Some parts of the shutter assembly came off suddenly and quickly, and re-alignment became a guess. Only proper instructions would solve that. Sadly, some controls became even tighter after re-assembly. I'm reluctant to tackle it again.

Its clear that one needs a good work space. I would almost recommend a box closed on 4 sides to work in, but for a lack of light. The work surface should be soft and dull (not shiny) so you can see small pieces. Arrange for some covering that doesn't allow things to bounce. That applies to the floor as well. Keep away from open containers or the small things will fall or bounce into them and wind up under the contents. Some screws are very small and must be handled by tweezers. If your grip is poor, your eyesight is poor, or your hands jitter, don't try this.

Proper training helps too.

 

[summicron1]

actual camera repair people typically work with all the bits and pieces and the camera itself on a towel or some other cloth to prevent bouncing. In my few attempts I did that also, and it helped. Sadly, I lack the patience and manual dexterity to fix anything more complex than an Argus C-3.

 

[Brett Rogers]

So, you have a faint hope of resurrecting your Contaflex, but this will require a more complete dis-assembly, to (a) remove any corrosion; (b) thoroughly dry and re-lubricate sparingly and as appropriate. With my own success rate of order of 50% in shutter repair, I won't dare to give detailed technical advice.
But: consider your camera is dead anyway, and that you are doing an autopsy for your education rather than attempt therapeutic surgery: in this mindset, you won't be disappointed.
Last June, I bought a 2nd Super B at a photo fair, as a backup, for 35€. This will protect my investment in pro-tessars, proxars, and those nice Zeiss filters.
@ Brett Rogers: interesting information, thank you. When will you write a comprehensive, illustrated, and definitive guide to Contaflex repair?

Well, I suppose that is sort of a vote of confidence, Bernard, so thank you for your suggestion, but I think such a publication might be a rather slow seller, because there do not seem to be very many people interested in using a Contaflex in 2017, which I still struggle to comprehend.

Notwithstanding the undeniable limitations on minimum focus distance, lens speed, and maximum shutter speed imposed by installing a lens shutter, Zeiss Ikon still had some pretty good reasons for going with Deckel's new reflex Synchro Compur shutter (that was, in fact, originally prototyped by Victor Hasselblad's engineers). This was the era before the introduction of instant return reflex mirrors. SLRs with fabric curtains were not immune to sun damage. And tapering and capping problems could occur with even the best brands of 35mm cameras equipped with focal plane shutter curtains. And flash sync beyond 1/60, at best, for the new electronic flash tubes that were being released just didn't exist in the 1950s FP SLRs. The Contaflex kicked any other SLRs butt for its sync ability when it was released (and it is still better than some brand new cameras sync specifications today, for that matter).

Users of more modern focal plane shutter designs forget these points today. In the context of the times, using a super reliable and sun proof Compur shutter that would never taper or burn, made a great deal of sense. It's also the reason why, over sixty years after they were manufactured, a Contaflex can often be made to work as new again with precisely zero replacement components, just some cleaning and lubrication of the mechanism (dodgy selenium cells excepted, in some cases, but that is hardly the domain only of a metered SLR). Something you can't say about Leica, Exakta, ALPA or most other designs that employed a cloth shutter.

The Contaflex series also sold very well. The best part of a million of them were made. all models included. Their Contarex series may have been the glamour models for Zeiss at the time, but they were horrendously expensive to manufacture. Personally, I suspect the success of the Contaflexes was a significant factor in why ZI kept going throughout the late 1950s and 1960s for as long as they did.

But few observers today seem capable of assessing the merits and disadvantages of a lens shutter SLR in the context under which they were developed and sold. A revisionist (and partly inaccurate) interpretation of camera technology has the lens shutter SLR written off as a complex, evolutionary dead end, that was a bad idea when it was new, which offered no advantages over a focal plane design, and was complex and unreliable to boot. Notwithstanding that this conveniently overlooks the medium format designs that did so well with lens shutters, it's factually inaccurate in many cases.

Yes, the focal plane shutter eventually became super reliable, and instant return mirrors greatly minimised the possibility of sun damage to curtains. And there were, undeniably, some cheaper leaf shutter SLRs that have not stood the test of time very well. Most of the Japanese efforts spring to mind, (though I'd happily take a punt on a Fujicarex if I spot one at the right price).

But the Contaflex and Bessamatic (to a slightly lesser extent) remain two beautifully made, high quality cameras capable of truly excellent results on film in 2017. Few people would think twice about cleaning the Compur shutter of an immaculate Rolleiflex in 2017 if it needed it: but somehow, that very similar, overall, shutter, when installed into a Contaflex, becomes an unreliable diva that can never be trusted to work correctly.

Yet, as I've previously outlined, there's not as much additional complexity as most people think in the reflex versions, and it's rarely those particular parts that are troublesome anyway. The shutters just get gooey and stick like any other leaf shutter that needs some servicing. But you can't tell people that. They've been told that these complicated cameras are never reliable, and exceptionally hard to work on. And that, apparently, is that.

So I've given up trying to explain to people that the Contaflexes are solid, reliable cameras, Bernard. I like using mine, and encourage others to do so when they're like-minded, and do my best to help. But I've got a number of projects of my own I'd like to get running again at the moment. An ALPA 7 & 50mm Switar (I like focal plane shutters as well as leaf shutters too). A Varex IIb Exakta to complement my IIa. An immaculate Contaflex III I've never had time to strip and clean, but really should. A second version Super that has been messed with, and has a damaged mirror drive (fairly unusual). A lovely Contax D SLR, early version, that I've had for years and would rather like to shoot with. And another one I'm replacing the curtains of for a friend. I don't have time for all of these projects, let alone writing a repair manual for a camera most people don't want to use, in the first place. But if you have any problems with your own, Bernard, you're welcome to get in touch, and I'll do my best to help.
Cheers,
Brett

 

[Brett Rogers]

@Brett Rogers: Thank you for your kind response.
Well, here is the story so far.
After immersions in several rust removal solutions....no change, still frozen. I probably extracted all the lubricants.
Ah, yes,...the meter display (top left) now has an air bubble in it and so can double as a level indicator...neat!
I have found a repair manual on Ebay (Zeiss Contaflex Super B, Contaflex Super Service & Repair Manual) of 74 pages, but parts are said to be illegible. At CDN $46 for the book and shipping, its too risky. Maybe someone has a manual that they can send for free?
I wonder, how does one take the top half off...the part with the shutter release and prism? The salt water hit that above all and the frozen parts may only be in there. Anyone know?

Lou,
I've got that manual, I purchased it several years ago simply because it was available, and, if I have an interest in working on a particular model, particularly on more than one occasion, I believe in acquiring whatever reference material is available that is not extortionately priced.

I actually pulled my copy out today to refresh my recollections, and as I suspected, the text is actually all perfectly legible. What is compromised is the reproduction of a number of the original photographs in the manual. They are not all unusable, but it seems the original manual that was copied was poorly scanned, because some of the images are extremely contrasty with detail that's very hard or impossible to discern. Given a decent original I'm certain I could have done a much better job of scanning it myself.

I still have no hesitation in recommending it, because it contans much useful information about the specifications of the various models, parts compatibility or non-compatibility between them, some basic assembly measurements and clearances and other helpful details. And some of the images are still good enough to interepret. The seller in question (without doubt, the same eBay seller I bought my copy from) is just being ethical, by advising that there are some parts of the document that are sub-standard. But it's still a helpful reference document that is worth obtaining if you are thinking of acquiring an example of the Contaflex in better condition to service and use.
Cheers,
Brett

 

[Louis Nargi]

I read a long time ago about salt water contamination and put it into a fresh water bath could have save the camera, but the next step send it out immediately for repair.