Voigtländer Superb Heliar, missing element?

[VisualDarkness]

I'm devastated right now, my new Superb seems to be a very expensive paper weight.
I developed my first test roll and realized something was very wrong. There was absolutely no sharpness in any of the pics, not even the ones at infinity F8-F11, and blur looked really weird.

After checking with tape I noticed that the focusing was extremely off, a lamp close to me was getting closer to focus at infinity but still a blur.

Then I inspected the lens closer and realized that the Heliar seems to lack the rear group. Anybody who can confirm?

 

[gone]

Yep, that does not look right. Just to be sure, turn it over and shine a flash light into the lens and look for the reflections of the light. There should be 5. I'm betting you only see 3. That's really too bad, as the Heliars on all the Voigtlanders are superb (sorry!). Hopefully you can send it back for a full refund. You could hunt up a rear element for it, but they are not exactly common.

 

[VisualDarkness]

I see six reflections, three on either side when from an angle. That sounds about right with six air to glass surfaces. The Heliar was what sold it to me, they are indeed superb! Half a Heliar? Not so much.

Yeah, I contacted the seller and we'll see how this goes, an anti-climax after craving a Superb for so long. Hunting down a rear section for the Heliar would most likely mean another camera for the same price, it just don't make sense. If there was a broken one with a Heliar on Ebay or similar then maybe but I haven't seen one.

 

[Dan Fromm]

VD, you seem to have a focusing problem, not a lens problem. I have a heliar type 105/3.7 Ektar ready to hand and asked it whether its rear group (a cemented doublet) or its front cell (center group, a singlet, and front group, a cemented doublet) could form an image. No. Your lens forms an image.

Check that the focusing screen is in the right place and oriented correctly (ground side facing the mirror) and that focus in the film plane coincides with focus on the ground glass. It is possible that the taking and viewing lenses are out of synchronization or that one of them has been replaced. Remember, they have to be a matched pair and having the same focal length engraved doesn't guarantee a match.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

It's possible the focusing mechanism has been assembled incorrectly, too, I had one of these a long time ago so I don't recall the details but it's worth checking. The lens looks complete.

 

[VisualDarkness]

You may be right, I got no real idea but another guy told me that one group is missing in the last lens threads. Anybody who got a Superb with a Heliar?
I shot test shots also at a small aperture around infinity just to take the screen out of the equation and that is just as blurry. I also also shot at 0.8m with both foreground and background but that's just complete blur too. Only really a really bad synchronization or a lens fault left as a possibility left as a possibility. As each frame of the film got razor sharp edges I doubt it's a processing or film advance thing.

 

[VisualDarkness]

It's possible the focusing mechanism has been assembled incorrectly, too, I had one of these a long time ago so I don't recall the details but it's worth checking. The lens looks complete.

That's a relief if that's the case. I'm was going to get a repairman to check it out tomorrow and was devastated after getting a feeling and an answer that it wasn't complete as that means I was out of luck.

I may have to send the seller a very apologetic message.

 

[VisualDarkness]

I checked it again and you guys might be correct. My computerscreen 0.8m was looking decenently sharp on the "focusing screen" at about 0.1-0.15m away. Infinity is at about 0.35m.

 

[VisualDarkness]

VD, you seem to have a focusing problem, not a lens problem. I have a heliar type 105/3.7 Ektar ready to hand and asked it whether its rear group (a cemented doublet) or its front cell (center group, a singlet, and front group, a cemented doublet) could form an image. No. Your lens forms an image.

I did the experiment with a Bergheil and a Heliar 105/3.5, and true, it just made a white blob no matter the distance or bellows extension.

 

[VisualDarkness]

I just came up with something interesting. When cleaning the camera I found it weird that when at close focus the lens/shutter side of the taking lens helicoid came out of the housing quite far. I guess it shouldn't be?

As of now the inner helicoid is protruding out from the shutter housing by 3-4mm at 0.8m. If the focusing is synced about 1cm too far out it would explain why it is stuck in "macro"

Edit. Checking video clips they all have the same look the focusing.

 

[VisualDarkness]

I unscrewed the front group that one splits in two groups. After that comes the aperture and behind it the one or two last lenses (can't see). As the infinity setting seems to be closer than the supposed to be minimum focus I can't see how it's an error with the helicoid, the lens seems like the main question mark in my eyes.

 

[gone]

You're right, 5 elements, but 6 air spaces. My mistake. Still, looking at that photo that you posted of the lens, it sure looks like there's the rear group missing. But maybe not. Strangely, I actually have a Voigtlander TLR w/ a Heliar lens coming tomorrow or the next day in the post, but my camera is a Brillant, and the lens design is surely different than yours.

 

[Dan Fromm]

You're right, 5 elements, but 6 air spaces.

Five elements in three groups. Two air spaces. Six air-glass interfaces (is that what you were thinking of?) so six bright reflections, of which four from one cell and two from the other. Two glass-cement-glass interfaces so two dim reflections, one from each of the outer groups.

 

[VisualDarkness]

I've been chatting with Frank Marshman and he also seems to think that something have been tinkered with when it comes to the lenses, but he suspects the the two front groups. Sadly I'm mechanically stuck there so I can't switch the glass around the way he guesses.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Frank did a complete refurb on my Superb, including a brighter fresnel focusing screen. I sold it eventually, realizing I just wasn't a TLR guy.

 

[VisualDarkness]

Frank did a complete refurb on my Superb, including a brighter fresnel focusing screen. I sold it eventually, realizing I just wasn't a TLR guy.

This is my first TLR and one I longed for since seeing it the first time. Sadly so far it's a lemon.

 

[DannL.]

Have you tried this . . . by placing a simulated focus screen across the back of the camera at the focal plane you can make visual adjustments and tests of the taking lens. Something as simple as a piece of matte scotch tape, or a sheet of matte plastic will work fine.

 

[VisualDarkness]

Yeah, that is the exact method I've used. I first used tape to check the focal plane and then tested moving a real mattescreen further into the camera to check if I could find 0.8m at 0.8m. I estimate that the plane of focus is about 1cm inside the camera.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Yeah, that is the exact method I've used. I first used tape to check the focal plane and then tested moving a real mattescreen further into the camera to check if I could find 0.8m at 0.8m. I estimate that the plane of focus is about 1cm inside the camera.

I'd say it's likely someone reassembled it incorrectly, either the focusing mounts and/or lens elements. Possibly a single element reversed.

 

[VisualDarkness]

I hope that is the issue and not that something have gotten switched out badly

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I hope that is the issue and not that something have gotten switched out badly

The trouble is, when the butchers get a hold of something anything is possible.I recently paid a premium for a 1936 Contax II that has had maybe 100 rolls through it and has never been worked on. It needs a complete overhaul, but it's never been messed with.

 

[VisualDarkness]

The two front groups looks correct in my eyes but I can't really judge the rearmost one. I wonder what would happen and if it's possible to mount heliar parts in a skopar body or vice versa? Or maybe if the front and back groups isn't a matched pair?

 

[VisualDarkness]

As an update it now is at the repair shop but he is as confounded as I'm now, the lens simple can't focus. It is as if got wrong elements or something.

 

[VisualDarkness]

Frank Marshman has tried to do everything with the lens but something is mismatched with the elements.

"Hi Sorry I haven't gotten back to you. I've also been on ebay looking. I pulled the shutter assembly and checked the lens and can find no SrN on the rear element. Again, none of this makes any sense unless the cells are mismatched. My answer is that if you want this camera to work you need to find a set of lenses that are matched so if there is one that is not too crazy in price go for it. The camera is ready, cleaned, shutter adjusted and focusing well. Just need glass."

Now I need to source replacement glass at a reasonable cost incl shipping. That won't be that easy.

 

[VisualDarkness]

I got the Superb back from the CLA and it now got "downgraded" with a hopefully working Skopar now instead, the joy!
I now got one and a half Superb as the spare body basically only needs a working lens now. I got the Heliar in pieces with but I can't seed what's wrong a all, the poor fella must have been butchered badly a mix of elements.

Voigtländer Superb Brillant by Andreas Sundell, on Flickr