Related Local Links:
LF on a Microbudget
MF on a Budget
LF Lenses
Homebrew Lenses Pages
Trailing Flash Synch for Leaf Shutters
Packard Shutter Pages
you wrote:
>Richard Knoppow wrote: >> Solenoids are easy to adjust with an oscilloscope and are quite reliable >>although a shutter with built-in synchronizer is better. I will explain how >>to do this via private e-mail for anyone interested. > >I am curious, Richard. I have a late Automat III and I have a Heiland >solenoid, though I lack the proper bracket to connect the two, a matter of >minor fabrication in my (hah!) spare time. But can I goose the solenoid to >provide X synch? If so, how? > >This is a proper List topic, in my (autocratic?) opinion, incidentally. > >Marc > >msmall@roanoke.infi.net
No, the design of the solenoid is such that it has a time delay. The
delay is adjustable over a narrow range by mechanical means but it will be
approximately 20 milliseconds. The delay has to do with the magnetic
circuit so is not something which can be changed.
The idea of the scope is to use the one-shot capability. Set the sweep
rate so that 20 milliseconds is somewhere near the center of the screen,
you might want to mark the point with a grease pencil. The scope trigger
is tripped by the voltage which actuates the bulb and solenoid. Set the
shutter for its fastest time and look through it at the scope trace. You
will probably want to take the lens cells out. You can tell from the
position of the trace on the screen what the delay is. Adjust the solenoid
to get at 20 ms exactly. Check the shutter at slower speeds to make sure
the trip point is still approximately centered.
If you have a shutter with "X" synch it can be hooked up to provide a
pulse to the vertical deflection of the scope. That will give a pulse at
the point where the blades are just wide open. The visual method works
well and is applicable to non-synch shutters. The same arrangement can be
used for checking synch shutters. The trigger pulse is gotten from the
synch terminals using a battery. Look at the trace through the shutter
when tripping it. The position of the trace indicates the flash delay.
Delay for Class-F should be 5 milliseconds, Class-M, 20 milliseconds.
Since the flash is fired before the shutter is opened none of these will
work for strobe no matter what the shutter speed is. However, Class-F
flash lamps can be used on X shutters at slower speeds where the shutter
stays open long enough for the lamp to peak. However, you loose he ability
to vary the exposure with shutter speed.
Nearly any Compur or Compound shutter can be modified for X synch since
there is usually an accessible part of the blade actuating mechanism to
operate a contact at maximum opening. You need a really good shutter tech
to do this mod. I've seen some non synch Rolleis were the flash connector
was installed in place of the cable release socket. There is probably a
better way.
It seems to me that someone with some electronic skill could make a
delay device to work with M-F shutters. It would delay the strobe trigger
for the required amount. I've not investigated this but suspect it would
be very simple.
---- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles,Ca. dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Notes:
From Modern Photography, April 1982, p. 87, How to do the Impossible by
Andrew Davidhazy...
A set of mirrors, arranged in a semi-circle, such as 10 mirrors, each 2x4" can be used
to shoot sequences at very high shutter speed equivalents. The trick is to shoot with
a focal plane shutter at highest speed (e.g., 1/1000th second). As the shutter travels
left to right, it progressively exposes different mirror's views of the event. The
event could be a drop of blue dyed milk hitting a bowl of white milk, so the drop is
shown at various stages of the event. Unlike strobe shots of different drops at different
times (due to varying the delay), this layout will provide shots of the one event at
much higher speed shutter equivalents (though on small part of film to be enlarged).
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: [Rollei] Rolleiflex original and 620 film?
you wrote:
>-----Original Message----- >> It would be neat to get this old timer working. The mirror can be >>replaced or resilvered. If the lenses have become hazy inside they can be >>opened with a friction tool and cleaned and old Compur shutters usually >>respond to a cleaning. >> Slower Tessars tend to be better than faster ones so likely the lens in >>this guy is good and sharp. >>---- >>Richard Knoppow > > >Thanks for the info. Actually, the lenses of the camera are surprisingly >clear. The Compur is also still functioning at settings. It probably has >been cleaned not really long ago. >First, I had the impression that the 1/300th may be broken but it turned out >that you need to turn it pretty hard to get it into that position. Probably >a booster spring that need to be tensioned. What I still need to do is to >synchronize the viewing lens with the taking lens. It's now possible to >focus beyond infinity, which I think it's not right. Without the plate film >adapter, it's a kinda awkward thing to do since there is now way to mount it >on a tripod or so. But I'll soon give it a try. > >Siu Fai
There is a booster spring which is partially compressed by the speed
cam, so you will feel it when moving the speed ring to the highest speed.
True of most Compur shutters.
This is why the speed should not be changed when the shutter is cocked,
its really only the top speed which is the problem. If the shutter is
cocked you put a lot of stress on the parts involved and there is a chance
of forcing the end of the spring under the speed cam.
If this camera is like somewhat later ones the lock screws for the
finder lens are accessible on the outside of the camera making adjustment
easy. Check the position of the ground glass before adjusting anything.
Getting the taking lens set for infinity is a pain in old Rolleis which
have three or four little coupled gears working screws which move the
front. Tedious.
I have 1936 vintage Rollei, a real beater but works fine and is sharp.
I've not completely restored it because I need parts I can't find.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Packard Shutters
andermar@teleport.com (Mark Anderson) wrote:
>I've seen reference to Packard Shutters here, apparently as something to >mount a non-shuttered lens on. What exactly are these things? How >versatile are they. Are they something available new, or just used? > >-- >Mark Anderson
Micheal Brigs posted the web site. The illustrations there will make
clear what these are.
Packard shutters date in design from about 1870 although the Packard
name is not that old.
Shutters in general began to make their appearance when dry plates
were introduced. They were much faster than wet plates so that it was
no longer satisfactory to control exposure by using a lens cap (or
hat). There were an enormous number of shutter designs proposed, but
only a few survived.
The Packard type shutter is very simple, consisting of three blades
operated by simple levers. For instantaneous exposures there is a
simple toggle mechanism. Depending on the size of the shutter, and the
strength of your hand, the speed is somewhere around 1/15th sec. for
larger shutters to 1/25th for smaller ones.
Packard shutters can be built in quite large sizes so could be used
with some of the old time portrait lenses.
Some are equipped with a flash contact but its easy to mount a
microswitch so that it is actuated by the air cylinder.
Packard shutters were quite plentiful and cheap on the used market
for a time but the supply started to dry up about three years ago and
I rarely see them now at the local photo sales.
New Packard shutters are cheaper than full mechanical shutters but I
don't think they can be called cheap any longer.
A useful item is a large Packard shutter with flash contacts mounted
on a lens board with an adaptor for smaller lens boards or an iris
clamp. That way a single shutter can be used for any number of lenses.
Hub still sells bits and pieces for Packard shutters. If you find
one minus the Bulb/Instantaneous pin you can get a new assembly from
Hub for not much. They also have air bulbs and fittings. Hose is
cheaper from the auto parts supply store, its just vacuume hose.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001
From: Michael Briggs MichaelBriggs@EarthLink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Packard Shutters
Mark Anderson wrote:
> Are they something available new, or just used?
Both. New from:
http://www.hubphoto.com/photographic-products.htm
From Rollei Mailing List;
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Prontor shutter
you wrote:
>I was perusing through the "75 Years" book and saw one >of the prototypes that had a Prontor shutter that went to >1/1000th sec. This was in 1969 when they were also testing >the CdS meter cells. I wonder why they didn't end up using >the newer shutter technology? The book described that at >the time, the shutter was only available in 00 size so they >couldn't have a lens wider then f/3.5. BTW, it's the bottom >camera on page 144 if anyone's wondering. This just stood >out for me as some great technology for its time.
I can't address the Prontor shutter specifically but there were two well
known attempts at high speed mechanical shutters in the US, the Kodak 800
and the Graflex 1000 used on Super Speed Graphics. Both had poor
reliability due to stress on internal parts. Its possible the Graflex
shutter could be made more reliable by replacing certain parts which were
made of plastic with metal. Another problem is that it takes a pretty
strong motor to get these speeds. Most slower shutters really are a bit of
a fraud at their top speeds. The Synchro-Compur used on Rolleis and
Hasselblads is marked to 1/500th. Actually, its around 1/350th, the marked
speed being the _effective_ exposure speed with the lens wide open. The
shutter efficiency is not very good at its highest speed.
Aerial camera shutters are operated by fairly large electric motors so
can have true speeds of around 1/400th even for small apertures, and
better efficiency, but they are very large and heavy compared to shutters
for the same size lenses on other cameras.
I suspect that a leaf shutter with 1/1000th sec and good efficiency
could be made but would be expensive and perhaps heavy.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From ROllei Mailing List;
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Prontor shutter
you wrote:
>Richard: > >Do you have any information on the effective speeds of PQ and PQS >shutters on the Rollei 6008 system? These lenses/shutters are expensive, >large, and heavy. I'd like to know if anything from 1/500th and up can >be trusted. > >Thanks...
I don't. You can measure the total open time easily. Use the little
shutter tester sold by Calumet, about $80 US last time I looked.
No mechanical shutter will have 100% efficiency at any speed since it
takes the blades a finite time to open and close. For most modern high
speed shutters the opening and closing times are about 1/2000th each. The
effective time is measured at the half open points for the size of
aperature involved. Marked speeds are for the full open apertur of the
shutter. The idea is that mostly the lens will be wide open when the
highest speed is used.
For most shutters the efficiency is around 80%. Of course, for small
openings the opening and closing times become a smaller part of the total
open time, effectively the efficiency goes up so the speed is slower. The
main thing is to know what it is and whether its consistent. Even old
Compur shutters are pretty consistent although the highest speed may never
have been more than wishful thinking.
The service manual for the Synchro-Compur used in Rollei E's and F's
gives a speed of around 1/380 as the target speed for 1/500th when
measuring total open time.
For slower speeds the error becomes much less since the opening and
closing times remain constant.
I will plug this little shutter tester again. Its a bargain especially
if you have older cameras or lenses or want to work on them. Its quite
accurate and will also measure strobe duration time. It can be used to
measure effective time for focal plane shutters and, actually, for leaf
shutters too but you must set the thing up so that its getting a focused
beam of light exactly twice the threashold point.
The instructions show how to do this for focal plane shutters, sort of.
The last meaning that the efficiency of a focal plane shutter depends on
the ratio of the slit width to the distance of the shutter from the focal
plane and the angle of the cone of light from the lens so its not easy to
measure exactly although it can be calculated.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From Rollei Mailing List;
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
> From: "mark blackman" mark.blackman1@btinternet.com > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 > Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com > >> If these are electronically regulated shutters they may very well vary >> the speed with the iris setting to keep the effective speed the same. > > Surely whether a shutter's spead is regulated by springs etc or by > electronics they are still mechanical devices? Does anyone know whether > anyone has looked at using purely electronic methods, maybe using LCD > technology?
All shutters used in the cameras we can buy are mechanical to one extent
or another. Rollei is the only maker using electrically driven shutter
blades (unless Bronica's very vague statements about the shutter in their
RF 645 lenses really means they are electrically driven) in current
production. Konica used this in the original Hexar, but was only able
to coax 1/200 second from their version.
The solid state shutter, whether LCD or some other technology, has been a
dream of camera designers for years. The main advantage would be complete
lack of shutter vibration. I've seen prototypes of LCD shutters (and LCD
diaphragms!) a number of times, but always there have been three serious
problems with them. They are not clear enough when "open", not black
enough when "closed", and not optically neutral in light transmission.
So far no one has solved these problems.
There are some high speed LCD shutters available for research purposes and
high speed photography, but they cost thousands of dollars and are too big
to be practical in hand held cameras. They also require an external power
supply weighing several pounds.
We may see a solid state shutter one day, but I don't think it will be
soon.
Bob
From Rollei Mailing List;
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001
From: Laurence Cuffe Laurence.Cuffe@ucd.ie
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
>From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com > >> If these are electronically regulated shutters they may very well vary >> the speed with the iris setting to keep the effective speed the same. > >Surely whether a shutter's spead is regulated by springs etc or by >electronics they are still mechanical devices? Does anyone know whether >anyone has looked at using purely electronic methods, maybe using LCD >technology?
Its called a kerr shutter. Bob has outlined some of the problems
while I was writing this but if you want really fast its the only way to
go. The power supply is generally big because for really fast you
need high voltage, and the faster you change a high voltage the
more power you need. Current speeds are around 240 fs. or say a
frame rate of 2.5 Thz for the shutter, Though in that paper they
were not using it for photography.
all the best Larry
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
> From: "Philippe Tempel" ptempel@home.com > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 > Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds > > Interesting technology. It sounds like it should theoretically be > more efficient than most mechanical shutters. I wonder if the > power draw would be more feasible if you only needed it to > operate up to 1/1000th or 1/4000th of a second. There would > be no shake from the camera if you designed a rangefinder or > TLR around this shutter. Now if my hands were only as rock > steady...
Many of the major camera makers have prototyped cameras using LCD
shutters and shown them as "trial balloons" at photokina. All of
the ones I have seen would require a big external power supply.
It would be like going back to the days when electronic flash had
those big things you had to hang on your belt.
One idea even used a semi-silvered mirror which also was the shutter.
No vibration at all from that puppy.
Bob
From Rollei Mailing List;
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
you wrote:
>> Rollei is the only maker using electrically driven shutter >> blades (unless Bronica's very vague statements about the shutter in their >> RF 645 lenses really means they are electrically driven) in current >> production. > >What about focal plane shutter cameras that are electronically driven?
This is done in some aerial cameras. Depending on how you qualify the
answer they are also nearly universal in motion picture cameras
(electrically driven ones, that is). Nearly universal because some
shutterless cameras have been made. These use rotating prisms of various
sorts. One very widely used shutterless camera was devised for ABC News
and used by them for several years until replaced by electonic cameras. I
have drawn an absolute blank on the name of the manufacturer.
----R
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:57:33 -0700
From: Richard Knoppow
you wrote:
Various sorts of non-mechanical shutters have been developed, mostly for
scientific research use. Kerr cell shutters are often used for very high
speed photography and for other uses where light must be modulated. I
don't know of any attempts of a commercial shutter of this type for normal
cameras, but I am not a specialist and wouldn't be surprized of someone
else does. One problem with Kerr cell shutters is that they are fairly
thick, meaning they will affect the optical properties of the optical
system if they are not used in a collimated beam.
I find it curious that no one has written a history of shutters. They
are mentioned in passing by Kingslake and others, but there doesn't seem
to be a definitive history of them.
Shutters began to be used about the time dry plates began to supplant
wet plates because of the much increased sensitivity. There are an
enormous number of variations and permutations of the theme. The "modern"
clock-work regulator was invented by Theodore Bruck, one of the founders
of Ilex, around 1910, and that company made much of its revenue from
royalties while the patents were in effect.
----
From Rollei Mailing List;
The semi silvered mirror deflects part of the total amount of light,
leaving the remaining light to go through and strike the film. When the
LDC is blacked out, most of the light is reflected in the finder. When the
LCD is clear, most of the light passes through to the film.
The rangefinder uses a semi silvered mirror in the eye piece to allow you
to see forward and at the same time to see a reflection from the prism at
the other end or the RF
Andrei D. Calciu
From Rollei Mailing List;
Yes it is the speed requirement. The LCD used in a watch has a response
time of about 1/20 second (just look at the tenths of seconds display on a
LCD stopwatch). As with most things higher speed means disproportionately
higher power.
Richard
From Rollei Mailing List;
In the grand scheme of things calculators operate at VERY low speeds,
hence the ability to operate with tiny batteries. Notice that on the
basic LCD calculator you can actually see the LCD elements darkening as
the numbers kind of ripple across the display. Use in a shutter would
require that they go from blackest black to clear to blackest black in the
period the shutter is set to, say 1/1,000th of a second. Making things
change that quickly is what requires power. Plus, of course, the
microcontroller running the show would need to be a bit quicker and that,
too, requires more power. Argh, still no free lunch!
Best Regards,
...
[Ed. note: a reminder that speed of focal plane shutters is same, just the
slit width is reduced...]
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001
Actually, it would move 16 inches. The duration of the shutter being open
is roughly the X-synch speed of the camera (1/250 in this case).
However, any one point on the frame is only exposed to light for 1/8000
sec. The film is only exposed to a narrow slit but it takes 1/250 sec.
for the entire frame to receive its total exposure to light (longer in the
case of cameras with slower x-synchs). There were some bizarre
slanted-looking photographs of race cars shot in the infancy of
focal-plane shutters that illustrate this quite clearly.
Jim
From Rollei Mailing List;
you wrote:
The motors are springs. Some shutters use helical springs (like a screen
door), some use spriral springs, like a clock motor. The maximum speed is
dependant on the strength of the spring (along with the mass of the moving
parts). Self-setting shutters require you to compress the spring when you
press the shutter release. If the spring is made too strong it becomes
difficult to trip the shutter, espeically without disturbing the camera,
so most of these shutters are limited to rather slow speeds.
Cockable shutters work at higher speeds, but there is a limit on how big
a spring motor is practical and how hard to cock the shutter is.
Another factor, and maybe a more important one, is the amount of stess
on the moving parts. Even though the moving mass is minimised the
acceleration and deceleration is considerable and the forces are large. As
I mentioned, the Graflex 1000 shutter fails because it has plastic parts
(Nylon in think) as pivots for the shutter leaves, which follow an
eliptical path. These shutters don't stay working for very long,
especially if the top speed is used much.
I don't know the failure mode of the Kodak 800 shutter but they have a
bad reputation for reliability. OTOH, the Kodak Supermatic is a nearly
bulletproof shutter but suffers from spring fatigue. Springs are not made
weaker by being left compressed or expanded but do become weakened by
metal fatigue from being worked many times. Leaving a shutter cocked is
not so much bad for its springs as it can put a lot of force on very small
parts.
----
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001
Some of the older Compur Rapid shutters were indeed stepless shutters. I
have a 1939 book called "The Rollei Book" that states that intermediate
speeds were allowed between 1 second to 1/10 second and between 1/25
second and 1/250 second. No intermediate speeds are availabe between 1/10
second to 1/25 second and between 1/250 second to 1/500 second. Also,
some of the Autocords with Citizen shutters were stepless and the
instruction books even mention intermediate speed settings being allowed.
karl
"Norm Fleming" NFleming@ms.UManitoba.CA wrote
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001
aardor@optonline.net wrote:
Its made by Ilex. Acme is their trade-name for settable shutters.
Their double-action shutters are called Universal.
These are decent shutters, found on a lot of large lenses. Ilex
invented the clock-work escapement for slow speed regulation along
about 1912 and lived on the patent royalties for decades afterward.
The company was started by a couple of alumni from Bausch & Lomb who
devised the regulator but didn't want to give it to B&L.; The company
was originally called Excell, but Goerz already used a similar name
for a shutter, so the founders reversed the name (XL to LX) and called
the company Ilex. Acme was originally a lens making company. It was
aquired by Ilex sometime in the late teens or early twenties at which
point they started making lenses as well as shutters. The name lives
on in the Acme shutter.
Ilex was also the first company to make shutters with built-in flash
synchronization, about 1946 or 47.
Of course, any flash synch shutter can be used without flash. The
synch part simply provides a means for setting off a flash bulb or
strobe so that the shutter is completely open when the light from the
flash is at its peak.
In fact, if you don't cock the synchronizer in the Acme it simply
does nothing.
There is some description and a couple of photographs of larger Ilex
shutters on Steve Grimes's web page at http://www.skgrimes.com
My experience with Ilex shutters is that they are practically
bulletproof although not always very accurate. Steve Grimes thinks the
very early ones, with the small speed setting dial at the top, are
dogs and should be avoided. Later rim set types can all be brought
back to life.
A caution. The shutter and iris diaphragm leaves in many Ilex
shutters are made of hard rubber (Ebonite) which melts at relatively
low heat. If you clean one _do not_ try to accelerate drying with
heat, you will melt the thing. This is the voice of experience
speaking.:-(
Ilex built a tremendous mumber of lenses under contract for other
manufacturers. Many home movie projectors have Ilex lenses as many low
price cameras. They could be excellent lenses when required to as the
Calumet Caltars prove. I have several late Paragon tessar types for LF
cameras. They are not up to the Kodak Ektar and could have better
flare baffling but are nonetheless very good lenses.
Ilex also made a line of projection lenses for motion picture
theaters and many special types under government contract.
The company was aquired by Meles-Girot (sp?) several years ago, who
was interested mainly in the lens manufacturing end and discontinued
the shutter line completely.
--- From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow) When a len is remounted a couple of things need attention. One very
The cost of a new shutter and the often extensive hand work required
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 The way the release magnets work is this. There is a permanent magnet Bob Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001
I couldn't find a photo of a Copal electronic shutter in my
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Rollei] help with MX instructions
you wrote:
>I have an Automat MX (1251441) and have downloaded the instruction book as
>posted by Siu Fai (thanks!). I'm still a bit perplexed by the exposure
>table on the back of my camera, which doesn't seem to be adequately
>addressed in the manual. The table has rows labeled (top to bottom)
>f/22-f/2.8, and columns (R to L) labeled 1-8. There is also an icon on the
>table showing what looks like a focusing-knob/light-meter, but my camera
>doesn't have one! Can anyone explain how to read the table, assuming there
>was a meter available? It really won't be useful without the meter
>reading, but I'm just curious. Sorry to be so dense, but I just can't
>figure it out.
>
>Also, the manual says you can set intermediate shutter speeds between 1 sec
>and 1/10 sec, and between 1/25 sec and 1/250 sec. I had always assumed you
>had to set the dial right on the shutter speed, though there's no indent to
>indicate the exact spot. Finally, the manual says to set the highest speed
>(1/500) only *before* cocking the shutter. Would disobeying this directive
>damage the shutter?
>
>Thanks again to Siu Fai for posting the URL for the instruction manuals.
>There's always something new to learn.
>
>
>Phil Swango
>307 Aliso Dr. SE
>Albuquerque, NM 87108
>505-262-4085
>714-908-7846 (fax)
>pswango@att.net
The shutter speed cam is tapered, sort of, between speed settings so you
can set between them. I don't think its very accurate. The break between
1/10th and 1/25th is because of a gear shift in the retarding clockwork,
one of the gears is disabled to get the middle range of speeds. The speed
cam has a separate section for operating the pin which moves the gear out
of the way so its an all or none thing.
Do not set the shutter to 1/500th with the thing cocked. The speed ring
compresses a booster spring for this highest speed. If you push it while
the shutter is tensioned it can push the end of the booster spring under
the speed cam jamming the shutter. Its OK to back it down to a lower speed
although not good practice since everything is tensed with considerable
force.
The later Synchro-Compur as used in E and F models has a completely
different arrangement using a single spring for all speeds. Its similar in
many ways to the Hasselblad shutter which is designed to be left cocked all
the time.
The chart is pretty definitely from an E or maybe F. I tried this just
now and the back from my 2.8E fits on my old MX just fine.
The chart is not really an exposure chart but shows the exposure for very
low values of Exposure Value where time exposures are needed. The times are
in _seconds_ not fractions of a second. Not very useful if you don't have
the meter. An EV meter will, of course, give these values to you directly.
This also explains why there is no window in the case for the chart. If you
are doing time exposures you will have the camera on a tripod and out of
the case. So, Watson, no window needed.
Not all shutters can be set between speeds. The Kodak Supermatic, for
instance, has flat sections for each speed on the cam. There is essentially
no change until you get to the next speed. The idea being that careless
setting has no effect on the speed.
I strongly recommend investing in a shutter tester from Calumet. They
were about $80 US last I looked. These will work on nearly any camera and
will tell you _exactly_ what the shutter is doing, and if its doing the
same thing every time. It also measures strobe flash duration over a wide
range, helpful in finding out if you need to make reciprocity corrections.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: History of Ilex Optical
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002
Helge Nareid usenet@nareid.demon.co.uk wrote:
>76266.333@compuserve.com (Dan Fromm) wrote
>> dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow) wrote
>>>large snip Ilex was bought out by Meles-Griot perhaps ten or more
>>>years ago.
>>> They seem to have wanted mainly the lens manufacturing section and
>>> shutters were dropped quickly. If you call them they don't even want
>>> to admit Ilex ever existed and don't support any of the old Ilex
>>> products.
>> Um, er, ah, not to start an argument or anything but the last time I
>> went to Melles-Griot's on-line catalog the electronically controlled
>> #3 and #4 shutters were still listed. No clockwork ones, though.
>> Last visit was less than a month ago.
>
>Agreed, it is slightly longer since I last checked the Melles-Griot
>catalog, but the electronically controlled shutters were still in their
>catalog last time I checked. Until a couple of years ago or so, they also
>had mechanical shutters, but they have dropped them now (at least from
>their catalog).
>
>
>--
>- Helge Nareid
> Nordmann i utlendighet, Aberdeen, Scotland
I looked at the web site just before posting. I couldn't find the
electric shutters. I may have been looking in the wrong place.
The clockwork shutters have been gone for some time. When I tried to
get parts a couple of years ago I could barely get them to admit such
shutters even existed.
Ilex shutters use all hair springs, which are not difficult to make
but some other parts are available only by canabalizing another
shutter. Steve Grimes can make shutter and diaphragm blades, in any
case, he can repair Ilex shutters and get them working about as well
as they ever did. He has a section on Ilex on his web site
http://www.skgrimes.com
There are tons of these shutters on old lenses. For the most part
they are still practical and repairable, partly due to their
simplicity.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From Rangefinder Mailing list:
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002
From: Winfried Buechsenschuetz w-buechsenschuetz@gmx.de
Subject: RE: Werra Rangefinder Camera
Clayton Ravsten wrote:
> Has anyone had experience with the Werra Rangefinder Cameras? Any
> information performance of this camera would be appreciated. Thanks.
An australian guy who bought a Werra in the 60s told me about it. He
said he was surprised about the sharpness of the pics and first thought
this was due to the Tessar lens (which has an excellent reputation).
Later he found that it was due to the almost non-existing camera shake.
The Werras have a very special leaf shutter which is probably the only
one which can run at an actual speed of 1/750 (at full aperture). It is
inherent to this design that it won't cause any camera shake since the
blades rotate continously (on all other leaf shutters the blades are
stopped when fully opened and forced to return).
There are quite a few different models of the Werra line, I am not sure
whether they all have this shutter. I think on
http://www.tigin.de
you can get more information.
Winfried
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Ilex #1 synchro electronic shutter question - apology if
duplicated
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002
multi-volti@softhouse.com (Murray) wrote:
>Hello:
>
>Looking, at the risk of redundancy, for electrical info on Ilex #1
>synchro electronic shutter.
>
>I have a manual for a #3 and if there is such a document for #1, it
>would answer my questions about the differences between the two.
>
>Or, maybe someone can answer some of them...
>
>What does the 'synchro' part mean? I would guess something to do with
>flash synchronization. But if this was from an oscillocope camera as
>was the #3, who needs a flash for that? That doesn't seem to be a good
>assumption anymore.
>
>Thanks
>Murray
I don't know too much about these shutters. I think Meles-Girot may
still make them in some sizes. Its essentially a Ilex shutter which is
driven by an electric motor.
Synchro means only that it has contacts for flash. In a scope camera
the flash synch may have been used for triggering whatever was
generating the trace where only a single trace was used. A great many
of these cameras date from a time when storage scopes were rare.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: joneil@multiboard.com (Joseph O'Neil)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Komura 500 f7 Lens info wanted
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002
Ted Burford Tedburford@yahoo.com wrote:
>I saw a Komura Komuranon 500 f7 Lens for sale today for $600.00 and I
>would like to know how sharp it is and what format it will cover.
I have never used that Komura lens, but I have used 4 other
Komura lenses,still use three of them, including an enlarging lens
(150mm), and all of them are very nice lenses. My Rodenstock Sironars
are shrper at the very edge ofthe image circle, but otherwise the
Komuras are pretty darned nice.
If this lens is anything like the others, I would go for it.
joe
http://www.oneilphoto.on.ca
From: bobjames27@cs.com (Bob Gurfinkel)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Date: 27 Jan 2002
Subject: Re: Fatif 4x5
>Does anybody know this camera?
Lens and Repro, NYC, distributed the complete line for some years, maybe they
still do.
Bob G.
From: Jon Grepstad gjon@online.no
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Fatif 4x5
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002
PANOPTICUM wrote:
> Does anybody know this camera?
>
> panopticum@pro.onet.pl
They have a web site here:
http://www.fatif.it/fotoproeng.html
http://www.fatif.it/fotoproeng.html
Jon Grepstad
http://home.online.no/~gjon
From: "Jerry Fusselman" cmesa@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace.large-format
Subject: Copal #0 shutter (Correct use)
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002
My question concerns the correct use of a Copal #0 shutter on a Super
Angulon 47mm f/5.6: What is the correct sequence of operations with it, or
is just about any sequence as good as any other? (Iask because after using
Plaubel Makinas for a dozen years, I recently learned that I should not
focus or set exposure settings with the camera collapsed---perhaps there is
something I should know about my new purchase to keep it in top condition.)
The tiny instruction book for my just-purchased-and-still-learning-about-it
Plaubel Proshift camera lists this procedure:
1. attach cable release connecting the shutter release button to the lens's
shutter-release socket.
2. focus (and here, I assume all distances are from the film plane rather
than the front nodal point of the lens---right?), use viewfinder, set
parallex correction, if any.
3. set the shutter spead
4. tension the shutter
5. set the aperture
6. take the picture
7. advance the film (after pressing the film transport locking lever to
unlock film transport)
My questions:
A. Is it really fine to advance the film just after exposure, even if the
next shot is days away?
B. Can steps 1--5 be in any order?
C. Is it a bad practice to store the camera with the shutter cocked?
D. If I accidently leave the lens cap on for an exposure, can I simply fire
the lens (without using the shutter release button) to avoid losing 9cm of
film?
Any help will be appreciated.
Jerry Fusselman
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Copal #0 shutter (Correct use)
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002
"Jerry Fusselman" cmesa@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>My question concerns the correct use of a Copal #0 shutter on a Super
>Angulon 47mm f/5.6: What is the correct sequence of operations with it, or
>is just about any sequence as good as any other? (Iask because after using
>Plaubel Makinas for a dozen years, I recently learned that I should not
>focus or set exposure settings with the camera collapsed---perhaps there is
>something I should know about my new purchase to keep it in top condition.)
>
>The tiny instruction book for my just-purchased-and-still-learning-about-it
>Plaubel Proshift camera lists this procedure:
>
>1. attach cable release connecting the shutter release button to the lens's
>shutter-release socket.
Can be done at any time.
>2. focus (and here, I assume all distances are from the film plane rather
>than the front nodal point of the lens---right?), use viewfinder, set
>parallex correction, if any.
>
Some distance scales are measured from the focal plane, some from
the first principle point.
>3. set the shutter spead
>
>4. tension the shutter
>
Depends on the design of the shutter. For late Compur shutters it
doesn't matter. For older ones and most other shutters the speed
should be set before cocking the shutter. See if there is a tension
increase when you set it for the highest speed. If the speed selector
moves freely to all speeds you may be able to change speed after
cocking. Copal shutters are basically copies of Compur shutters but
are not exactly the same.
>5. set the aperture
>
Can be done at any time.
>6. take the picture
>
Well, you sort of have to cock the shutter and set stuff first.:-)
>7. advance the film (after pressing the film transport locking lever to
>unlock film transport)
>
>
>My questions:
>
>A. Is it really fine to advance the film just after exposure, even if the
>next shot is days away?
>
>B. Can steps 1--5 be in any order?
>
>C. Is it a bad practice to store the camera with the shutter cocked?
>
>D. If I accidently leave the lens cap on for an exposure, can I simply fire
>the lens (without using the shutter release button) to avoid losing 9cm of
>film?
>
>Any help will be appreciated.
>
>Jerry Fusselman
>
Its better practice to wind roll film shortly before taking the
picture. That tends to keep it from buckling in the film gate.
For the most part shutters are not damaged by leaving them cocked
despite the popular wisdom to the contrary. Springs are not weakened
by being under tension or compression but rather by fatigue from many
operations.
Probably shutters with booster springs for the highest speeds should
not be left cocked for long periods since there is a lot of pressure
on some of the parts when cocked. Any shutter where you must overcome
some extra tension when moving the speed selector to the highest speed
has a booster spring for that speed.
As you pointed out about the Plaubel camera some cameras folding
cameras need special attention. My advice above is general, not for
specific cameras.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: flexaret2@aol.com (FLEXARET2)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 14 Mar 2002
Subject: Re: What did people do before X synch?
Leaf shutters with "M" sync have internal contacts which close before the
blades are fully open and cannot sync with electronic flash.
Somebody handy in opening leaf shutters can find the sync contacts
(different designs in various type shutters) and retard the contacts
closing until the shutter blades are at full open. This is done by bending the
contacts back in some cases. Then testing with a bulb flash unit and
test light bulb to see if contact is made when the blades are fully open.
In most designs this can be done. In some shutters a new contact design must be
installed as the original contacts are not able to be converted for this use.
- Sam Sherman
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Ektar 101 f4.5 - suitable shutter?
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002
Carl and Helen carlandhelen@nmayers.demon.co.uk wrote:
>I've acquired a Kodak Ektar 101mm f4.5 in a Synchro-Rapid 800 Shutter.
>I've heard a lot of good things about this lens (will be using it for
>6x9), and would like to put it in a more reliable shutter (can't find
>anyone to service the Synchro-Rapid 800). Does anyone know if the
>shutter on this lens can be replaced with another newer shutter?
>
>Many thanks, Carl
This lens came standard in a No.1 Kodak Supermatic shutter. I don't
know if the cell threads are the same as for the Synchro-Rapid 800 but
would guess that they are. Kodak sold lenses in England in Epsilon
shutters. I don't know if these were the same as the Supermatic but
may be more common there.
I don't know who works on the Sychro Rapid 800 or what exactly its
weakness is. The Graflex 1000 shutter, used on Super Speed Graphics
has plastic spindles which simply break under use. The Kodak shutter
may have similar problems. There are some good reasons why leaf type
shutters were not commonly built with speeds above about 1/500th
second.
Some other shutter repair people in the U.S. who are worth talking to
are:
Fred Lustig
4790 Caughlin Pkwy #433
Reno, NV
89509
1 775 746 0111
Graflex Parts and Service
No e-mail or web site. Might have a Supermatic for sale.
focalpt@ecentral.com
The Focal Point
John Van Stelten
1017 South Boulder Road
Suite E-1
Louisville, CO 80027-0027
Tel.- 303-665-6640
Fax - 303-665-3803
http://www.411web.com/F/FOCALPOINT/
Paul Ebel
Shutter Repair
1715 778 4372
w230 Terrace Street, Box 86; Spring Valley, WI 54767.
Reputedly does excellent work. If he has e-mail or a web URL I don't
have it.
Ken Ruth
Photography on Bald Mountain
Davenport, CA
baldmtn@pacbell.net
831-423-4465
Phone calls Wed & Thur 9-5 and Fri 9-Noon.
http://www.baldmtn.com/
Has an exellent reputation and is the last resort for cameras no one
else can fix. Not cheap. (probably no one who is good is cheap).
Its possible none of these well work on the Super Synchromatic.
101mm Ektars are not particularly rare so be careful of spending
more to fix this one than replacement cost.
The 101mm and 127mm Ektars were the first of the shorter focal
length series for use on press cameras. Both are exceptional lenses.
Both tend to develop internal haze which is easily cleaned off. I've
posted instructions for opening the lens cell many times to this
group. If you decide to get the shutter repaired any of the above will
be able to clean the indside of the front element at the same time.
Steve Grimes does excellent work but can't work magic. I think he
has had too many bad experiences with the 800 shutter to attempt them.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" qnu@worldonline.nl
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Basic question
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002
an wrote:
> Could someone point out a good site to learn the mechanism of leaf
> shutter medium format camera mechanics?
I don't understand, do you want to learn how to repair leaf shutters? Or...
?
Cameras using leaf shutters are no different in use than cameras using focal
plane shutters. The only difference is that with SLRs you don't get an
instant return image (you will have to reset the camera first, i.e. wind on)
and leaf shutters offer flash synchronization at all available
shutterspeeds.
Or is it the release sequence you're interested in?
Obviously when the shutter is in the lens as opposed to in the body, and the
lens is used as a viewing lens too, there needs to be a secondary "shutter"
to protect film while the lens shutter is open.
The typical release cycle of a camera with leaf shutter is:
a) you press the release button
b) the lens shutter and aperture close
c) the mirror lifts up and the secondary shutter opens
d) the leaf shutter opens and closes to expose the film
e) the secondary shutter closes, the lens shutter (and aperture) stays shut
f) you reset the camera and transport film, in the proces the mirror is
returned to the viewing position and the lens shutter is opened again.
The sequence in a focal plane shutter camera is:
a) you press the button
b) the aperture closes
c) the mirror klifts up
d) the focal plane shutter opens and closes to expose film
e) the aperture reopens
f) the mirror bounces back to the viewing position
g) you recock the shutter and transport film
> Specifically I am looking for information on how a waist level or
> SLR-type prism finder design works in cameras designed to work with leaf
> shutter lenses.
No different than with focal plane shutter cameras.
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002
From: "Q.G. de Bakker" qnu@worldonline.nl
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: [HUG] Electronic leaf shutter?
On September 26, 2000 a patent was awarded to Victor Hasselblad AB titled
"Electromagnetic displacement unit".
"Abstract
Apparatus is disclosed for cyclic displacement of a camera shutter mechanism
or the like between first and second end positions comprising an
electromagnet displacing the shutter mechanism, the electromagnet comprising
a pivotable armature pivotable between first and second positions, a
plurality of blades, a rocker arm connected to the armature, a linkage
connecting the rocker arm to the blades whereby pivoting of the armature can
be translated into rotary movement of the blades, a biasing spring for
biasing the armature towards a neutral position between the first and second
end positions, a driver for ensuring that the armature reaches the first and
second end positions, the driver comprising a permanent magnet for holding
the armature in either of the first and second end positions and
counteracting the biasing spring, and at least one coil for exerting a force
on the armature upon activation of the coil, the force being sufficient to
overcome the permanent magnet and the biasing spring."
So what do you think, can we expect to see CFEE lenses with electronically
controlled leaf shutters and apertures, plus a 500 CE camera with built-in
metering electronics soon?
From camera makers mailing list:
From: "John Yeo" jonnieo@thegrid.net
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] focal plane shutter theory of operation
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002
> Can someone either explain or refer me to something explaining the theory of
> operation of a focal plane shutter? Are there single and double curtain
> ones?
Think of it as a slit moving across the film plane. Although the entire
image isn't formed at the same exact instant, each part receives the same
exposure. Usually the speed that the slit moves across, but the width of
the slit changes, which affects how long the film is exposed to light.
Don't know about the single curtain/double curtains..
> What determines the limits of their usability? I hear of certain photos
> revealing problems with FP shutters?
There is not really a problem with fp shutters. There is ONE famous photo
of a racecar traveling at speed, that was taken with a graflex camera about
ten million years ago. In those days, the slit did not move across the film
very fast, but since it was a small slit, it still gave short exposure
times. In this particular photo, the car was moving fast horizontally, and
the shutter was moving rather slowly vertically, so the result was that the
car looked like it was leaning forward - the wheels ended up oval shaped,
not round. I am sure most of us aren't using our 8x10 cameras to shoot
formula 1 races, so we don't have much to worry about. This just seems to
be something that people like to talk about a lot, but doesn't have much
substance in the real world.
One problem with focal plane shutters that could apply to homebrew, is
getting the curtain to move at a constant speed. If the slit is a constant
width, and the shutter starts off slowly, and accelerates, the part of the
image where the shutter was moving slowly will be overexposed, and the
exposure will decrease as the curtains accelerated. I would imagine that a
focal plane shutter placed directly at the lens aperture would not have this
problem.
From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002
From: Robert Mueller r.mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] focal plane shutter theory of operation
>A few additional words might help here. The single curtain with a fixed
>width slit cut in it is rare in modern cameras. This shutter type
>has the problem of needing a curtain moving at a constant speed over the
>film to obtain a constant exposure. Making such a shutter is possible but
>there is a way which is normally better, the reason it is now standard.
You must go back to the fundamental problem; the film must be
opened to the light and then closed off a constant time later, no matter
where on the film the exposure is occurring. One way to do this is launch
a curtain which is covering the film to move out of the way so it no longer
blocks light. A split second later a second curtain can follow the first,
again covering the film. The exposure is the time between the departure of
the first curtain until the arrival of the second. In fact, it makes no
difference whether the first curtain is still moving and uncovering other
parts of the film at a later time, what counts for the exposure is the
"local" time difference between opening and again closing. And it is this
time difference which must remain constant over the film. The same
argument applies whether the exposure is long or very short.
There is a trick in all this and here is where your design work
will come. For the sake of compactness, simplicity and quick response, the
curtains do not accelerate up to speed and then settle to a constant speed
before the edge of the curtains passes over the film. The curtains are
accelerating during most of the journey. This would be a danger with a
constant slit width and even with the two curtain design, but the trouble
is easily removed with two curtains when they accelerate at the same rate
in their passage over the film letting the slit width be whatever it turns
out to be in order to fulfill the "constant time of exposure"
requirement. This depends on attention to details. The driving springs
produce force (torque, really) which depends on how far they are tensioned,
and this tension will be decreasing as the spring unwinds during
exposure. The roll of curtain material will have variable diameter and a
variable amount of mass as the curtain is fed onto the path across the film
and this translates into a different rate of acceleration for a given
spring generated force. And the length of the linear chunk of curtain
sliding in front of the film is also varying, changing its mass and
response to an applied force. To a considerable extend, some of these
factors cancel (no surprise, the mass lost from the roll is just the mass
added to the curtain.), helping to make the acceleration more constant, but
that is not so important, as long as these variables combine in a way which
makes the acceleration of the two curtains similar at a particular place on
the film. (Actually, it is the integral of the acceleration which must be
the same, but you will see that when you do the design)
Some of you might find the math a little formidable (it
isn't exotic, but might be unfamiliar to many readers of this group) but
you can come pretty close using identical springs and curtain rollers
containing similar amounts of curtain. By all means include adjustment for
the spring pretension, which you will adjust to correct the timing of the
slit width so the exposure is essentially constant on all parts of the
film. Incidentally, you can already see one problem in the tradeoffs. The
first curtain starts out straight and winds onto its roller; the second
curtain is straight at the start but then stretches out into a flat
sheet. Here the cancelation can do wonders to make the acceleration versus
time curves similar.
When I think of making such a shutter, I consider two methods as
practical for the faster speeds. I like electronic control for its
flexibility, reliability and constancy of the exposure which will be
produced. Electromagnets would then release the curtains at the command of
the electronics. Older shutters which were mechanical do the faster speeds
using pins or notches or something on the first curtain and these cause the
release of the second curtain after the first curtain has moved a certain
distance, which corresponds to having been underway for a certain
time. This works only up to a maximum exposure time of "about" 1/100
second. Beyond this maximum time, the first curtain has already "long ago"
finished its journey and nothing more is moving when the second curtain
ought to be released. Some other method is required for longer exposures
and this usually resembles the mechanism for timing a between-the-lens
shutter. In my older 35 mm cameras the transition to slow speed timing
takes place at 1/30 second, while some more modern mechanical shutters are
much faster and have the transition at 1/125 second though in these "more
modern" cameras the transition is better hidden from the user; all speeds
will be set on a single dial, unlike the earlier models in which exposures
were set on two dials, one for the slower speeds and the other for the fast
ones. These values are interesting to the user because they also set the
fastest shutter speed which can be used with the short light pulses of
electronic flash. (Special flash bulbs were able to beat this problem by
offering a prolonged pulse. These may be hard to buy these days but
special electronic flash units can make a rapid series of smaller flashes
to achieve a similar effect.)
The two curtain design also has another benefit. It is easy to construct
the shutter so the curtains overlap during cocking, keeping light off the
film during the cocking operation. With a single curtain some separate
capping device will be needed, like leaving the dark slide closed (bad if
you forget and cock after opening the slide and much more troublesome in 35
mm where we rarely have a dark slide. I guess you would cap the lens and
viewfinder! Or pull a special dark slide, but nobody bothers with such
methods. I suspect the self-capping shutter was already in the first Leica
35 mm camera, though I have never seen a description to verify this
guess. Does any reader really KNOW?)
In large format these processes will probably take longer. Pulling the
curtains across a 4 or 5 inch path in 1/125 second and making the shutter
durable at the same time will be an interesting design task. Already,
Copal Square is using titanium for ruggedness, along with moving the
shutter blades over the short dimension of the film.
Sorry it went on so long; I am hoping the above is enough to remove some
occasional misunderstanding how these shutters function.
Bob
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002
From: Marc James Small msmall@infi.net
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Rollei] OT: 6x9 or 6x45
J Patric DahlTnobOlu wrote:
>>From: Dan Kalish
>>This posting relates to my Voigtlander Avus camera, made in 1919-1934.
>
>
>You can date it more precisely by looking at the shutter. If it has the dial
>set Compur, with a little wheel, then it's from 1919 to ca 1927, but if it
>has the rim set Compur like the early Rolleicords, then it's a later model.
>It would be even better if we knew the seriel numbers from Compur and
>VoigtlSnder. Does anyone here know a source for that?
>
The great student of Compur serial numbers is Major Simon Worsley
From: slberfuchs@aol.com (Ted Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Date: 28 Feb 2002
Subject: Re: Lens Mounting Help Needed
Bob,
I own two lenses with these spacer rings and they have another purpose as well.
On some field cameras (Phillips for one) the front element of the lens fits
too close to the camera body and will not allow mounting of the lens WITHOUT
the use of the spacer ring. This only applies to lenses mounted in #3 shutters
and only to some lens/shotter combinations. I know it is the case with a
Symmar-S MC 240 in a Prontor Pro shutter (and thus I would assumle other
Symmars in the same shutter) and a Docter Apo Germinar 360 in a Copal #3. None
of this applies to the use of the same lens/shutter combos on a monorail or a
field camera that uses a larger lensboard (e.g. 140x140 Sinar/Horseman board).
It is a fairly common problem with Technika/Wista size and smaller boards.
Ted Harris
Resource Strategy
Henniker, New Hampshire
from camera makers mailing list:
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002
From: Robert Mueller r.mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Ilex #1 synchro electronic shutter question
Try looking in the Melles Griot catalog for data. I believe their shutters
are identical to the ILEX models except for the label. (They look identical.)
I doubt that you will find a schematic unless you have a well-placed friend
or construct one from a controller you have or can borrow (there is little
in the shutter itself; just a solenoid.)
Bob
you wrote:
>Any place to find data, wiring, history of problems ? (Ilex #1 electronic
>shutter)
From: Mandoblast@aol.com
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] 'Lectronic shutters & such
I did a web search some time ago on the subject and found useful info,
including a schematic for a precision timer circuit. Probably not necessary
if you want long time exposures. The more important thing is to rig a
circuit with different voltages for kicking it open and holding it open. The
holding voltage is a fraction of the opening voltage--I think half or less.
I think the simplest way to do this would be to use a use a potentiometer in
the circuit (5K should do nicely, as I think the coil resistance is in the
hundreds) and with a volt meter hooked in parallel, run up the power till it
kicks, then quickly turn it down to find the release voltage. My
understanding is that giving it the opening voltage for very long at all will
fry the coil. The finished circuit, then, would involve the resistance
chosen for the holding voltage, then a small capacitor (1mfd?) in parallel to
ground, then the switch. The cap will charge to the supply voltage and give
a quick kick followed by the lower voltage/current through the resistor. I
have a Melles Griot #3 (same as Ilex) that will close with a fresh 9v
battery. The coil didn't complain about being held open at that voltage for
any length of time.
If you determine that the leads you're dealing with go to the coil, it's
probably fried if showing an open circuit. Might not be too hard to rewind
it if you can find skinny enameled wire. Try cannibalizing a small speaker.
Good luck.
By the way, I got an e-mail inquiry about my Graflex SLR project yesterday
from a string surfer, so I guess I'll post details of that project soon.
Roger Stevens
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002
From: Jerry Lehrer jerryleh@pacbell.net
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Rollei] OT: Flash Bulb Help -- Thanks
Allen
They are wrong! I have had extensive experience with Kodak shutters
since the 40's. They are sturdy devices 'cept for the Synchro 800.
Why not ask a real shutter expert such as Mr, Grimes ?
Jerry Lehrer
you wrote:
>
> << Kodak shutters are very rugged. Internally, they look crude compared to a
> Compur shutter but nothing wears out and they are accurate and consistent.
> Generally, a good cleaning will bring the speeds back to standard although
> sometimes the springs are a little weak. Kodak was concerned with color
> photography and made sure their own shutters were accurate ones. Why they
> chose to use Ilex shutters on their largest lenses is beyond me. Perhaps
> just to keep Ilex in business to avoid anti-trust actions. Kodak Ilex
> shutters are not quite the same as the standard Ilex product, different
> threading and some other changes.
> ----
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@ix.netcom.com>>
>
> And yet, every camera repair person I met in those days, including a couple
> who worked for Kodak, disparaged Kodak shutters. That included those of the
> Kodak 35, Signet, Tourists and Supermatics offered on various Graphic models.
> They claimed the shutters kept breaking, no matter what was done with them.
>
> Based on this almost universal disdain for Kodak shutters by those I thought
> knew them, I generally avoided cameras so equipped, although I must admit the
> one 2X3 Anniversary Speed once owned with a 101 mm Ektar in Flash Supermatic
> held up well.
>
> Is there more to be said on this subject?
>
> Allen Zak
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: Re: [Rollei] OT: Flash Bulb Help -- Thanks
....
All I can say is that there are a hell of a lot of Supermatics around
which have survived decades of hard use. There is nothing delicate about
them. Perhaps the repair people didn't like the alarm-clock construction,
compared to a Compur they look crude, but part of that is that everything
is a little oversized and very rugged. I suspect that when new they were
more accurate than Compurs.
When I was in junior highschool I thought Kodak stuff was cheap! Kodak
made box cameras so what could be so great about their lenses, etc? Oh,
well. There was no one to wise me up.
It may be that cheaper Kodak shutters were not so wonderful but
Supermatics seem to be very reliable and long lived.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002
From: David Gerhardt davidgerhardt@mindspring.com
Subject: [HUG] Article on Hasselblad Shutters
Just as a point of interest; I just received my copy of Forum (#1, 2002),
and it has a very interesting article on both the manufacture of the central
shutters for the Zeiss Hasselblad lenses, & and article on Compur/Prontor
history. Just thought I'd pass that along, since there have been a couple of
recent "shutter" related messages.
(ps: Does everyone else get their issues of Hasselblad Forum this late?
Issue #1 of 2002 in late April?)
--
David Gerhardt
davidgerhardt@mindspring.com
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Pacemaker Focal Plane Shutter
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002
groovensynth
From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002
From: "Kelvin" kelvinlee@pacific.net.sg
Subject: Re: Lens Shutters
I'm not the expert but what I know is this:
Seiko , compur and Copal are basically different brands.
Seiko and Copal I believe are Japanese, and Compur is german.
The #1,#2,#3 indicate the speed range e.g. I think a #1 goes up to
about 1/125 and the #3 goes up to 1/500, or something like that.
Copal is better known for their "square" shutter , which is fundamentally
what is found in the vertical blind shutters you see in modern nikons
and canons.
I am not sure if you can use the M645 lenses on your 67. Firstly, the
working (flange) distances are probably too long i.e. you can't get
infinity. Second, you will have to trigger the shutter manually from
the shutter mech with RB in mirror-lockup. Thirdly , and most importantly,
the question is whether the lens will give enough coverage . If not, you
will get dramatic light falloff towards the edges.
If you want to try this approach, lookout for old 4x5 lenses which do fit
into these leaf shutters , and find a means to mount them onto your RB.
You will likely need a focus helical , or some sort of bellows to effect
the focus.
That's why most of the time we only try remounting lenses for use in cameras
with focal plane shutters and not shutter-in-lens cameras . E.g. good candidates
for "hacked" lenses incl the Kiev88, Pentax 6x7, Pentax 645, Mamiya 645,
Pentacon 6, Bronica S.
From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002
From: Stephen Castello scastello@cfl.rr.com
Subject: Re: Lens Shutters
For descriptions of some of those shutters see: http://www.skgrimes.com
Stephen
from camera fix mailing list:
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: Lens Shutters
Kelvin at kelvinlee@pacific.net.sg wrote:
> The #1,#2,#3 indicate the speed range e.g. I think a #1 goes up to
> about 1/125 and the #3 goes up to 1/500, or something like that.
No, the numbers indicate the diameter of the shutter opening which
determines which lenses can be used. They have nothing to do with the
shutter speed range. Typically the big ones have lower top speeds, though,
and most #3 shutters only have 1/50 or 1/60 as their top speeds, while the
smaller sizes usually go up to 1/500.
Bob
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: How to use Ilex shutter?
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2002
"Marcus Carlsson" marcus.carlsson@ebrevet.nu wrote:
>Hi!
>
>I have just but an Ilex #3 shutter with lens on eBay and I wonder if anyone
>could explain how all the "arms" work. For instance what is the large arm on
>the left for (It is rounded in the end)?
>
>/Marcus
If its an Acme Synchro Shutter it has the following on it.
At upper right (facing the shutter) at about2 O'clock is the cocking
lever. Its pushed down to cock the shutter.
Next to this at abou 1 o'clock is the focusing button or blade
arrestor. If this is held down when tripping the shutter it will hold
the shutter blades fully opened for focusing. The shutter is then
re-cocked to fire it.
At 11 o'clock is the shutter tripping lever.
At 10 o'clock is the cable release socket.
The synch shuters have a knob and lever at about 8 o'clock. the dial
sets the synch delay. 0 is for strobe. The label shows the delay time
for the various color dots on the knob.
the lever is for cocking the flash delay mechanism. When using flash
cocke the shutter first, then cock the delay.
At 7 o,clock is the bi-post connector for the flash contacts.
Paramount cords (on the web) have adaptors for this connector.
Early, non-synch versions of this shutter, do not have the flash
controls but are otherwise about the same.
Steve Grimes has some infor on Ilex shutters on his web site, I
don't remember if he includes the smaller shutters.
http://www.skgrimes.com
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Questions on Rollei Shutters
you wrote:
>I have a couple of questions about Rollei shutters:
>
>(1) For a given time period, were the same shutters used on both Rolleiflex
>3.5's and the same vintage Rolleicords? I presume that the Rolleiflex 2.8's
>might use a physically larger shutter due to the greater lens diameter.
The same shutter is used on Flexes and Cords of the same vintage.
>(2) Is there a practical way to clean the Synchro-Compur shutters used in
>Rolleis without disassembly of the shutter module?
The instructions from Deckel suggest removing the slow speed escapement;
not hard to do. The rest of the shutter can be left alone. The escapement
is adjustable in position. Its set to bring 1/10th second in and the other
slow speeds should follow.
> I recently cleaned the shutter on a Rolleicord III. I tried solvent
>flushing then immersion of the module in an ultrasonic bath with solvent but
>the slow speeds continued to stick. What solved the problem was removing
>the slow speed escapement and sparingly lubricating the gear bearings with
>clock oil. It is difficult to imagine lubricating both sides of the
>escapement without removing the escapement cage but perhaps there's a more
>convenient way to do this that didn't occur to me.
>
>
>Ed Balko
The escapement is intended to be lubrated with watch oil. Ideally it
should be applied to the bearings only. The instructions indicate other
points of lubrication, light grease in a couple of places. I was told be
the distributor that they use moly-kote on the springs of the new synchro
Compurs. Older rim set shutters use helical springs, dial set shutters use
spiral wound clock motor type springs. The last Synchro-Compur as used on
Rollei E and F models and on Hasselblads have gone back to the clock motor
type.
In important factor in cleaning is to make sure there is absolutely no
residue on the shutter blades. Anything at all on them will cause some drag
slowing down the opening and closing times.
Reprint factory instruction manuals for Compur shutters are available as
are reprint factory manuals for Rollei cameras. Check with Petra Keller at
http://www.camerabooks.com or John S. Craig at http://www.craigcamera.com
Both in the $30 US range and well worth it. Also see the _Rollei Technical
Report_ Claus Prochnow, available from both the above. This has limited
repair and adjustment instructions for nearly all F&H; camereas and the
shutters used in them. Text is in German and English.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Adding flash synch to an antique
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001
"Frank h" frank@hovie.net wrote:
>I got a great deal on an old Calumet. I want to use my strobes with it and
>the Acme shutter doesn't have a synch port. The shutter lever swings up
>during operation and I was thinking a $1.50 photo switch could be mounted
>there to activate my stobes. Because it seems so obvious I must believe it
>has been done and I was wondering if this is available, not wanting to
>re-invent the wheel. It is a 170mm Kodak lens and it seems clear and plenty
>usable. -Frank
If you release the cocking lever slowly with a finger you will find
it travels with the blade operating ring. So, its halfway up when the
shutter is just completly open. This is where the stobe should be
fired. You may be able to fit a spring strip that will operate a
contact or a micro-switch at the right point but have enough
flexibility not to interfere with the continued travel of the cocking
lever.
Its also possible to modify Ilex Acme shutters for strobe synch
without extensive surgery. Check with Steve Grimes about how much this
would cost vs: finding a later synch version of the shutter.
Your idea is practical but it may be a little touchy to get it to
work right.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Adding flash synch to an antique
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001
Sandor Mathe sandorm@enzyme.torolab.ibm.com wrote:
>Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>> I've seen a number of Packard shutters set up this way, just a
>> spring strip operated by the air cylinder contacting either another
>> stip or a micro switch.
>> Packard makes a synch version of the shutter. I don't have one
>> otherwise I'd have look at how they do it. I'll bet its simple.
>
>Thanks for the replies. I'll save my self the $2 on a micro switch
>and use two metal strips. That will also save the trip to an electronics
>store. Should work great for my 210 Celor and though the shutter is
>too small for an old 14" f5.6 lens that I have I won't be using it wide
>open anyway. I'll have to check sizes on a 600 Apo Ronar as well.
>
>Given the weight of these lenses (large) compared to the weight and strength
>of the packard shutter (its not a large one) does putting the lenses on
>individual boards and creating a way to mount the shutter to the front of
>the different lenses make sense?
>
>Given studio flash use, the vignetting that occurs *during* the shutter
>opening will not matter.
>
>--
>Sandor Mathe
>sandorm@ca.ibm.com
Its possible to adapt a Packard for front mounting. You need a board
and something like a hose clamp. The edges of the Packard shutter can
leak light but that should not be a problem.
My arrangement is to mount the Packard on the back of a lens board
as usual and make the board itself an adaptor for smaller boards or
mount an adaptor on it, lots of ways to skin this one. The iris clamp
makes it dead simple, you just mount it on the front of the board the
shutter is on the back of.
I've made several adaptors for various view cameras so I can use 4x4
wooden Speed Graphic boards on all of them including the big shutter.
I have one 4x4 board with an iris clamp on it. Again, there are lots
of variations. I can use many lenses on any of seven cameras ranging
from 4x5 to 8x10. The 4x4 boards will take surprizingly large
shutters. You can also use 4x4 metal Graphic View boards. The Calumet
4x5 will accept these boards although you can not use the flat calumet
boards on Speed Graphic type fronts. (Actually, in an emergency you
can, by turning them backward).
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 06 May 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Shutter repair advice
you wrote:
>I have just bought a Rolleiflex (not sure what model) to replace the one my
>brother borrowed several years ago. Unfortunately, it came with a damaged
>shutter. Shutter blades are jammed partially open, with one blade
>noticeably twisted away from the others...
>
>Assuming it is possible to repair these, I would appreciate any advice as
>to where to send it, and ideally a ballpark estimate of what it would cost
>to fix or replace the shutter and do a general CLA. I would like to get it
>fixed, but that may need to be postponed depending on cost.
>
>The seller enclosed the bill from the last service / CLA in which is noted
>that the shutter was 'jammed, won't go to "B"'. It was repaired, with the
>remark "cleaned fungus from mech." This was from Groundglass Camera Repair
>Service (Harrisonburg, VA) in 1989. Not exactly encouraging! :-)
>
>I believe there is someone on this list keeping track of camera and lens
>serial numbers, so here they are:
> Camera: 1604522
> Viewing: Heidosmat 1:2,8/80 736557
> Taking: Zeiss Planar 1:2,8 f=80mm Nr 226696
The someone is Marc Smith, our distinguished list owner.
A couple of things. First, late compur shutters have a raised tip on the
leading shutter blade. Its meant to insure the blades fold over each other
in the right way. Its turned up just a little at the tip. There is one
visible from each side of the shutter.
Secondly, if the shutter is jammed there may be some force on the shutter
blades tending to bow them a little. The point is that the shutter may not
be hopeless at all.
Probably someone who doesn't understand these shutters tried to work on
it. There are lots of little levers in the shutter and it will jam if one
is cocked a little from where it belongs.
If the cocking lever is jammed at its starting position it will jam the
winding mechanism.
If the camera is in generally good condition, particularly if the lenses
are good, it may be worth having it overhauled by someone really good.
I taught myself camera repair, and especially Rollei repair after a local
shop, once highly recommended, screwed up a Rolleicord IV I had. These are
not very complicated cameras. I wound up fixing it myself with the aid of a
set of jeweler's screwdrivers from the grocery store (grocery stores sell
everything now). The shop that messed it up would not admit doing so. I
should have sued them but didn't. The problem turned out to be nothing more
than dried out grease on one of the levers in the wind mechanism.
A camera like this one is beyond me but not beyond someone like Harry
Fleenor or Marflex. I would at least e-mail them describing _exactly_ what
you have and asking their opinion.
IMHO it takes a lot to get a Rollei to the junk stage. They are very well
built and relatively easy to service. Don't give up just yet.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Leaf Shutter Speed
you wrote:
>
>> Cut
>> >With leaf shutter cameras there's another more serious problem.
>> >At 1/500 sec (for example) f/22 becomes the equivalent of about
>> >f/16 because the small aperture is "open" for about 1/250 sec.
>> >Reason is that the shutter takes time to open and close and the
>> >small aperture suffers for it... Ed
>>
> Why would so many camera manufacturers such as Rollei sell cameras
>with leaf shutters and claim to have a possible shutter speed - aperture
>combination such as f22 @ 1/500sec if this is not possible due to the
>limitations of the shutter?
A good question. I posted in great detail just now about shutter
efficiency. However, for many years there was a sort of horsepower contest
among shutter makers as to who could produce the highest speed. This was
taking place when film speeds were pretty slow so I don't know what end it
served other than to be able to advertise higher top speeds.
In fact, the speed of the top speed, or perhaps the top two speeds,
varies with aperture being the marked speed only for the maximum clear
aperture of the shutter.
Probably, it would be better to mark the shutter for its actual speed for
the range of stops actually used.
However, shutter speed accuracy is not very good anyway. Although Deckel
marked their shutters within about 25% of the actual speed at the highest
speed and about 10% at slower speeds, the standards allow something like a
50% speed error over much of the range. Also, there were no standards for
shutter speeds until relatively recent times.
In some cases, for instance older Ilex Universal shutters, the top speed
or speeds were never more than wishful thinking. Old #5 Universals are
marked to 1/150th! None of these shutters ever ran faster than about
1/35th. Later ones are marked only to 1/50th, which is probably reasonable
for the full clear aperture of the shutter.
The Compur shutters used by F&H; were the best available at the time. They
are accurate enough cosidering the latitude of even transparency film,
certainly for B&W; negative film, and have proved to be reliable and very
long lived.
Those requiring very accurate exposure can measure shutter speeds. Even
the simple Calumet tester can measure _effective_ speed if set up right to
do it. Not too difficult for FP shutters but more fussy for leaf shutters
where the tester must be in the image of a light source. The tester has a
threshold, so the measuring set up is made so that it trips at the 50%
point.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Optics question
you wrote:
>Cut
>>With leaf shutter cameras there's another more serious problem.
>>At 1/500 sec (for example) f/22 becomes the equivalent of about
>>f/16 because the small aperture is "open" for about 1/250 sec.
>>Reason is that the shutter takes time to open and close and the
>>small aperture suffers for it... Ed
I am glad you mentioned this as I used Compur shutter cameras for years
without realizing this until I read it in Ted DiSante's (sp?) Medium Format
book. I gather one should use large apertures to get the most out of leaf
shutters (in terms of fast shutter speeds).I'd be curious if anyone has
measured the actual/effective shutter speeds of the various PQS lenses at
various apertures for this effect. The results would be useful for
determining the best strategies (lenses, film speeds) for aerial
photography and other fast ss needs.
>Tom Kline
>Cordova, Alaska
FWIW, the opening and closing of medium size late version Compur shutters
takes about 1/1000 second total. For a #1 Compur the factory adjustment is
to have a total open time at 1/500th of about 1/380th second.
The assumption is that at the highest speeds the lens will be used wide
open or nearly so. Of course, this isn't true so when smaller stops are
used its well to remember that 1/500th is probably closer to 1/400th. This
is still about the right ratio for the #00 and #0 Compurs found in
Rolleiflex and Rolleicord cameras.
There are shutter testing machines which measure effective time but most
measure total time for the center of the shutter. This is the case for the
little tester Calumet sells.
While many old shutter actually _are_ slow at their highest speeds many
are not but appear to be slow because total time is being measured rather
than the effective time reflected in the speed markings. So, it your old
Compurs measure about 20% to 25% slow at the highest speed its probably
going as fast as it ever did.
Attempts at making shutters with speeds faster than about 1/500th have not
been very sucessful. The Kodak Syncrho 800 and Graflex 1000 shutters both
suffered from rapid wear due to the tremendous forces needed to drive the
blades open and shut fast enough.
Focal Plane shutters do better but still have the problem of efficiency
when the slit is narrow. In order to get high speeds one needs either a
narrow slit or to move the curtains rapidly. The latter gets into the same
sort of problems the leaf shutter has, namely accelerating a mass quickly
with the attendant stress on the parts and the need for a powerful motor.
The improvements in FP shutters, at least for 35mm cameras, have come
from the use of different materials for the curtain. Nikon started using
Titanium ribbon rather than rubberized cloth with the F model and other
manufacturers have used Titanium or other materials so that the speed of FP
shutters has been increased from about 1/1000 to 1/8000 on some cameras.
There are also alternative types of FP shutters such as the Copal Square
shutter, which is capable of quite high speeds.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From Rollei Mailing List:
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Optics question
you wrote:
>In other words, twice the amount of light. f22 being f16.
>
>That is why I stated, perhaps a variable mechanical stop, based on the
>aperture setting. The shutter would be set one stop over the actual
>aperture setting on the diaphragm. Wouldn't this correct this problem.
>
>Not being really familiar with shutters. In a typical mechanical shutter
>are there two springs, one gets tension as the shutter is cocked. When the
>shutter is fired and the blades open, do they tension a second spring for
>closing.
>
>John Kufrovich
Most shutters have only a single drive spring. The spring is wound when
the shutter is cocked. For so called self-setting shutters cocking is done
by the first part of the motion of moving the tripping lever.
The shutter blades are actuated by a ring. Each blade is more or less
triangular shaped with a pin in one apex and a hole or another pin in one
other apex. The third apex is the part you see. One pin is in a fixed hole
so that the blade rotates around it, the other is in a slotted ring which
drives the blades. The ring is actuated by a pin connected to an
interesting bell crank sort of arrangement. When the shutter is tripped the
spring drives the crank which in turn drives the blades opening them as
quickly as possible. Then, before the thing can close, a toggle must move a
certain distance to release the crank. This toggle is required to move some
sort of regulator mechanism. In old shutters is was often an air cylinder
of some sort, in more modern shutters it is a lever connected to a
clockwork gear reduction chain with a regulating pallet on the other end.
When the toggle gets past the lever on the regulator the crank is free to
continue rotating and drives the blade ring back the other way as fast as
it can go, closing the shutter. The effect is to open the shutter quickly,
hold it open for a precribed time, and drive it closed again. The opening
and closing times are fixed. In some shutters a second, or booster, spring
is brought in for the highest speed. This is a separate spring but it acts
in tandem with the main spring to boost its power. This increases the speed
of the blade ring making the shutter open and close faster. At the two
highest speeds the shutter speed is usually regulated by the inertia and
friction of the mechanism. The greater spring power helps to overcome this.
The efficency of a leaf shutter varies with its speed. Since the opening
and closing times remain constant they are much less a part of the total
time for the slower speeds.
Austin is right that the speed is effectively slower for small stops. The
aperture is completly open as soon as the blades pass them opening and
closing but for larger stops the shutter blades are also acting as a stop,
so, in effect, for larger stops, the lens is partially stopped down by the
shutter blades while they are opening and closing.
The loss in a shutter without rotating blades is less than a stop. The
maximum possible is a one stop, assuming the blades reverse instantly when
they are completly open, and this loss is only for the maximum clear
aperture of the shutter.
For shutters like the Compur Rapid, as found on Rollei cameras, the loss
is around 20% to 50%, perhaps 1/3rd stop to 2/3rd stop at most. The
effective speed for small stops for the Compur shutters used on Rolleis is
around 1/380th for the speed marked 1/500th, providing the shutter is in
good condition.
Generally the shutter blades and aperture blades are nearly touching so
that distance between them has no effect.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Optics question
you wrote:
>> From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
>> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001
>> To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>> Subject: Re: [Rollei] Optics question
>>
>> Most shutters have only a single drive spring. The spring is wound when
>> the shutter is cocked. For so called self-setting shutters cocking is done
>> by the first part of the motion of moving the tripping lever.
>>Excellent, Richard!! Should be saved as "Shutters 101".
>
>As an aside, did you ever see the guts of one of those Graflex shutters, I
>think it was Supermatic or something like that, that had 1/1000 second
>top speed? It was a non-reciprocating design which used eccentric gearing
>to drive the shutter blades in a sort of oval, non-reciprocating motion.
>The blades never changed direction and thus they got the high speed, when
>the danged thing worked. Often it didn't. After going into a couple of
>them in the 70s and almost exploding from frustration I refused to even
>open one again. Good idea, but the nylon gears weren't up to the stresses
>put on them and just blew off gear teeth.
>
>Bob
The Graflex 1000 shutter is described in _Photography: Its Materials and
Processes_ Sixth edition, C.B.Neblette, 1962, D. van Nostrand Company in
the section on shutters.
This is an amazing piece of machinery. The blades are each driven by an
eccentric pin and the other end is hinged on a slot. The blades overlap so
that they can begin accelerating some time before actually opening. I am
not describing this well, you really have to see a drawing of it to
appreciate it. Its actually a pretty elegant design, but the stress must be
terrific. In any case the shutter has a bad reputation and few repair
people will touch them.
I've seen pictures of the Kodak 800 shutter but don't know exactly what
is in it. That also has a bad reputation for reliability.
BTW, this book has a good explanation, with drawings, of shutter
efficiency for both leaf and focal plane shuttes with formulas for
calculating the effective speed of FP shutters. Its long out of print but
sometimes shows up used and should be available through interlibrary loan.
There is no general handbook remotely like this available now.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Sat, 04 May 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Synchro Compur new and old
you wrote:
>I was speaking to Bill Maxwell the other day, and he said he hates working
>on the 2.8C, because it has a more primitive shutter than the newer models.
>Okay, here's my question: when did they switch over to the new shutter? I
>remember being told that the shutter which has tension between 1/250 and
>1/500 is an older variety -- is this what he's referring to? He said the
>older shutters are less likely to seize up, but harder to adjust for
>accuracy.
>
>(By the way, Bill's a huge fan of the Xenar -- thinks it comes close to the
>Xenotar and Planar. He doesn't think much of the Tessar, and thinks the 3.5
>Xenotar is the best of the bunch.)
>Douglas Cooper
>http://www.dysmedia.com
I believe the grooved bolster was available by changing the back. I
suspect that new backs didn't cost any more than having the camera serviced
and the bolster replaced.
The "new" type Synchro-Compur has an EV scale. It varies from the older
one in several ways.
First, it has a single drive spring, which is easily replaceable,
practically a drop-in.
It also has a different drive arrangement for the diaphragm so that the
f/stops are linearly spaced on the scale (needed for the EV system). It
also has different shutter speeds than the earlier versions.
The speeds of the later shutter can be changed at will regardless of
whether its cocked or not.
I am not sure this type of shutter is any more accurate than the earlier
one. In both shutters the only speed adjustment is by setting the position
of the slow speed gear train. Compur instructions say to set it for 1/10th
second. Other speeds are controlled by the speed cam. While its possible to
adjust a speed cam I think its probably asking for trouble to do it.
There have been several Compur shutter models. The earliest are the "dial
set" type, sometimes also called Model A shutters. These have a small dial
at the top of the shutter for setting speeds. They can be made to be
accurate but often the cams are worn. Speeds are limited to around 1/200th
although some small ones are marked higher. This type originated around 1912.
The second type of Compur is the "rim set", sometimes called the Model B.
Speeds are set by a ring around the body of the shutter. Earlier versions
have speeds to 1/200th or 1/250th and no booster spring. The larger ones
may have a booster spring for 1/200th. Smaller sizes to to 1/400th. This
shutter appeared about 1930.
This was followed by the Compur-Rapid, which is similar but has a top
speed of 1/500th.
Following WW-2 another model with built-in flash synch was made under the
name Synchro-Compur. This is the shutter found on the MX Rollei.
Rolleis with EV dials have the later single spring shutter. My
understanding is that this shutter is a variation of the shutter designed
for Hasselblad but without the automatic diaphragm arrangement.
The dial set Compurs used spiral clock motor type springs. Rim set
Compurs use mostly helical type springs. The late Compur went back to the
clock motor type spring.
Early dial and rim set Compurs have the sometimes useful ability to open
the shutter in T and B without cocking it.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
from rangefinder mailing list
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002
From: Winfried Buechsenschuetz w-buechsenschuetz@gmx.de
Subject: RE: Most reliable shutter?
Sergio wrote:
> Well we all know about the shutter on the Canon GIII QL-17, but what
> about the other compact rangefinders such as the Olympus RD/SP, Yashica
> Lynx, Minolta 7, etc.? Do any of these 70's rangefinders have a more
> reliable shutter than the GIII QL-17?
No. I own all of the above mentioned (assuming that the 'Minolta 7'
cited refers to a Hi-Matic7 or 7s, NOT a 7sII), and I have seen sticky
shutters on all of them (except for the Oly35SP). All leaf shutters are
prone to get stuck when they are not used for long periods. Even the
german Synchro-Compur shutter is not immune (fortunately, since Kodak
Retina c/C models with stuck shutters can be a real bargain, and due to
the removable front element it takes some minutes to clean the shutter).
> Barring that, are there any that
> are easier to fix than the GIII QL-17 when they do get stuck?
Yes, quite a few... since the lens of the QL17 is not easy to
disassemble. Almost all others are much easier, especially the Lynx5000
which even does not have a retainer ring - just unscrew the front lens
cell (on the Lynx14, there is an additional name plate ring which only
causes trouble when the filter thread is dented). Concerning sticky slow
speed escapements, I found the Oly35RD easiest to repair since its
escapement is outside the lens barrel. You will have to open the body to
access it, but the Oly designers made this very easy for you.
Some 'sticky shutters', however, are caused by a defective self timer,
and repairing this can be a real pain. I tried it on a Canonet and was
very happy I had a spare front assembly to swap....
Winfried
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Source for CLAs
Date: Thu, 09 May 2002
"007" invalid@nospam.com wrote:
>"Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com wrote in message
>> >
>> You won't find much cheaper service. Its hand work, someone can do
>> only so much, and the time must be charged for. Cleaning a #1
>> Supermatic takes as much time as a larger or more expensive shutter.
>> There are a few good shutter guys around but none are going to be
>> cheap.
>> You can try doing it yourself, Supermatics are not difficult to work
>> on. But, if the main spring has taken a set the higher speeds will be
>> slow and replacing the spring is the only way of geetting them back
>> up. The problem is that springs are not available.
>
>Richard, how hard is it to do a big old Alphax? I've got one in fine shape,
>but I bought it with the understanding the vendor would CLA it before
>sending. The price I paid was with this in mind. He didnt, its still slow at
>slow speeds. I'm not going to open it up unless I'm pretty sure I wont make
>matters worse. I dont want to send it back because I dont trust the seller
>to do it right-this is the second time he's done this to me, and the price I
>paid makes a CLA out of the question right now. If it would help, I've got
>an old Betax, same size, thats even worse off (nearly useless) that I could
>practice on. Slight diference in that the Alphax goes to 1 second and the
>Betax only 1/2
The Alphax and Betax are reasonably simple shutters. The slow
running is probably due to congealed lubricant. Lighter fluid works
well as a cleaning solvent. You can get it cheaper as Naphtha at paint
stores. Its a fire hazard, treat it as you would gasoline. Very pure
Isopropyle alcohol is also a useful cleaner.
You will need a set of jeweler's screwdrivers (which you can get
even in the grocery store now). And fine point watchmaker's tweezers
of the "Dumont" pattern, preferably of non-magnetic stainless steel.
You can sometimes find these at electronic supply stores. I get them
from C&H; Surpus in Pasadena Ca, but that's because they are a fifteen
minute drive from here. Theirs are pretty cheap. About a #5 is right.
You will proabably also appreciate a low power loupe or magnifying
glasss on a stand.
It helps to have drawings of the shutter mechanism. I think the only
easily available source for these is from Ed Romney. Ed publishes some
books on elementary camera repair which are pretty good. He's improved
the presentation a lot recently. He has a web site.
Wollensak Alphax and Betax, and Ilex shutters use hair springs all
over. The larger ones can be made from piano wire. There was once an
adjustable jig for bending them but I haven't seen one advertized for
years. It can be done with hand tools and some care, but new springs
are not often needed.
Fine oil can be gotten from hobby shops specializing in model
railroads. For Compur type shutters watch oil is specified but for
these somewhat cruder shutters the main requirment is an oil which
does not creep or oxidize.
Very little is used, mainly on the bearings of the gear train speed
regulator. Virtually everything else in these shutters should be dry.
You will need something to measure the speed. The best value is a
shutter tester sold by Calumet. The last I looked it was about $80 USD
(60 when I bought mine). It is small, simple to use, and will also
measure strobe flash duration. It works on shutters from the largest
to the focal plane shutters in 35mm cameras (with some care, the
instruction book tells you how to do it).
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002
From: blackbird711@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: [HUG] Leaf shutter accuracy
> What is the accuracy of the leaf shutters in a Hasselblad lens, such as the
> 80mm CFe? Particularly at the 1/500sec end.
>
> Simon
Your leaf shutters will typically run between 1/375 and 1/425 when set
at 1/500. If you fine tune them higher, you will start to break blades
in a short while.
Dick Werner
From camera makers mailing list:
From: veggie@monmouth.com
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002
Subject: [Cameramakers] A Pair of Useful Lens/Shutter Combinations
There seems to be a abundance of barrel mount process lenses available
very cheaply now as the process camera world goes digital. It is tempting
to consider mounting these in shutters for use on a view camera but high
price of shutters with a throat diameter large enough to accomodate most
such lens can negate the low purchase price of the lens.
There are some good process lenses available that will fit into the
shutters that can be salvaged from oscilloscopte cameras. The shutters,
#3 Elgeets and Alphaxes, generally sell for $20-40 cettainly an
attractive price compared with the $200-300 that a Copal#1 seems to fetch
these days.
I've fitted two Wollensak process lenses onto Alphax shutters recently.
Both the lenses and shutters are good 'Murcan products so no metric
tooling was needed to cut threads.
The first was a 10 1/4" f10 Apo Raptar - didn't have the option of a
front mount here as the original iris was unusable when the lens came to
me. These element groups on this lens are 1.44" diameter and they fit
easily into the 1.75" bore of the Alphax shutter I had; only a pair of
reducing bushings was needed. The collet which I made to hold the
bushings for final machining greatly simplified the work. In this case,
I reproduced the rear-flange to diaphragm distance in the rear bushing,
the faced off the fron bushing to make the flange separation distance in
the bushed shutter the same as the original lens barrel.
The second lens was a 13" f10 APO Raptar. The front element will screw
directly into the second Alphax shutter which I had. I machined a 0.08"
thick spacer to prevent the rear of the element group from interfering
with the shutter. A short extension ring was needed so increase the
flange separation in the bushed Alphax to match the larger distance in
the orignal barrel.
The parts for either of these lens/shutter combinations can be had for
well under $50 - not bad at all for sharp lenses with wide coverage
circles.
From Camera Makers Mailing List:
From: "Earthmother" veggie@monmouth.com
Date: Sun, 19 May 2002
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re: A Pair of Useful Lens/Shutter Combinations
These shutters appear frequently on eBay. Sometimes they're listed as
shutters, but just as oftern they're listed by the lens mounted in them.
Look for lens names they read "Oscillo-Raptar" or "Oscillo-Graphic". The
lenses themselves aren't really good for much since they only cover 4x5 at a
1:1 ratio. They do make handy magnifiers and aren't took bad a focussing
loupe - and you get two of them with each shutter.
Be sure that you don't but the "electronic shutter" version of these. They
require an external control box, which even if available, works of AC. The
shutters are labelled as electronic on the rim.
Another way to do this is to buy an entire oscilloscope camera and throw
away everything but the shutter. So far, I've been able to get the eBay
sellers to dismount the shutter for me to cut down on shipping costs. The
entire oscilloscope cameras generally sell for less than the shutters alone
(my cheapest buy was $7), probably because someone listing a shutter alone
has some idea of its value whereas the oscilloscope cameras are sold by
people salavaging obsolete electronic gear. You'll have to take some care
doing this since the later model oscilloscope cameras have built-in
electronic shutters which are useless for fitting a LF lens. Usually you can
see the lens/shutter assembly protruding from the front of the Polaroid
camera film back as a cylindrical object with a shutter visible in the
center.
Other variants are the "Speed-i-o-Scope" and "Speed-i-o-Graph" shutters
which , for some reason, came in little jewelry boxes. Avoid the Wollensak
ones since they don't have a "T" setting or rear threads for lensboard
mounting.
> There are some good process lenses available that will fit into the
> shutters that can be salvaged from oscilloscopte cameras. The shutters,
> #3 Elgeets and Alphaxes, generally sell for $20-40 cettainly an
> attractive price compared with the $200-300 that a Copal#1 seems to fetch
> these days.
Where can I find some of these shutters? Are they a rim set type?
Thanks for the info.
Ted
From: sanking@clemson.edu (Sandy King)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Betax No. 5 Quality
Date: Sun, 12 May 2002
...
> If you decide that you don't want it, I will buy it from you. The first 12"lens
> I ever owned had a #5 Betax and I liked it a lot.
>
> Michael A. Smith
> Peter De Smidt wrote:
>
> > Hi Folks. I have a Wollensak Betax No. 5 shutter that I've been thinking of
> > rigging up to use barrel lenses on my 8x10. The problem, though, is that
> > it's only firing on one speed, right around 1/20th of a second, and I'm
> > considering whether to send it in and have Mr. Grimes work on it. But
> > before I do so, does anyone have any thoughts on the reliability/quality of
> > these shutters once they've been professionally cleaned? I don't want to go
> > to the expense and trouble if it's not worth it.
> >
> > Regards,
I agree with previous posts that the Betax #5 is a good shuttter. I have
owned two lenses mounted in this shutter and found it to be very reliable
and simple in use, though the lack of a 1 second speed was an
inconvenience.
However, if the question is would I pay to have a barrel lenses mounted in
a Betax #5 the answer is probably not. To begin with, you will be spending
over $250 for the mounting job alone, and perhaps another $50-75 for
having the shutter brought back to working order. And what you wind up
with is a lens in a very old shutter with no flash synch and less value
than if mounted in a newer shutter. However, if you are absolutely certain
that you do no need flash synch, and if there is no concern at all about
resell value, it makes sense to use the Betax.
I have had two large barrel lenses mounted in shutter within the past
year, a 42" Red Dotar Artar and a 30" Red Dot Artar. In both cases I
determined not to mount these in a #5 Betax that I have but in a syn #5
Ilex in the first case, and in a #3 Copal in the second. These shutters
provide more versaility in my present use than would have the Betax #5,
and almost certainly give these lenses greater resale value should I need
to sell them later.
Sandy King
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Betax No. 5 Quality
Date: 13 May 2002
pdesmidt@dotnet.com (Peter De Smidt) wrote...
> sanking@clemson.edu (Sandy King) wrote
> > I agree with previous posts that the Betax #5 is a good shuttter. I have
> > owned two lenses mounted in this shutter and found it to be very reliable
> > and simple in use, though the lack of a 1 second speed was an
> > inconvenience.
> >
> > However, if the question is would I pay to have a barrel lenses mounted in
> > a Betax #5 the answer is probably not. To begin with, you will be spending
> > over $250 for the mounting job alone, and perhaps another $50-75 for
> > having the shutter brought back to working order. And what you wind up
> > with is a lens in a very old shutter with no flash synch and less value
> > than if mounted in a newer shutter. However, if you are absolutely certain
> > that you do no need flash synch, and if there is no concern at all about
> > resell value, it makes sense to use the Betax.
> >...
> > Sandy King
>
> Hi All,
>
> Thanks everyone for your replies. So far, I've tried Richard's
> suggestion, but I haven't been able to get the speeds to change. I'll
> give it a little more work. The max speed did increase, though, to
> about 1/30th of a second, according to my Calumet shutter tester.
>
> I'm not planing on having a lens professionally mounted on the
> shutter. I have a threaded ring that screws into the shutter, and I
> plan on mounting an old lensboard holder from a trashed speed grahic
> on it. That way, I'll be able to mount barrel lenses in graphic
> boards for use on the shutter. This probably won't work for wide
> angle lenses, but I have in mind using it for a 15" process paragon
> and a 480 kodak anastigmat, and so the added depth shouldn't be a
> problem.
> I've not shot 8x10 extensively before, and I'd like to get a feel for
> these lenses before I commit to having them mounted, or buying
> expensive lenses in shutters.
>
> Peter
When you have the shutter open look at the mechanism to see if part
of it isn't working. It may be that there is a spring missing or
something of the sort.
The speeds are regulated by a clockwork with an oscillating pallet
at the end of the gears, very similar to the escapement of some
watches or clocks.
Some shutter have more elaborate systems of gears than others but
the general principle is the same for all.
When the shutter is tripped the blades are driven open by a fairly
strong spring. When fully open some form of crank like toggle comes
into contact with a lever which drives the gears in the escapement.
The time the blades stay open is controlled by how long the lever on
the toggle stays in contact with the lever on the escapement. This is
controlled by setting the position of the lever on the escapement by
means of a cam and pin. The escapement allows only rather slow movemet
of the toggle lever. After it moves far enough to lose contact with
the escapement the toggle can continue to move to the point where the
blades are released again and are driven shut by the strong spring.
The speed with wich the blades open and close is constant regardless
of the shutter speed, it is the time the shutter pauses when fully
open that changes.
When a shutter operates at only one speed, especially one slower
than the top speed, its because the position of the escapement lever
is not changing.
It may be that the entire lever is stuck, often from oxidized
lubricant. Or, it may be that the mechanism is jammed for some other
reason. Possibilities are that the spring which counters the movement
of the escapement is lost or has come loose on one end. Also, the pin
which controlls the position of the escapement lever, and thus sets
the speed, may not be in contact with the speed cam. It may be jammed
under it, for instance.
The Betax is a fairly simple shutter so it may be possible to find
out what is happening by visual inspection. Work the speed mechanism
with a small tool to examine its movement.
I can't tell you exactly what is wrong with this shutter but the
sort of examination I'm suggesting will often find the problems.
A missing spring may be hard to spot without a drawing or photo, or
a working shutter for comparison, but examination of the mechanism as
it moves may show where one should be.
Almost all the springs in Wollensak and Ilex shutters are hair
springs. That is they are made from straight bits of piano wire bent
into shape. Most of these springs can be fabricated with simple tools
if you have some idea of what the missing one looks like.
I will also reiterate the warning about scum on the shutter blades.
It can jam the shutter. This is not what is happening here but is
something anyone intending to work on shutters should watch out for.
It doesn't take much friction to slow the opening and closing times or
keep the blades from moving at all.
Careful cleaning is the way to avoid this.
A general note about barrel lenses and remounting. For large format
lenses shutter speeds are generally fairly slow. For this reason a
back shutter is quite practical. Virtually any large shutter can be
used as a universal back shutter by having an adaptor made which
screws into the front of the shutter and takes lens boards or mounting
an iris clamp on the front. Any lens within the size of the shutter
opening can then be used on the shutter.
--
Richard Knoppow
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Los Angeles, CA, USA
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Betax No. 5 Quality
Date: Sat, 11 May 2002
"Peter De Smidt" pdesmidt@fdldotnet.com wrote:
>Hi Folks. I have a Wollensak Betax No. 5 shutter that I've been thinking of
>rigging up to use barrel lenses on my 8x10. The problem, though, is that
>it's only firing on one speed, right around 1/20th of a second, and I'm
>considering whether to send it in and have Mr. Grimes work on it. But
>before I do so, does anyone have any thoughts on the reliability/quality of
>these shutters once they've been professionally cleaned? I don't want to go
>to the expense and trouble if it's not worth it.
>
>Regards,
>Peter De Smidt
Betax shutters are good ones, but have limited speeds.
The problem is probably that the shifting lever for the speed
regulator has stuck due to caked lubricant.
You can probably clean it yourself.
The face plate is probably held on by two or three small screws
(Wollensak had a couple of variations). Once off you can remove the
speed cam. Make notes of how everthing comes apart.
You really do not need to disassemble the shutter beyond this point.
Use lighter fluid (like Ronsonol) as the cleaning solvent and canned
air to blow it around and out of the shutter. You can get Naptha in
large amounts at paint and hardware stores. Ronsonol is just Naptha
but seems to be pure enough not to leave a residue. You can also use
99% Isopropyl alcohol from the drug store, the Naptha is more
effective on the dried oil and grease in the shutter.
Use several treatments until there is no residue left.
Sometimes even a few drops on the regulator gears is enough to free
them.
If it needs lubrication you can get a very fine synthetic oil at
hobby shops specializing in model trains. Locally the stuff is sold
under the LeBel trade name. Not expensive.
Use the minimum amount you can on the bearings of the gears. You can
use a toothpick or a very small brush to apply the oil.
Once cleaned the thing will run for years without further attention.
The actual speeds should be checked. If you have many older shutters
or want to work on them a shutter tester is a necessity. The best is a
small one sold by Calumet. I bought mine several years ago, its still
in the catalogue. The current price is around $80 US.
The top speeds will always read slow because the shutter is
calibrated in effective time for maximum aperture and the tester is
measuring total open time.
The difference depends on the opening and closing times of the
shutter. For a Betax or Alphax the total time and effective times will
be different even for relatively slow times. The slow speeds should be
quite accurate.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Betax No. 5 Quality
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002
pdesmidt@dotnet.com (Peter De Smidt) wrote:
>Eventually, I was able to free up the mechanism. Thanks everyone for
>your suggestions. I cleaned everything as best I could with naptha (a
>few drops) and canned air. The results are as follows using a Calumet
>shutter tester reading total open time. the 1/2 second reading is
>about 1/2 stop slow, but by making a custom lens speed plaque, the
>shutter can be made to give a consistent 1/2 second. I also get 1/4,
>1/8 and 1/15th of a second, but that's the fastest that it'll go. Ok,
>ok. The fastest setting is more like 1/20th. For most of what I will
>do, this should be good enough, but... it'd be nice to get up to
>1/30th. Is it normal for this type of shutter to be limited to around
>1/20th? I have some nyoil on order. Would light 'toothpick'
>applications of nyoil increase speed? In any case, if a shutter is
>'working', what would the role of the oil be? I know that Ilex
>shutters should be run dry, but I haven't heard that about Wollensak.
>
>Peter
The oil should speed the retarder up a little.
However, the shutter may still be dirty. It really needs a good soak
in the naphta followed by blowing it out with compressed air (canned
air is fine). It may need several treatments to get the residue off
the shutter blades. Even slight friction can slow down the top speed.
It may also have a weak main spring. Wollensak and Ilex both use
hair type springs. To some degree they are adjustable. New ones can be
made from spring wire or piano wire by bending it around a mandrel the
right size. A drill stock makes a good mandrel and there is probably
one of about the right size in a set of medium sized drills.
An alternative to fine oil, at least on shutters like this, is a
brand of electronic contact cleaner called Deoxitt D-5. A very little
of this applied to the shafts of the gears in the speed regulator will
lubricate them. The stuff does not seem to oxidize with time.
There are special applicators used by watchmakers but for shutters
oil can be applied with a toothpick or the tip of a small brush. Put a
drop of oil on a smooth surface, like glass, and brush it out thin.
Then pick up a little on the tip of the brush and apply it. The
retarder is really the only part of the shutter which needs
lubrication. Sometimes large sliding surfaces like speed dials can use
a little Lubriplate but it should never be applied to the levers in
the shutter itself.
It should be possible to get the low speeds pretty close. Actutally
half a stop would be quite good for an Ilex shutter:-)
This is more than you really need. Try a little oil before doing
anything else.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From camera makers mailing list:
From: "Earthmother" veggie@monmouth.com
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002
Subject: [Cameramakers] Another Interesting Combination
In addition to the lens-in-shutter fitting which I described in a recent
posting, I've also done a fair amount of mounting lenses in rear shutters.
That is, the entire lens is in front of the shutter. You make a transition
piece which resemble a whopping big filter holder which screws into the
shutter and the lens screws into this adaptor.
With lenses less than 300 mm focal length, there can be some loss in
movements for a 4x5 view or field camera because the bore of the shutter can
cause some vignetting. Even this isn't always a genuine problem. I've
mounted a 240 mm Ronar on an Ilex #3 univeral shutter and still had 2 1/2 of
rise. The camera which I use it on has a maximum of 3" rise (Calumet CC400)
so I didn't lose much.
Last week another oscilloscope camera arrived in my mail, a Tektronix Model
12. This had another Ilex #3 and an (essentially useless) 75 mm
"Oscillo-Raptar" lens. These Ilex shutters are really reliable mechanisms,
the most I've ever had to do on one is lube the escapement - 30 minute job.
The 75mm lens was mounted in a pair of 3/8" wall, 3" diameter aluminum
tubing sections; one end already 1.75 x 52tpi to mate with the shutter.
Tektonix evidently uses first rate material for these lens mounts; this
stuff was lovely to machine.
I used the Raptar lens mount to fabricate an adaptor for a 480 mm f9 Ronar
(I'm partial to German optics, my Ronars all seem to have either 0.75 mm or
1.0 mm pitch threads on the mounting thread. I cut the threads on a SothBend
10 K usimg metric transposing gears). The 1.4" diameter (appx) maximum
shutter opening calculates to be a maximum effective lens opening of f13.5.
Graphics arts lenses, like my Ronar collection work best at f16+ ( I use
f22) for distant objects. I use this lens/shutter on a Calumet 45 NX, which
has a 21" maximum bellows extension. The lens mount acts like a short
extension tube and I'm able to focus to slightly less than 12 feet. No
problem focussing outdoors at my f13.5 wide open setting.
Rear shutter mounts have proven quite practical for me; the modest cost of
oscillioscope camera shutters makes the whole thing work. This particular
shutter set me back $7 - NASA surplus, your tax dollars at work, I'm afraid.
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] GX/FX selftimer??
Byron Rakitzis at byron@rakitzis.com wrote:
> Are there *ANY* production cameras with mechanical leaf shutters which
> feature a self-timer these days? I don't know of any, but my experience
> is limited to Hassy, Rollei TLR, and Copal shutters in large format.
There are some Chinese ones, but I don't know which ones are actually in
current production.
Bob
From Rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] GX/FX selftimer??
Austin Franklin at darkroom@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> Are Compur shutters made in Japan?
>
> Austin
No they are not. The GX uses Japanese shutters. I believe they used Copal
for a while and then switched to Seiko, but I may have that reversed.
Compur shutters are not made anywhere today. That's why current production
Hasselblad lenses use a Prontor shutter.
Bob
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] GX/FX selftimer??
Austin Franklin at darkroom@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> Well, sorry, but you're wrong about the shutter the early GX uses. My GX
> has a Synchro-Compur. It says so right in the "User's Manual" on page 18
> under "Shutter". The later ones, as I understand it, DO use a Seiko
> shutter.
>
>> Actually, it is simply that available Japanese shutters do not come with
>> self timers. Simple as that.
>
> If Synchro-Compur shutters are not made in Japan, then the early GXs did not
> use Japanese shutters...and therefore not having a self timer has nothing to
> do with using available Japanese shutters.
>
> Regards,
>
> Austin
My understanding is that the very first GX cameras were made with NOS Compur
shutters that Rollei had on hand. Perhaps those shutters were bought
originally for some other camera and lacked self timer mechanisms for that
reason. It would not make sense for Rollei to pay people to take out the
self timers.
After that first batch, which you may have an example of, they ran out of
the Compur shutters and switched to Copal shutters, and at some later time
switched again to Seiko.
At least this is how I remember the sequence as explained by someone from
Rollei. Martin Arndt would probably know the exact details.
Anyway, if you buy a recent production GX you will be getting a Japanese
shutter. I would assume the same to be true of the FX. Whether any GX
front plates marked with Compur were ever put over top of Japanese shutters
I don't know.
Bob
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] GX/FX selftimer??
RHaigh5748@aol.com at RHaigh5748@aol.com wrote:
> Is there any difference in the Compur and the Copal shutter or is it simply a
> manufacturing company name for the same type shutter?
The Compur, Copal and Seiko shutters are all very similar mechanically, and
all work well. They were made by different companies, of course, with the
Compur being the original and the others copied from it.
Functionally you won't find any difference, although I think maybe the
scales move in opposite directions on some of them.
Interesting that if you buy a Rollei GX/FX you are probably getting the
identical Japanese shutter used in the Chinese Seagull 4A-109!
Bob
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Jerry Lehrer jerryleh@postoffice.pacbell.net
Subject: Re: [Rollei] GX/FX selftimer??
Bob
The Compur and Copal, as well as the Seiko, have entirely different
escapement and gear-train mechanisms. The companies have no
relationship with one-another.
Jerry
...
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002
From: bigler@ens2m.fr
Subject: [Rollei] [slight OT] availability of Compur Shutters
After merging of both German Shutter companies controlled by the Zeiss
Foundation, Compur shutters were made by Gauthier in the Black Forest.
This is a RUG FAQ explained by Marc many times.
At least as of year 2000 you could order a Schneider or Rodenstock
view camera lens with either a Japanese Copal, a German Compur or a
Prontor. No self-timer IHMO on those professional tools. And many
other shutters can be supplied on request, including the fantastic
electronic Rollei leaf shutter (1/1000s) with electronic remote
control.
I do not know if Compur shutters are still available now (2002) but
the Compur option was sold at an extra price (vs. the 'basic' Copal)
similar to the self cocking Prontor pro, a very interesting shutter
for view camera aficionados with extra features w. respect to a copal.
So except if you insisted on having a German-mde Compur, usually the
basic Copal was the choice since the recent view camera Compur, except
for 1/3 f-stops cliks, is very similar to the Copal in terms of
functionalities.
Mechanically the Copal is certainly not a mere copy of the Compur and
about its reliability : simply ask to any professional photographer
using routinely a view camera lens.
--
Emmanuel BIGLER
bigler@ens2m.fr
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002
From: "Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" peterk@avaya.com
Subject: RE: [Rollei] GX/FX selftimer??
Austin,
Maybe Marc can shed some light on this. Zeiss merged Deckel (Compur) and
Gauthier (Prontor) around 1984 (both had been Zeiss Companies for a long
time before). Maybe he has knowledge of when production for the compur
stopped.
Peter K
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] GX/FX selftimer??
Jerry Lehrer at jerryleh@postoffice.pacbell.net wrote:
> The Compur and Copal, as well as the Seiko, have entirely different
> escapement and gear-train mechanisms. The companies have no
> relationship with one-another.
Japanese shutters began as copies of German ones, and later took separate
evolutionary paths. I know the current ones are different. I've repaired
all of them.
Bob
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] GX/FX selftimer??
Austin Franklin at darkroom@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> In references I've seen to the Seiko shutter, they specifically list it as
> "Seiko/Copal", which, without really knowing much about the companies, leads
> me to believe they are the "same". What I gather from your comment above is
> they are not. What do you know about the history of the Seiko/Copal shutter
> and the GX?
Seiko, which I believe may be a subsidiary of Kyocera these days, is a
totally separate company from Copal, a subsidiary of Konica.
Bob
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] GX/FX selftimer??
J Patric DahlTn at jenspatricdahlen@hotmail.com wrote:
> I see that some Schneider lenses for large format cameras are available with
> Compur shutters. Maybe some models of Compurs still are in production?
Not according to the Zeiss-Prontor people at the last several photokinas.
Bob
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Marc James Small msmall@infi.net
Subject: [Rollei] 2.8GX Shutter Figures
you wrote:
>No they are not. The GX uses Japanese shutters. I believe they used Copal
>for a while and then switched to Seiko, but I may have that reversed.
Bob
You are simply wrong on this. Drive up here and I'll show you the Compur
shutter on my GX.
Preproduction GX's had Prontor shutters -- witness the ones tested by the
camera magazines around 1986.
PR751/1 Synchro-Compur 8/87 - 3/94 10.200 produced
PR751/2 Synchro-Compur 1989 1,500 produced
PR751/3 Synchro-Compur 1994 500 produced
PR751/4 Synchro-Compur 3/94 - 1/95 500 produced
PR751/5 Synchro-Compur 3/94 - 12/94 33 produced
PR752/1 Synchro-Compur 1/95 - 12/95 900 produced
total with Synchro-Compur shutters
13,633
PR751/6 Seiko 9/95 130 produced
PR752/3 Seiko 1996 100 produced
PR752/4 Seiko 1996 - 2000 1,000 produced
total with Seiko shutters
1,230
PR752/2 Copal 6/95 - 12/96 1,000 produced
total with Copal shutters
1,000
Thus, as of 2000, the numerical winner was the Synchro-Compur. I do not
have production figures since 2000, but I suspect that this would add about
400 more to the Seiko total, as production seems to be running around 200
cameras per year.
Marc
msmall@infi.net
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: Shutters
sbug@kkh.com.sg at sbug@kkh.com.sg wrote:
> What are the differences between Compur, Prontor, Copal, Seiko and etc.
> types of shutters?
It would take a book to go into all the details. They are similar in that
they use sets of shutter blades and a ring that rotates under spring tension
to drive the blades open and closed. Gear trains introduce delay between
opening and closing except at the fastest speed. What is different in them
is the design of the gear trains and drive systems, although all are
generally similar. The most different ones are the self-cocking "press"
shutters, mostly from Prontor.
An offshoot of the basic design is the Rollei shutter used in SLX and 6000
series lenses. These use the same sets of blades and drive ring, but move
the ring with electrical power and thus have no springs. Fascinating
design, and mechanically much simpler than the others.
Bob
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: [Rollei] Re: Shutters
you wrote:
> So the Compur is more of a Audi? And the Copal the Lexus.
>That leaves the Seiko to be a .... oh no ... Daihatsu. Peter K
>-----Original Message-----
>From: curtiscr@pe.net [mailto:curtiscr@pe.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002
>To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: Shutters
> > I'd say more like the difference between Subaru, Toyota and Mercedes!
>>
>> Bob A professional
>landscape photographer I know once told me he owned a kit of
> The outfit was stolen and
> He
>thought the Fujinon lenses were sharper than the Schneiders, and -
>in particular - he considered the Copal shutters to be superior in
> He refused to use Seiko shutters,
>because they have a lever that flips back with a crash when the
>shutter is released.
>--
>Curtis Croulet
>Temecula, California
Keep in mind that Compur made many different models of shutters and that
most Compurs in service are getting old.
What is meant by "reliable"? Presumably, the two properties wanted in a
shutter are consistency and accuracy of speed. Its fairly easy to test for
both of these. My suggestion is the small shutter tester sold by Calumet
Photo for around $80 US. What this does not measure (although you can set
up to measure it) is shutter effeciency. Efficiency is the effective speed
taking into accound the opening and closing times of the blades. Most leaf
type shutters are marked according to the effective speed for the _maximum
aperture_ of the shutter. At smaller stops the efficiency goes up and the
effective speed goes down. At their top speeds Synchro-Compur shutters are
about 80% efficient. If you measure total open time the maximum speed will
read about 20% low, maybe more. Because the opening and closing times are
determined by frictional and inertial forces its hard to reduce them
without the use of special materials or the use of an oversize motor to
drive the shutter. The latter increases the stress on everything it moves.
Very few attempts to make conventional shutters with speeds greater than
about 1/500th second have been made. Both the Graphic 1000 and Kodak
Synchro-800 proved to be short lived in service because of the concentrated
stress on some parts
.
Compur shutters are notably trouble free if kept reasonably clean. By
reasonably clean I mean having the shutter properly serviced at intervals
by someone who knows what they are doing. A shutter probably does not need
a CLA more than about onece every five years, and maybe not that often.
I don't know Copal shutters as intimately as Compurs. They could very well
be improved over the Compur but someone who had both could tell by using a
shutter tester with some sophistication about what its testing.
As far as mechanical stability, i.e., holding the lens cells in place, I
doubt if there is much, if any, difference.
There are other good shutters beside the Compur. Kodak Supermatics, if
clean and with good main spring, are quite accurate (they were hand
adjusted) and very consistent. They are also very rugged.
Gauthier, (sp?) who made Prontor shutters, mainly made low cost shutters
for cheaper versions of folding cameras. These were mostly single action
(self cocking) shutters with limited speed ranges. Its interesting that
this is the line which survived.
BTW, the term "press shutter" for a self-cocking shutter is of very
recent origen. In the past a press shutter was one which included a
press-focus device, sometimes called a blade arrestor. This holds the
shutter blades open for ground glass focusing without having to use the T
setting. Compur press shutters also had oversize buttons on the cocking
lever. On these shutters the blade arrestor replaced the self-timer found
in the standard version.
No press camera would have employed a self-cocking shutter since they are
generally without the highest speeds and require strong pressure on the
triping lever (since you are also cocking the shutter). They would have
been useless with the old type of solenoid flash synchronizer.
I think the term is used for self-cocking shutters due to a
mis-understanding of its original meaning by Japanese or Asian manufacturers.
While some very good lenses are now found in self-setting shutters in the
past they were always the mark of a cheap camera, except for very large
shutters (Ilex Universal #5). They still have the same shortcomings they
always had, namely limited available motor power. Since the cocking is done
when the shutter is tripped the tripping lever must necessarily have a
relatively long travel and be hard to move compared to one which is simply
releasing stored energy.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002
From: Marc James Small msmall@infi.net
Subject: RE: [Rollei] Re: Shutters
Richard Knoppow wrote:
>Because the opening and closing times are
>determined by frictional and inertial forces its hard to reduce them
>without the use of special materials or the use of an oversize motor to
>drive the shutter. The latter increases the stress on everything it moves.
>Very few attempts to make conventional shutters with speeds greater than
>about 1/500th second have been made. Both the Graphic 1000 and Kodak
>Synchro-800 proved to be short lived in service because of the concentrated
>stress on some parts.
The East German Presto shutters, made at the Carl Zeiss Jena Saalfeld plant
(also home to OAS, incidentally) had a top speed of 1/750". These were
used for more than a decade in the Werra line of 35mm cameras and proved
very hardy in use. But, again, these are 00 shutters, small by
leaf-shutter standards.
Marc
msmall@infi.net
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: [Rollei] Re: Shutters
...(quoting above post)
I wonder how these were made. There have been a number of shutter designs
using double shutter blades which turn continuously when the shutter is
operated. In the US the Wollensak Optimo and Kodak Rapid-800 are examples
of the type. Higher speeds can be obtained from this design than from
conventional reciprocating blade shutters but the efficiency at the top
speed is only fifty percent, and, of course, varies with the aperture.
Actually, this is a problem with all high speed, low efficiency shutters,
the effective exposure time varies with the stop size, becoming longer for
smaller stops.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Shutters
you wrote:
> Are there any manufacturers that make their own shutters?
>I mean, the old Wollensak lenses, did they use Compur.
>How about the Hexanon/Omegon on the Rapid Omega, Seiko perhaps?
>I have to check out my old rangefinders and see if it lists the shutter
>manufacturer.
>I have some that are stamped "Made in Occupied Japan" so it should be
>interesting to see what those are.
>
>Peter K
Wollensak, Ilex, and Bausch & Lomb made shutters. Actually, both Ilex
and Wollensak were started by men who had worked for B&L; originally. Kodak
originally used Bausch and Lomb shutters for cheaper cameras and Compurs
for better cameras but began making some of their own early on. The Kodak
Ball Bearing shutter is very common on folding cameras from the 1920's 1nd
1930's. When Compur shutters became unavailable in the late 1930's Kodak
began builting their own equivalent, the Supermatic. Around 1960 Kodak
again supplied smaller lenses in Compur shutters and discontinued the
Supermatic. Some Kodak lenses are also found in Wollensak shutters. Larger
Kodak lenses are in Ilex shutters.
For many years B&L; was licensed by Deckel to make Compur and Compound
shutters. The B&L; ones differ in details. Just as with the Zeiss lens
license all was seized by the U.S. government at the outbreak of WW-1. B&L;
continued to make Deckel type shutters during and after WW-1 without license.
Goerz also made some shutters around 1900.
The clockwork speed regulator, used nearly universally after about 1912,
is an Ilex patent. The company lived for many years on the royalties of
this, and subsequent patents.
Ilex was formed by two Bausch & Lomb employees who did not want to give
the gear train escapement to B&L.; After about a year in business Ilex
bought the Acme Optical Co., of Rochester, and began to make lenses as well
as shutters.
The Wollensak brothers, German imigrants, also worked for B&L; but went
into business for themselves after a few years, making shutters at first
but eventually branching out into lens manufacture. Both Wollensak and Ilex
built enormous numbers of lenses and shutters OEM for various camera
manufacturers and for slide and motion picture projectors.
Other than Goerz, I don't know of any German lens makers who also made
shutters. The camera manufacturers seem to have used either Deckel or
Gauthier shutters although these somtimes have the camera maker's name
featured on them prominently, sometimes confusing people into thinking they
are actually the camera maker's shutters.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: Shutters
Richard Knoppow at dickburk@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> Actually, this is a problem with all high speed, low efficiency shutters,
> the effective exposure time varies with the stop size, becoming longer for
> smaller stops.
I'm sure the PQ-S shutters must have this problem as well, but it appears
that Rollei has programmed the light meter system to allow for this.
Exposure accuracy does not seem to vary with aperture as you would expect.
These shutters achieve 1/1000 second through a combination of a special
drive motor which produces more force than the one used in the regular
shutter and shutter blades made from carbon fiber composite which have much
lower mass than metal blades.
Bob
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: Shutters
you wrote:
> Richard Knoppow at dickburk@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>> Actually, this is a problem with all high speed, low efficiency shutters,
>> the effective exposure time varies with the stop size, becoming longer for
>> smaller stops.
>
>I'm sure the PQ-S shutters must have this problem as well, but it appears
>that Rollei has programmed the light meter system to allow for this.
>Exposure accuracy does not seem to vary with aperture as you would expect.
>These shutters achieve 1/1000 second through a combination of a special
>drive motor which produces more force than the one used in the regular
>shutter and shutter blades made from carbon fiber composite which have much
>lower mass than metal blades.
>
>Bob
The construction may be the answer. Its likely the opening and closing
times for this shutter are significantly faster than for conventional
shutters. This would increase the efficiency for larger stops and make
total open time more nearly equal to effective time at all stops.
The Graphic-1000 shutter used a construction which allowed the blade
drive mechanism to accelerate before starting to move the blades. This
shortened the opening and closing times, but the total open time is
1/500th. 1/1000 is the _effective_ time for the maximum shutter aperture,
meaning that an exposure at, say, f/22, would be a full stop greater than
one made at f/4.5.
I don't have info on the Kodak-800 but revolving blade type shutters have
a theoretical limit of 50% efficiency at the greatest speed the mechanism
is capable of. The maximum marked speed of the Kodak shutter may be lower
than the limiting speed, I don't know, but it would be easy enough to
measure if one had a working example.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: fotocord fotocord@yahoo.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Rolleicord
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002
Flash wrote:
> I just bought a Rolleicord it has a Schneider Xenar 3.5 /75 and a Synchro-
> Compur shutter.
> Can any one tell me about the camera . Is the lens any good? The slow
> speed shutter train is sticking.
> Is that some thing I can clean?
http://miss_stephe.tripod.com/shuttercla.htm
I've found most shutters to have the same issues and this same technique
works on most of them. Getting to it and getting it open might be more of a
chalenge than on a folder. The lens is a very good one and worth fixing.
--
Stacey
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Where to get a threaded mounting ring for a BIG ol' lens?
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002
Marco Milazzo mmilazz1@elp.rr.com wrote:
>I just bought an old 18-inch Wollensak Verito, but I have no way to
>mount it to my Burke & James 8 X 10 camera. ( It uses 8-inch boards).
>The diameter of the lens is about 4.75 inches. I
>
>Any idea of where to obtain a threaded mounting ring or for this
>dinasaur?
>
>Does anyone know what size packard shutter might fit it?
>
>TIA
Packard shutters are sold by the size of the open area. See their
web page at http://www.photomall.com The shutter numbers are for
various types of shutters rather than size.
A lot of Verito and similar lenses were equipped with Wollensak
Studio shutters. These look like a large but thin disc about the
middle of the lens. Many of them are inoperative, I don't have one so
don't know what is involved with repairing it. Steve Grimes will
undoubtedly know how and whether its practical. In any case a Packard
shutter will work fine. Steve can also make flanges for old lenses. He
may need to have the lens to measure it.
The Verito was a widely used and well respected adjustable soft
focus lens. 18" is about right for 8x10 portraiture.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002
From: "Mike Elek" melek@fptoday.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Synchro - Compur shutter service!
Bo,
The leaf shutters require very little lubrication. A little bit in the
escapement to keep the slow speeds accurate but otherwise not much at all.
In fact, oil on the shutter blades usually prevent the blades from opening
and closing correctly. If it's running reasonably accurate, I wouldn't mess
with it.
One thing you can do is visually inspect the shutter blades. If they are
clean, then the shutter itself probably is OK. If they seem to have a hard
residue or oil on them, then it might be time to think of having it
serviced.
Anyway, just my thoughts on this.
-Mike
from hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002
From: Johnny Johnson jjohnso4@attbi.com
Subject: Re: [HUG] Shutter speed discrepancy in Distagon
Peter Rosenthal wrote:
>They are never accurate by the way. I've never seen 1/500 better than
>1/400 but more often 1/350. Right out of the box. But that's another thread.
Hi Peter,
That probably explains why that 80mm "C" that you recently CLAed for me
acts the way that it does. After it came back I tried a series of test
exposures with it on a cloudless day with Velvia. The subject was a
mountain and lots of sky and I shot at 1/500, 1/250, 1/125, and 1/60 - all
at the same EV. Comparing the four the two at 1/60 & 1/250 were the same,
the 1/125 was slightly underexposed, and the 1/500 was slightly
overexposed. It was my guess that it was at least a 1/3 stop slow, if not
more, at 1/500. In any case, I figured that the speeds were more accurate
than I am with my Weston Master V meter. ;-)
Later,
Johnny
Johnny Johnson
Lilburn, GA
mailto:jjohnso4@attbi.com
from hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002
From: Peter Rosenthal petroffski@mac.com
Subject: Re: [HUG] Shutter speed discrepancy in Distagon
> Q.G. writes:
>
>> So, come to think of it, perhaps you'd better
>> send it to our very own Peter Rosenthal.
>
> Who is he?
He be me! I've repaired Hasselblads for 25 years and ticking. I'll just
leave it at that.
As far as the current thread goes... The low speeds are related to the
high speeds in that the speed escapement for one is the same as the speed
escapement for the other. Will bad low speeds affect the high speeds? Most
likely but not at all directly. Bad low speeds is an indication that
something is wrong. Dirty, sludgy, out of adjustment, loose escapement
lock screw. Exactly what is wrong is difficult to say over e-mail. If it
were an old, used lens I'd guess that it needs some maintenance and the
the high speeds are certainly affected as well.
The speed escapement uses mechanical resistance to give speeds. The drive
spindle for the shutter is held at a near stationary position while open
by the escapement for different amounts of time giving different speeds. 1/
500 is running full out with no resistance. They are never accurate by the
way. I've never seen 1/500 better than 1/400 but more often 1/350. Right
out of the box. But that's another thread. Anyway... My guess is that your
high speeds and middle speeds as well, are affected by whatever is messing
with your low speeds. Good luck!
Peter
Peter Rosenthal
PR Camera Repair
111 E. Aspen #1
Flagstaff, AZ 86001
(928) 779-5263
from hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002
From: Anthony Atkielski anthony@atkielski.com
Subject: Re: [HUG] Shutter speed discrepancy in Distagon
Peter writes:
> Bad low speeds is an indication that something
> is wrong. Dirty, sludgy, out of adjustment, loose
> escapement lock screw.
I find this extremely disappointing in a brand-new lens costing over 3000
and supposedly hand-inspected individually by expert German technicians.
And if they are too incompetent to even have the lens in spec out of the
box, why would anyone trust them to _repair_ the lens that they couldn't get
right in the first place?
> If it were an old, used lens I'd guess that
> it needs some maintenance and the the high speeds
> are certainly affected as well.
No, it's brand new, and it is normally stored vertically in my camera bag in
a fairly constant environment. I don't use it very often. Is it possible
that a lack of use would cause shutter speeds to slow down?
> 1/500 is running full out with no resistance. They
> are never accurate by the way.
That's nice to know.
> I've never seen 1/500 better than 1/400 but
> more often 1/350. Right out of the box.
Half a stop. So much for German craftsmanship.
> Anyway... My guess is that your high speeds
> and middle speeds as well, are affected by
> whatever is messing with your low speeds.
> Good luck!
Luck is apparently what I need, since paying lots of money doesn't seem to
get me the quality I expect.
From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002
From: Anthony Atkielski anthony@atkielski.com
Subject: Re: [HUG] Shutter speed discrepancy in Distagon
Q.G. writes:
> You're pretty harsh in your judgement, based
> on one single lens.
That one single lens cost 3700. Considering what I paid for it, I'm being
very gentle indeed in my judgement. I could hire a lawyer and sue for that
kind of money.
> You do still like your other lens, don't
> you?
I like all my lenses, but I still expect value for the dollar. I have no
love affair with any particular vendor, and if they are not providing value
for the money, I say so.
There is no excuse for a new lens in this price range to not be precisely in
spec out of the box, period. No lens need be perfect, but it must at least
match the manufacturer's published specifications.
> However, the line of action is clear: return
> the lens and get another one.
And what would they do with the one I returned? Give it to someone else?
That just shifts the problem around. Indeed, maybe that's how such lenses
get into circulation in the first place.
A better solution is to return the lens, destroy it, and then compel the
vendor to provide a new one for free. After a couple of incidents like
that, the vendor will learn how to maintain quality control in fact and not
just in name.
> Do that until you get one that is good.
No. For 3700, I expect every lens to be good, right out of the box. You
don't search for a good lens when you pay that kind of money. I don't have
to do it with a $300 Japanese lens, why should I have to do it with a German
lens costing ten times more? Are Zeiss or its subcontractors just too
incompetent to do the job?
> If it isn't that new anymore, but the
> warranty is still good, have them repair it,
> and have them do that until the problem indeed
> is gone.
It's only a few months old.
Ideally, I expect lenses to be replaced, not repaired. And replaced means
that the old one is destroyed, not just sold to someone else in a continuing
cycle until a customer indifferent or ignorant enough to accept substandard
workmanship is found.
> Long short shutterspeeds are the rule when
> using leaf shutters.
I understand, and if the spec says plus or minus x, and the lens is within
that spec, fine. But if the lens is not within spec, there is a problem.
So ... what are the specs for the Distagon 50mm, for shutter speed accuracy?
> And things get worse when stopping down.
I did my tests at the smallest aperture. However, that's a problem only at
high shutter speeds, not at one-second speeds.
from hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002
From: Peter Rosenthal petroffski@mac.com
Subject: Re: [HUG] Shutter speed discrepancy in Distagon
Johnny Johnson wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> That probably explains why that 80mm "C" that you recently CLAed for me
> acts the way that it does. After it came back I tried a series of test
> exposures with it on a cloudless day with Velvia. The subject was a
> mountain and lots of sky and I shot at 1/500, 1/250, 1/125, and 1/60 -
> all at the same EV. Comparing the four the two at 1/60 & 1/250 were the
> same, the 1/125 was slightly underexposed, and the 1/500 was slightly
> overexposed. It was my guess that it was at least a 1/3 stop slow, if
> not more, at 1/500. In any case, I figured that the speeds were more
> accurate than I am with my Weston Master V meter. ;-)
> Later,
> Johnny
> Johnny Johnson
> Lilburn, GA
As you saw with your visit from Mr. Test Roll, the high speeds are a fussy
lot. The 1/250th runs typically, quite consistently actually, at about
1/300 or slightly more. This is at between f:5.6 and f:8. All quality test
equipment works in milliseconds and the mathematical conversion to
fractions ain't pretty. I won't include it here. Older lenses have a
little more slop in them making them just as accurate as newer mechanisms,
in practice, but slightly less consistent. We're talking very small
percentages here. The speedometer in your car should work so well. The
films typically used back when these lenses were designed were much slower,
making the higher shutter speeds not quite so relevant. With the newer
faster films, they are somewhat more relevant but unfortunately not as
accurate, exposure-speakingwise. To be honest... I'm continually amazed
that accuracy, or longevity is as good as it is. What happens in the
shutter at button-pushing time is quite violent.
As noted by Q.G. (does anyone know what Q.G. stands for? I'm dying to know)
the higher speeds (the amount of error changes proportionately with the
slower speeds, read: less error) are adversely affected by changing the
aperture. Not only does it affect the speeds themselves it affects the way
they are measured as well. Focal-plane shutters are immune to this effect
almost completely. Without going into it too deeply, I have no net
underneath me here you see, lens shutters have finite opening and closing
times. Measurable and troublesome, much easier to diagram on paper than to
describe. Throw in full-open times and you have a problem in mathamatics,
not photography. I've never measured it myself (not a simple matter) but
I'll bet there is nearly an effective 1/4 stop difference (depending how
one measures it) in exposure time between f2.8 and say, f16 at 1/500. My
job is to make the numbers match well within the industry standard. Which
is 1/3 of a stop. Not good.
Manufacturers have lied about their products for years. ALL of the
Nikkormats, FM's, FE's, to name just a small few, have speed dial numbers
that don't match up with reality. They say 1/125 but are in fact 1/100 of
a second. They couldn't make a flash sync at 1/125 so they lied. The FM-2s
(not the N model, newer) lie as well. The sync is 1/200, not 1/250 as
marked. Mamiya gave up years ago and just marked their RB lenses with a
top speed of 1/400. They can't even match that.
As far as the original Distagon speed discrepancy goes... No, of course
the slow speeds should not be that far off in a new lens. Mechanical
perfection, no matter how much money is spent, is an illusion however.
What is not an illusion is recourse, warranties and people caring and
standing behind their work or products. A warranty was paid for and should
be used if necessary. If such a thing as mechanical perfection in all
cases were possible, there would be no need for guarantees and warranties.
Ramble, ramble, ramble...
Peter
Peter Rosenthal
PR Camera Repair
111 E. Aspen #1
Flagstaff, AZ 86001
(928) 779-5263
From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002
From: Andrew Wilcox andrew.wilcox@mentorgen.com
Subject: RE: [HUG] Leaf Shutter speeds (was: Shutter speed discrepancy in Distagon)
Peter Rosenthal wrote:
Without going into it too deeply, I have no net
underneath me here you see, lens shutters have finite opening and closing
times. Measurable and troublesome, much easier to diagram on paper than to
describe. Throw in full-open times and you have a problem in mathamatics,
not photography. I've never measured it myself (not a simple matter) but
I'll bet there is nearly an effective 1/4 stop difference (depending how
one measures it) in exposure time between f2.8 and say, f16 at 1/500. My
job is to make the numbers match well within the industry standard. Which
is 1/3 of a stop. Not good.
If any one is remotely interested, there is a section in the book "Basic
Photographic Materials and Processes" that explains why leaf shutters suffer
from timing problems. It even gives a handy little chart that will tell you
how to compensate exposure based on shutter speed _and_ aperture (since
timing problems at high shutter speeds are in part of function of the
aperture).
In fact, since there seems to be a subset of the members on this list who
seem keenly interesting in the smallest of technical details (there was a
very long thread recently about f-stops and diffraction which is covered in
depth in the above mentioned book), I would whole-heartedly recommend this
most excellent and authoritative book to those who wish to know the secrets
of the photographic process.
Cheers,
Andrew.
From rollei mailing list:
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: [Rollei] OT: Ektar Lenses
you wrote:
>> The button is for "press-focus".
>
>Richard,
>
>Thanks for explaining the functions and the info about the Supermatic
>shutter. Just checked it, and the button does exactly what you described. I
>don't have the right cord to connect a flash but I'm sure the handle does
>exactly what you described.
>
>Siu Fai
>
There are two types of connectors found on Supermatic shutters. Those
made by Kodak for themselves have so called ASA connectors, a sort of
bayonet thing. Those made for Graflex (they say Graflex on them) have
standard bi-post connectors.
Paramount cords can supply cords for both kinds of connector. Some
electric shaver cords will fit the bi-post type.
Forgot to mention that the slider is adjustable for either Class-M or
Class-F bulbs by loosening the locking screw and sliding it. Its simply a
stop for the retarder cocking mechanism.
Flash bulbs are still available and put out an astonishing amount of
light.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: rgivan@cix.compulink.co.uk
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Synchro - Compur shutter service!
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2002
bo@visicon.se (Bo
Wrangborg) wrote:
> I have some German black T* lenses. with Synchro-Compur shutter HBL.
> They are from the late seventies and begin of the eighties.
>
> How often to sevice them for optimum performance.
Just in case anybody is interested - I have some details of opening up the
Synchro-Compur and Prontor shutters on my website:
http://www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk/
:-)
Roland.
from rollei mailing list:
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] OT: Ektar Lenses
you wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
>Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002
>Subject: RE: [Rollei] OT: Ektar Lenses
>
>..snip
>> The button is for "press-focus". It holds the shutter blades open for
>> focusing without setting the speed on T. Cock the shutter and push the
>button
>> down while tripping the shutter. To close the blades again re-cock the
>> shutter. The blade arrestor does not allow the blades to quite completely
>open
>> so it will not trip a strobe, about which more below. Do not cock the
>flash
>> delay mechanism when using the blade arrestor.
>>
>..snip
>
>Another "keeper" email - with all the details on synchs and shutters !
>
>Luckily I bought a (photocopy) of a manual at the same time I bought my
>Crown Graphic, so I knew about the purpose of the button -- it is by the way
>an extremely useful item, especially when you switch back and forth between
>the ground glass and the rollfilm back.
>Mike
There was a gadget on the market in the 1930's for accomplishing the same
purpose with Compur shutters. I have a couple of them. Its no more than a
small bar which can be flipped down against the side of the shutter to
catch and stop the cocking lever just as the shutter gets to the fully open
point. The gadget is screwed to the lens board in the right place. When you
want to take the picture you recock the shutter and flip the little bar
back up out of the way. I have no idea who made them.
Old Compur shutters have a useful feature: the shutter does not have to
be cocked for T or B. This makes it possible to make intermittant time
exposures, for instance, to photograph a building front at night without
having headlight streaks from passing cars in the image. You just close the
shutter when a car is coming.
Deckel made a "Press Compur" starting some time in the late 1930's. This
was similar to the standard Compur except it had a press-focus button and a
large paddle shaped handle on the cocking lever, all for use on Speed
Graphic and similar press cameras. The press-focus button looks the same as
the self timer button on the standard model. These old Compurs are, BTW,
tough and rugged bits of machinery.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
from rollei mailing list:
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002
From: Jorje Trevino jtrevino@interlinea.com.mx
Subject: [Rollei] 1/500" with pre-F Rollei TLR?
Hi Ruggers!
I have a Rollei 2.8E (type 1) from 1956 and the manual states that if you
want to use the 1/500 shutter speed, you must select it before tensioning
the shutter (eg. advancing the film). What I haven't been able to find out
is what happens if you do not heed this advice. Do you damage the shutter or
will it simply not access the 1/500 speed, therefore -I should think-
shooting at 1/250?
Thanks for any insight you might provide.
--Jorge.
from rollei mailing list:
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] 1/500" with pre-F Rollei TLR?
you wrote:
>Hi Ruggers!
>
>I have a Rollei 2.8E (type 1) from 1956 and the manual states that if you
>want to use the 1/500 shutter speed, you must select it before tensioning
>the shutter (eg. advancing the film). What I haven't been able to find out
>is what happens if you do not heed this advice. Do you damage the shutter or
>will it simply not access the 1/500 speed, therefore -I should think-
>shooting at 1/250?
>
>Thanks for any insight you might provide.
>
>--Jorge.
Are you sure this is an E?. I thought they all had late type
Synchro-Compur shutters, maybe not.
In any case, older type Compur shutters have an auxilliary booster spring
for the highest speed. This spring is compressed by the speed ajusting cam.
If the shutter is cocked first the amount of force which must be applied to
the spring is excessive. It may even push the end of the spring under the
cam very effectivly jamming the shutter. No great damage is done but the
shutter must be disassembled part way to un-jam it.
If you have a shutter with the booster sping you can feel it when setting
to the highest speed. There is also longer travel of the speed setting ring
(or dial on Rolleis) in going from the next to highest speed to the highest.
Later shutters use a single spiral clock motor type spring, which is
always under a fair amount of tension (pre-loading). This is the motor
arrangement used for Hasselblad shutters, which must be left cocked. Speed
changes can be made at will on these shutters, regardless of whether they
are cocked or not. It also does not matter where they are left cocked for
long periods of time, they are designed for just that.
There is no exta tension when going to the highest speed nor any extra
travel.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Where to get a repair manual to No 3 Acme Synchro Shutters?
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002
Marcus Carlsson marcus.carlsson@ebrevet.nu wrote:
>Hi!
>
>I have a Kodak Ektar with a No 3 Acme Synchro Shutter.
>I have measured the timing and have found that the higher
>speeds > 1/15 is not accurate. Since I live in Sweden shipping
>it to sk grimes is out of the question (to expensive). So I
>wonder if any of you know which shutter repair manuals describes
>how to mend the time. I know that it might not be easy, but I would
>at least give it a try. Or have any of you had the same problem
>and solved it yourself?
>
>/ Marcus
I have a little information on this shutter. It was used on some
military Speed Graphic cameras and is covered in the repair manual.
I can copy the pertenent parts of the manual and send them to you.
Send me your regular mail address via e-mail.
I don't think you can do much to get these shtters accurate, they
were not particularly accurate when new. If they are clean they are
fairly consistent.
Its possible to make some adjustment by bending springs or making
new one. All the springs are wire springs, not too hard to make.
Getting both low and high speeds on is a matter of a rather delicate
balance of spring strength.
Ilex shutters can be cleaned using Naptha or very pure Isopropyl
alcohol. The Acme series has metal shutter and diaphragm blades but
the larger Universal type uses hard rubber for both. Becareful of
solvents and don't use any heat (for drying) on the Universal
shutters, you will melt the blades.
I strongly advise getting one of the little shutter testers sold by
Calumet Photo. They were about $80 US when I looked last. I've had one
for several years and wouldn't be without it. I think they are a must
for anyone working with large format lenses, especially older
shutters. It will tell you what the shutter speed really is and
whether its consistent.
Its too bad these outstanding lenses were supplied in such poor
shutters.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002
From: "jonyquik" jonyquik@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: FP Shutter Question
Modern FP shutters are a marvel of geometric design. Curtain Travel
Times(CTT) can vary anywhere from 2.5 to 25 milliseconds(MS),
depending upon the particular design of the shutter. Of course the
faster CTT's belong to the vertical moving, metal bladed gullotine
type shutters, with the ones having a 1/250 X sync speed, being in
the range of 2.5 MS. The ones with X sync of 1/125, are usually in
the range of 5 to 5.5 MS. Horizontal focal plane shutters have 1/3rd
more distance to travel. This and a few other design differences more
than double the slowest CTT of vertical shutters. The fastest of
these of course being those that have metal foil curtains(Nikon F3, 8
MS). Rubberized cloth curtains have the slowest CTT, with some of the
older cameras going as high as 30 or 40 MS. I have no current list of
each individual CTT as I used to, but those were always only guides
to getting good performance. To further complicate matters, each
camera has its own design of braking to prevent shutter bounce, and
the CTT must be sufficient in some cases to overcome and actuate that
mechenism. Each curtain has an individual braking mechenism, and CTT
must be sufficient to trip these brakes. So far we are only
considering 35mm cameras, but I shall refer to the method used to
adjust the curtains on a camera none of you are likely to ever
repair, the Hasselblad 1000f, but it illustrates a means of getting
the right combination of tensions so both curtains give the same CTT.
Back in 1960, I was working for Paillaid Inc. a Swiss firm that was
then the rep for Hasselblad, and Bolex. I was trained to repair the
Hasselblad 1000f by my good friend to this day Carl Classon. CTT was
setup in this way. First the tension was set for the second curtain,
by having minimal tension on the first curtain,(enough so it would
travel freely the full length of the aperture) one would set the
second curtain so that it would just be able to clear the aperture.
This was checked by putting a finger in front of the curtain as it
was released, and advancing spring tension until the curtain would
just clear the aperture even with the offending finger blocking and
slowing down its progress. Setting the first curtain was a bit
trickier, and really not necessary to understand this tutoral. The
idea is that the second curtain on any camera only needs tension to
travel sufficiently in order to clear the aperture and the braking
mechenism without bouncing back. If this is used as a general
guideline in setting up a camera where one knows nothing about the
actual CTTs. Of course this is dependent upon all the rest of the
shutter mechenism working properly, including the braking. On cameras
such as the Nikon F, the braking mechenisms use slippage mechenisms,
and those need to be set up for the proper slippage or they do not
function properly either giving all stop, or all go. Of course I
would suggest a decent digital shutter tester for the final setup,
one that can read both CTT, and actual shutter speed. Once the second
curtain is set to this beginning, it can be measured, and one would
have a good idea of that cameras CTT. A CRT or florescent lights can
also be used to check for shutter speeds. I prefer an overhead
florescent light. The principle of this is quite simple, but takes a
bit of time to learn to see, and the proper methods of adjusting. In
that a florescent light runs on 60 Hz, it literally goes on and off
60 times a second(50Hz outside the USA). While looking at this light
through the back of a camera while tripping it at arms length, one
can see dark vertical bands at the speeds higher than the sync speed.
The sync speed of course always being an open aperture, first curtain
fully open, releases the second curtain. Of course the speed above
the X sync speed, will only have one dark band, and the next speed
will have two. As the speed increases, the bands will also change in
width, illustrating the width of the slit for that shutter speed. By
observing this while tripping the camera several times, one can
observe if the beginning slit is the same size as the slit at the
end. So if we have a shutter in a Nikkormat; a Copal with a top speed
of 1/1000th, and a sync speed of 1/125th, we would expect to see one
band at 1/250, two bands at 1/500, and three bands at 1/1000. This
method can be successfully used if one has no digital shutter tester,
but it must be understood that it is a trial and error method, and
one will learn about each individual camera's differences in using
it. I use a digital shutter tester I built myself about 20 years ago,
and is based on a clock chip from an Epson printer, that is accurate
to 100,000 cycles per second, so the testers ability is 100 times
what is necessary for testing 1 MS or 1/1000th of a second. It also
has two readouts for beginning and ending speeds. The sensor has
three sensors, the outside two at opposing corners for focal plane
shutters, and the center one for leaf shutters. I also built a second
sensor for medium format cameras. At this point I cannot think of
anything else to add to this, but I am open to questions.
....
From: "Steve Grimes" skgrimes@skgrimes.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: LF shutter repairs
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002
The challenge for the specialist is what to do after you find you are
working 80 hours a week.
The options are:
1. Raise prices.
2 Become more selective about the work you do. (specialize
more) practice and become more efficient in your specialty.
3. Become a prima donna and make people wait a year and a half
for your service. (This actually causes more work and less income)
4. Hire support staff (secretary, shipper, etc)
5. Hire and train employees then supervise them in your specific
area of expertise.
Options 1requires balls and not a lot else. High self esteem and ego will
help. Its a legitimate response to market forces.
Options,2,4, and 5 require pressing oneself in personal development,
choosing and trusting others.
Option 3 is the usual default choice of those with poor interpersonal skills
who take their satisfaction in material objects rather than in the game of
human interaction.
I currently employ three full time and one part time employees, besides
myself.
I am actively seeking a skilled and experienced repairman that will allow me
to get back more into general camera repair but am at the moment limiting
the repair service not to include 35mm equipment. I don't feel in any way
limited by the number of hours I have at my personal disposal. We all have
the same 24 hours in a day.
SKG
S.K. GRIMES -- MACHINE WORK FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS
153 Hamlet Ave. (5th floor) Woonsocket RI, 02895
+ Lenses mounted into shutters.
+ Shutters repaired, restored.
+ For more info-- http://www.skgrimes.com.
(updated 8-1-01 Site Map)
Now: flat and pointed tip Spanner Wrenches
http://www.skgrimes.com/span/index.htm
"Robert Monaghan" rmonagha@smu.edu wrote
>
> I also think the specialist repairer is often preferable; but I am seeing
> problems now, with a handful of rollei repair types getting most of the
> recommendations, or here, Steve Grimes, and there is only so much time
> that they have to sell us. Higher demand for that time means higher
> prices, yes? ;-) Longer delays in getting jobs done. Some are older and
> experienced repairers, now in semi-retirement, and may have a harder time
> seeing and doing repairs as in the past too.
>
> Now some of these guys are retiring, with no replacement in sight, as the
> specialty tools and training and esp. spare parts inventory is not
> feasible to build, esp. for an uncertain field like camera repair, and
> new entrants are likely to go for higher volume repairs or warranty work
> Past 7 years after last sale, USA firms don't have to maintain parts
> replacement stocks etc. under Magnuson-Moss Consumer Protection Act...
>
> I can readily see a future in which not only camera mfgering, but camera
> repairs are done off-shore; but for older cameras and shutters, it may
> be due to more mechanical repair skills available more cheaply overseas
> along with willingness to make repair parts at an affordable rate vs. the
> cost of custom machining in USA/Europe?
>
> my own mini-solution to the above has been to buy up cheap or ugly parts
> cameras for Kowa, Bronica.. and lenses so I will have my own donor cameras
> and lens parts inventories ;-) ditto nikon FE, FTN.. and favorite lenses
> like 105mm f/2.5 etc. with backups. You can often get the good pieces for
> less with a damaged camera than when buying separately, and still have a
> parts camera left over ;-)
>
> the other problem with not patronizing local repairers is if we don't,
> they will soon be gone (esp in this economy). There are lots of minor
> checks or adjustments that can be done, competently, by lots of camera
> repair techs out there. The more serious or pricey cameras and repairs
> should probably be passed on to the specialists, at higher costs for
> better work and warranties. Unfortunately, many cameras have "tricks"
> to make them work well that people who work on them all the time learn,
> but the guy who sees a leaf shutter Topcon for the first time is in
> for a nightmare ;-p)
>
> Given the costs for inventories, repair manuals, advertising, and all
> that, I'm not surprised so many camera repair techs are going out of
> business. I am trained and have a lot of electronics technician repair
> kits and manuals and instruments and parts, but it is uneconomic to fix
> most electronic equipment these days except by replacing entire modules,
> and cameras are getting that way too...
>
> bobm
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: PC Socket on Large Format Lenses
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002
"Matt Clara" no.email@thisguy's.expense wrote
> I'm not seeing any mention of PC sockets on the large format lenses I'm
> examining at Badger Graphics and B&H.; What gives? Surely these lf cameras
> are desirable in the studio?
> Matt
I haven't looked at Badger Braphics site but most modern
shutters have PC flash sockets on them. Older synch shutters
usually have bi-post connectors, these were a sort of
defacto standard for many years. Some shutters, mostly Kodak
shutters have ASA bayonet connectors. Kodak used these on
their own cameras, Kodak shutters for Graflex cameras had
the bi-post connector.
Paramount cords makes adaptor cords for the older type
connectors.
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Kodak Anastigmat 170mm
Date: 2 Sep 2002
"fbearl" fbearl@cox.net wrote
> I have been using a Kodak Anastigmat f7.7 170mm lens on my 4x5 camera.
> Originally, I believe these lenses were used on Kodak #3A cameras. I like
> the lens very much. It covers adequately. It seems to resolve nicely and
> since I only do B&W;, I have not had to worry about color.
> But it is in a Kodak Ball Bearing shutter with T,B,25,50 and 100. I
> would like to move the lens cells into a better shutter and have tried them
> in a Kodak Compur and a Polaroid Copal. Of course, (since I am writing this
> request) they do not fit.
> I believe that Kodak also offered this lens in an Ilex Universal
> shutter.
> Has anyone had any experience moving these cells to a competent shutter
> (T,B,1sec - ???) without machining.
> I would send it to Steve Grimes and have checked his web page, but I am
> on a budget with this and like most, I would prefer a quick, easy and cheap
> fix :.)..
>
> Thanks
Even if the lens also came in an Ilex shutter the threads and
mounting depth are probably different. Remounting the lens in a modern
shutter will be expensive. A fair amount of labor is involved and the
shutter itself is expensive. If you really want a good shutter I would
invest in a modern Copal rather than struggling with an old Ilex. Ilex
shutters were not wonderful when new although Steve Grimes has a
better opinion of them than I do.
The Kodak Ball Bearing shutter was used mainly on medium priced
folding cameras. It may be possible to bring it back to life. I have
only one and its on a collector's camera; I've never tried working on
it. Many shutters can be made reliable by cleaning and lubricating.
The speeds may not be accurately what it marked but they will be the
same each time, which is more important.
There are two series of Kodak Anastigmats, the 30 series, which are
f/4.5 Tessar types and the 70 Series, which are f/4.5 dialytes (four
element air spaced). The f/7.7 is also a dyalite. The last of these
was the K.A. f/7.7 203mm lens. Sold later with coating as an Ektar.
Some of the K.A. lenses are very good.
I suggest contacting Steve Grimes for an opinion.
http://www.skgrimes.com
--
Richard Knoppow
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Kodak Anastigmat 170mm
From: dfstein@earthlink.net (David Stein)
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002
Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> the 70 Series, which are f/4.5 dialytes (four
> element air spaced). The f/7.7 is also a dyalite
I have a Kodak Anastigmat 170mm f/6.3 which appears similar to what is
being described-dialyte. If you compare front and rear groups they are
not quite symmetrical but of similar powers. The lens in question can
actually take wonderful pictures (like the 203mm 7.7 Ektar it is quite
compact for its focal length and coverage) and will fit-as far as I can
determine-in its original Ilex, an Optimo Ia, a Betax #2 and a Compund
shutter (no size marked). Where to find them-look for a Kodak
Autographic 3A with one fitted.
From: "Gene Johnson" genej2@cox.net
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Using a focal plane shutter behind the lens
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002
Kenneth,
I've often thought that for some large lenses, that this might be the
way to go. Buy an old Speed graphic body and stick it behind a large
process lens. Just build it into the front standard. Adjust the
position of the individual lenses with the configuration of the
lensboard to get the rear element very close to the shutter. I don't see
any particular disadvantages. Just make sure to give enough clearance
around the image cone to prevent excessive vignetting. With a speed
graphic body this should not be hard, especially with lenses of more
than say 8 inches fl or so. It would be a practical way to get exposure
control on lenses that can't be fitted to a conventional shutter
economically. One drawback might be the lack of flash synch. That is
not completely insurmountable, though, since I remember someone on this
list modified a Graflex D to have a full frame shutter curtain slit in
place of the 1/8 inch one, then placed a flash contact on that slit. I
think that would give something like 1/30 sec synch at max curtain
tension. I've been trying to remember who that was since I'd like to try
the same thing and I'd love to pick his brain.
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: Kenith Ryan=20
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 4:00 PM
Subject: [Cameramakers] Using a focal plane shutter behind the lens
Does anyone know if there are any disadvantages to using a focal plane
shutter behind the lens rather than at the focal plane? If so what are
they?
Kenith Ryan
From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002
From: Michael Hendrickson mhh@pacbell.net
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re: Using a focal plane shutter behind the lens
Hello,
In the late 1800s/early 1900s somebody (I think it was Thornton, or
maybe Anthony) used to build small focal plane shutters which could be
mounted on the front of a view camera lens. The shutter was cocked using
a string to pull the rollers which would pull the curtain to the correct
slit position.
I have one of these but it's currently non-functional (the strings often
broke, and that happened to mine).
The construction of these shutters is described in "Photographic Cameras
and Accessories" by Paul N. Hasluck, published by Cassell and Co. Ltd.
in 1901. This is available as a reprint from:
Lindsay Publications Inc.
PO Box 12
Bradley, IL 60915-0012
www.lindsaybks.com
I would think that if one were to either use one of these shutters, or
mount an old Speed Graphic body just behind the lens, it could be a very
workable arrangement -- certainly an improvement over using a lenscap
for a shutter! Also, the correct accurate exposure times could be found
by testing the shutter and taking the readings from the actual film
plane of the camera itself, thus eliminating all new variables
introduced by placement of the shutter.
The main conundrum I've had to solve with the Speed Graphic is camera
shake -- the old cameras often vibrate because of lack of lubrication at
the ends of the rollers. I solved this in two of these cameras by
dropping a little moly grease mixed with 3-in-1 oil into this area with
a toothpick. The result is vastly reduced noise from the shutter (before
lube I could feel the vibration with my hand when firing the shutter;
this was accompanied by a rather loud "ratchet" (hard to describe) noise
as the shutter fired) and I no longer feel the vibration in the camera.
Additionally, as I recall, I have in the past used Packard shutters
mounted just behind the lens with great success; the placement of the
shutter and changes in focal length seemed to make no difference in
actual exposure at the film plane; I've gotten gratifyingly consistent
results this way. So I would think the focal plane shutter idea should
be just as workable.
Incidentally, the book also has plans and construction instructions for
various other types of shutters, as well as cameras, dark slides (film
holders) and enlarging cameras. As far as I know it's currently in print
at Lindsay's.
Hope this helps.
'Bye for now,
--Michael
mhh@pacbell.net
From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002
From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Re: Using a focal plane shutter behind the lens
...(quotes above)
Start here: Packard Ideal Shutter Co. (Hammonton, New Jersey)
#800-257-8541 - new shutters from 1 1/2'' to 3 1/2'' diameter, synchro,
air or electric solenoids, original parts and service..
And here: http://www.hubphoto.com/packard-shutters.htm
These bulletproof shutters are still being made and serviced.
Regards,
Marv
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
From: Robert Mueller r.mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Ilex Process Paragon
From the photos I cannot judge but the electrical thing on the back of the
lenboard is probably a shutter operated by a "rotary solenoid", most likely
made by "LEDEX". Instead of a linear motion the shaft turns with
application of an adequate voltage. It might operate something else than
a shutter but you should be able to tell that by manually inducing the
rotation. I will avoid letting my imagination run wild regarding what it
might be when it is NOT a shutter!
Bob
you wrote:
>http://www.uptowngallery.org/ilex1.jpg
>http://www.uptowngallery.org/ilex2.jpg
>
>If anyone can identify what the mechanism did, it would be appreciated.
>
>Thanks
>
>Murray
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002
From: "Francis A. Miniter" miniter@attglobal.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Supermatic shutter
Not every lighter fluid is the same. Use Ronsonol only. Lightly spray, work
the controls and allow it to evaporate. Use disposable lens cloths to pick up
any dirt that comes out. If you use oil, you will be cleaning it out for a
year or two to come and it will spit the oil onto the lens.
Francis A. Miniter
>From: Tony Galt galta@uwgb.edu
>
> >what sort of oil would be appropriate--I
> >assume in very small amounts?
>
> Never oil. Only degreaser like lighter fluid or crc56 electronics cleaner
> (non-residue).
>
> RDE.
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Supermatic shutter
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002
"Tony Galt" galta@uwgb.edu wrote...
> I've had an old 2x3 Busch press camera sitting around for years
> (bought on a whim decades ago) and yesterday I dismounted the lens and
> shutter and remounted them on a Linhof board for used on my Shen Hao
> 4x5. I know it will not cover 4x5 and the intended use is with a 6x7
> Graflex roll film back. The lens is an f/4.5 Ektar 100 mm in a
> Supermatic shutter. The shutter could probably stand lubricating,
> although it seems to run OK without the hitches you often hear in the
> slow speeds in an old shutter. The shutter looks as though it could be
> lubricated without disassembly. You can see the workings when you
> remove the lens elements and they appear quite clean. Would this be a
> reasonable thing to do, and what sort of oil would be appropriate--I
> assume in very small amounts? Or should I let well enough alone?
> Tony Galt
If its running well leave it alone. What makes most
shutters run slow is gummed up lubrication. Slow shutters
need cleaning. Currently the best cleaning solution is pure
Naptha, like Ronsonol, followed by 99% Isopropyl alcohol.
Lubrication should be sparse. Use a very light synthetic
oil, like Nyoil or real watch oil. Its needed only on the
gear trunions and on the surface of the pallet.
Cleaning without some disassembly may get residue on the
shutter blades. This will slow down the top speeds, they
need to be very clean.
Calumet has a little shutter tester which is IMHO a
necessity for anyone working with older shutters, it will
tell you what the shutter is actually doing. Last I looked
they were around $80 US.
Supermatics are good shutters, very rugged. The main
problem is fatigued springs causing the high speeds to be
slow. I don't know of a source for replacements.
Kodak designed the Supermatic as a replacement for Compur
shutters which became impossible to get after the entry of
the US in WW-2. They were made from about 1940 or 41 through
about 1960 when Kodak discontinued them and began using
Compurs again.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002
From: ronald anger anger@sympatico.ca
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] electric shutter
Hello Michael,
It looks like a shutter out of a polaroid oscilloscope camera ,possibly
"Techtronics".Has the slow shutter speeds to capture the beam trace.Made
one of these out of a Polaroid Color Pack II
Camera.Give that a try!!
Ron Anger
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Weird problem with Ilex #5
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002
"RWatson767" rwatson767@aol.com wrote ...
> Issac
> >Weird problem with Ilex #5
>
> I am not the expert that others are but some of these shutters don't need to be
> cocked to operate on Bulb or Time.
> Most of the problems you mention are indicative of needing some cleaning and
> lubrication. About $100.00 on my bench. I expect the same at others. Be sure
> and avoid the temptation to squirt some cleaner or the like in the mechanism.
> The $100.00 will be $200.00.
> Bob AZ
I wish I could send a drawing. There are a couple of
levers near the trip lever. You tell them from looking at
the cam ring which sets the speeds. If they are not aligned
properly, or the tabs which contact the cam ring are pushed
down under it, the T and B settings will not work and the
shutter will just open and close when the shutter tripping
lever is pushed.
The shutter is easy to get open. Take off the f/stop
calibration plate (two small screws at its ends) and you
will find another screw under it. There are a total of three
screws holding the front plate on. Once off, you can lift
the speed ring off and expose the cover of the mechanism.
Its held in place by four long screws. Sometimes there is
one shorter one. Note where it comes from. If the tabs on
the levers are pushed under the speed cam it will be
immediately obvious and fixable without taking the cover off
the mechanism. Otherwise take the cover off, which
completely exposes the mechanism. If one lever is stuck
under the other, or stuck in the wrong position you should
be able to see it and fix it.
Ilex shutters were intended to run dry but must be very
clean. I've found that despite the factory specs of running
dry that sometimes a very sparing amount of light oil on the
retarder gear trunions and on the palet itself helps smooth
running.
The top speed is calibrated to be the "effective" speed
for the entire clear area of the shutter. If you measure
total open time it will be around 1/30th.
The low speeds depend on a balance between the main spring
and the spring on the retarder, they are often off, the
slowest speeds being fast, the high speeds being slow.
Steve Grimes has some information on the Ilex Universal on
his web site and can repair them. http://www.skgrimes.com
A note of caution. Universal shutters have hard rubber
diaphragm and shutter leaves, if overheated they will melt.
So, when cleaning don't subject the shutter to heat to try
to dry it out faster, you will have blobs instead of an
iris.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Michael Briggs MichaelBriggs@EarthLink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Xenar 135/4,7
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002
Fabian Oliver wrote:
>
> Hello all.
>
> I've take some B&W; with a Graflex Graphic View and a Xenar 135/4,7 ( copal
> NO.0)
>
> I would like to hear your opinions about this lens.
> It's a coated one.
>
> I find it low on definition on the edges, really.
> I don't know if it's just this lens, but i was dissapointed.
>
> The lost of definition is equal at 4 edges so i supose is not a camera
> problem.
What aperture (f-stop) did you use?
The Xenar is a Tessar design of four glass elements in three groups.
The Tessar design is been used in very many lenses because of the
quality image it delivers for a reasonable price. It is however a
normal coverage rather than a wide coverage lens. It works best when
the focal length is at least equal to the diagonal of the negative. For
large format, if you want the ability to use some front movements, it
would be best to use Tessars only in focal lengths longer than the
diagonal of the negative.
Coverages around 55 degrees are cited by many manufacturers; in a recent
Schneider brochure (which doesn't include the 135 mm focal length)
Schneider said 60 or 62 degrees at f22. For a focal length of 135 mm,
these angles of coverage correspond to diameters of coverage of 140, 155
and 162 mm. Note that only the last two values cover 4x5. Schneider
stated 53 degrees wide-open, which is only 135 mm diameter of coverage.
I don't know what Schneider claimed for this lens when it was made.
The summary is that you probably need to stop down to around f22 for the
best edge performance that you will get from the lens.
--Michael
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Xenar 135/4,7
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002
...(quotes above query)
The edges should be sharp at any stop smaller than about
f/8. I've examined only one "press Xenar". That one had
excessive coma leading to unsharp corners until it was
stopped down to f/22. The Wollensak 135mm, f/4.5 Raptar has
the same problem. Since I examined only one sample I don't
know if this is a common fault with the type.
Coma shows up as a tear-drop shaped smear of highlights
which becomes wors as you move toward the edges of the
field. It is reduced by stopping down. Both 135mm, f/4.5
Tessars and 127mm, f/4.7 Ektars are free of it at the
corners of a 4x5 at f/8 and completely free at f/11.
However, all Tessar types have it to some degree when wide
open.
The Xenar is a Tessar type lens, but there are a number of
different designs of lens which were sold under that name.
The f/3.5 Xenars used in Rolleiflex and Rolleicord cameras
are excellent but this lens will be of a different design
and may have different performance. The Press Xenar I
checked was a post WW-2, coated lens. In general Schneider's
post 1946 lenses were of very high to excellent quality,
their pre-WW-2 lenses of questionable quality.
Note that the coverage of any Tessar is limited. A 135mm
lens will not have enough coverage for any camera movement
on 4x5. There are lenses better suited to general use on a
view camera. For instance, look around for a used Schneider
f/5.6 Symmar, even the older convertible ones were of
excellent quality and have much more coverage than a Tessar
type.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Fred Perry" fsp@world.std.com
Newsgroups: sci.engr.lighting,sci.optics
Subject: Re: High Speed Shutter
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002
The fastest 1 inch aperture mechanical shutter available (to my knowledge)
is Boston Electronics' SH-20. See
(http://www.boselec.com/pdf/EOPC%20SH-10%20SH-20.pdf). Response time is 15
milliseconds.
--
Fred Perry
Boston Electronics
www.boselec.com
From: Michael Briggs MichaelBriggs@EarthLink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Help: Copal shutters?
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002
"Robert J. Mathes" wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I would like to know what Copal shutter means as well as the difference is
> between Copal 1,2, and 3. I would appreciate any information from any
> experienced LF photographer. Thanks!
Current large format cameras don't have shutters, instead the lens
includes a shutter in its middle. Virtually all new LF lenses come with
a Copal shutter -- Copal is a brand name from Japan. In recent decades
the German brand Compur was popular, but I think they have stopped
production. In a bit of obscurity, the sizes are not 1, 2 and 3, but
rather 0, 1 and 3. A long time ago, there was a size two, but it
hasn't been made in decades. To the lens manufacturer, the important
aspect of the shutter is the maximum opening. The available max
opening and shutter threads are standardized to sizes 0, 1 and 3.
Lenses for 4x5 cameras are almost always in size 0 or 1. The three
sizes have different fastest speeds, but it hardly matters because one
rarely uses a speed faster than 1/60. You will find the details of the
dimensions on SK Grimes' website and the website of Schneider USA.
--Michael
From: John Stafford john@stafford.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Kodak Supermatic Flash Shutters
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002
Marv Soloff at msoloff@worldnet.att.net wrote
> I was of the opinion that this family of shutters synched at all speeds
> for electronic flash. I know that Kodak rated them for "F" and for "M"
> using the primitive delay timer built in. Anyone on this NG have a
> definitive word on these shutters and "X" sync? I am finishing my
> Tourist II conversion from 620 film to 120 film and want to couple it
> with one of my Sunpaks for holiday shots. Something documented would help.
Marv, I'm almost certain that there were at least two different Supermatic
shutters and one was specifically an X synch, and only X synch. In fact, to
use bulbs required a separate solenoid. Yes, seems strange but I'm almost
positive about this.
Are there some markings you can post, or maybe a picture?
From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Kodak Supermatic Flash Shutters
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002
Am going to do just that this evening. As an aside, this $2.00 flea
market camera produces very nice, sharp large 6 x 9 negatives (the test
negs were B&W;) - if I can get the sucker to work with electronic flash,
I'll use it for the holiday pix - small, light, unobtrusive, easy to
load, slips into a jacket pocket. If you can find a clean one, email me
off line and I'll give you some points about how the casting has to be
shaved down for 120 film. It's about two hours work to do the mod.
Regards,
Marv
John Stafford wrote:
> As a last resort, you can test X-Synch using an electronic flash. You need
> not even expose film. If you can see the flash through the shutter, then it
> works, otherwise it doesn't.
From: "Alec Jones" alecjspam@bellsouth.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Kodak Supermatic Flash Shutters
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002
My error - the Tourist I has a Kodak Anastigmat - no sn's - and appears
to be lightly coated or uncoated. The Tourist II has the Anastar and is
coated. BTW - the electronic flash does sync with both cameras.
Regards,
Marv
From: spaam_this@hotmail.com (Don)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Kodak Supermatic Flash Shutters
Date: 6 Dec 2002
hemi4268@aol.com (Hemi4268) wrote
> Well, the numbers I got out of this camera were some of the highest I have
> ever recorded for a camera of any kind.
Now I understand your willingness to shell out for it.
> Another camera came available on the ebay market several years ago. Again
the
> same price of a little over $300.
I see one on Ebay once every month or two, in case you need a backup.
> Meanwhile, the camera I purchased in Maine shutter had gone bad.
The Synchro shutter seems to be the Achilles heel of the Tourist; less
reliable than the Supermatic, and very expensive to repair. Besides
that, it's a very solid camera, even though the plastic top section
makes it look a bit cheesy. I'm still not sure I like the placement of
the shutter "button" on the door, because it feels like I'm pushing
the lens down when I trip the shutter. But with a lens this sharp, I
should probably be using a tripod/cable release.
From: "Uptown Gallery" murray@uptowngallery.org
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002
Subject: [Cameramakers] Solenoid Source (I'm assuming electrical)
I had tracked down the source of miniature solenoids used in the Ilex and
Melles-Griot shutters. I can't find the name right now, but Electro-Mech
comes to mind. That might be part of the email address, however.
I think I found them in Thomas Register (www.thomasregister.com), I think in
California.
I just started asking questions about something similar to the Ilex shutter
solenoids and the CS rep gave gave me a bunch of info for a while then
clammed up suddenly saying it was proprietary :O)
He was either a little 'slow', or his boss smacked him when they found out
how much he told me.
They were standard items electrically, but had custom mechanics so I
couldn't buy, say, for example, an identical solenoid with a different coil
voltage.
But you could probably check out their standard items and live the mechanics
the way they are.
Murray
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Help using Crown Graphic shutter
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002
"Ed" ednot@home.net wrote
> Hello All!!!
>
> In my continuing effort to enter large-format photography I have
> obtained a Crown Graphic with the 135mm Optar f/4.7 lens. Naturally,
> there is no instruction book. I think I can see how to set the shutter
> speed and aperture but I can't figure out how to cock the shutter or get
> the aperture blades to open at all. Can anyone give me a hint? It says
> it's a Graphex shutter made by Wollensak for Graflex.
>
> TIA
> Ed
See:
http://www.graflex.org/speed-graphic/graphex-shutter.html
for labled pictures of the shutter.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Ed ednot@home.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Help using Crown Graphic shutter
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 200
rsmith@dmv.com says...
> One additional piece of advice: The shutter must be cocked before the
> preview lever ("press focus lever" shutter override for focusing and
> adjustment) can be employed. Tripping the shutter will close the shutter
> but then one must re-cock the shutter mechanism prior to exposing the film.
> At any rate, don't forget to cycle the preview lever. I'll guarantee every
> photographer has ruined a plate this way at least once.
>
> Truly, dr bob.
>
> Have a happy Holiday!!!
Dr. Bob, thanks for taking the time to post on Christmas Day. Let me
repeat and see if I understand you correctly.
1) cock shutter
2) press preview lever for focus and adjustment
3) trip shutter
4) insert film holder
5) cock shutter
6) trip shutter
Is that right or did I misunderstand?
Thanks to you and happy holidays as well.
Ed
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002
From: "Victor Bazarov" v.bazarov@attbi.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Help using Crown Graphic shutter
"Ed" ednot@home.net wrote...
> [...] Let me
> repeat and see if I understand you correctly.
>
> 1) cock shutter
> 2) press preview lever for focus and adjustment
> 3) trip shutter
> 4) insert film holder
> 5) cock shutter
There is nothing wrong with
1) ..
2) ..
3-5) raise preview lever to close the shutter
> 6) trip shutter
> Is that right or did I misunderstand?
"You are young and you think life is simple. But life is
so much more simpler." :-)
Victor
From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutters (testing, making)
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003
Suggest you visit Steve Grimes website and look at the Leitz tester he
has described: http://www.skgrimes.com/idcc/index.htm This very simple
device can be made at home and is quite accurate. Expense can be close
to zero with scrounged parts.
Regards,
Marv
John Stafford wrote:
> Two part question.
>
> Is there a way to test leaf-type (iris and guillotine type) shutters
> without sophisticated equipment? In this case I cannot simply make test
> exposures because the shutter in question is electric and has too many
> possible speeds. (Well, I guess I could if I could adapt a 4x5 to 35mm
> or just damn the film expense - but I can't.)
>
> Or - making BTL shutters. Packard shutters (which I have several of)
> won't do because of the limited 'I' speed. Steve Grimes once mentioned
> that there was a method of creating a shutter with thin blades in a
> guillotine style shutter using rubber bands. I cannot quite imagine how
> that would work. Finally, I am limited to BTL shutters because of the
> size of the lenses (6" diameter) and the front and rear lenses are
> deeply convex.
>
> Ideas? Or should I take this to an engineering group of some kind?
>
> Happy New Year!
> jjs
From: "JY" jonnieo@thegrid.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutters (testing, making)
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003
For testing, you can photograph a dot on a record player turning, calculate
the degree of rotation and use that to figure out the speed. But of course,
that requires film to be burned.
You can also make a tester that plugs into the microphone port on a computer
described at http://www.kyphoto.com/classics/combinationtester.html
I've often thought of making a shutter, but have never succeeded. The best
design I've thought of if to have two disks, each with a half circle cut
out. Depending on the rotation with respect to each other, the size of the
opening can be controlled. If you can get them to take one rotation
together at a known speed, you can change the time that the shutter is open
by opening or closing the gap. Hope that makes sense.
John
From: reynolds@panix.com (Brian Reynolds)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutters (testing, making)
Date: 2 Jan 2003
John Stafford john@stafford.net wrote:
>Steve Grimes once mentioned that there was a method of creating a
>shutter with thin blades in a guillotine style shutter using rubber
>bands. I cannot quite imagine how that would work.
A guillotine shutter works by having a board with an aperture pass by
the lens opening. If you restrict the board to traveling within a
pair of channels you can better control it. Here is some bad ASCII
art.
Top Front
+---+
------- | | <---- shutter board
[-----] | O |
------- +-----+
| O | <---- shutter body
+-----+
| |
+---+
If you arrange this vertically you can just let go of the board and
allow gravity to accelerate the board past the lens opening. You
should get consistent times with this. You can change the shutter
time by using different sized holes (lengthened along the vertical
axis).
If you arrange this horizontally (to remove acceleration due to
gravity) and connect the shutter body and the board with a spring or
rubber band you can get variable shutter times with only one board.
The further you stretch the spring the faster the board will travel
and the shorter exposure time will be. So long as you don't over
stretch the spring the relationship between the shutter speed and the
amount you stretch the spring should be consistent.
In either case you'll have to figure out how to mount the lens cells
to the shutter body (for a BTL shutter) and make a stop so that the
board doesn't just drop out of the body. You'll probably also need to
figure out a way to prevent the board from bouncing back and causing a
double exposure.
--
Brian Reynolds
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutters (testing, making)
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003
"John Stafford" jstafford@winona.edu wrote
> Thank you to everyone who responded to my query. It was quite helpful.
I will second the recommendation for the Calumet tester.
Mine cost $60 new, I guess its been a while.
A caviat: the tester checks total open time. This is the
effective exposure time for small stops but doesn't take
into account the opening and closing time of the shutter.
The repair manuals for Compur shutters give total times at
various speeds. The opening and closing times become
significant at about the next to highest speed. At the
highest speed the tester will read about 1.2X the calibrated
speed. The marked speeds are the _effective_ speeds for the
maximum clear area of the shutter.
The tester can also be used for focal plane shutters but a
special technique must be used to get the effective time. It
is detailed in the small instruction book which comes with
the tester. Some FP shutters, notably the ones in Graflex
and Speed Graphic camers, are not very efficient at high
speeds.
The sensor is small enough to check speed consistency of
the FP shutters in 35mm cameras. It will also measure the
duration of strobe flash, sometimes quite useful to know.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutter Method (was Re: Shutters (testing, making))
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003
"John Stafford" john@stafford.net wrote
> Richard Knoppow wrote
>
> > A cat's eye shaped iris will not change the distribution
> > of light in the image but will change the relative
> > diffraction effects. All lenses suffer from this to some
> > extent: that's why radial resolution is higher than
> > tangential resolution when you get off axis.
>
> I do not understand what that means. What is radial and tangential
> resolution?
Think of a spider web or wagon wheel. The radial lines are
the parts that radiate out from the center to the edge. The
tangential lines are the ones which form the circles. In an
otherwise perfectly corrected lens the ability of the lens
to separate closely spaced lines varies with their position
in the image due to the differing paths the light takes
going through the system.
If you look at the iris from an angle you will find it
becomes eliptical. Since the limit of resolution increases
with the diameter of the lens it is larger in which the iris
is larger namely for radial lines.
The resolution falls off as one moves from the center to
the edge of the field but it falls off faster for tangential
lines than for radial lines.
For instance, for green light the limit of resolution due
to diffraction for an f/8 lens is 174 lp/mm at the center of
the image. At 10 degrees it becomes T=166 lp/mm R=168 lp/mm;
at 20 degrees it becomes T=130 lp/mm and R=163 lp/mm.
There is a further difference due to astigmatism.
Astigmatism is similar to the above. If one measures the
point of sharpest focus for radial and tangential lines for
an astigmatic lens one finds that the two can not be focused
at the same place. The fields projected by the two sets of
lines have different curvatures. In lenses made before
modern glass was developed about 1890 it was thought
impossible to correct astigmatism and longitudinal chromatic
simutaneously. In fact an anastigmat lens can be made with
the old glasses but no one discovered that until after the
newer types had become available. In any case they very
substantially reduced the limitations on lens designers. In
some of these older lenses, the Rapid Rectilinear, for
instance, the field is allowed to curve a little to reduce
the effect of astigmatism.
Modern lenses are all anastigmats and generally are very
well corrected for it. The "distortion" of the stop at
angles away from the optical axis introduces a similar
effect although it is not astigmatism since there is a
single point of sharpest focus for both sets of lines. Its
just that there is more diffraction blur instrduced in one
direction than the other.
This effect is probably reduced in lenses with a tilting
entrance pupil, a devise used in many modern wide angle
lenses to reduce the fall off of light away from the center.
In any case, the contribution due to the shutter blades is
insignificant.
From: w-buechsenschuetz@web.de (Winfried Buechsenschuetz)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: TLR Shutter Cleaning/Repair
Date: 17 Jan 2003
> Is there any online source for shutter repair
> for my Mamiya TLR 105 D (black) Seiko?
I don't think there is an online (or printed) repair manual for that
specific shutter. However, most leaf shutters are designed very
similar, and all japanes ones I have seen follow the design of the
german Prontor-SV shutters very closely.
An overview of the Prontor shutter disassembly can be found on
www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk (see the Isolette pages). Also, Rick
Oleson has quite a bit information about leaf shutters on his site - I
don't have the URL handy but Google will find it.
> Or, what book should I purchase?
Don't know... AFAIK none of the common books about camera repair
covers this issue in detail. Someone is selling manuals for Prontor
and Compur shutters on ebay from time to time.
Winfried
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Question about using barrel lenses and Packard shutters--Will it
work for stobe portraiture and 8x10
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003
"J. Burke" burkeboyz@peoplepc.com wrote
> I have a couple of APO Nikkor barrel lenses (360 and 420mm) that I would
> like mounted into shutters by Steve Grimes but would like users opinions on
> Packard shutters and Studio flash using my Deardorff 8x10. Will the Packard
> shutter be fairly accurate and what about flash sync and lastly --Is the
> shutter speed consistent? Sure the Copal 3 shutter would be best but "my
> goodness" imagine the cost of mounting both lenses!!!!
>
> J. Burke
Packard shutters are available with flash contacts, they
can not be retrofitted into existing non-synch shutters but
its not too hard to mount a microswitch on the back of the
lens board so that it is actuated by the air cylinder.
The speed of the Packard shutter depends on how hard you
squeeze the bulb but given a reasonably hard squeeze they
are remarkably consistent at around 1/20th to 1/30th second
depending on the size of the shutter.
A good arrangement is to have a large Packard mounted on a
lens board which is fitted to take auxilliary lens boards.
That way you can use any number of barrel lenses on the same
shutter.
The same arrangement can be made using a conventional
shutter but large shutters are getting hard to find and are
too expensive new.
Packard shutters are still made. See:
http://www.hubphoto.com
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "namexa" cdarr52***nospamersallowed@comcast.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: little lever on Ilex No. 4ACME Synchro shutter?
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003
He'
I have one of these in a #3 but the function should be the
same. As my technician at the repair shop told me it is used
to set the firing delay (or more correctly shutter delay)
for different flash bulbs. There should be a little plate
that indicates what delay the colors equal. I have never
used mine with any kind of flash. It is apparently
transparent to the main shutter unless you cock it using
it's own cocking lever. Hope this helps.
"Cor Breukel" cor@lumc.nl wrote
> Hi,
>
> I just obtained a Commercial Ektar 12" in a Ilex No. 4ACME Synchro shutter.
> I was wondering what the function is of the little lever next to the little
> black wheel with which you can choose the different bulb
> maybe? Did not function like that, at least if I used it properly.
>
> I assume you cock this shutter by pressing the "thingy" down, and fire it by
> tripping the big lever (and for composing you press the small thingy down,
> the shutter opens, and you press the big thingy again to close it?)
>
> Sorry for the vocabulary, but I do not know the right descriptions in
> english,
>
> thanks,
> best,
>
> Cor
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: little lever on Ilex No. 4ACME Synchro shutter?
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003
...(quotes Cor above)
Its used to cock the flash delay mechanism, which has a
separate spring. If not cocked the flash will not fire
allowing the shutter to be opened for focusing and
composing. When ready to shoot cock the shutter first, then
the delay. The black wheel sets the delay time. There should
be colored dots on it (they sometimes wear off)
corresponding to the colors on the delay chart next to the
wheel. The numbers are the delay in milliseconds. 0 is for
strobe flash, the flash is triggered when the shutter blades
just come completely open. The other times fire the bulb
before the shutter allowing it time to come up to
brightness. 23 milliseconds is for large or medium bulbs and
slow speeds. 20 milliseconds is for Class-M bulbs (includes
most medium size flash bulbs), 5 ms is for miniature
gass-filled bulbs or the type known as Speed-Midgets. Flash
bulbs are still occasionally used, and there is an outfit in
Irland making them (too expensive). They deliver more light
for the weight than any other source except possibly flash
powder.
BTW, the small button at the top of the shutter is the
press-focus button. This holds the shutter open for focusing
without putting it in T. Cock the shutter and press this
button. The shutter will open and stay open until cocked
again.
Another BTW, believe it or not Ilex invented the gear
train speed regulator and was the first shutter with
built-in flash synchronization. Steve Grimes has a healthy
respect for them but I still think they look like dollar
alarm clocks inside.
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "doug duthie" dnduthie@sympatico.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Cold Weather LF'ing advice.....
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003
John's warning is right on the mark. Be especially careful with older
shutters:
> For large format, the air inside your lens and
> shutter may not ventilate promptly enough. If you chill it quickly, you
> could experience condensation, or even freezing, inside...where you cannot
> see it, but where it can do great harm
A number of years ago I had two shutter blades on an old ILEX #4 shutter cut
into each other on the first exposure of the day with the temperature
approx. -20 F. Luckily it wasn't fatal to the shutter. The camera repair
tech fixed it and explained the combination of wear, dirt, and, frozen
condensation made one of the blades lag in closing. I had taken the lens
from warm house to warm car to very cold setup.
Doug, (in eastern Canada)
"John Hughes" jhughes@surfglobal.net wrote
> >
> > It does no harm to take gear from warm into cold. The problem is taking it
> > from cold into warm.
>
> Be careful about this. It is true that condensatin will not form on
> exterior surfaces when the camera is taken from warm to cold dry air.
> However, interior places where warm moist air is trapped could still be
> problematic as the camera cools down. For 35 mm medium format, this
> includes the entire camera. For large format, the air inside your lens and
> shutter may not ventilate promptly enough. If you chill it quickly, you
> could experience condensation, or even freezing, inside...where you cannot
> see it, but where it can do great harm
>
> The only safe answer is to buffer temperature changes, in both directions.
> I have a three season sun porch that is ideal for this, and store my cameras
> there in winter. The trunk of my Subaru station wagon (the official Vermont
> state car) parked in the garage is also good. The porch temperature stays
> around 38-44 most days, the garage is a bit colder, maybe low to mid
> thirties. Having it in a padded bag helps when I go out (usually low
> teens-twenties, although the past few days it has been colder). If I need
> to take things inside quickly, I warp them in plastic bags for a few hours.
>
> When it gets as cold as South Dakota, I work in the darkroom.
>
> Leave it in its bag for a couple of hours, otherwise you
> > will get massive condensation, which will later cause rust.
>
> Not to mention damage to electronics for smaller format, or ice damage to
> shutter mechanisms in LF.
>
> Keep your light meter in your pocket, if you can. The batteries like body
> heat. Exhaling through a straw is an interesting idea I may try, even at
> the risk of looking rather odd. I had previously considered a diving
> snorkel, but that would be too strange, even for photographers.
>
[Ed. note: thanks to mevansmi for this update!]
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003
From: mevansmi mevansmi@cbpu.com
To: rmonagha@mail.smu.edu
Subject: gravity slit shutter
I would like to add to your thoughts with the following:
I just picked up a copy of the Here's How Book at a book sale and was
pleased to see the description and complete illustration on page 38 of
the Harris Shutter.
Basically I guess I made a rough model except instead of three openings
for colored filters I used a 3/8ths slit to drop over the one
opening.And by the way, those little magnets from radio shack are very
heavy and make a perfect weight on their own, plus you could use two or
more together and increase down speed that way.
I had used magnets at the bottom of the board that goes over the lens as
a pull and stop for the sliding strip, but a baffle over the top like on the
Harris shutter would serve just as well.And the strip itself only has to be as
long as the lens diameter times 2 plus the size of the slit you choose to
use.And the Harris Shutter slide within a box while I think two guide
rails from old picture frames glued on the front lens plate work just as
well , are simpler and lighter.
The cokin idea sounds keen, or an old Ambico laying around.And I also
thought one might sacrifice a B&H; gelatin filter holder and remove the
two barn-door type wings which serve as a lens shade. Then just add two
rail guides with a little epoxy and you have the added advantage of
something that attaches to lenses from 20mm diameter to 67mm diameter
with the spring loaded clamp.They sell for about $33 but a modest
investment for the convenience of using on different lenses and the
minimizing of lens movement.
It might even be possible to solder modern pc flash contacts to fire by
a copper contact on the drop slide. But that is a an upscale adaptation.
Best regards and thanks for such an invaluable site.
mevansmi
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003
From: Robert Monaghan rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
To: mevansmi mevansmi@cbpu.com
Cc: Robert Monaghan rmonagha@post.cis.smu.edu
Subject: Re: gravity slit shutter
thanks for your notes, yes, I agree with your points ;-) there are lots
of options here. ;-)
I hadn't thought of the flash synch issue, but it would be easy to do
optically, with an "optoisolator", this is basically an infrared LED
and an infrared phototransistor mounted together with a U shaped slot,
they are used in projects like counting thin items that fit in the U shaped
channel, which could easily be a hole in the edge of the cardboard ;-) then
you have the cardboard sliding past the opto-isolator, no contacts needed,
and when it sees the hole, it turns on the transistor, and that can be
used to turn on a SCR or trigger a strobe directly, depending on the strobe.
yep, this keeps getting more and more fun ;-)
let me know when you get a chance to put up your project on a webpage ;-)
regards bobm
From: john@stafford.net (J Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: moving film past slit? Re: using a big simple gravity slit shutter;
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003
rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert Monaghan) wrote:
> another fun possibility is a moving film past a slit design,
Wow, flashback! George Silk (Life Magazine) had a Nikon motor drive
modified by _The Great_ Marty Forsher to do that and made some of the
first of those slit-film _action_ shots. Olympics I think. (Marty is the
one who made a Nikon 180mm F2.5 lens adapters to fit the S lens to the
F... among many other things.)
> as is done on
> some panoramic cameras ;-) the idea here is to rotate the camera around
> the lens rear node and move the film past a fixed width slit.
Oh. :(
You mentioned x-ray film. We used to mess with that stuff when I was a
medic in the service. There was a size used by the dental techs that was
just right for MF folders. We developed it in the XRay tanks. You couldn't
get bigger grain if you developed 2475 recording film in boiling Rodinal.
From: "Steve Grimes" skgrimes@skgrimes.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Instructions for Fuji lenses?
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002
Quoting from the Copal instruction booklet packed with each new shutter:
"Charging the shutter, opening or closing the shutter blades, changing the
shutter speed, changing the aperture stop....all these can be manipulated in
any order you like without the least ill effect on the shutter mechanism."
--
S.K. GRIMES -- MACHINE WORK FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS
153 Hamlet Ave. (5th floor) Woonsocket RI, 02895
...
"Leonard Evens" len@math.northwestern.edu wrote
> Dan Fromm wrote:
> > Leonard Evens len@math.northwestern.edu wrote
> >
> >>I just got a new Fuji 300 mm lens from Badger Graphics. The included
> >>instructions are in Japanese. I assume this works the same as other
> >>lenses I've have, and it looks pretty straightforward. But one thing
> >>I'm not sure of is whether it is safe to change the shutter speed when
> >>the shutter is cocked. Similarly for opening the diaphragm to preview
> >>with the shutter cocked. The instructions for my old Horseman lenses
> >>said you should be careful about such things, but the instructions for
> >>the Rodenstock lenses I got for my Toho say I can do anything in any order.
> >>Any advice?
> >>
> >>Might there be something else in the Japanese instructions I should know
> >>about?
> > What shutter is it in?
>
> Sorry for bothering everyone. It is of course dependent on the shutter,
> and it is a Copal shutter.
>
> --
> Leonard Evens len@math.northwestern.edu
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Front thread size on a No. 4 Alphax?
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002
"Davidlindq" davidlindq@aol.com wrote...
> Anyone know the front thread size on a No. 4 Alphax shutter? I want to machine
> an adapter to front-mount a barrel lens. I can measure the inside diameter and
> knowing the thread pitch can calculate back from there but this process is
> prone to introducing errors. Knowing the nominal diameter of the male thread
> that screws in here will help in the inevitable cut-and-try process. Steve
> Grimes has this info for Ilex shutters on his website but not the Wollensak
> shutters. If anyone having a lens mounted in one of these shutters could
> measure the o.d. of the thread that screws in the front, that would be helpful
> to me in verifying my calculations too. Now if you could measure the pitch
> diameter using the three wire method that would be really nice....
> David Lindquist
> Davidlindq@aol.com
The front lens opening is 2.389 inches, 40 threads/inch.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Steve Grimes" skgrimes@skgrimes.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Front thread size on a No. 4 Alphax?
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002
2.415-40 TPI (Actual measurement from lens part which fits #4 Alphax/Betax.
SKG
--
S.K. GRIMES -- MACHINE WORK FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS
153 Hamlet Ave. (5th floor) Woonsocket RI, 02895
From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002
From: Michael Hendrickson mhh@pacbell.net
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re: Lens set-up questions
Regarding the mounting of lenses into new shutters, here's what I've
managed in the past:
I take a caliper measurement of the front-to-back distance of the lens
in its original mounting, whether that's a barrel or shutter.
Then when I try it in the new shutter I make the same measurement, front
to back. If it's the same, then I know the spacing is the same in both
mounts.
I've had this work beautifully with two different older Schneider Symmar
Convertibles -- the 300/500 and the 240/420. I mounted the 300/500 into
an old Compound shutter, which incidentally (and luckily!) came to me
with a dual aperture scale that worked out perfectly; and I mounted the
240/420 into an old Compur shutter from which I had removed the elements
to an ancient Xenar. They both fit perfectly with no shims required.
My understanding is also that if you get lenses made after about the
1950s to 1960s, and shutters made during that same period, you'll find
the going pretty easy. Manufacturers apparently started standardizing
their shutter sizes around that time, and the lenses from that time on
were made to fit these shutters.
On the other hand, if you're mounting older process camera lenses, it
might be a bit of a crap shoot; I haven't had any luck at all with these
so far. Seems that you have to have adapter tubes or flanges made or
whatnot. But then again, on eBay I've seen plenty of later process
camera lenses mounted in late model shutters, so I might be wrong about
the newer ones. But the older process lenses that I have don't fit the
older shutters I have.
Hope this helps.
'Bye for now,
--Michael
mhh@pacbell.net
From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002
From: Robert Mueller r.mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Re: Lens set-up questions
One further word should be added; measure the distance from one of the
flange surfaces to the iris. The iris should be at a particular location
relative to the glass and you should try to reproduce this with reasonable
accuracy. Because of the standardization mentioned below and a tendency
to make barrels to dimensions like those of shutters, you often will have
little trouble, but sometimes life will be harder!
Bob
From: john@stafford.net (J Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Got the shutter working (big WA)
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003
Joy of joys. I finally made up a manual shutter release modification of
the electric shutter for the Monster SWC lens. It works. Very slick.
AFAIK, nobody's done this before with this shutter. I also (ta daaa) have
F-stops for it. Disabling the second shutter blade set left room for some
handmade stops plates. Done!
...now the QUESTION - I used to see slow-shutter-speed add-ons for early
cameras, such as the early Leica. Any clue on where one can find the same
today? (I made one from an external self-timer, but it's got one speed: 2
seconds :( )
Next: pictures!
--
(Talking about this thing: http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/proto1 )
From: john@stafford.net (J Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: using a big simple gravity slit shutter; congrats Re: shutter..
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003
rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert
Monaghan) wrote:
> congrats on the success with shutter adaptations! it would be interesting
> to see what you have wrought ;-) might spur others to adapt some too? ;-)
Unfortunately, the shutters for these lenses are made of unobtanium or
something. I've never seen another, although through Google I read of
someone else who had one and had no idea how to make it work, but that was
years ago.
> re: mechanical delays
> there are some clockwork style delays that screw into older cameras.
Thanks, I will check out KEH.
> re: recycle option
> I've also used a solenoid cable release from an older defunct CB radio
> based remote release in past experiments for remote telephotography with
> ELM. these are obsolete, so cheapies used, and you only need the cable and
> solenoid parts to be working ;-)
Ah ha! Good tip.
> re: homebrew electronics
> How fast or slow? A radio shack solenoid could be used to pull on a
> control [...]
Another good idea. Another good thing about this shutter is that it can
push or pull to open and I can vary the return tension very easily. I use
rubber bands, but can now use springs.
> re: using a big simple slit gravity shutter for very low $$$...
No room for such a thing. I drafted several versions in scale, but no way
will one fit in the space. It's round down there.
> in short, I think this simple gravity drop shutter setup can help us
> bridge the gap between the "hat trick" multi-second exposure trick and the
> range down to under 1/125th second or so. [...]
Indeed! Steve Grimes once described such a setup using rubber bands to
control the exposure time. I realize it sounds unsophisticated, but it
does work. One can also add a pneumatic dampner taken from an old Packard
shutter to keep the unit from slamming shut.
(Bob, maybe we can start another experimental page on your site, but for LF?)
From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: using a big simple gravity slit shutter; congrats Re: shutter..
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003
Several decades ago (seems like yesterday) we experimented with
something called a liquid crystal shutter. This was an electronic
device about the size of a large filter which was fed by a control
box/timer. It was opaque until you fed some current to it, then it
became transparent (or was it the other way around). No moving parts,
exquisitely accurate control. I have no idea if these things are still
around or what they cost.
Regards,
Marv
Robert Monaghan wrote:
> congrats on the success with shutter adaptations! it would be interesting
> to see what you have wrought ;-) might spur others to adapt some too? ;-)
>
> re: mechanical delays
> there are some clockwork style delays that screw into older cameras (leica
> etc. cable release). My impression is that these only did really slow
> seconds timing, not fast stuff. SHould still be available from older gear
> dealers such as KEH, pacific rim, columbus camera group or ?? see links at
> http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/albro.html to dealer used gear pages/links...
>
> re: recycle option
> I've also used a solenoid cable release from an older defunct CB radio
> based remote release in past experiments for remote telephotography with
> ELM. these are obsolete, so cheapies used, and you only need the cable and
> solenoid parts to be working ;-)
>
> re: homebrew electronics
> How fast or slow? A radio shack solenoid could be used to pull on a
> control (as could some model plane " " I guess), tied to a timer chip (555
> chip?), yielding a wide range of speeds from subsecond to minutes that
> would be repeatable (depending on shutter mechanics only and temperature).
> see forest mims timer cookbook at radio shack for info on these; they are
> easy to setup on a small protoboard (also at radio shack). you can use a
> potentiometer to vary times over seconds to minutes range (non linear
> taper).
>
> ===============
>
>
> re: using a big simple slit gravity shutter for very low $$$...
>
> what we need is a simple to build shutter for really big lenses, but with
> multiple speeds, cheaper than big packard shutter with only one variable
> speed (1/25th sec), yes? how about a $5 slit shutter for multiple speeds?
>
>
> I suggest a solution using a dropping gravity slit (like the harris
> tricolor effects shutters see http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/tricolor.html -
> this is just a holder that lets a cardboard filter holder drop past the
> front of an open lens using a small weight and gravity to pull it down.
>
> This design can be turned into a useful shutter for LARGE barrel lenses...
>
> Simply use a slit in the cardboard and vary the slit length to vary the
> exposure time (as with focal plane camera) for faster exposures with a
> narrower slit. Depending on starting height and slit width, you should be
> able to get a wide variety of relatively fast shutter speeds this way too.
> Wider slit widths equate to longer exposures. At the start and end of the
> cardboard is a solid black light blocking cardboard section, so you only
> expose while the dropping slit is going past the lens. Simple to build!
>
> longer duration exposures could be possible with two slits; one drops to
> open up the exposure, the second is delayed (555 timer chip again?) any
> desired time from sub-second to longer, then drops to stop the exposure.
> In this case, the solenoid or an electromagnet is used to keep the second
> slit up after the first has dropped, then releases it to let it drop after
> timing out the desired exposure time. It falls to block further exposure.
>
> A nice factor is that the whole setup should be do-able using a
> conventional front of the lens filter holder or mask setup to mate with
> the lens filter threads (or press on holder?). Tilted exposures may be
> possible with the right weights, but may vary more than the gravity drop.
>
> in short, I think this simple gravity drop shutter setup can help us
> bridge the gap between the "hat trick" multi-second exposure trick and the
> range down to under 1/125th second or so. This shutter requires mainly
> some cardboard and glue, should fit any sized lens, and is very cheap!
> Best of all, larger lenses don't add much to the cost of cardboard needed!
>
> grins bobm
From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: using a big simple gravity slit shutter; congrats Re: shutter..
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003
Strange, I did a search on them last night - they're still around, I
think Alltronics has some of them surplus, and they have re-emerged as
the glasses for 3D computer stereo.
Regards,
Marv
J Stafford wrote:
> Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>>Several decades ago (seems like yesterday) we experimented with
>>something called a liquid crystal shutter. This was an electronic
>>device about the size of a large filter which was fed by a control
>>box/timer. It was opaque until you fed some current to it, then it
>>became transparent (or was it the other way around). No moving parts,
>>exquisitely accurate control. I have no idea if these things are still
>>around or what they cost.
>
>
> I'll bet they had a short shelf life, otherwise I'd expect to see them in
> the surplus lists. Darn.
>
> Strange shutter? When they were trying to freeze-frame the a-bomb, they
> tried a camera that opened its shutter before the blast, then a small
> cannon shot melted wax over the lens at the moment they ignited the bomb.
> Watch the birdieeee.
From: rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert Monaghan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: using a big simple gravity slit shutter; congrats Re: shutter..
Date: 21 Jan 2003
re: LCD shutters
yes, a good point; though an LCD shutter would require a fairly hefty
external power source IIRC this was the reason they didn't make it into
many consumer cameras, esp. when fast shutter speeds were needed (slow
speeds used less power IIRC). I'll have to look up the alltronics source;
they'd be fun to play with. The ones I have seen have been rather small,
for 3d stereo work, might not be good enough optically in optical path?
I also seem to recall there is some light leakage issues so you might need
a darkslide for longterm light protection?
Again, the cardboard gravity slit shutter is in front of lens, an air
space, so no impact on optical quality of image, and no battery required!
Just it would be nice to have a low cost solution to using a barrel lens
with multiple speeds (at least 3 or 4) [vs. packard's 1/25th] that newbies
could brew up, and I think the gravity slit shutter would work here folks!
Being a cardboard only project, this is easily done and dirt cheap to
make. John, I'd be glad to put up some photos, and may eventually do so
when I get some project fun time to experiment with one this semester? ;-)
John, note that this shutter fits on the FRONT of the lens, e.g., filter
thread mounted gel filter holder enlarged with a dremel etc. so cardboard
slit can drop past it easily idea; so it doesn't have to fit inside the
lens, moreover, the same shutter could be mounted on different lenses, and
it would work with big - as in 8" front element lenses (hey Murray! ;-)
and be LOTS cheaper than a copal #3 or bigger shutter often needed.
a deluxe version might have two two dropping slits, the first to open up
and start the exposure, the second delayed by a 555 timer and
electromagnet to drop on the time out (block SCR current..) and end the
exposure however many milliseconds or seconds later ;-)
Most of these cheap barrel/copier lenses can't justify $$ for copal big
shutters or steve grimes careful work on them, but it is a shame not to be
able to use them, esp. for newbies or oddball lenses (long telephotos..)
which would be otherwise prohibitive to experiment with in a shutter lens
mount...
grins bobm
--
* Robert Monaghan POB752182 So. Methodist Univ., Dallas Tx 75275 *
From leica mailing list:
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003
From: Javier Perez summarex@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: [Leica] RE: Longevity of Leica products
Howdy
Before Quartz control, all "electronic" shutters were
controlled via capacitive discharge. The cap acted as
a delay circuit discharge time was controled by
modifying the discharge network either through trhe
introduction of new RCL elements or by varying source
voltage to the network. IE putting a resistor in shunt
with the cap would make it discharge more quickly.
Interestingly enough the primordial electronic shutter
is not truly electronic since there is no
amplification going on. Similarly the digitally driven
cameras are notb truly digital in that that there is
no inferencing, interpolation or the like going on
except for low level counters and bar segments.
BTW: the old ca[pacitive electronic shutters like the
R3, RTS Nikkormat etc are very reliable at all
temperatures.
Javier
...
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Wollensak lens retaining ring needed...
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2
"James E Kropp" jimkphoto@aol.com wrote
> Hi all,
> The lens is in Barrel mount and would actually be interested in finding a
> shutter for this lens. I know that I can use a Packard shutter but to get a
> packard shutter for the 4" ID size, It would place me in the 8" square overall
> size. Kinda hard to remove through a 6" lensboard opening. See my problem...
> My second option is to place it on the front of the lens, but the lens front
> has no threads to mount anything. (Second problem)
> Im almost at the point of just using it as a paperweight.
> (not really, just kidding...)
> Thanks for the help everyone...
> Jim Kropp
There are other possibilities. A Packard shutter can be
front mounted using a clamp like a hose clamp. It can also
be mounted in a box with a lens board on the back. This
allows using a shutter too large to fit into a camera.
Another solution is to adapt a large conventional shutter
so that it takes lens boards. The shutter is mounted on the
camera in the usual way and whatever barrel lens you want is
fitted to the front of the shutter. This works quite well
and is somewhat more versitile than a Packard shutter. I
have an Ilex No.5 Universal set up this way. Its on a
lensboard that fits on my 8x10 cameras and takes smaller
lensboards, including one with an adaptor for 4x4" Speed
Graphic boards. I have a variety of lenses which can be
used with it. The range of speeds is not very great, a
limitation of large shutters, but it does have more than one
speed and has flash synch.
Finding a suitable shutter may be the biggest problem. Big
Ilex shutters have become rare. Also suitable are the large
Wollensak Alphax and Betax shutters and large Compound
shutters. Actually, the old Compound is a very good shutter.
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Ilja Friedel ilja@sue.caltech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: gravity slit shutter speed test
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003
J Stafford john@stafford.net wrote:
>> The shutter plane is accellerating as it falls. [...]
> Probably doesn't really make any difference. It's not as if the light were
> dispersed sharply in the same plane as the shutter. Or does it?
It seems to me that one will receive more light at the top of the picture
than at the bottom. As long as one can limit it to less than 1/3 of a stop
it won't be noticable. (E.g. the speed of the shutter on the bottom should
be not more than 25% faster than on top. This clearly means the shutter
must already have a minimum speed on top.) Adding friction will also help
against acceleration. Otherwise one could use a graduated density filter.
Ilja.
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003
From: mevansmi mevansmi@cbpu.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: using a big simple gravity slit shutter; congrats Re: shutter.
While scribbling out some design ideas for this gravity shutter project for my
own barrel lenses I wanted to pass on these thoughts.
For the part that fits on the front of the lens itself I would use 3/8 inch
foam core which is very light yet stable. I just made a successful filter
holder for my 75mm biogon which has no screw in threads.
The copper plated solid PC boards sold at radio shack can be used to make the
part that slides up and down with the slit in it and black stick on velvet can
be attached to the back. Old metal photo frames are available at any thrift
store and make excellent guide rails.
It also occurred to me, and I will have to make one to be sure it works, that
rather than just gravity one could use a rubber band held at a point on each
side of the slider on the none moving foam core and the center part of the
rubber would be affixed to the top of the sliding panel.It would be in the
form of a triangle. So what you would have in effect is like a bow and arrow,
but aiming down vertical rather than horizontal.
This way you might be able to calibrate {by marks on the slider}different
speeds depending upon how far upward you pulled the slider and the elastisity
of the rubber band. Its closed position would just be neutral with the lens
covered and no tension until pulled upward and released.
Anyway its fun toying with.
mevansmi
Robert Monaghan wrote:
> re: LCD shutters
> yes, a good point; though an LCD shutter would require a fairly hefty
> external power source IIRC this was the reason they didn't make it into
> many consumer cameras, esp. when fast shutter speeds were needed (slow
> speeds used less power IIRC). I'll have to look up the alltronics source;
> they'd be fun to play with. The ones I have seen have been rather small,
> for 3d stereo work, might not be good enough optically in optical path?
> I also seem to recall there is some light leakage issues so you might need
> a darkslide for longterm light protection?
>
> Again, the cardboard gravity slit shutter is in front of lens, an air
> space, so no impact on optical quality of image, and no battery required!
>
> Just it would be nice to have a low cost solution to using a barrel lens
> with multiple speeds (at least 3 or 4) [vs. packard's 1/25th] that newbies
> could brew up, and I think the gravity slit shutter would work here folks!
> Being a cardboard only project, this is easily done and dirt cheap to
> make. John, I'd be glad to put up some photos, and may eventually do so
> when I get some project fun time to experiment with one this semester? ;-)
>
> John, note that this shutter fits on the FRONT of the lens, e.g., filter
> thread mounted gel filter holder enlarged with a dremel etc. so cardboard
> slit can drop past it easily idea; so it doesn't have to fit inside the
> lens, moreover, the same shutter could be mounted on different lenses, and
> it would work with big - as in 8" front element lenses (hey Murray! ;-)
> and be LOTS cheaper than a copal #3 or bigger shutter often needed.
>
> a deluxe version might have two two dropping slits, the first to open up
> and start the exposure, the second delayed by a 555 timer and
> electromagnet to drop on the time out (block SCR current..) and end the
> exposure however many milliseconds or seconds later ;-)
>
> Most of these cheap barrel/copier lenses can't justify $$ for copal big
> shutters or steve grimes careful work on them, but it is a shame not to be
> able to use them, esp. for newbies or oddball lenses (long telephotos..)
> which would be otherwise prohibitive to experiment with in a shutter lens
> mount...
>
> grins bobm
> --
> * Robert Monaghan POB752182 So. Methodist Univ., Dallas Tx 75275 *
From: "Dennis O'Connor" doconnor@chartermi.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: gravity slit shutter speed test
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003
Assuming no friction or air resistance:
Assuming a 5 inch fall to give a half inch over lap at the top and bottom of
the 4X5 plate in landscape mode:
The first inch of fall takes 0.016 seconds.. 0" to 1" in 16 milliseconds
The last inch of fall takes 0.0058 seconds... 4" to 5" in 5.8
milliseconds...
Roughly 2.7 times as fast over the last inch compared to the first inch...
Or about a 1.3 stop difference in exposure between the top half inch of the
plate and the bottom half inch... Being that the image is upside down on
the negative this means that for a landscape picture the sky will get about
1.3 stop less exposure than the foreground, which may be quite beneficial at
printing time...
Denny
If you want to get picky, given that the the first half inch and the last
half inch of acceleration are off the negative, the difference is close to 1
stop, top to bottom...
From: "Dennis O'Connor" doconnor@chartermi.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: gravity slit shutter speed test
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003
If I am mentally seeing it correctly , that will cause horizontal stop
differences with the center getting more light..
Actually, a correction is not that bad... A bit of friction, pneumatic
plunger, or other mickey mouse, will retard the later acceleration, evening
things out... Also, a longer fall pre-exposurewill help by getting rid of
the slow first 2 inches before the film sees light... By then you are
reinventing the wheel and losing the simplicity... I suspect that friction
in the guides is going to make a significant contribution to controlling the
rate of acceleration and if the difference top to bottom is less than a
stop, not a major problem with BW film...
Denny
...
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Wollensak lens retaining ring needed...
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003
"Steve Grimes" skgrimes@skgrimes.com wrote
> I have in stock or can make flanges up to and larger than that size. Best
> thing is to send the lensbarrel for fitting as a sure thing. Next best
> thing is to try out flanges from stock. I think this is larger than any
> flange I stock though. Shipping both ways is at your expense. A large,
> special made flange like this one will cost $125.00. See:
> http://www.skgrimes.com/adapter/index.htm for more about this.
> --
> S.K. GRIMES -- MACHINE WORK FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS
> + For more info-- http://www.skgrimes.com
...
> http://www.skgrimes.com/span/index.htm
>
> "James E Kropp" jimkphoto@aol.com wrote
> > Hello all,
> > First I want to thank all who reply. I have a nice, HUGE, Wollensak 16"
> > Vitax portrait lens that I would like to use. Problem: No way to mount it to a lensboard,
> > I would like to fix this problem with a retaining ring of about 4.25 inches in
> > size. (Not exactly sure, just ball park in size) Any help is appreciated.
Jim Kropp
This lens is probably in a Wollensak Studio Shutter. These
are simple shutters with, I think, combined iris and shutter
leaves.
Unfortunately, the list of dimensions I have is not
complete or completely clear. A "maximum diameter" is given
but I can't tell if this is for the entire shutter or for
the mounting thread diameter. The largest is for the No.5
shutter--6-7/8", with maximum clear aperture of 4-1/8"; the
No.2 is 4-1/4", with clear aperture of 4-1/8". No thread
information is given.
I don't have any old Wollensak catalogues but someone out
there may have and may have the other dimensions for the
Studio Shutter listed.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From ZICG mailing list:
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002
From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Subject: Re: Compur shutter repair manual
Both the Comput Dial-set and Compur Rim-set (Pre 1945) shutters are
covered rather thoroughly in a book called "Camera Repair and Servicing"
by one E. Valera. I have this information, bought as a Shutter Repair
only reprint on eBay from someone who trades as "nikondave". This book
is precisely what you are looking for. If you cannot contact "nikondave"
and get a copy of the Valera book, contact me privately, we'll work out
something.
Regards,
Marv
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003
From: Ted Burford tedburford@yahoo.com
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re: Cameramakers digest, Vol 1 #578 - 1 msg
> I have two Packard shutters that I want to use in cameras I am building.
> When I squeeze the rubber bulb, both shutters stay open until I release the
> bulb, as if it was on a "B" setting of a modern shutter. Is there a Packard
> shutter that closes instantaneously without releasing the bulb?
This web site explains a lot about Packard shutters.
http://www.hubphoto.com/packard-shutters.htm
Ted
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003
From: Michael Hendrickson mhh@pacbell.net
To: Cameramakers List cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] Re: Packard Shutters
Hi there,
Original message with question:
"I have two Packard shutters that I want to use in cameras I am building.
When I squeeze the rubber bulb, both shutters stay open until I release the
bulb, as if it was on a "B" setting of a modern shutter. Is there a Packard
shutter that closes instantaneously without releasing the bulb?"
Over the years I've seen two different models of Packard Shutter; on
has the "instantaneous" option and one doesn't. The ones with this "I"
setting seem to be more common, but I'm sure there are plenty of both.
Here's how to find out which model of shutter you have.
Look at the back of the shutter, the side that will face the inside of
the camera if you mount the shutter on the back of a lensboard, or in
the camera itself. On the right hand side you'll see the pneumatic brass
tube arrangement which opens and closes the shutter. If it has the "I"
option, then looking at an angle of about 11 o'clock, you'll see a small
protuberance, a closed cylinder maybe 1/16" in diameter sticking out
from the body of the shutter. On the front of the shutter there will be
a corresponding hole. If there's felt on the front of the shutter you
probably won't be able to see the hole, but you'll be able to stick a
small nail or un-bent paper clip into the hole. It will go through the
body of the shutter into that cylinder and stop when it reaches the end.
Important: Try this when the shutter is closed.
This hole is a for a pin which came with the shutter when it was new.
When the pin is inserted in the hole, you squeeze the bulb hard and the
shutter has a speed of about 1/15 second.
Even if you don't have the "I" option on your shutter, you could
probably get a speed possibly as fast as 1/8 second. To do this, deflate
the bulb part way before squeezing, then work it as fast as you can. If
the shutter is clean inside, you can get a pretty short speed with it.
With practice you can get some consistency in the speed using it this
way. I found that 1/4 second was easy to achieve with consistency,
faster in a pinch.
I also found that you could get some slight variance in the "I" speed by
varying the force of the bulb-squeeze, but it's been so long since I
worked out with this that I don't remember the details. I think it was
on the order of magnitude of a difference between 1/10 sec. and 1/15
second. Rarely did I see a shutter that would go as fast as 1/20 sec. If
you have a shutter tester you could work it out; if not, then testing
back and forth with a regular lens/shutter combination and the Packard,
developing your films together, you could probably work out what the
speed is by noting the difference in negative or print density between
the two shutters driving lenses open to the same stop, or even the same
lens (using the same lens, you'd make exposures with its regular
shutter, then open it up using the "T" or "B" setting and expose using
the Packard).
Hope this helps.
'Bye for now,
--Michael Hendrickson
...
From rangefinder mailing list:
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003
From: Karen Nakamura mail@gpsy.com
Subject: Copal electronic shutters in RFs
All of the Yashica Electro line used Copal electronic shutters. It
was actually quite a nice design. The shutter is utter stepless from
1/500 sec to 30seconds. The metering electronics open the shutter,
wait until an adequate amount of light is registered (maybe by
bleeding a capacitor), then close the shutter.
Without a battery, the shutter speed reverts to 1/500 sec. Of course
being a leaf shutter design, flash sync is possible at all speeds
including 1/500 sec.
What's really neat is that the camera is measuring the light *WHILE
THE SHUTTER IS OPEN*. This means you can do some neat tricks:
* Slow synchro: Stop the lens down to f/16 during a night shot. This
would normally make the camera do about a 15-20 second exposure.
Release the shutter wait until your subject is doing what you want,
then release the flash manually. The camera will detect there's
enough light and will close the shutter *at that moment*.
* Even if the exposure changes during the shot, the camera will compensate
The disadvantage is that you have no control over the shutter speed
at all. In fact, there isn't even a reading. What you can do is:
* Open the aperture all the way until the overexposure warning light
is on, then back off one stop. The shutter will be at 1/500 sec. Then
you can close the aperture and count down 1/250, 1/125, 1/60 etc.
* Close the aperture down until the underexposure warning light
turns on (I think at 1/60 sec).
Karen
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Another ebay lens puchase-- Kodak Comm. Ektar Opinions dry blades!
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003
josburke@bellsouth.net wrote
> Just got my Ebay Kodak Commercial Ektar F 6.3 14 in. mounted in a #5 Univ.
> Synchro shutter- flawless glass appears uncoated- pluses and minuses on this
> lens-lens and shutter (times seem close) look great but a few alum specs
> inside--blades look very dry-suggestions!!!!!!!
> $116 Dollar no holler plus shipping--- also has the old style 2 pin (bi
> post?) flash sync-how to adapt?
The blades of Ilex Universal shutters are made of hard
rubber. Don't lubricate them, they are meant to run dry.
Also, don't subject the shutter to heat, such as drying it
after cleaning it, both the shutter and diaphragm blades
will melt (the voice of experience speaking).
All Commercial Ektar lenses are coated. The coating is
single and appears a light magenta,almost gray, but its
there.
Ilex Universal shutters are not particularly accurate
although they can be made more so by careful balancing of
the springs. They are also not too consistent. The shutter
should be tripped a couple of times before making the actual
exposure. The speed marked 1/50th is actually about 1/30th
unless the diaphragm is wide open due to the rather low
efficiency of the shutter.
Paramount cords makes adaptor cords for bi-post synch
connectors. These are very common on older shutters,
particularly press and larger shutters. They are quite
rugged and better connectors than the more modern PC
although their size would preclude using them on many
cameras.
Commercial Ektars are outstanding lenses. They are very
nearly apochromatic in correction. Kodak made them to
promote the use of color film. They are exceptionally well
corrected for both lateral and longitudinal color.
If the lens is hazy inside the front cell it can be opened
easily by unscrewing the back retaining cap. Clean the
inside lens surfaces with plain lens cleaner or a no-streak
window cleaner. The rear element should be clear after
cleaning the surfaces. If the _rear_ is hazy its from the
cement going bad. The mechanical work of opening and then
repairing the rear cell makes recementing these lenses (and
most other Tessar types) overly expensive.
The mechanical parts of the shutter can be cleaned with
naptha (lighter fluid). Be careful of the shutter blades. I
think they are immune to naptha but test first with a cotton
swab. A very small amount of synthetic oil can be used on
the bearings and pallat of the speed regulator, although
they were designed to run without lubricant. Probably most
existing Ilex shutters are so old that a little lube is
necessary. Use Nyoil or the very light synthetic oil found
at model railroad shops.
Begin by taking out the lens cells and the front plate.
Blow out the shutter gently with canned air. The metal specs
bother me, they should not be there.
Do NOT lubricate the shutter or diaphragm blades of ANY
shutter ever. You will jam it. Its a job to clean out an
oiled shutter.
Steve Grimes has a considerable amount of information on
Ilex shutters on his web site. It will take some poking
around to find it.
http://www.skgrimes.com
Steve does excellent shutter work and is an expert on Ilex
shutters.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Another ebay lens puchase-- Kodak Comm. Ektar Opinions dry blades!
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003
"Donn Cave" donn@drizzle.com wrote
> Quoth tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon):
> ...
> | It's a real shame that Kodak used Ilex shutters; also made in Rochester
> | at the same time was the Wollensak Rapax, which may well have been the
> | best mechanical shutter ever made. Cost about the same, too. Go figger.
>
> Were Rapax shutters made in that kind of size, comparable to Ilex #5?
>
> Donn
No, the Rapax, like the Kodak Supermatic, was originally a
replacement for the Compur shutters which became unavailable
at the outbreak of WW-2. The Rapax, also called the Graphex
when on Graflex cameras, was a very good shutter, although
perhaps not as ruggedly constructed as the Kodak Supermatic.
The Rapax/Graphex was available only in small sizes for
press camera and similar lenses.
Wollensak's larger shutters were the Alphax and Betax,
both good, reliable, shutters. The Alphax (I think) was
available in a large size, about the same as the big Ilex.
About the only other shutter this large was the largest
Compound shutter, an extremely reliable and rugged shutter,
made for over seventy years.
Ilex shutters are not as bad as their reputation. When
carefully serviced bby someone like Steve Grimes, who knows
what he is doing, they can be made fairly accurate. However,
the mechanism has substantial mechanical hysterisis and
should be worked a couple of times before making an
exposure. In fact, this is stated in the Ilex instructions.
I have no idea why Kodak choose to use Ilex shutters
rather than Wollensak. It did not make its own large
shutters probably because it was too small a volume. Kodak
was also careful to keep some if its Rochester neighbors in
business to avoid anti-trust actions. It had been subject to
many such around the beginning of the twentieth century. To
this end Kodak supplied sensitizing dyes to Defender Photo
and even made some of their films. Kodak also bought
millions of lenses from Bauch & Lomb for its cheaper cameras
before going into the lens business big time in the mid
1930's.
The Ilex shutters made for Kodak are slightly different
than the standard Ilex's. They have somewhat different
threads and may have been made to higher QC standards.
However, they were never well liked.
I am also somewhat surprized at the choice of Ilex since
the Ektar series of lenses, especially the Commercial Ektar,
was intended to promote the use of color film, where an
accurate shutter is highly desirable.
If the answers were somewhere in Kodak's business records
they will be pretty hard to find now. The records were
donated to one of the Rochester educational institutions. I
thought it was RIT but understand they are not there, so I
don't know where they are.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Another ebay lens puchase-- Kodak Comm. Ektar Opinions dry blades!
Date: 14 Mar 2003
josburke@bellsouth.net wrote:
>Just got my Ebay Kodak Commercial Ektar F 6.3 14 in. mounted in a #5 Univ.
>Synchro shutter- flawless glass appears uncoated- pluses and minuses on this
>lens-lens and shutter (times seem close) look great but a few alum specs
>inside--blades look very dry-suggestions!!!!!!!
If your shutter's timings are close with the blades dry, don't mess with
it. Ideally, shutters will run dry or very close to (some dry graphite
as lubrication *at most*) if the blades are perfectly flat and aligned.
If you have a shutter that's beat up enough that it needs liquid lube, it
has seen better days (and will need periodic cleaning and lubrication as
the liquid lube *will* gum up over time).
All lenses marked "Ektar" are coated.
Ilex Universal shutters are terrible, but unless you find a very late
Ektar in a Compur shutter, there's not much you can do. You will be
able to get the high or the low shutter speeds right but not both, and
these shutters are never tremendously consistent. You just get used to
it over time.
One thing you _could_ try would be to accidentally release the tripod
lock with your heavy metal 8x10 on the tripod and your Ilex-shuttered
Ektar on the front, so the whole camera falls over on the shutter,
wrecking its insides. Then take it to Lens & Repro and beg Richard
to repair it, so long as it costs less than a new shutter; I did that
once and I may have the only *good* "Ilex Universal" shutter in the
world. :-)
It's a real shame that Kodak used Ilex shutters; also made in Rochester
at the same time was the Wollensak Rapax, which may well have been the
best mechanical shutter ever made. Cost about the same, too. Go figger.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com
From: bobjames27@aol.com (Bob G)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Date: 14 Mar 2003
Subject: Re: Another ebay lens puchase-- Kodak Comm. Ektar Opinions dry blades!
>Commercial Ektar F 6.3 14 in. mounted in a #5 Univ.
>Synchro shutter- flawless glass appears uncoated- pluses and minuses on this
>lens-lens and shutter (times seem close) look great but a few alum specs
>inside--blades look very dry-suggestions!!!!!!!
>$116 Dollar no holler plus shipping--- also has the old style 2 pin (bi
>post?) flash sync-how to adapt?
Very sharp
Excellent 8x10 lens, Tessar type, plenty of coverage
Universal 5 is no good, speeds inconsistent, difficult to fine tune, put it on
a shutter tester if you're going to do available light
If the shutter blades open and close instantly (or reasonably so) leave them
alone. Otherwise try gently rubbing them with a touch of powder graphite on a Q
tip, both sides
Bi-post cables are not hard to come by, some stores may have them, or try photo
swap meets
If the lens serial number is followed by an L in a circle it's coated, but not
multi-coated (not important in long lenses). The L stood for "lumenized",
whatever that meant
There was a time when your lens fetched $600 used, sic transit...
Bob G
From: jaymp@earthlink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutter options for Kowa Graphic lenses?
Date: 22 Mar 2003
teveg666@ultranet.com (Stephan Goldstein) wrote
> I've just come into 210mm and 305mm f/9 Kowa Graphic lenses
> in barrels. Does any one have ideas about what shutter options
> might exist. I read somewhere that one of them might fit a Copal 1...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Steve
Congratulations on your recent acquisitions. Some Graphic-Kowa barrel
lenses have threaded elements that can be readily removed by
unscrewing. If your lens elements are threaded, the 210 will fit
directly into a Copal 1 shutter, and the 305 will fit into a Copal 3S
shutter. Computar lenses are similar. In my experience, Graphic-Kowa
and Computar lenses are small, light, sharp, and have large image
circles; the 210 easily covers 8x10. Enjoy.
Jay
From: aaron@post-modern.net (Aaron van de Sande)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: What voltage on Ilex Oscilloscope shutters?
Date: 2 Apr 2003
There is a pdf about this on the melles grott site...
These shutters kind of stink for fast exposures, I think they max at
around 1/30 of a second. I started playing around with a 555 circuit,
but you could just use a 9v batteray and a hand switch for second +
exposures.
drdagor@hotmail.com (Dr. Dagor) wrote
> I searched the archive and didn't find anything on this. Does anyone
> know what the design voltage of the Ilex #3 oscilloscope shutters
> (solenoid built into the shutter) might be? Also... Some of these
> were designed for two voltages -- a strike voltage that opened the
> blades, and then a holding voltage that kept the blades open on a
> timed exposure.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Thanks
From: danielwfromm@att.com (Dan Fromm)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: What voltage on Ilex Oscilloscope shutters?
Date: 2 Apr 2003
Go to http://www.chemie.unibas.ch/~holder/ , look around on his site.
He gives schematics, directions, software, .. for a controller for
Melles Griot (= Ilex) electric shutters.
From: "MVD@MVD" multi-volti@multi-volti.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: What voltage on Ilex Oscilloscope shutters?
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003
Hello:
I have to find my info - I opened one got the name off the solenoid and
pestered the company. The tech support person eventually gave me a huge pile
of electrical data and then clammed up claiming proprietary nature- it was
like a window of opportunity.
If you can measure the resistance I can probably tell you which design you
have - they varied from 6 to 48 volts.
The dual voltage concept was to 'hit it' with 4x nominal coil voltage for
5-10 ms then have the voltage decay to 1/2 nominal coil voltage to hold it.
5-10 ms was 5-10 time constants, consistent with electrical theory that RL
or RC circuits are very nearly fully charged at about 5 time constants.
Murray
From: danielwfromm@att.com (Dan Fromm)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: How do you use Barrel lenses - shutters?
Date: 14 Apr 2003
jdunn jddunn@plano.net wrote
> I see on e-bay some intresting looking long lenses, but they are
> barrel lenses - no shutters. I guess that means you MUST use a body
> with a focal plane shutter. Except for old speed graphics I don't
> know what that would be. Is there some other way to use these ?
To add to the other comments, you can hang a 4x5 Speed Graphic body in
front of the lens (or put the Graphic on your board and hang the lens
in front of it). This is equivalent to using a Thornton-Pickard
roller blind shutter, much the same thing as using a Packard EXCEPT
that the Graphic shutter offers higher and better controlled shutter
speeds than the Packard and is bigger than the Thornton-Pickard. Part
of the charm of those old lenses, if you're looking at ones from
aircraft cameras, is their speed, and with a Packard or fast-acting
lens cap that's unusable.
Cheers,
Dan
From: "Brian Downey" brian.downey@stratcomm.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: How do you use Barrel lenses - shutters?
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003
Sinar makes an shutter that works great for barrel lenses. There were three
versions over the years you can use any three but the earliest only
controlled the shutter speed, appears fairly regularly on eBay for around
$300 (about the same price of a good Ilex #5 after being CLAd), and is all
you really need (later versions also controlled aperture if the lens
elements were mounted in special "DB" lens boards).
The shutter is square and looks like the front standard of a sinar camera
and has the locking mechanisms for both lens board and bellows. You mount
the barrel lens onto a normal Sinar (or Horseman - they're the same)
lensboard which mounts, in turn, on the front standard of the camera. The
shutter mounts on the back of the front standard where the bellows would
normally mount and the bellows mounts to the back of the shutter. The
barrel lens should be flush mounted to the lens board (or at least not
protrude more than 20mm behind the back of the board) so it doesn't get in
the way of the shutter mechanism. Set the aperture using the barrel lenses
iris and use the Sinar shutter for exposure speed. Three additional nice
features of this system: you only need one shutter regardless of how many
barrel lenses you want to use; it also has shutter speeds of much longer
than any copal, compur, ilex, etc shutter (8 seconds max if I remember
correctly), and Sinar cameras have a port in their film back to run a cable
up to the Sinar shutter for automatic opening and closing of the shutter as
the film holder is inserted and removed. Hope this helps.
"jdunn" jddunn@plano.net wrote
> I see on e-bay some intresting looking long lenses, but they are
> barrel lenses - no shutters. I guess that means you MUST use a body
> with a focal plane shutter. Except for old speed graphics I don't
> know what that would be. Is there some other way to use these ?
From: Le Grande Raoul raoul@olympus.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: How do you use Barrel lenses - shutters?
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003
Nick Zentena zentena@hophead.dyndns.org wrote:
> jdunn jddunn@plano.net wrote:
> > I see on e-bay some intresting looking long lenses, but they are
> > barrel lenses - no shutters. I guess that means you MUST use a body
> > with a focal plane shutter. Except for old speed graphics I don't
> > know what that would be. Is there some other way to use these ?
>
>
> 1) Hat.
> 2) Packard shutter
> 3) Slow film
> 4) ND filters
> 5) Get them mounted in a shutter
> 6) I'm sure I've forgotten something.
If small enough, they can be mounted on the front of a leaf shutter of
a larger size- a #5 Ilex for one. This is cheaper than actually
getting the shutter mounted in a shutter because the machine work is
not as difficult. I would imagine if you didn't mind using JB Weld to
mount the barrel lens to the shutter, it could be done really cheap.
In reality, the easiest way of using a barrel lense is a black hat or a
loose lens cap and a watch with a second hand.
Jeff
From: Nick Zentena zentena@hophead.dyndns.org
Subject: Re: How do you use Barrel lenses - shutters?
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003
jdunn jddunn@plano.net wrote:
> I see on e-bay some intresting looking long lenses, but they are
> barrel lenses - no shutters. I guess that means you MUST use a body
> with a focal plane shutter. Except for old speed graphics I don't
> know what that would be. Is there some other way to use these ?
1) Hat.
2) Packard shutter
3) Slow film
4) ND filters
5) Get them mounted in a shutter
6) I'm sure I've forgotten something.
Nick
[Ed. note: possible source of handy information...]
From: rwatson767@aol.com (RWatson767)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Date: 19 Apr 2003
Subject: Re: What size is Ilex #5 mounting flange--Can I make one since mine is
All
>What size is Ilex #5 mounting flange--Can I make one since mine is
From the Camera Repairmans Handbook-National Camera Repair School.
82mm 40 threads per inch.
Bob AZ
From: danielwfromm@att.com (Dan Fromm)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: $1 gravity slit shutter Re: How do you use Barrel lenses
Date: 16 Apr 2003
rmonagha@engr.smu.edu (Bob Monaghan) wrote
> or, for about $1, you can build a gravity slit shutter of any size needed
> using black cardboard and some glue or tape ;-) fits in front of the lens
>
> see http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/shutters.html for tips and techniques.
>
> Vary the length of the shutter slit to vary the exposure times; unlike the
> typical packard shutter, you can have a variety of shutter speeds,
> including faster exposures, add flash synch (see tips), and so on ;-)
>
> a deluxe version can use an existing gel or modified cokin filter holder
>
> grins bobm
Use barrel lenses? What a thought!
I have a couple (100/6.3 Reichert Neupolar, 210/9 Konica Hexanon GRII)
that go in front of a Copal #1 via adapters that Steve Grimes made for
me. And I have a pair of Taylor Hobson lenses, 4"/2 (ex-Vinten F95)
and 12"/4 (ex-Agiflite), for my little Speed Graphic.
I don't like to suggest brutalizing Speed Graphics, but for some
lenses a Speed Graphic body in front of the lens is one way of getting
more and better controlled shutter speeds than a Packard offers.
From: p2macgahan@compuserve.com (P. MacGahan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Ilex shutter and 300 f9 tessar question.
Date: 25 May 2003
p2macgahan@compuserve.com (P. MacGahan) wrote
> Stacey fotocord@yahoo.com wrote
> > Two questions, first on the shutter. ...
>
> ... While it might not be a problem for
> your application, a behind the lens shutter can soften the image slightly if
> it is used at high speed (where the blades spend some time in the field).
> Any idea at what sort of speeds this becomes a problem?
It depends on the shutter. At the highest speeds, some shutters begin to
close about as soon as they fully open. If you are shooting with iris in
the lens, and the shutter blades displaced behind the lens, they will
diffract the light a little as they move in the field. If the shutter gets
fully open and stays there for a while (slower speeds) this is negligible.
If it is otherwise, it just might be a small effect. My guess is that when
you are using a strobe everything happens with the shutter fully open. When
you use available light at slow shutter speeds, you couldn't see
it (camera motion would be a far greater problem). It is unusual to use
such an arrangement for high shutter speeds and available light, but then it
might be something to look for.
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Ilex shutter and 300 f9 tessar question.
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003
"Stacey" fotocord@yahoo.com wrote
> Richard Knoppow wrote:
> > I'm not sure which lever this is. I talked to someone at
> > Ilex before they were swallowed by Melles-Griot and was told
> > the shutters were meant to run without lubrication. I have
> > found a very small amount of very thin synthetic oil on the
> > escapment and gear trunions will help out some of the older
> > shutters. If it works without lube leave it that way.
> >
>
> The lever I am talking about is the one that rides on the speed setting cam
> for the higher speeds. At 1 and 1/2 second this lever would hit the inner
> groove of the cam before it could release the mechanism that closes the
> shutter. Seems the slow speed gearing works through the high speed linkage
> to operate the blades. Anyway, a slight tweak of this lever fixed the
> problem it had hanging up on the slowest speeds and also helped the higher
> speeds become closer to their correct setting. Never worked on one of these
> but am impressed with how simple it is!
>
> Also thanx for the info on the lens, sounds like it might be a good one! BTW
> it has a lever above the f stop ring that doesn't seem to do anything. It
> runs in a groove that goes about 1/4 of the way around the lens. Have any
> idea what it's there for?
> Stacey
Ilex's are simple and rugged. The groove is a slot for
Waterhouse stops. It can also take filters. Waterhouse stops
are named for John Waterhouse, a photographic pioneer of the
19th century. Before iris diaphragm adjustable stops were
invented many lenses took individual stops, just holes in
strips of brass, fitted in a slot in the barrel. These were
invented by John Waterhouse.
For half tone plates of the type made up of small dots the
shape of the dot is important. Originally, this process was
done by placing a screen of fine, crossed, lines in front of
the film. The cross-line screen acted as an array of
pin-holes, each projecting an image of the lens stop on the
film. This image was slightly out of focus. The brighter the
part of the image being copied, the larger the fuzzy area of
the projected image of the aperture. Since the film was very
high contrast the result were dots varying in size dependant
on the brightness of the original image. The best shape for
these dots is square. That way the transition from bright to
dark is the most linear since, effectively, the dots form a
chekerboard whith black squares which increase in size until
its all black. In order to get square dots its necessary to
have a square aperture. So, process lenses were frequently
equipped with both an iris diaphragm and a slot for square
Waterhouse stops. The round diaphragm was used for
auxilliary exposures.
Cross-line screens can produce extremely high quality
printing plates but require a lot of skill to use. Sometime
about 1940 self screening film came out. This film had a
screen pattern with tapered density printed on the film. It
elminated the need for the cross-line screen and the special
stops and also the careful adjustments of distances, etc,
necessary to make good plates. It was many years before the
cross-line screens went out of service but self-screening
film eventually took over. Now, even that is mostly gone,
the halftoning being done by computer controlled laser.
The sliding thing is a cover to prevent light leaking in
when a stop is not in the lens.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Ilex shutter and 300 f9 tessar question.
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003
"Stacey" fotocord@yahoo.com wrote
> Two questions, first on the shutter. Seems like I remember these shutters
> were designed to be run dry correct? I thought the slow speeds were draging
> from lack of lube but lubing it made it really slow. Cleaned it out and now
> seems to work fine. The main problem ended up being a slightly bent high
> speed setting lever.
>
> The other question is the lens. It's a 300mm f9 APO zeiss jenna tessar front
> mounted on a #4 shutter. Is this a process lens and what can I expect from
> it? Can I assume it covers 8X10? Is there any problem using a front mounted
> lens if the shutter doesn't vignette? TIA
> Stacey
I'm not sure which lever this is. I talked to someone at
Ilex before they were swallowed by Melles-Griot and was told
the shutters were meant to run without lubrication. I have
found a very small amount of very thin synthetic oil on the
escapment and gear trunions will help out some of the older
shutters. If it works without lube leave it that way.
The Zeiss Apo-Tessar was the second most widely used
apochromatic process lens after the Goerz Apochromatic
Artar. Beside color separation process work they were also
used for very high quality enlarging (before specialized
enlarging lenses were available) and for three color
photography, as were the Artars.
Because the lens is so slow the qality at infinity is very
good despite being optimized for 1:1.
Coverage is very slightly larger than the
Apochromatic-Artar. While the specs for both lenses indicate
they don't cover 8x10 at infinity focus, in practice they
do. There is some fall off of quality toward the edges. The
specs for process lenses are very tight. The slight loss of
sharpness at the edges will not be a problem for most
pictorial work.
Because the coverage is not particularly wide the back
shutter should not interfere. You can check this by lookin
through the cut out corners of the ground glass, if your
camera has them, or by removing the back and looking back at
the len from were the corners of an 8x10 would be.
It will have somewhat less flare than an
Apochromatic-Artar because it has six rather than eight
glass-air surfaces.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003
From: "ned99992001" nedsnake@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: copal shutter
--- In camera-fix@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Wallage"
peterwallage@b... wrote:
> --- In camera-fix@yahoogroups.com, "peterinbrussels"
> petergutierrez@c... wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > I'm getting mixed messages here. Robert seems to think I'm not
> > measuring correctly. Mike says my measuring technique is sound.
> > Stephen says I should expect the reading to look slow. Can I get a
> > referee in here to straighten this out? Who's right and who's wrong?
> >
>
> Heaven forbid that I should prtetend to set myself up as a referee
> on something as complex as as the effective exposure of a leaf
> shutter. However, a professional repair man once explained it to me
> in a simplified way which made sense to me, at least.
>
> Suppose, at a setting of 1/500 sec, that the shutter blades remain
> at their fully open position for 2 ms. In starting from closed, it
> took them, let's say, a ms to reach fully open. They stayed open for
> 2 ms and then took another ms to close. Total opening cycle time
> from closed to closed again equals 4 ms. This isn't the same as
> effective exposure - the amount of light that gets to the film.
> Assume that the stop is open to maximum aperture. While the blades
> are opening you have the blades themselves forming a gradually
> increasing aperture, so the exposure is gradually increasing, and
> when they are closing they form a gradually decreasing aperture so
> the exposure is gradually decreasing. The effective exposure is the
> total amount of light reaching the film during the three stages of
> opening, remaining fully open and closing. This, I understand, is
> what most shutter manufacturers work to in deciding how long the
> blades stay fully open, but they express this exposure in
> milliseconds, or label the speeds 1/500, 1/250, etc rather
> than 'amounts of light' because in practice photographers use
> shutter speed to judge whether or not a moving object will
> be 'stopped' as well as to regulate the exposure.
>
> The efficiency of the effective exposure depends on the aperture
> because a small aperture is affected by the opening and closing
> times for a shorter length of time. So, when the main spring in a
> leaf shutter gets weaker, and the blades move slightly more slowly,
> it has a greater affect on the effective exposure at large apertures
> than it does at small apertures.
>
> When you use times longer than the sometimes called 'instantaneous'
> speeds, and introduce the inertia and drag of timing escapements to
> determine the 'fully open' time, things get much more complicated.
>
> I hope all this makes at least some sense. It seemed logical
(though
> probably simplified) in the way it was explained to me.
>
> Peter
My intent is not to start an argument with any one, however the
example given is not quite right. My response begins and ends in
brackets.
Peter wrote:
Suppose, at a setting of 1/500 sec, that the shutter blades remain
at their fully open position for 2 ms. In starting from closed, it
took them, let's say, a ms to reach fully open. They stayed open for
2 ms and then took another ms to close. Total opening cycle time
from closed to closed again equals 4 ms. This isn't the same as
effective exposure - the amount of light that gets to the film.
Assume that the stop is open to maximum aperture. While the blades
are opening you have the blades themselves forming a gradually
increasing aperture, so the exposure is gradually increasing, and
when they are closing they form a gradually decreasing aperture so
the exposure is gradually decreasing. The effective exposure is the
total amount of light reaching the film during the three stages of
opening, remaining fully open and closing. This, I understand, is
what most shutter manufacturers work to in deciding how long the
blades stay fully open, but they express this exposure in
milliseconds, or label the speeds 1/500, 1/250, etc rather
than 'amounts of light' because in practice photographers use
shutter speed to judge whether or not a moving object will
be 'stopped' as well as to regulate the exposure.
[Actually Peter when measuring a leaf shutter's speed it is done with
the aperture fully opened on all of the test equipment I know of.
To the best of my knowledge there is no test equipment in use in any
repair shop (private or manufacture) that measures mid open to mid
closed, there is no reason to measure a shutter's speed in that
manner. When I am adjusting a leaf shutter's speeds I need to know
how long the shutter allows light through from the time it opens
until it closes.
I do have another camera tester built by Kyoritsu, which I can use to
measure and or calibrate the actual diaphragm. This same instrument
is used to measure horizontal and vertical focal plane shutters,
which I do read in three places; start, middle and end.]
The efficiency of the effective exposure depends on the aperture
because a small aperture is affected by the opening and closing
times for a shorter length of time. So, when the main spring in a
leaf shutter gets weaker, and the blades move slightly more slowly,
it has a greater affect on the effective exposure at large apertures
than it does at small apertures.
[The effective exposure is taken at the film plane measuring the
amount of light which falls on the film it is not taken into account
when adjusting only the shutter speeds. The effective exposure or
what I term, exposure at the film plane, takes in to account the
shutter speed and aperture setting and the amount of light or EV
being measured. If the shutter speeds are not set correctly than your
effective exposure will be incorrect also.]
When you use times longer than the sometimes called 'instantaneous'
speeds, and introduce the inertia and drag of timing escapements to
determine the 'fully open' time, things get much more complicated.
[All speeds on a modern leaf shutter are instantaneous. When the
shutter is released it opens instantaneously runs through is cycle
and closes instantaneously. Actually leaf shutters are the least
complicated photographic devises in use. Most focal plane shutter
require much more support in their operation than do leaf shutters.
I do apologize if I have stepped on any toes
Mike]
I hope all this makes at least some sense. It seemed logical (though
probably simplified) in the way it was explained to me.
Peter
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: coating Rodenstock Eurynar 24cm
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003
"Kevin H. Phillips" kh-phillips@9-5usa.org wrote
> I just acquired an interesting lens; it is a Rodenstock
> Doppel-Anastigmat Eurynar 24cm focal length. The glass is in extremely
> good shape. It is in a non-working Optimo No. 3 shutter (the shutter
> appears to be in good shape but won't cock. I took the front plate off
> and looked inside but can't see any obvious problems). I've been doing
> a little research on the Web and found that the lens appears to be a
> 4-element double gauss design (Topogon).
>
> I have two questions:
> #1: who might be a good person to repair the shutter?
> #2: since the lens is most likely uncoated, can it be coated now?
> Somewhere in the dark recesses of my mind I thought I remembered reading
> about someone who could at least single coat older lenses.
>
> Thanks for any advice. You may e-mail me if you wish. If you have
> problems e-mailing me, please try this as an alternate address:
> kh-phillips@mail.9-5usa.org.
>
> Thanks!
> Kevin
The Eurynar is a four element lens of the Dialyte type.
This is different from the double Gauss type which is the
basis of the Topogon and Wide Field Ektar to name a few. The
diffenence is that all the sufaces in a double Gauss lens
are concex to the stop. The elements of a Dialyte are either
bi- or are plane on one side. Double Gauss types have wide
angle coverage, Dialytes are rather narrow coverage.
Dialytes are the basis for many process lenses (the
Apochromatic Artar) and many other lenses. The well known
203mm, f/7.7 Kodak Ektar is a dialyte.
Coating is probably too expensive, although, because the
lens has no cemented elements, its worth at least checking
out. Cemented elements must be separated for coating and
recemented afterward. The cemented surfaces are not coated
but the heat of the process will separate the cement,
especially in old lenses which are cemented with Canada
Balsam.
The Optimo is an interesting shutter. The shutter leaves
are double bladed and rotate 180degrees when the shutter is
tripped. When its tripped again they rotate 180degrees in
the other direction. This arrangement allows quite high
shutter speeds.
I've rebuilt a couple of Optimo's. I suspect the shutter
may just be gummy. Try the trick of putting it on a riser in
a closed jar with some lighter fluid in it. Leave it for a
day and then rinse it out with more lighter fluid, then blow
it out with canned air. Be careful of the shutter and
diaphragm blades, they are made of hard rubber, won't stand
heat.
Once working the Optimo is a fairly reliable shutter. They
were deluxe shutters in their day.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Michael Briggs MichaelBriggs@EarthLink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Copal #1 screw threads size.
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003
My understanding is that RTS is the US distributer of Copal shutters.
They can probably sell you the screws and the cable release socket. Or
perhaps they can tell you the size of the screws that hold the cable
release socket in place.
They have a table on their website with some of the dimensions, but not
the screws you are asking about:
http://www.rtsphoto.com/html/copal2.html. Amusingly they give three
different dimensions for the cable release socket. I am pretty sure
that M3.2mm P0.5 is correct and P0.75 is a typo. The drawings on S K
Grime's website have 3.2X0.5: http://www.skgrimes.com/products/. Only
one of the table entries has a tapered socket, but it is not very useful
unless one has access to obscure standards documents: "Taper Screw JIS
B7104-1971". Looking at Copal shutters, some have a straight socket for
the cable release and others a taper, with no pattern that I can
discern.
--Michael
> Hi, I just got a Symmar 210 in a copal shutter off Ebay and found that the
> shutter (which was supposed not to be working) is in perfect working order
> but that it is missing a little part. More precisely it is missing the
> cable release metal block (where you screws the cable in). In addition to
> photography I'm also into machining, so making a part to fit wont be too
> hard but I do need to know what thread size Copal would have used to hold
> the original part ( the size of the small screws). The shutter is a copal
> #1. I'd be very grateful for any info. Thanks.
>
> Alain Labbe.
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Large shutters?
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003
"Dan Fromm" danielwfromm@att.com wrote
> "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com wrote
> > "Nicholas O. Lindan" nolindan@ix.netcom.com wrote
> > > Has anyone taken the focal plane shutter out of a speed
> > graphic and mounted
> > > it in a view camera? Is this even a practical suggestion?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio nolindan@ix.netcom.com
> > > Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
> >
> > I've seen this done. The Graphic back is cut down so that
> > it snaps in like a standard back on the view camera. In
> > fact, some view camera manufacturers made such backs. I
> > think Thornton Picard had one c.1920s.
> Richard, that was the Thornton Pickard roller blind shutter. I've
> seen versions that were made to mount between lens and the front of
> the lens board.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dan
Thornton Picard made both curtain type front shutters and
focal plane shutters. I am looking at an ad in the 1916
edition of the British Journal Photographic Almanac (p.144)
which shows illustrations of three patterns of front
shutters and three focal plane shutters and lists more
versions. The front shutters were available in a behind the
lens version and another which clamped on the front of the
lens. There is also a stereo model.
The focal plane shutters are intended to mount in Thornton
Picard view and studio cameras. Sizes are available from 1/4
plate (about 3-1/4 x 4-3/4 inches) to 10x12 inches. There
are four models ranging from the "original" model with
adjustments inside to more complex models with all
adjustments outside. There forth one is the Ruby, a
self-capping shutter. T-P used the name "Ruby" for its
deluxe models.
Speeds are listed as being from 1/20th to 1/1000th of a
second plus time.
For those who have never seen a Thornton-Picard roller
blind shutter is is a wooden box fitting over the front or
rear of the lens with a focal plane type curtain shutter in
it. They look a little like the shutters in 35mm cameras. I
don't know over what period these were made. Most I have
seen had rotted shutter curtains. I suspect they would be no
harder to repair than a simple 35mm camera but have never
been inside one.
Some other manufacturers made focal plane shutters to fit
on large cameras. The facsimile edition of the 1904 Graflex
catalogue shows a focal plane shutter to fit on their view
cameras in sizes from 4x5 to 8x10. These were evidently very
similar to the shutter used on Speed Graphic and Graflex SLR
cameras.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: w-buechsenschuetz@web.de (Winfried Buechsenschuetz)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: c330: shutter cocking do and dont
Date: 27 Jul 2003
"redcat" nospam@prism.gatech.edu wrote
> But then again, with manual 35mm cameras, i could always change shutter
> speed at any time before or after advancing the film. Is there a difference
> here because the shutter is within the lens and not the body?
>
> What do the wise men say to this?
I am not sure if I am wise but listen to what I am saying:
All leaf shutters control the speed via an escapement gear. A lever
protruding from the escapement mechanism will delay the shutter
cocking shaft when turning. The base position of this lever is set via
the shutter cams and a control pin linked to this lever.
Once the shutter is released the control pin of the escapement gear
does no longer ride on the cams. Thus, if you move the dial now,
changing the cams will have no audible effect. The control pin only
rides on the cams when the shutter is cocked. What you hear is no
'scraping' sound but rather a buzzing sound since the gears are moved
a bit when the control pin goes from one cam to another one.
Usually, if the shutter is well designed and if the cam material is
hard enough (usually it is chrome plated brass) there will be no
noticeable wear if you move the shutter dial when the shutter is
cocked. Only exception are early Compur Rapid shutters, on these
shutters it is recommend NOT to set them to the fastest speed when the
shutter is cocked (these guys have a strong booster spring for highest
speed which puts a lot of pressure on the related cam).
Also, it makes no difference whether a leaf shutter is in a fixed lens
or in an interchangeable one.
Winfried
From: "Mike" nedsnake@earthlink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: shutter cocking do and dont
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003
"dr bob" rsmith@dmv.com wrote
> "redcat" nospam@prism.gatech.edu wrote
> > Hi all,
> > once again, another question on the C330.
> > This is more of a workflow question. While shooting, I find myself
> > automatically readying for the next shot by advancing the film before
> > setting up my shot. This automatically cocks the shutter as well. Now, when
> > i begin composing for the next shot, i find that i might have to change the
> > shutter speed on the already-cocked shutter. I am not sure if this is a good
> > thing to do. The guy at KEH said its definitely not a good thing for the
> > shutter because its already cocked. The reason i ask this is because when i
> > change the shutter speed after it is cocked, i get a "scrapy" sound from the
> > shutter that i never get when i am adjusting shutter speed BEFORE advancing
> > the film.
> >
> > But then again, with manual 35mm cameras, i could always change shutter
> > speed at any time before or after advancing the film. Is there a difference
> > here because the shutter is within the lens and not the body?
> >
> > What do the wise men say to this?
> > redcat
> >
> It is not the best practice to change shutter settings while it is
> cocked but it won't be disastrous. The "scrapy" sound is the gears meshing
> which occurs when the springs are compressed after cocking. It is abnormal
> movement and it does create stress in the bearings in directions they would
> not normally see. A change of one speed should have very little effect on
> operation. I find I have to do this occasionally and so far there has been
> no bad effects - that I know of. I would advise against
> moving the speed ring from one extreme to the other however. One nice thing
> about the Mamiya TLRs, parts are still available.
>
> Truly, dr bob.
The sounds you hear when changing speeds on a cocked shutter, are the gears
of the speed governor and the pin of the segment gear pin the pin rubs along
the edge of the speed cam. The engagement of the pin will depend on which
speed you are on with one second giving the most and 1/500 the least.
You might also hear the shutter speed ring rubbing along parts of the
shutter housing.
On modern shutters you will do little damage to the governor unless your
changing speeds quickly, then you might do some damage as the governor is
not designed to cycle quickly.
Mike
From: David Nebenzahl nobody@but.us.chickens
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Cocking lever on old COMPUR shutter
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003
Bogdan Karasek spake thus:
> I thought that maybe somebody in the group might have a solution
> to my problem with the cocking lever on an old shutter.
>
> I recently acquired an old Zeiss Tessar 1:4.5 f=16.5 cm Nr
> 759106. The glass is immaculate. It is fitted in an old black
> COMPUR shutter (Lic and Pat. March 31 and Dec. 29, 1914; D.R.P
> NY 258646 D.R.G.M.) that has a dial at 9 o'clock marked ZDM and
> IBT (that's OK), at 12 o'clock is the dial for the speeds, 1 sec
> to 1/200 sec and at 3 o'clock is a dial with a lever attached to
> it. The speed dial has Zeiss Ikon engraved in script underneath it.
>
> The lever looks
> like the shutter cocking lever on later Compur and Compur-Rapid
> shutters. I tried to move the lever down but it moves only a few
> mm as I don't want to force anything. Would this be the cocking
> lever for the speeds? If so, is it stuck from disuse; how do I
> can get it functional again. I am assuming that there is
> lubricant (grease) inside that has congealed over time.
>
> Would removing glass elements and then soaking the shutter in
> lighter fluid solve the problem or just a quick shot of "contact
> cleaner"? B and T work fine since the shutter doesn't have to be
> cocked. Worse comes to worse, I can use it like that since I use
> very slow film (25iso) and exposures are more than a second. But
> it would still be nice to have the use of the faster speeds if I
> decide to use Tri-X. If anybody has any ideas on the matter,
> they would be welcome.
If it helps you to know, I just opened up, cleaned and successfully
reassembled my old Compur shutter. (Mine's actually newer than yours, being
rimset rather than dialset, but it's very similar otherwise.) It was no
problem getting into it, even for a dummy like me. When you get the dials and
nameplates off, there should be one or two screws holding the front faceplate
on to the body. Once the faceplate is off, you can see everything inside, and
hopefully correct the problem that's causing the jam.
By the way, contrary to popular myth, there are *no* adjustments inside these
shutters. Apart from bending springs or cams back into shape, once they're
lubricated, they should work about as well as they did the day they left the
factory. (Generally, the slow speeds on these shutters stop working simply on
account of lack of lubrication. A few well-placed drops of oil are usually all
that's needed to restore functioning.)
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Cocking lever on old COMPUR shutter
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003
...
Check to see if the Z-D-M is in D or Z (bulb and time),
the shutter will not cock in those positions. If it doesn't
cock in M something is jammed. Likely one of the levers in
the shutter has ridden up over another. Sometimes this is
easy to fix but the out of place part may not be easy to
spot if you are not familiar with the insides (or sometimes
even if you are). Disassembly is not difficult but I would
work in some sort of container to avoid loosing small parts
or springs. I don't know of an on-line source of photographs
of the inside of the shutter. I think one of Ed Romney's
books covers the dial set Compur, he has a web site, do a
goodle search.
I don't remember the German but D.R.P means German Reichs
Patent and D.R.G.M. is similar for a sort of design patent.
These were changed to DBP German Bundes Patent, and DBGM
after WW-2 although the old abbreviations persisted until
around 1950.
The shutter is a Dial Set Compur. These were superceded by
the Rim-Set Compur around 1930. The patents are actually
Ilex patents for the clock-work escapement speed regulator.
Dial Set Compurs are very rugged and reliable shutters and
generally can be brought to life with a little cleaning. The
cams sometimes wear so that 1/5th and 1/10 are the same
speed. If you are skillful you can sometimes fix the speed
cams (there are two) to fix this.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Books and reference on shutter CLA and basic repair
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003
"Dr. Dagor" drdagor@hotmail.com wrote
> I know, I know, I know... smart people send their shutters to Grimes
> or Camera Wiz, and fools like me try to clean and adjust them
> themselves...
>
> So for fools like me, what are the basic books/articles/references on
> doing CLAs and adjusting shutters?
See John Craig's site at http://www.craigcamera.com and
Petra Keller's at http://www.camerabooks.com both have
reprint factory manuals on shutters and cameras.
Another source is Ed Romney who publishes a series of
books on camera repair. His current stuff is considerably
improved over the originals.
Craig, I think, has some of the old National Camera
training booklets which are excellent.
I got into repairing my own stuff after encountering an
absolutely incompetant fellow at a highly recommended place
locally.
You don't need many special tools but a good magnifier and
a steady hand are helpful. Most shutters do not need
extensive disassembly to clean.
A very helpful tool is the little shutter tester sold by
Calumet. I think these things are to around $100 now (I paid
$60 for mine). This will tell you exactly what the shutter
is doing. I can be used on between the lens shutters and
focal plane shutters. Its sensor is small enough to check
the end to end uniformity of the FP shutters in 35mm
cameras. It will also measure strobe duration time,
sometimes useful to know.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Cocking lever on old COMPUR shutter
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003
...
> By the way, contrary to popular myth, there are *no* adjustments inside these
> shutters. Apart from bending springs or cams back into shape, once they're
> lubricated, they should work about as well as they did the day they left the
> factory. (Generally, the slow speeds on these shutters stop working simply on
> account of lack of lubrication. A few well-placed drops of oil are usually all
> that's needed to restore functioning.)
Actually, there is one adjustment. That is the position of
the speed regulating gear assembly. It is held in place by
two screws. The funny shaped one at the top is the clamp.
The assembly slides back and forth a little. Its set to be
exactly on at 1/10th second. That will bring in the other
slow speeds. There is no adjustment for the other speeds.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Camera and lens questions
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003
...
I don't think DRP and DBP are _copyrights_ they are
_patents_.
Zeiss No.277,808 dates from about 1914 to 1915, there is a
break in the serial number list here.
Nos. 249,886 to 252,739 are given as 1914, 1915 is shown as
starting at 282,820, no ending number. The next number is 28
9,087 the start number for 1917. So the lens dates from in
there somewhere. Dial set Compur shutters became available
sometime around 1914.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: Check it out!!!
Gene Poon wrote:
> The original Exa appeared to have a combined mirror/shutter, as I
> recall, and a limited range of shutter speeds set by a lever on the left
> side of the viewfinder. Top speed was 1/150 or so, with only four or
> five choices. I'm not exactly sure why, but the shutter was called a
> "guillotine" type. I wondered, does this mean that your finger would get
> cut off if you stuck it into the shutter while the camera was
> operating?
> {G}
Yep, the mirror acts as the first shutter curtain and a moving baffle
acts as the second curtain. The Chinese Great Wall DF series medium
format SLRs have the same type of shutter.
> It's baroque in styling like its bigger cousin the Exakta of the same
> era, but smaller and actually kind of "cute." The Exakta, though far
> more capable, always looked too complicated and cluttered, as though the
> designers just stuck features and doodads on it wherever they had room,
> as they thought them up. The Exa II got a different and better shutter
> but lost its baroque character.
The EXA II has one of the few vertical travel cloth focal plane
shutters ever designed. I've been into a couple of them, and they're
nightmarish to try to repair.
I have a nice Exakta VX1000, but don't use it often. You're right
about the complexity, and it's designed for left-handed operation to
boot!! Norm Rothschild used to always have one around his neck.
Bob
From: reynolds@panix.com (Brian Reynolds)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: External dimensions of shutter(s)
Date: 29 Aug 2003
J Stafford john@stafford.net wrote:
>reynolds@panix.com (Brian Reynolds) wrote:
>
>> Dimensioned drawings for the Copal #0, #1 and #3s shutters can be
>> found on the SK Grimes web page at:
>>
>> URL:http://www.skgrimes.com/products/index.htm
>
>Am I going blind? Did I overlook the dimensions on that page I was
>referring to? Or perhaps you didn't read my query? Mysteries,
>mysteries.
Towards the middle of the page are a trio of links ("click once
here"), one for each shutter.
Just below these links is a table with some dimensions, although not
the one you are looking for.
--
Brian Reynolds
From camera makers mailing list:
From: "John Cremati" johnjohnc@core.com
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: [Cameramakers] sizes of lensboards for Ilex-shutter on Toyo-view 45E
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003
Bert from Holland Wrote:
..........Copal# 00, 0, 1 and 3. Can anyone tell me what sizes these are?
John Cremati replied:
These are the lens board openings needed for Copal shutters and not the
thread size of the shutter..
Copal 0: 34.6 mm , Copal 1 : 41.6 mm , Copal 3: 65 mm , Copal 3s : 64.1 mm
.
The "SK Grimes" web site is a wonderful source for information on
various , shutters, lenses ect.. They can also make you up lensboard for
your camera and lens if you do not want to go thru the hassle.
John Cremati
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: ? about oddball 75mm lens
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003
"David Nebenzahl" nobody@but.us.chickens wrote
> jjs spake thus:
>
> > "David Nebenzahl" nobody@but.us.chickens wrote
> >> Is it an oscilloscope lens?
> >
> > Yes. Back when (seventies), I used something very much like that for
> > capturing plots on 'graphic' scopes. They only had to cover possibly 11" of
> > screen onto a polaroid back and I think (not sure) they didn't cover the
> > whole film. Might be cool for MF closeup work. I'm mainly interested in the
> > shutter.
> How good are those Alphax shutters?
> --
> Until I have some idea who these folks are, I have to assume they're all
> the same person.
>
> - "RicSilver", resident village idiot from ba.transportation.
Alphax shutters are very good. They are relatively simple
"self setting" shutters, meaning the shutter is cocked by
the tripping lever. Self-setting shutters are generally
limited in their top speed because this method of winding
the spring motor is not suitable for powerful motors. Those
need a separage cocking lever to wind them.
Wollensak always made excellent shutters. In general
Alphax and Betax shutters are more reliable and accurate
than their Ilex counterparts. Even the Rapax shutter made
mainly for Speed Graphics is an excellent shutter. Don't
confuse Wollensak's sometimes not-so-hot lenses with their
shutter quality. Plus some Wollensak lenses are very good to
excellent, its just that they vary all over the place.
The No.4 Alphax will take the barrels from a Wollensak 15"
Tele-Raptar or Tele-Optar directly, no adaptors are needed
and the spacing is right. This series of telephoto lenses is
excellent and often sold very cheap.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Gene Johnson" genej2@cox.net
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Repromaster lenses (210, 150, 135) and what to use shutters and how
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003
The Repromasters are neat lenses with a lot of coverage. Do you have
mounting rings for them? I used an Alphax shutter from an oscilloscope
camera per a suggestion from another list member. The Alphax came with
a lens, which I gutted. I reduced the housing of the front element to
the bare minimum needed to screw into the shutter. I then glued the
lens mounting ring into the "housing" remains. Now I can screw the lens
into the housing, and the housing into the lens. The the 135 still
covers 5x7 this way. I use it on my 4x5. It is very sharp and
contrasty and has good color saturation. it can also be easily used
without a shutter. it stops down to f64 I think, and with a polarizer
in front of that, "Sunny f16" for Velvia gives an exposure of about 1.5
sec. Easily done with a lenscap or even cooler, a black hat.
If you don't have the lens mounting ring or even a flange for the
shutter, all is not lost, but it gets a little more involved, and I'd be
tempted send a sketch.
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter McDonald
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2003
Subject: [Cameramakers] Repromaster lenses (210, 150, 135) and what to
use shutters and how
Guys:
I have recently come in to possession of two 213 mm Repromaster =
process lenses, and also 150 and 135 lenses.In the same deal, came a 300 =
mm Rodenstock Sironar in mint condition, also shutterless.
List member Gene Johnson, in a note to the list on 5 October last =
year, mentions cobbled up shutters, for amongst others, a Repromaster =
210 mm.
Could someone help with references as to what shutters for which I =
might look, to use as large format taking lenses?
Amongst the other bits and pieces in the deal, which involved two =
complete working Agfa Repromaster process cameras, one manual and the =
other automatic, were the three 20x24 bellows I had wanted to make a =
12x20 panoramic camera, and a 16x20 studio portrait camera. So I am also =
interested in contacting anyone who has had experience in building such =
photographic 'behemoths'.
Thanks,
Peter McDonald
Canberra, Australia.
From: Stacey fotocord@yahoo.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Answering Questions in this group
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003
David Nebenzahl wrote:
> Stacey spake thus:
>
> > David Nebenzahl wrote:
> [...]
>
> >> I was hoping to draw upon the expertise of someone with sense enough
> >> to give me the SIMPLE ANSWER to my SIMPLE QUESTION.
> >
> > Do you have ANY IDEA how many oddball old shutter mounts there are?
> > Thousands at least.. Just because they both will allow the cells to
> > screw in doesn't mean a thing. Back then there was NO standard and
> > anyone who tells you it will or won't fit without measuring YOUR
> > shutters is feeding you BS, hence why Steve responded the way he did.
> > THERE IS NO SIMPLE ANSWER. They have to be measured and if you're too
> > lazy to, send it out to be fitted.
>
> Just to clarify, the shutters and lenses I was asking about (Compur &
> Tessar) happen to be very well known and were very common at one time:
>
So you believe a rim set compur is the same as any other rim set compur?
And the same with dial sets? Yes these were comon but in many cases they
were made to order for specific lenses. I've seen plenty of the same "size"
that would fit one group of lens cells and not another due to threading and
spacing issues. The older the stuff the worse this is.
And yes I know about old lenses and shutters as that's all I use. The point
was you don't and ASSUMED there was a simple answer. One person may have a
rimset and dial set that are the same, your's may not be. The ONLY way
you'll know is to measure them yourself.
--
Stacey
From: Eric eric002@limpoc.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Question about lens cell spacing
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003
David Nebenzahl wrote:
> CamArtsMag spake thus:
>>
>> #1 I consider cell spacing very critical. The fron and rear cells have to be
>> set at precisely the right distance not only from each other but also in
> [...]
>
> As usual, you didn't answer the question: the question (#1) was (paraphrasing
> now) "is the lens cell spacing the same between dialset and rimset Compur
> shutters of the same size?". Can someone please answer *this* question?
>
Ok, I'll try to contribute.
I have here an old dialset Compur and an old rimset Compur. Their spacings
definitely don't match, however their threads don't either, so I'm not
sure they're the same "standard" size shutter, if there was such a thing
back then. The dialset is about 0.908 in. at the thread limits and the
rimset is about 0.790 in. I have also a newer Synchro-Compur that does
appear to closely match the prewar rimset (.790 vs .791 in.,) however the
iris placements may differ, as I have no way to measure it accurately.
But more to the point, I think, but can't prove, that many shutters sold
as OEM parts for particular cameras (my dialset Compur is original equipment
for an early Speed Graphic, for instance) were machined specifically for
a particular lens that was sold in them -- so I suspect you can't count
on one shutter having the same spacing or iris placement as another, even
of the same size and make.
eric
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003
From: Bob Fowler crazybob2525@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] sizes of lensboards for Ilex-shutter on Toyo-view 45E
To: cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
--- curzon@dds.nl wrote:
> Hello,
> I bought a Toyo-view 45E camera. It came with one
> lensboard,
> but the hole is too small for my lens. I have a
> Kodak Commercial Ektar 12"
> in an Ilex Acme #4 shutter. It needs a hole of 73mm.
>
> I want to buy some lensboards and was looking on
> Ebay. I saw the sizes
> of Copal# 00, 0, 1 and 3. Can anyone tell me what
> sizes these are?
> And how to compare this to the Ilex shutter?
>
> Thanks,
> Bert from Holland
> my website: www.tegenlicht.com
According to the S.K. Grimes website, the Ilex #4
shutter needs a 2.604" hole (66.1mm). Copal 0 requires
a 34.6 mm hole, Copal 1 takes a 41.6 mm hole, Copal 3
needs a 65 mm hole, and the Copal 3s needs a 64.1 mm
hole. I don't believe that Copal made a size 00
shutter, but Compur did and it required a 26.3mm
mounting hole. I suggest that you measure the threads
again on your shutter to confirm the 73mm dimension.
The Grimes website also mentions that Ilex shutters
made FOR Kodak are not always the same as the standard
Ilex in mounting size, so there is a good possibilty
that your 73mm dimension is correct.
Buying an undrilled board would be your best bet as
it's easier to drill a fresh hole than opening up an
existing hole. Keep in mind - the Ilex will use a
flange and not a retaining ring. The flange will have
be secured by 4 or 5 screws (I don't have one in front
of me at the moment).
Bob Fowler
crazybob2525@yahoo.com
From: Stacey
From: Bob Salomon bobsalomon@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Where to buy aperture scales?
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003
teveg666@ultranet.com (Stephan Goldstein) wrote:
> Are new scales for Copal shutters available to mere mortals?
> I spent some time yesterday searching through Calumet's web
> site, but if they sell them I couldn't figure out where they're listed.
>
> Thanks.
> steve
Shutter manufacturers sell blank aperture scales. Since they have no way
of knowing what lens will be put in the shutter and what the
specifications of that specific lens is. So lens manufacturers calibrate
the scales for the lens they install in the shutter. Camera repair
companies can calibrate and engrave/mark the aperture scale for any
specific lens.
--
HP Marketing Corp.
From: James jdunn@augustmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Question on lens mounting methods
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004
I used to work in a Motion picture rental company. We spent great time
and effort checking and collimating our lenses with laser optical
benches. Frequently we would dismantle a lens and add shims of 1/1000
inch to the lens to adjust it. Sometimes an element would shift ever so
slightly and we would return the lens to manufacturer to re-align.
Thus I find the idea of un-screwing a lens from the shutter and
re-attaching it after mounting on a board to be suspect. Surely the
exact distance from the front cells to the rear cells is critical. I
have even heard tell of photographers that use the same shutter with
different lenses.
Is there some standard on how the threads on the shutters and cells are
positioned ? How can one be sure that you are getting it back in the
optimal alignment ?
From: Michael Briggs MichaelBriggs@EarthLink.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Question on lens mounting methods
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004
James Dunn wrote:
........
> Thus I find the idea of un-screwing a lens from the shutter and
> re-attaching it after mounting on a board to be suspect. Surely the
> exact distance from the front cells to the rear cells is critical.
......
>
> Is there some standard on how the threads on the shutters and cells are
> positioned ? How can one be sure that you are getting it back in the
> optimal alignment ?
The spacing between the cells of the lens is NOT determined by the threads.
Setting the in/out location of a lens cell by having the threads tighten against
each other would be imprecise. A different amount of torque applied by the
user, or thread wear, would cause a different spacing. The method used is
different. There is a shoulder on the cell behind the threads that butts
against a flat area on the shutter surrounding the lens. If you feel the
resistant against turning, you should feel it suddenly rise when the shoulder
hits the stop.
The distance between the flat area (stop) on the front and the flat on the back
of the shutter is specified by the manufacturer of the shutter with a tolerance.
For example, the brochure that came with a Copal 1 shutter gives the "front
and rear lens mounting length" as 20 +/- 0.025 mm. (Probably some old standard
was 0.001 inch, thereby explaining the figure of 0.025 mm). The clever optical
designer will design so that their lens design will perform with the desired
imaging quality despite 0.025 mm variations in the spacing of the cells. If the
spacing needs to be controlled more precisely, extra work (= higher price) will
have to be done, e.g., measuring and correcting with a shim. (However, my
guess is that lenses with shims are probably correcting manufacturing variations
in the optical components rather than in the shutter.)
--Michael
From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004
From: Bob Fowler crazybob2525@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Copal 0 and Polaroid Prontor Shutters...
--- Sam mygroups@eventshorizon.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are the Copal 0 and the Polaroid Prontor shutters
> same in thread sizes?? I
> bought a Super-Angulon 90mm f8 lens without a
> shutter and would like to fix
> my Polaroid shutter from my 127 Rhodenstock lens to
> it... The Super angulon
> was supposed to be on a Syncro-Compur shutter but
> was taken off, I found the
> lens is available in the Copal 0 aswell so I guess
> its same threading.
>
> PS. Any ideas on what I would be looking at when the
> lenses arrive?
>
> Sam
The Rodenstock 127mm were in Copal size 1 shutters,
not size 0. Most 90mm f/8 Super Angulons were in size
0 shutters, earlier examples were in size 00.
I transplanted a 127mm f/4.7 Rodenstock Ysaron from
it's bad Polaroid Prontor into a size 1 Synchro
Compur.
Both the Copal and Polaroid Prontor-Press shutters in
size 0 and 1 have the same threads and are of the same
thickness. The set and release Copal and the Copal
Press size 0 shutters have a .75mm difference in the
placement of the iris (the iris is closer to the rear
element in the Press version). Transplanting a 90mm
f/6.8 Angulon from a Synchro-Compur to a Copal Press
doesn't work without some machine work for this
reason. Check the data on the SK Grimes website for
detailed info.
Bob Fowler
crazybob2525@yahoo.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Kodak Ektar 127mm lens
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004
"Neil Purling" sextant@sextant.karoo.co.uk wrote...
> Well, my Ektar has a rim set Supermatic which need gloves to adjust the
> speed or else you can hurt yer fingers. The lens cells have a whole regiment
> of what look like this: -.
> They are look thin and like tiny dashes under a magnifier. There are rounder ones.
> It was at that point I wondered if it was really worth sending the thing
> away to SK Grimes.
> I am shooting some negs first.
> The lens is 1949 I didnt expect it or the shutter to be mint.
Supermatics are very rugged shutters and can usually be
brought back to life if they are not actually corroded.
Naptha (Ronsonol) is a suitable cleaning solvent but I
will also warn against a simple soaking to clean the
shutter. Several cleanings may be necessary and some
disassembly is needed to do it right. Nearly all shutters
need some lubrication. Very light oil on the trunions of the
gears in the speed regulator and some light grease on some
sliding parts. The Supermatic needs a little light grease,
Lubriplate will do, on the rim of the speed ring. I
occasionally see shutters which appear to have had large
amounts of Vaseline smeared on the ring. Vaseline (petrolium
jelly) is a fairly good lubricant but oxidizes badly with
time so it become hard. Synthetic grease is much better and
you need very little. NEVER use powdered graphite on a
shutter.
The 127mm Ektar is a Tessar type with air spaced front
elements. The front element is held in place by a threaded
retaining ring. Usually, the threads have been painted over.
The cell can be opened by removing the paint on the threads
with Acetone and using a friction wrench to remove the ring.
A friction wrench is simply a tube of the right diameter
with a sticky rubber washer cemented to one end. Once open
the inside of the cell can be cleaned. The spots may be bits
of anti-reflection paint or they may be fungus, although
fungus usually looks different. Most old lenses get a
coating of haze on surfaces which can not be easily reached
for cleaning. The haze comes off with any lens cleaner or
alcohol. Enough can form inside the front cell of a Tessar
to ruin its contrast. Its visible if you shine a flashlight
through the lens.
From: Bob Salomon bob_salomon@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Schneider Kreuznach lenses also labeled "Sinar"
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004
"christoph-erdmann.pfeiler" christoph-erdmann.pfeiler@gmx.de wrote:
> I'm not only referring to the combination of not matching cams and
> lenses. I'm referring to remounting the optical parts of a lens onto a
> different shutter or diaphragm body.
>
> Evem remounting can introduce some error in the proper alignment - if
> the torque is different!
>
> That's the reason for the emphasis done by Linhof and Sinar on
> discouraging of remounting lenses - they sell 'remounting sets', but
> they obviously do not advertise them nor encourage the uses to do so.
Neither we, nor the companies we represent - Linhof, Wista, Rodenstock
recommend users changing the shutter on their lenses. To change a
shutter so performance is not effected a qualified service center is
required.
However none of us tell users that they can not mount their lenses on
the lens board and we stock Rodenstock's Lens Wrench for 0, 1 and 3
shutters to help owners mount their lenses on their lens boards. We also
stock Technik 23, Technika 45, Kardan and M679 lens boards as well as
Wista boards with factory milled holes so the user can simply mount the
lens of their choice on the proper board with a proper mounting hole in
it. We do not recommend customers drilling lensboards (creates heat and
pressure that can warp a board). We only recommend milling or, at the
least, using a chasis punch to make the hole.
--
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Question on lens mounting methods
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004
"James Dunn" jdunn@augustmail.com wrote ...
> Thanks Michael,
> I suspected there was more than I was seeing.
> Is it also safe to presume that diferent manufacturers,
> ie. Copal, Compur and Seiko have different ideas of
> the correct/optimal distance from seating flange on the
> front of the shutter to the same on back ?
> Is it also different from say Copal #3 to Copal #1 ?
>
> That is, if a lens was designed to use a Copal #1 would
> it be spaced correctly in a Copal #3 ?
>
> I guess I should also ask if the thread sizes are the same
> from manufacturer to manufacturer ?
There is no standardization of the thickness of shutters.
Each make is different and often different shutters from the
same manufacturer are different. The lens cell or cell and
adaptor are designed to space the cells the correct distance
apart.
The criticalness of this distance depends on the lens
design but, in general, the better the lens the more
critical it is of spacing.
Lens elements in a lens cell are located by the structure
of the cell or by inserted collars. Some lenses have spacing
shims. Element spacing can be very critical. In general,
individual adjustment is expensive so not too many lenses
offer it. However some very high quality lenses are
individually spaced and any shims must be accounted for and
replaced when disassembling them.
Centering is generally done when the element is
manufactured but not always. The usual arrangement for
elements with spherical surfaces is to clamp them between
rings. The ring clamp will automatically center the lens
provided it has been ground correctly. Cemented elements are
centered before cementing by precision edge grinding. they
are also automatically centered by the mount. Aspherical
surfaces are not automatically centered and some mountings,
Leitz for instance, mount the elements in rotatable rings
which are hand centered in the mount. The centering of these
lenses can be lost when disassembled.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004
From: Bob Fowler crazybob2525@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: Copal 0 and Polaroid Prontor Shutters...
Sam,
Used Copal 0 and Copal Press 0 shutters show up on
ePay at least once a month or so. You do have other
options besides Copal and Compur though...
Though they aren't made anymore (neither are Compur),
Prontor shutters aren't bad if you take care to keep
them clean and get them serviced every year or two. If
you can find one, Seiko shutters are excellent (not
certain if they are still made).
There is a guy who used to sell a lot of Prontor-S
shutters in size 0 on ePay. I bought a couple from him
(as well as a three speed Vario) and - aside from
needing a minor cleaning to free them up (these were
OLD, new old stock), they're great. I have a
Mamiya-Sekor 180mm f/4.5 TLR lens in one now on my
Miniature Speed Graphic. I don't have his info at my
fingertips, but if you want to get in touch with him,
drop me an email and I'll dig it up.
For size 1 shutters, it's a bit tougher. The
occasional used Copal shows up on ePay, but the
selling price is usually close to what a new one goes
for. There are almost always a few Polaroid Prontor
Press type in size 1 on the auction. I just bought one
(still waiting for delivery) that I've ear-marked for
a 150mm Schneider Xenar I picked up in barrel.
BEWARE! There are some Polaroid shutters that aren't
quite what they seem on the surface! Many of the Copal
Polaroid shutters for the MP-4 do not have an iris
diaphram. Some, like the 75mm Tominon, are in the
shell of a size 1 shutter, but the max iris opening is
limited to something like 17mm - smaller than a
standard size 0. Be careful when buying the Copal
Polaroid stuff sight unseen. They're GREAT shutters,
but purpose built and may not be exactly what the
doctor ordered. AFAIK, the MP-3 Polaroid stuff
(Prontor Polaroid) is all standard sized gear. A lot
of it's out there, and a lot of it needs servicing -
catch my drift?
Good luck.
Bob Fowler
crazybob2525@yahoo.com
From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004
From: "velostigmat" velostigmat@hotmail.com
Subject: Kodak Kodamatic #1 Shutter - the Good & The Bad
Hello All:
I have so far attempted three of these shutters on Kodak Senior Six-
20 folders. Two were unquaified successes and the third was an abject
failure. This is the same shutter found on most Kodak Monitor
cameras, as well.
First step was to remove the shutter from the camera. There is a
bracket and linkage which is removed by unscrewing two small screws.
With the camera back open, and the bellows closed, the threaded
retaining ring is easily accessible through the open rear film door.
Be careful using your spanner wrench so as not to damage the bellows.
Once you get the ring loose you can unscew it using a jewellers
screwdriver in the one slot that is not hidden by the first fold of
the bellows.
The only really tricky part about dismantling this shutter is that
the middle element housing is not notched for your spanner wrench.
Unless you have the special Kodak tool (unlikely) you need to Very
carefully drill two holes into the narrow mounting flange of this
element. I used a 1/16th drill bit, the smallest commonly available
size. This is more than big enough for the pointy-ended spanner
wrench I use. On the first two cameras I did, the ring came away
easily using the spanner wrench. On the third shutter, the ring made
one-eigth of a turn and then froze. Stupid Mistake #1: I used a small
punch and tapped lightly with a light hammer to free the ring. I
should have just retightened the ring and contented myself with flush
cleaning.The ring became completely stuck. The element flange is made
of soft brass and became deformed. I ended up having to drill the
whole assembly out. Result: the shutter works but the central element
housing is damaged beyond repair. Lesson: quit while you are ahead.
The other two shutters were a complete success. This is a very well-
made shutter compared to the absolute junk Kodak put in their 1950s
35mm cameras. The only thing to be aware of is that you will need to
retension the shutter spring (not the high speed coil) after you
remove the front plate. This will be obvious if you miss it, as the
shutter will be very lazy if you don't.
Once again the problem was grease migrating from the focus helicoid.
As usual, I made indexing marks using a permanent marker. They come
off easily with alcohol or naptha.
The painted finish on the Kodak shutter is resistant to acetone, but
I would still be careful. You probably won't have to use the acetone
as Kodak weren't the grease freaks that Argus was (see Argoflex E
post).
The Kodamatic tells you it's ready for CLA when all the shutter
speeds are the same. The 1/10 is the first to go.
You can do one of these shutters in a couple of hours or less.
I really like the Senior Six-20 as an alternative to the Monitor.
Much lighter and more compact and very nice-looking. You lose the
positive stop film advance, but this is a somewhat flaky mechanism
anyway and makes the Monitor a real heavyweight.
Barry
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: 'proper' lens for Century One 8x10
Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003
"jjs" nospam@nospam.xxx wrote ...
> "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> > Found it John, its a Goerz Tenax shutter with lots of
> > parts missing. The sets of two holes on either side are for
> > air cylinders. The one on the left side was an air release,
> > the one of the right the speed regulator. The speed cam is
> > also missing as are the levers which went to the air
> > cylinders and other parts.
>
> =8^} Not much left of the shutter at all!
>
> > I don't have an exact date for the Tenax but is one of
> > many shutters made before the clockwork regulator shutters
> > were introduced c.1912. Illustrations of Goerz cameras in
> > McKeown's suggest that Goerz switched to Deckel shutters
> > (Compound or Compur).
> > [... snip good stuff]
> > In any case, what you have probably dates from the period
> > from perhaps 1900 to perhaps 1920. This is about the right
> > range for the camera.
>
> You are very generous to share that, Richard. I will check the lens
> elements, too. There is quite a bit of glass there, and while there is
> some edge separation I might try it anyway. I recall a post of yours quite
> some time ago releasing the balsam cement and recementing. Will look for
> it again.
Well, now I have to post a correction. The previous
poster who identified the shutter as a Bausch & Lomb shutter
was RIGHT. I found the same shutter illustrated in _Handbook
of Photography_, Keith Henney and Beverly Duddley, 1939,
McGraw-Hill p.100 In fact, its identical to the photograph
in Ed Romney's old book on antique cameras. Its called the
B&L; Automatic shutter.
Now what happened is that Romney shows the actual Tenax on
the overleaf page and the caption on the illustration facing
the text is so faded that I couldn't see it until I looked
very hard just now. I hate doing things like that.
Now, the general dates are the same for both shutters.
Bausch and Lomb was licensed by Fredric Deckle to make
Compound and Compur shutters in the US, along with Zeiss
lenses. Shutter manufacture began in 1888. The Automat
probably dates from the late 1890s and was probably made
even after the more expensive Compound and Compur shutters
went into production around 1909 (Compound). Its hard to
guess at a cut-off date but probably not until the early
1920's if not later.
B&L; sold shutters world wide as well as using them for
their own lenses. A great variety of lenses can be found in
their shutters, including Goerz lenses. Again, you may have
some luck determining the construction of the lens in this
shutter by counting reflections. From that it may be
possible to guess at what it is. The approximate speed is
also helpful. That is, if you know that a lens is about f/8
and not f/6.3 it confines the number of possible designs.
My other statements still apply. The Automat was a
relatively low cost shutter which suggests the lens might
have been a Rapid-Rectilinear or something similar.
Again, view cameras were made to take a variety of lenses
so that virtually any lens made around the time the camera
was made would be authentic.
Sorry about the error, I just didn't look hard enough at the
original source.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: 'proper' lens for Century One 8x10
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003
"jjs" nospam@nospam.xxx wrote...
> "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> > "jjs" nospam@nospam.xxx wrote
> http://wind.winona.edu/~stafford/shutter.jpg
>
> > Neither a dial set Ilex or a Compound or a dial set
> > Compur. Not sure what it is.
> > A lot of companies made shutters before about WW-1. I'll
> > look at some books I have to see if I can find one with a
> > paddle near the dial.
>
> Richard, please don't trouble yourself. I'll measure the barrel of the
> lens (which I rather like) and just keep my eyes open for something that
> fits.
Found it John, its a Goerz Tenax shutter with lots of
parts missing. The sets of two holes on either side are for
air cylinders. The one on the left side was an air release,
the one of the right the speed regulator. The speed cam is
also missing as are the levers which went to the air
cylinders and other parts.
I don't have an exact date for the Tenax but is one of
many shutters made before the clockwork regulator shutters
were introduced c.1912. Illustrations of Goerz cameras in
McKeown's suggest that Goerz switched to Deckel shutters
(Compound or Compur). Ilex introduced the clockwork
regulator c.1914. Many older shutters were continued after
that but most were gone by the early 1920's. The orignal
lens was probably a Goerz lens but may have been another.
You may be able to identify what is in it by getting some
idea of its speed and counting the number of elements by
counting reflections of a small flashlight shown into it.
Check each cell separately. Goerz made many lenses other
than the ones its famous for (i.e. Dagor, Dogmar, Artar,
Celor, Syntor). Some of these are datable. I don't have data
on German made Goerz serial numbers, only on those made in
the USA.
In any case, what you have probably dates from the period
from perhaps 1900 to perhaps 1920. This is about the right
range for the camera.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Nicholas O. Lindan" nolindan@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutter repair
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004
"Tom" tom@localhost wrote
> I do not think that lens (unless it is a wide-angle) will cover 4x5.
A few seconds of web search reveals it to be a wide-field-Ektar design.
And, it says wide angle right there in the name: "Weitwinkle" is
"wide angle" in German (literally "far bend").
> I notice a couple of folks mentioned the Ronsonol (ligter fluid) soak. See my
> article on service Graphex Shutters for my negative opinion of that.
Yup, if the problem is grit or sand then a solvent soak will just make
the performance (what there is of it) worse. OTOH, it won't break the
shutter.
Some shutters use paper blades, and if this is the case then I second
Tom's advice to _not_ soak.
Otherwise my advice is to soak, if it doesn't work then it wasn't gummed oil,
and it will have to be taken apart: spend a $150 or so on a rebuild or get
another shutter. A re-build is a sure bet, another shutter has a high
probability of landing you just another gummed up shutter.
The chances of getting a shutter working with a soak (90% success) are
far higher than do-it-yourself disassembly (1%) unless you are
well versed at taking watches and clocks apart and putting them
back together again in fine working order (back to 90%).
Fishboard, a very stiff black or brown cardboard used for insulation, will
survive solvent and oil: it is often used in oil impregnated
transformers.
Very few folks have the factory manuals, without which the chances of
putting it back together again are close to zip. Video recording the
take apart stage has been recommended by some. And if a part goes sproing
across the room then one is SOL.
Prontors are all metal - I have a pile'o'parts to prove it -
so the paper problem isn't. In my experience the problem, if it
'worked once', is old grease or oil. 50 years ago oil didn't last
for 50 years without turning into dried up oil-based paint: All old
shutters are gummed up (unless there is solid evidence otherwise),
and some may have sand in them for extra added aggravation.
I can not recommend do it yourself shutter disassembly unless you are
versed in this sort of thing (or don't mind chucking a half dozen
shutters in learning it). The chances of success for most everyone
are miniscule, and those that can attempt it with success don't ask
... they just do.
As always, advice worth price charged.
--
Nicholas O. Lindan
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Dial set Compur shutter help
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004
"st" s@t.com wrote ...
> I have a compur shutter that I need to try to find a main spring for. The
> shutter is a dial set compur. O.D is approx 79mm (about 3.1 in) and the
> thread diameter for the flange is about 44mm (about 1.75 in). Markings on
> the face say D.R.P No258648 D.R.G.M. Patent dates are March 31, 1914 and
> December 29, 1914. Markings on the shutter speed dial say ICA Dresdin. For
> what it is worth, the lens mounted in the shutter is a Carl Ziess Jenna
> Tessar 15cm f 4.5 lens. If anyone can provide some info about the origin of
> the shutter, what camera it originally came with may help. Any help is
> appreciated.
I don't have a source for parts for these old shutters.
You might try a couple of the shutter repair technicians,
they might have something but would probably want to repair
the shutter. I will list some below. Like anything else
nearly eighty years old parts may be hard to find.
Compur shutters were made by Fredrick Deckel, in Munich.
The dial set was made from about 1914 to about 1930, after
that it was replaced with the rim set version. The Compur is
based on the clock work regulator invented by Theodore Bruch
of the Ilex company in Rochester N.Y.
ICA on the shutter indicates it came from an ICA camera
company, which became part of the Zeiss-Ikon combination in
1926. ICA did not make the shutter or lens.
Dial set Compurs have spiral clock motor type springs
which are contained in an assembly under the cocking lever.
I don't think spring were ever available separately, the
entire motor assembly was replaced. Rim set type Compur
shutters mostly have helical springs (screen door type
springs). Curiously, Compur went back to the spiral type
spring for their late Synchro-Compur shutters.
Ken Ruth
Photography on Bald Mountain
Davenport, CA
baldmtn@pacbell.net
831-423-4465
Phone calls Wed & Thur 9-5 and Fri 9-Noon.
http://www.baldmtn.com/
Paul Ebel
Shutter Repair
1 715 778 4372
w230 Terrace Street, Box 86; Spring Valley, WI
54767.
I don't think Paul has e-mail or a web site.
W. W. Umbach dba Z-V Sevice
1410 Seafarer Dr; P O Box 754
Oriental, NC 28571
(252) 249-2576, FAX (252) 249-3924
For old Zeiss and Voigtlander cameras
There are others but I don't have contact information.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: B&L; compound shutter?
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004
"David Nebenzahl" nobody@but.us.chickens wrote
> Richard Knoppow spake thus:
>
> > The Compound is a very reliable shutter with an air-brake
> > regulator. The speed adjustment is inside. At one time there
> > was some information on Compound shutters on Steve Grimes
> > site, it may still be there http://www.skgrimes.com
>
> I looked there but couldn't find anything: is it still there?
Its still there, just hidden:
http://www.skgrimes.com/compound/index.htm
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: B&L; compound shutter?
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004
"Nick Zentena" zentena@hophead.dyndns.org wrote
>
> I know this isn't really large format but I bet you're all more
> likely to know more about compound shutters then any other newsgroup. I
> picked up a Kodak 1a fitted with a B&L; compound shutter. I guess built under
> license? For the first time ever I have a shutter that runs way too fast.
> None of the slow speeds seem to work. T & B do work just fine. The problem
> is I figure I need to run the lens at F/16 or smaller to get a reasonable
> image. That isn't likely to work well with a real fast shutter. Any chance
> that adjusting the shutter is an easy fix? The dial on top is labeled 1 to
> 250 but only seems to go to 100.
>
> Nick
The Compound was built under license by Bausch & Lomb from
some time in the teens until around the mid 1930's. B&L; also
built Compur shutters under contract. Neither shutter is
identical to the German made ones, with differences in
threads and other details.
The Compound is a very reliable shutter with an air-brake
regulator. The speed adjustment is inside. At one time there
was some information on Compound shutters on Steve Grimes
site, it may still be there http://www.skgrimes.com AFAIK,
Compound shutters were the best of the large size shutters.
They were made by Fredrick Deckel, in Germany, from about
1905 (not sure of this date) until sometime in the late
1970's, a pretty long lifetime for any product. Be careful
of the shutter and diaphragm blades, in some early Compounds
they are of a fiber material or hard rubber (Ebonite).
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutter CLA prices and qualities
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004
"AArDvarK" noway@yourprob.com wrote
> My recent convo with http://www.khbphotografix.com/
> per my interest in their prices. Here I will reverse the
> order from bottom to top as follows, all comments are
> welcome.
>
> initial question from me:
>
> Subject: shutter CLA quote
>
> I have three shutters in need of CLA
>
> Wollensak Graphex / ?
> Compur rapid / 0
> Synchro compur-P / 0
>
> All are working, slow speeds and extremely innacurate
> and should not need any parts. The Graphex stops at
> slower speeds and can be pushed to closing. please reply
> with repair prices AND shipping costs.
>
> Thank you very much,
>
> reply:
> Alex,
>
> Thank you for contacting us. As long as parts are
> not required, an overhaul can be done on each lens
> for about $180 - $220CDN (about $135 - $170.00
> US) per lens.
>
> Because they would have to cross the border, we
> have to suggest that they be sent uninsured with $0
> commercial value declared. It does mean that there
> is a risk that if the shutters are lost or damaged,
> they won't be covered, but if any value is declared,
> customs brokerage fees are automatically applied.
>
> We're unable to quote you a fee for shipping
> without knowing the size and weight of the parcel.
> We would normally ship by FedEx Ground or
> Canada Post Small Packet service. Please let us
> know if there's any other information we can
> provide.
>
> Regards,
> Dave Etherington, KHB Photografix
>
> My reply back:
> Pass this on to managers please
>
> Well gosh, thanks for the reply.
>
> But why wouldn't you compete with S.K. Grimes
> on prices? They state a CLA on a LF shutter is
> $80.00 to $100.00 US. I think you should lower
> your cost and say so, and what that cost is on
> your website. People into LF photography always
> need a decent deal on a shutter CLA my friends.
> ALL the time. Most old lenses sold are in
> innacurate shutters.
>
> You could even sell a c$95.00 (US $72.54 not-
> rounded, $70.00 rounded) CLA service on ebay.
> I could bet you your business you'd make more
> C$ than you are now. Such a sale price would
> not include new parts or the fabrication of
> them, but it would be more than fair. People
> would also advo for you in communications
> groups about such a good deal.
>
> The thing about S. K. Grimes (not the man) is
> the site says $80.00, they will email you back
> and say $100.00 to you. That is since the man
> passed away, his younger workers have taken
> over the business. http://www.skgrimes.com/
>
> No offense intended, sincerely, Alex
>
> Reply to me:
> Alex,
>
> No offence taken. We appreciate your interest
> and candor. The proper way to service those
> shutters is to completely disassemble the shutter,
> ultrasonically clean all the parts, then reassemble,
> properly lubricating as you go. That's the way we
> do it. Other technicians use a solvent to attempt
> to dissolve the old grease and lubricants without
> disassembling. That saves time, thus allowing
> them to quote a lower price, but we don't believe
> it is as effective in the long run.
>
> With complete disassembly, it's 2 to 2-1/2 hours
> work. If the technicians at S.K. Grimes are able to
> do it that way for less money, so be it. If they do
> the service without complete disassembly, then
> you're paying less and getting less. If you're satisfied
> with that, that's fine too. But we won't compromise
> on doing the work properly.
>
> I suppose the analogy might be a car engine with
> sticky valves. You can pay a relatively inexpensive
> fee for running a solvent through and flushing the
> engine, or you can pay to have the head disassembled
> and cleaned. Which is best? That depends on your
> budget, how long you intend to drive the car and
> how much the car is worth to you.
>
> Since there are different levels of service, LF people
> should be sure of what service they're being quoted
> on so they can make a valid comparison
>
> Regards,
> Dave Etherington, KHB Photografix
>
> This was a bit enlightening for me as far as repair
> techniques being offered! I didn't such diffs existed.
> Alex
The technique of complete disassembly and rebuilding is
really the proper way to clean the shutter. It is not always
necessary but probably a good idea. It is very important
that the shutter blades be free of any oil film. One problem
with the often recommended technique of soaking the shutter
in solvent is that the solvent really does not wash out the
dirt and old lubricant and can leave a residue. I ran into
this just recently in fixing an old dial set Compur from a
c.1937 Rolleiflex. I gave it a casual cleaning and it kept
jamming. The problem turned out to be a small fiber of
something on one of the shutter blades, which was pushed
under the activating ring. Once I bit the bullet and did a
real cleaning job on it the problem went away. This shutter,
BTW is exactly on speed even at 1/500th. I think it has been
serviced at some time since it was built but probably not
for decades.
Most shutter technicians will charge about $80 US for a
CLA but find out what exactly they do for this. The $200
price seems a little high but the time quoted is about right
and may be short for shutters like the Kodak, Ilex, and
Wollensak, where it may be necessary to adjust springs or
even make them.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Jean-David Beyer jdbeyer@exit109.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Dial set Compur shutter help
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004
Richard Knoppow wrote:
> "Neil Purling" sextant@sextant.karoo.co.uk wrote
>>Is there a reasonably reliable way of establishing the age of a dial-set
>>Compur shutter withing the two dates of 1914 & 1930.
>>I have one from a Goerz Tenax 9x12 containing a
>>Doppel Anastigmat 13cm f6.8.
>>No sn on the lens.
>>This is going to go onto my Crown Graphic.
>
>
> I have never seen any serial number data for Deckel shutters. There
> were some changes over the life of the shutter but I don't have
> specific stuff that would help date it. The lens might be more help,
> is there anything else written on it beside the above? Goerz changed
> the names of the Dopple Anastigmat Type A to Dagor in 1900. However,
> that substantially predates the shutter. When I get home I will look
> up the Tenax in McKeown's to get the manufacturing dates, that's about
> the best I can offer.
Here is one datapoint, in case you are making up a list:
Meyer Gorltiz Nr.982076 Weitwinkel Aristostigmat 1:6.3 f=12cm is on
F.Deckel-Munchen Compur (rim set) shutter A477709. The shutter has no
flash contacts, has a built-in self-timer, T, B, 1, 2, 5, 10, 25, 50,
100, 200 settings. Whatever its age, everything started working, and
still works, once I had Marty Forscher and one of his merry men CLA the
thing. Before that, the self-timer did not work, and when it did not,
nothing else worked either.
I did have to take it apart many years ago because the aperture blades
were not working right. They look symmetrical, but they are not. They
are thin metal (probably stamped) with tiny steel pins staked through
them. The pins look symmetrical, too, but they are not, and if you put
one in upside down, they come out. It took a while to figure that out. I
could not measure the difference, but I could feel it with my fingers.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer
From: Nick Zentena zentena@hophead.dyndns.org
Subject: Re: How to get G-Clarons mounted in a shutter
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004
Heinz Grau phtx@bluemail.ch wrote:
> I recently got two Schneider G-Clarons, a 150 mm and a 240 mm for next to
> nothing, unfortunately as barrel lenses. Now I wonder if the lens is worth
> to have it mounted in a shutter (#0 for 150 mm and #1 for 240 mm).
>
> I know that the local Schneider dealer will do it for me, but compared to
> what I paid for the lens, this seems very expensive. Can I do it myself (I
> have some mechanical skills)? What about the f stop scale? Do I have to
> obtain this scale from Schneider? Is there a risk of damage to the diaphragm
> blades if I open the mechanical parts?
>
> Sorry, lots of questions!
>
> Anyone experienced in that? Or instructions available somewhere in the net?
I put a 150mm into a shutter from an old 127mm Xenar. Once I managed to
get the claron taken apart things went fairly well. I needed to have the
spacer in place but if you measure everything then I can't see it being a
tough job. My shutter had a f/stop scale and I just did a little math to
figure out the new scale. It's not exact but it's close enough for me. If
you go to the largeformat.info website you'll find a bunch of discussion on
this issue.
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/recent.php
Nick
From: rcochran@lanset.com (Richard Cochran)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: are mechanical shutters bad?
Date: 30 Jun 2004
mnhenley@msn.com (Mike Henley) wrote
> Dante Stella seems to make the argument that a $1 quartz watch is more
> accurate than a $10,000 mechanical rollex and likewise he argues that
> electronic shutters are more accurate than mechanical ones, and what's
> worse, is that mechanical ones deteriorate over time so that unless
> professionally checked every decade (at quite a cost) they're bound to
> be troubled in old cameras.
>
> I've been developing a liking for older cameras recently and
> especially so now that i ordered the gossen digisix i may be less
> inhibited in wanting to buy cameras which batteries are now outlawed
> or exposure is antiquated, but if mechenical shutters are problematic
> this may be a problem. What do you guys think of what he said?
A quartz/LCD watch can be made with almost no moving mechanical parts,
and yes, there are certain advantages to getting rid of those moving
mechanical parts. Even a quartz controlled watch with an analog dial
doesn't need high precision mechanical parts, but can make do with
much lower quality parts than a fully mechanical watch would need.
But a quartz controlled shutter still needs lots of high precision
moving parts in its mechanisms. The curtains must still be able to
travel across the film gate with precisely controlled motion.
Quartz controlled shutters generally do a better job of precisely timing
really long exposures, which is one reason you rarely see a mechanical
shutter with a timed speed longer than one second. But for more typical
exposure times around 1/30 to 1/1000, the mechanical precision of the
shutter curtain mechanism is more important than whether the second
curtain motion is started via a mechanical or electronic trigger. The
springs and curtains of a quartz controlled shutter are no more immune
to problems than the springs and curtains of a fully mechanical shutter.
ALL camera shutters are mechanical devices that deteriorate over time
and have potential for mechanical problems.
--Rich
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: 7" dagor cells
Date: 14 Jun 2004
Andrew Frith andy@sacredjourneys.com wrote
> I guess this might be a question for Richard...
>
> I have both the front and rear cell for a 7" goerz double-anastigmat
> (seriesIII no.2)....i dont have the barrel for it..just the cells. the lens
> threads are 45mm, any ideas on what kind of shutter i might look out for to
> put these in? does anyone else have this lens? wondering how theirs is
> mounted?
>
> I have used sk grimes once in the past to remount a barrel lens into a
> shutter and their work was excellent, just wondering if its worth trying to
> save a bit of money first before I consider sending it off to the grimes
> boys?
>
> -andrew
The problem is that the cells were not screwed directly into the
shutter. They are used with adaptor tubes which establish the cell
spacing. The cells screw into the adaptor and the adaptor into the
shutter. If you have the adaptors too it may be possible to figure out
what kind of shutter they came from but not from just the cells.
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Stacey fotocord@yahoo.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya Leaf Shutter
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004
Vincent Becker wrote:
>> It would work OK with a tele/long lens. I have some longer LF lenses
>> that
>> work OK with a rear monted shutter. The f stop diaphram does have to be
>> in the right place optically.
>
> On the Robot it is exactly the contrary: shiort lenses work very well
> with the rear-mounted shutter, while tele lenses produce circular
> images. But tme Mamiya C 135mm has rear-mounted shutter and diaphragm
> that work perfectly. Maybe it is more complicated than what I first
> thought :-)
That probably happens because the shutter is too far away from the lens
elements with the long lenses on the robot? See the explaination at the
bottom of this page.
http://www.skgrimes.com/lensmount/front/index.htm
--
Stacey
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Is it Copal or copal? Then what is it?
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004
"ATIPPETT" atippett@aol.comnojunk wrote...
> I am confused as to the use of the term copal. I have seen it in references to
> lens board openings, in referecnes to shutters (separate from the lens), and I
> have seen it in both upper and lower case.
>
> I found one reference that copal #00 was a 25mm opening.
>
> So what is copal/Copal #0, #1, #3, and #3S and how do they relate to lens
> boards.
>
> Thanks
> Alan Tippett
You will find information on all new Copal shutters on
Steve Grimes shop web site at:
http://www.skgrimes.com/products/index.htm
This gives dimensions of the shutters and sizes of
mounting holes.
Copal is a Japanese shutter of high quality, although I
think the old Compurs were better. Nonethelss, Copals are
very widely used for high quality lenses and are about the
only game in town. Copal makes both settible and
self-setting shutters. They call the self-setting variety
"press" shutters but this is a misuse of the term. A press
shutter was a shutter with a blade arrestor allowing ground
glass focusing without changing the speed setting.
Self-setting shutters are convenient and simple, shutters
that need to be cocked can have much stronger spring motors
and give higher shutter speeds.
S.K.Grimes also sells rebuilt old shutters which can
sometimes be an economical choice, or in the case of very
large shutters, the only choice.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Robert.J.Meyer@usa.xerox.com (Robert Meyer)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Another Big Old Brass lens to try-- Emil Busch Rapid Aplanet No. 5
Date: 7 Jul 2004
"Jos. Burke" josburke@bellsouth.net wrote
> I have acquired another big brass lens: An Emil Busch Rapid Aplanet No.
> 5 Foc. 18 ins. (R.O.J.A. vorm Emil Busch A-G Rathenow). Built in iris with
> f/8 thru 64 settings.
> It came attached to a Thornton Pickard shutter that seems to function
> properly. The Shutter and lens assy was a direct fit onto my Seneca
> 11x14--so I mounted it and focused to get an idea of its coverage. I was
> really surprised as it appears to cover the full 11x14 format even at f/8
> ( to focus at least !) on the GG. It also appears rather sharp with very
> good definition on the GG as well. I am interested in adapting to a packard
> shutter as that Thornton Pickard thingy is vibration infested-I wonder how
> users ever got a sharp image with that roller blind "clunking" contraption.
> Any insight on this lens--sharp--yes/no!! Original uses??
> Richard K.??????
> Thanks J Burke
I haven't used the Thornton Pickard shutter, but I have used Graflex
focal plane shutters, on Speed Graphics, Graflex SLR's, and an 8x10
unit on my 8x10 view camera. Vibration has never been a problem that
has resulted in unsharp pictures for me. I think the reason is that
the main vibration results when the shutter curtain stops moving
abruptly. By that time the picture exposure is done. Also, remember
that only a small strip of film is being exposed at any given time in
the exposure process.
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Questions about olde tyme lens
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004
"David Nebenzahl" nobody@but.us.chickens wrote
> Richard Knoppow spake thus:
> > "David Nebenzahl" nobody@but.us.chickens wrote
Long post snipped...
>
> Thanks again for, as usual, much useful and interesting information.
>
> Two questions remain unanswered: the retaining ring, and cable release
> problem. Do you know if these shutters were equipped to be used with some sort
> of cable release?
Early shutters were more likely to have an air release
than a cable release. If the shutter has two cylenders on it
one is probably an air release. It should have a nipple for
a hose on it. If so you need some hose (Pep Boys or other
automotive parts dealer) and a bulb. Bulbs are hard to find
other than buying them from Packard shutters
http://www.hubphoto.com but you may be able to find a
replacement one for a blook pressure guage or similar.
I don't remember what the problem was with the retaining
ring. Old shutters usually had mounting flanges. A good
machinist can make one for you if you show him another
similar one. Steve Grimes shop will make one but you may be
able to get it done locally for less. A machinist can
measure the threads on the shutter.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "jjs" nospam@please.xxx
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutter Size "0+1"
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004
"Bob Salomon" bob_salomon@mindspring.com wrote ...
> "jjs" nospam@please.xxx wrote:
>
> > What does Schneider mean when that state that a lens requires a shutter size
> > of "0+1"?
>
> They don't.
>
> [... snip good stuff ...]
Schneider specifies "0+1" here:
http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/vintage_lens_data/large_format_lenses/super-angulon/data/8-121mm.html
Do they perhaps mean they made two different sizes of the shutter mount
threads?
From: Bob Salomon bob_salomon@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutter Size "0+1"
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004
"jjs" nospam@please.xxx wrote:
> What does Schneider mean when that state that a lens requires a shutter size
> of "0+1"?
They don't.
Shutter sizes today are 0, 1 and 3. A lens will normally only fit in to
one of these sizes. An adapter would have to be made to fit into 2
different size shutter.
That said there is a discontinued series of shutters from Prontor Werke,
the Prontor Professional.
These were only made in 1 and 3 sizes. So for lenses that required a 0
size shutter Prontor inserted a reducing thread size adapter into the 1
size Prontor Professional and called it a Prontor Professional 01 size.
Are you referring to this shutter?
--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp
From: Bob Salomon bob_salomon@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Are the Sinar shutterless mounted lenses different?
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004
"jjs" nospam@please.xxx wrote:
> Do the the Sinar 'shutterless' mounted lenses have the same shutter mount
> size, or are their lens threads modified for the Sinar mount? If it varies,
> I'm particularly interested in the 121mm F8 Super Angulon. (The threads
> appears to be 30mm OD on my crude caliper.)
>
> Any recommended dealers for Copal shutters? Steve Grimes, Inc hasn't got
> back to me yet.They are standard threads.
Copal shutters are sold in the U.S. by RTS. They are the company that
sells them to camera stores and repair service companies. Any camera
store or service center can order a Copal shutter for you.
However they will come with blank aperture scales. Any camera repair man
can calibrate and mark/engrave the aperture scales for you.
--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
[Ed. note: items long sold by the time you read this, but archived for info on shutters..]
From: richard_brosseau@yahoo.com (Richard Brosseau)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace.large-format
Subject: FS: Packard shutters - new price
Date: 22 Apr 2004
I have 2 Packard shutters for sale. Both:
- are in like-new shape (less than 3 years old).
- are of the instantanuos type with a control pin in the front.
- come with a 4' tube and bulb.
Shutter #1:
- Fits a 6x6 Deardorff board 4 3/4" square with a 2 1/2" hole.
- Mounted on a 6x6 to 4x4 Deardorff adaptor board.
- Shutter alone is 60$ USD plus shipping
- Shutter with adaptor board is 150$ USD plus shipping
Shutter #2:
- 5 3/4" square with a 3" hole.
- 60$ USD plus shipping
(shipping either UPS or regular postal)
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Thread Adapters
Date: 15 Jun 2004
dpcwilbur@excite.com (Collin Brendemuehl) wrote
> Are there readily-available thread adapters for putting a lens built
> for a Copal/Compur #3 into, perhaps, an Ilex #4? (or whatever would be
> the suitable version)
>
> TIA,
> Collin
Hi Collin, There are no off-the-shelf adaptors. Generally the lens
cells are mounted in tubes which form the adaptor to the shutter. The
treads must be right but also the apex spacing of the lenses must be
right. In general the adaptors must be custom made for the particular
lens and the shutter its desired to mount it in. Such work is done by
precision machinists like S.K. Grimes shop: http://www.skgrimes.com
If your lens is in a Copal or especially a Compur why put it into
an Ilex shutter, which is IMHO inferior to either. Compur shutters
especially are very rugged and can almost always be brought back to
new shutter performance by a skilled repair person.
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Shutters and apertures
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004
"Stephan Goldstein" teveg666@ultranet.com wrote
> I've noticed that many older lenses have nonlinear aperture
> scales. By nonlinear I mean that the distance between
> successive indicated f-stops varies as the lens is stopped
> down. In contrast, many modern lenses have linear scales,
> i.e. a constant angular spacing between f-stops.
>
> I'm assuming there was some advance in iris design, either
> in the shape of the aperture blades or in some mechanism
> inside the shutter that controls them. When did this happen?
>
> Can anyone shed some light on the subject?
>
> Always curious.
>
> steve
It is a change in the way the iris leaves are hinged.
Modern irises originated with the Compur EVS shutter in the
late 1950's. In order for the exposure to remain constant
the distance the stop and speed controls move must be the
same for an equivalent change in exposure. Its fairly easy
to make a shutter so that the speeds are evenly spaced on
the speed scale, but to match it with stops the iris must
follow an inverse square law since the stop is a square law
function of the diameter of the stop. Linear stop irises
usually have fewer leaves than the older variety. The old
type iris is composed of a series of crescent shaped
sections which are hinged on a fixed pin on one end and have
a pin running in a slot on the other. Sometimes the relative
positions of pins and slots are reversed but the idea is the
same, A rotary motion of a ring connected to the moving end
of the crescent shaped segments moves them together or
apart. The uniform spacing type iris has blades simiar to a
shutter. These have two pins at one end and are brought
together by tilting them. Its hard to describe but a diagram
makes it plain.
The low number of blades on newer type irises results in
stops which are not very good circles. Some think that this
results in an unpleasant effect on the out of focus part of
the image, what the Japanese call bokeh. Ghost images of
bright objects take on the shape of the stop. Typically they
are pentagonal on newer lenses. Some old lenses,
particularly process lenses, like the Apochromatic Artar,
may have as many as twenty leaves or blades making up the
iris diaphragm. Most modern lenses have only five.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Sun, 16 May 2004
From: "r.mueller" r.mueller@fz-juelich.de
Subject: AW: [Cameramakers] shutter modification.
To: "E-mail discussion about homemade cameras" cameramakers@opusis.com
If the aperture size is limited by some sort of stop, as has been done on
some lens/shutter combinations, your job should be fairly easy. You must
just find and eliminate the artificial barrier to wider apertures.
In the case that the blades open to their full size intended in the original
design, I doubt you want to bother. The open state of the shutter will
offer an opening roughly equal in diameter of the maximum opening of the
diaphragm blades. Generally the outside of the shutter housing is just
large enough to accomodate shutter blades able to reach their present
maximum opening while also completely closing at the other extreme of their
motion. Major work would be needed to achieve a bigger shutter opening
within the confines of the present housing. I have never seen a shutter
attempting such a solution; instead the housing is just enlarged to handle
large enough blades for the desired opening.
You can see how large the maximum opening will be in most shutters I have
seen; the thin plates just above and below the diaphragm and shutter blades
have holes just about the size of the maximum design aperture. If your
blades stop short of this there is probably an artificial barrier somewhere.
It might be as simple as the length of the slot on which the aperture values
of the old lens were marked. You mostly likely will be modifying or
replacing this plate to carry the new calibration and now you would just
lengthen the slot. Another possibiliy is a screw or similar stop at some
other location.
Bob
-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: cameramakers-bounces@opusis.com
[mailto:cameramakers-bounces@opusis.com]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 16. Mai 2004
An: Camera Makers
Betreff: [Cameramakers] shutter modification.
Hi, I have a old Alphax shutter off of a ossiciliscope camera that
happens to fit a Wollansak 209 mm wide angle process lens.. I would like to
use the shutter but the aperture blades do not open wide enough to
accommodate the opening required on the process camera lens and if left
alone I would loose 1 mabey 2 stops... .. Has anyone ever tried to modify
the aperture size on one of these old alphax shutters?
Thanks, John Cremati
From camera makers mailing list:
Date: Sun, 16 May 2004
From: "Gene Johnson" genej2@cox.net
Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] shutter modification.
Yes. there is a small plate on the back that comes off with two screws. I
think there was a slot that had to be enlarged to allow the ring to go all
the way open. It's been a long time, but I remember it was pretty easy.
I'm sure I used a Dremel tool for the job.
I have one with a home made adaptor that I can screw either of my 240 or 300
Ronars into.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Cremati" johnjohnc@core.com
To: "Camera Makers" cameramakers@rosebud.opusis.com
Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004
Subject: [Cameramakers] shutter modification.
> Hi, I have a old Alphax shutter off of a ossiciliscope camera that
> happens to fit a Wollansak 209 mm wide angle process lens.. I would like to
> use the shutter but the aperture blades do not open wide enough to
> accommodate the opening required on the process camera lens and if left
> alone I would loose 1 mabey 2 stops... .. Has anyone ever tried to modify
> the aperture size on one of these old alphax shutters?
> Thanks, John Cremati
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard Knoppow" dickburk@ix.netcom.com
>
>> If these are electronically regulated shutters they may very well vary
>> the speed with the iris setting to keep the effective speed the same.
>
>Surely whether a shutter's spead is regulated by springs etc or by
>electronics they are still mechanical devices? Does anyone know whether
>anyone has looked at using purely electronic methods, maybe using LCD
>technology?
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001
From: Andrei.Calciu@hn.va.nec.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001
From: rurmonas@senet.com.au
Subject: RE: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
> I don't quite understand why an LCD shutter would have high power
> requirements. LCDs typically are VERY VERY VERY low power, hence their use
> in watches...the only guess I can make is the speed has something to do with
> it...
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001
From: David Seifert dseifert@absolute.net
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
David Seifert
From: "Jim MacKenzie" jim@dusykbarlow.sk.ca
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: 1/8000 sec.
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Prontor shutter
>When you say "strong motor" it's really just a spring mechanism
>(assuming mechanical with no battery), right? So it should be a
>matter of designing a system of one or more springs to get the
>1/1000th second speed. Huh. I didn't know about the effective
>speed. So if you have the lens stopped down to 16 or 22, then
>you could gain more light? How much, maybe 1/3 stop at best?
>Another reason that just becasue the camera says "Rollei" or
>"Hasselblad" on it doesn't mean that it is as precise as you think...
>I guess with all the inefficiencies in a camera, I'd be happy if it was
>accurate to within 1/2 stop.
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: "kab" koshaugh@teleport-spam.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mechanical shutters - speeds?
> I have a number of all-mechanical medium format cameras from the
> 1940s-50s
> (eg Zeiss Nettar, Voigtlander Bessa, Graflex 22, Flexaret, Kinax).
> Their shutters are
> the norm for the period - Prontor, Compur etc. and speeds range from 1
> sec to
> 1/200 or 1/400.
> Shutter speed selection is by a dial mounted round the lens. These dials
> seem to move
> in a stepless way, with no apparent indent or notch for each speed. Does
> this mean
> that intermediate speeds can be selected. e.g. would setting the speed
> indicator to the space between 1/200 and 1/400 on the dial give a speed
> of approximately 1/300? Or is the
> construction of these shutters such that they will default to the
> nearest indicated setting?
>
> (By the way, all of these old cameras produce great results at stops of
> f8 or smaller).
>
> Cheers
>
> Norm Fleming
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Ilex Acuton lens?
>I asked:
>
>>> It's a 215mm f4.8 Ilex Acuton lens that I want to use for a Calumet 4 x 5.
>>>
>>> Has anyone heard of the lens? Had experiences with it good or bad? I intend
>>> on using it primarily for Black and white although I may do *some* color in
>>> the future.
>
>And Richard was kind enough to give me lot's of good info but I had one more
>question:
>
>How about a no.3 Acme synchro shutter. This is what it's set in and I
>haven't heard of that company. I know this may sound like a stupid question
>but I can use it without a flash right? It comes with the Sync cord but I
>use hot lights...
>
>Harold, who's inexperience with LF is showing :-}
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: new shutter, old lens
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001
"Don Wallace" <don.wallace@nlc-bnc.nospam.ca> wrote:
>I have a 210mm Kodak Commercial Ektar that I got for a bargain price. It is
>in an old Ilex shutter that is not that great. Does anyone know what size of
>modern shutter would fit this lens and if it is an easy swap?
>
>Don Wallace
I responded once recommending Steve Grimes but maybe wasn't clear.
Its not an easy swap. For one thing there was no such thing as
standardized shutter threads when this lens was made. Each make had
its own set of dimentions and threads. In fact, the Ilex shutters used
by Kodak had special threads different from Ilex's standard line.
important one is to keep the spacing the same. The criticalness of
cell spacing varies with design but, in general, its more critical as
the quality of the lens increases. Pretty critical for Tessars like
this one. Usually new adaptor tubes must be made.
Bob Salomon mentioned making a stop calibration plate. Measuring the
effective stop is not complicated but should be done properly. Then
the stop plate must be devided and engraved. Again, Steve does this
job correctly and very elegantly.
to remount makes new shutters expsensive. The cost must be evaluated
in relation to the quality and value of the lens. Commercial Ektars
are exceptionally good lenses. One in good condition probably fits the
requirement for justifying a new shutter. Many other old lenses do
not.
As far as the Ilex is concerned, they were never considered exactly
precision shutters but are very rugged and usually can be brought back
to factory specs. The Ilex Acme is a cocking type shutter and is of
fair accuracy and repeatablilty of exposure. The Ilex Universal is a
self-setting shutter. The instructions suggested tripping it a couple
of times to overcome a sort of mechanical hysterisis they seem to
have. Meaning that it makes the exposures less variable.
Steve has a better opinion of these shutters than I do and he works
on them all the time so maybe he is right. In any case the cost of
getting the shutter overhauled is a fraction of the cost of a new
shutter, let alone getting the lens mounted properly in it.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
> From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>
> Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001
> To: <rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> Subject: RE: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
>
> What, on the picture on p. 19, are you believing are the drive springs? You
> said "you could clearly see the drive springs"...but I can't make them out,
> so if you could give me a better description of what you believed were
> springs I'd appreciate it.
>
> Here is the picture:
>
> http://www.darkroom.com/Images/RTSIIIShutter.jpg
>
> Do you have a different picture?
Probably same picture. I thought you could see the drive springs in the
printed brochure but they are obscured by the circuit board and lost in
shadow.
bar with the coil you can see wound around it. There are two metal pieces
attached to levers which are held against the permanent magnets against
weak spring tension. When you fire the shutter the camera sends a pulse
of current through each coil just sufficient to neutralize the permanent
magnet so the levers spring away and via mechanical links at their fulcrum
they release the spring-driven shutter curtains. One magnet for each
curtain and the timing of the two pulses is what controls the shutter
speeds. The cocking motor drives the shutter curtains back to their
original position and the two levers click back against the magnets.
All Copal blade shutters work this way, including the oversized one used
in the Contax 645 and Mamiya 645AF. Canon pioneered the permanent magnet
bar wrapped with a coil in the release system of their A series cameras,
and it has been widely adopted in the camera industry.
To drive the shutter blades electrically would require two bi-directional
solenoids like Rollei uses in the SLX/6000 series shutters, and would eat
batteries.
From: Bob Shell <bob@bobshell.com>
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: effective shutter speeds
Here's some info on Copal shutters for SLR cameras:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/nikkormat/elseries/el2/shutter.htm
This is a mechanical one, but generally similar:
http://www.redrival.com/usedcamera/copal_square.html
Here is a history:
(page was at http://www.mit.edu/people/rsuzuki/Photo-Tech/konica-history.html (broken link as of 2/2003)
brief web search.
Bob
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Ektar lens
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com>
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
> To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Rollei] Ektar lens
>
> The other good large shutter is the old Deckel Compound. This
> uses an air-brake to regulate speeds so is affected by altitude but
> otherwise is a smooth working, reliable shutter. They were made for
> something like seventy years, which says something for them.
Although not often seen for sale there were also the big Compur Electronic
shutters. My 300mm Apo-Lanthar is mounted in a Number 5 Compur Electronic
and it is still accurate in speeds and really nice to use. Since the
control box is connected to the shutter by a cable, you can keep the control
box at the back of the camera and set everything from there. Makes for
speedy and efficient operation.
Bob
HR>
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: hole and thread size for W.A. Optar 90mm
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001
"John Yeo" jonnieo@thegrid.net> wrote:
>Did the optar come in more than one shutter?
>
>
>"Mike King" mikeking@cableone.net> wrote
>> Would depend on the shutter used.
>>
>> darkroommike
>>
>> "Gene A. Townsend" wings@dakotacom.net> wrote
>> > I just ordered a Graphlex Optar W.A. 90mm lens, and it is coming
>> > without a retainer or flange. Can someone please tell me the thread
>> > and hole size for mounting this lens.
>> >
>> > Thanks in advance,
>> >
>> > Gene A. Townsend
>> >
I can't be sure which size shutter this lens came in. I suspect a
#1 Graphex or Rapax (they are identical) the hub diameter for the #1
is 1.185 inches and 40 turns/inch threads.
If by chance its in the larger shutter used for the 135mm
Optar/Raptar the hub diameter is 1.325 inches, again 40 turns/inch
thread. I suspect Steve Grimes would know exactly what the flange or
retaining ring dimensions are.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
HR>
From: wings@dakotacom.net (Gene A. Townsend)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: hole and thread size for W.A. Optar 90mm
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001
dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow) wrote:
Thanks for the information.
The lens DID come with a threaded retaining ring, although the seller
said that it did not. The thread diameter is very close to 1 3/16, so
I think Richard is right. It is an ordinary Rapex shutter, just
wasn't sure what size the threads were, and the Steve Grimes website
does not specify for this retainer. It is such a tiny little lens and
shutter! I will need to build a recessed lens board to mount this
lens, my project for this weekend.
Regards,
Gene A. Townsend
>"John Yeo" jonnieo@thegrid.net> wrote:
>
>>Did the optar come in more than one shutter?
>>
>>
>>"Mike King" mikeking@cableone.net> wrote
>>> Would depend on the shutter used.
>>>
>>> darkroommike
>>>
>>> "Gene A. Townsend" wings@dakotacom.net> wrote
>>> > I just ordered a Graphlex Optar W.A. 90mm lens, and it is coming
>>> > without a retainer or flange. Can someone please tell me the thread
>>> > and hole size for mounting this lens.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks in advance,
>>> >
>>> > Gene A. Townsend
>>> >
> I can't be sure which size shutter this lens came in. I suspect a
>#1 Graphex or Rapax (they are identical) the hub diameter for the #1
>is 1.185 inches and 40 turns/inch threads.
> If by chance its in the larger shutter used for the 135mm
>Optar/Raptar the hub diameter is 1.325 inches, again 40 turns/inch
>thread. I suspect Steve Grimes would know exactly what the flange or
>retaining ring dimensions are.
>---
>Richard Knoppow
>Los Angeles, CA, USA.
>dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Bogdan Karasek bkarasek@videotron.ca>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: ilex shutter question...
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001
Mark Baylin wrote:
>
> Just wondering if anyone out there has any experience with
> Ilex shutters. I'm thinking of getting a 25omm Kodak wide
> field ektar in a ilex #5 shutter. I have heard many glowing
> reviews of the glass, but I haven't heard many opinions
> about the various shutters these older lens come in.
>
> ...any thoughts??
>
> thanks in advance
>
> mark
> --
> p
Hi Mark,
I have an Ilex #5 in which I mounted an APO-Nikkor 360mm for use
on a 8x10. Mine works very well. You would need a large lens
board, at least 4 1/2 inches square. They were the standard
shutters for the Wide-field Ektar.
Regards,
Bogdan
--
MontrTal, QuTbec e-mail: bkarasek@videotron.ca
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Why do shutter slow speeds go south first?
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001
Marco Milazzo mmilazz1@elp.rr.com> wrote:
>Just curious:
>
>It seems that the slower speeds on old shutters are the first to go
>even while fastrer sppeds work okay.
>
>Why is this, and is there a way to fix it short of sending it to a
>technician?
>
>TIA
>
>Marco
The slow speeds in most shutters are controlled by a clockwork
mechanism. As it gets dirty or the lubrication ages and oxidizes and
gets gummy the gears are not free to turn to the speeds get slower or
the thing stops completely.
When a shutter is tripped the blades are driven open as quickly as
possible. They are not allowed to close again until the clock-work
mechanism runs for a time and releases them. They are then driven
closed again as quickly as possible.
The blade mechanism can also get dirty so that the opening and
closing times are longer than they should be. This makes the fastest
speeds slow. A weak drive spring also affects the fast speeds more
than the slow ones.
Generally, a thorough cleaning will fix the slow speed regulator and
get any residue off the blade mechanism. In most shutters the clock
work is lubricated very lightly with very fine, non-gumming oil. Some
of them are intended to work without any lubrication (Ilex for
instance). The blade mechanism is never lubricated.
A great many shutters will come back to their original speed with no
more than a thorough cleaning and perhaps some lubrication. Springs
become fatigued with use so some shutters have rather slow top speeds
from spring weakness. However, many shutters were never capable of the
top speeds marked.
Top speeds are _effective_ speeds not total open time. The speeds
are calculated to account for the opening and closing time of the
blades. This can be substantial for a large shutter. The speeds are
indicated for the full aperture of the shutter and when smaller stops
are used the effective speed can be significantly longer.
For common Compur shutters the total open time at the highest speed
is about 1.3 times the marked speed. i.e. for a a shutter marked
1/500th the actual total open time will be around 1/385th or even a
little longer. If you have a shutter tester which measures total open
time (like the little Calumet tester) this needs to be taken into
account when evaluating the top speeds of blade type shutters.
Some shutters have some means of adjusting the slow speeds. Most
Compur shutters are arranged so that the gear mechanism can be moved
back and forth a little to adjust its contact with the lever which
operates it. Generally after cleaning its set so that 1/10th second is
correct. The other speeds should then fall pretty close to correct.
Kodak shutters require adjusting the tension of the return spring on
the regulator mechanism, tricky to do without loosing the spring.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Why do shutter slow speeds go south first?
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001
Marco Milazzo mmilazz1@elp.rr.com> wrote:
>Thanks to both of you for the usual authoritative answers. This group
>is great. Let me tell you what inspired this question:
>
>I had an old Kodak Ektar 127mm in a supermatic shutter. I sent it to
>my local El Paso camera shop for a CLA. They charged me $70 but other
>than clean it up a little, I can't tell what they did, and the slow
>speeds are still way slow.
>
>I might be willing to try gleaning and lubing it myself if I had some
>kind of guidance -- instructions or something. Where can I get some
>of this degreaser of which you speak? A what is the right lind of
>lube?
>
>Marco
There are reprint military repair manuals for the Speed Graphic
which contain a section on the Supermatic shutter.
They are very easy to work on. You can see most of the mechanism
when you take the lens cells out.
I suspect it may neet just a little lubrication or else they didn't
clean it properly and there is still something on the retarder gears.
The lubricant should be the lightest oil you can find. Actually,
I've had good luck using an electronic contact cleaner called Deoxitt
D5. Just the tinyest amount on the tip of a brush on the gear bearings
and on the pallet.
Nothing else needs to be lubricated except perhaps a very little
light grease (like Lubriplate) around the edge of the speed dial.
There is a way of adjusting the slow speeds but it should not be
done unless you are certain the gear mechanism is really cleaned and
properly lubed. The adjustment procedure requires partial disassembly
of the retarder. Its easy to get apart and hard to put back together.
Eseentially it consists of winding or unwinding a little tension from
the counter spring. Actually, I've found Supermatics often run fast.
$70 should get you a thorough and proper job on virtually any
shutter so I think you should complain. If they tell you the thing is
worn out they don't know what they are talking about. Even when the
main drive spring is weak the slowest speeds are pretty close. Its the
top speeds which will be noticably slow.
The supermatic, in common with many other shutters, has two springs.
A main drive spring and a booster spring which is tensioned for the
top speed only. If you open the shutter be careful of the booster
spring and its actuating cam. They are right under the screw that
holds the face plate on and can fall out.
I don't know how you are measuring the speeds. Calumet sells a good
little shutter speed tester. The last I looked it was around $80. I
think this thing is a necessity for anyone working with older or even
just large shutters. It will also measure the duration of strobes,
which is sometimes useful to know.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Frank Calidonna cemeteryman@clarityconnect.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Why do shutter slow speeds go south first?
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001
If the shutter has already been cleaned, and it was done properly, your
times still might be off. One of the main causes of slow mechanical
shutters is lack of use. Generally speeds from 1/30 to 1/125 work fine
because they are the ones used the most. Your fast speeds can be too slow
too, but you don't see it. When you cock the shutter various springs and
gears are set at certain tensions - different for different speeds. They
need to be exercised.
While you are sitting watching TV (alone- or see definition for
long-suffering wife) set the shutter at 1 second and fire it repeatedly a
couple of hundred times. Repeat with all of the other speeds. If a lens
has been inactive for a long time this is a good thing to do with any lens
every so often. This should bring the speed back to snuff, but like any
mechanical shutter it might be off a bit. What you want is consistenty. Do
test it with your meter/film/developer combo. As long as it is consistent
the lens will be fine.
Frank Rome,NY
Marco Milazzo wrote:
> Thanks to both of you for the usual authoritative answers. This group
> is great. Let me tell you what inspired this question:
>
> I had an old Kodak Ektar 127mm in a supermatic shutter. I sent it to
> my local El Paso camera shop for a CLA. They charged me $70 but other
> than clean it up a little, I can't tell what they did, and the slow
> speeds are still way slow.
>
> I might be willing to try gleaning and lubing it myself if I had some
> kind of guidance -- instructions or something. Where can I get some
> of this degreaser of which you speak? A what is the right lind of
> lube?
>
> Marco
From: "Keith Olivier" keith.olivier_nospam@t-online.de>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Source for used shutters?
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001
I don't know the size of the Ilex shutters. A new Copal #3 shutter from
Linhof in Germany is less than $650 (Copal #1 less than $330), so this is
something to think about. If you have any difficulty with ordering directly
from Linhof due to the US franchise, you could order it from
www.robertwhite.co.uk The #3 shutter has the Linhof catalog part number
022776.
Regards
Keith Olivier
St Martin, Germany
"The Sleighteem" hopi@pro-ns.net> schrieb...
> Hi.
>
> Thanks for reading my post.
>
> I have a couple of barrel lenses which I'm thinking of mounting in shutters.
>
> I've sent them a 260 Hexanon and a 480 Nikkor to S.K. Grimes, and he
> suggested a #4 and #5 Ilex shutter, respectively.
>
> He can provide these shutters, but at a premium price. Hence, I thought I'd
> track them down myself.
>
> When you're shopping for bare, used shutters, where do you look?
>
> Thanks for your assistance.
>
> TS in Mpls.
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Source for used shutters?
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001
"The Sleighteem" hopi@pro-ns.net> wrote:
>Hi.
>
>Thanks for reading my post.
>
>I have a couple of barrel lenses which I'm thinking of mounting in shutters.
>
>I've sent them a 260 Hexanon and a 480 Nikkor to S.K. Grimes, and he
>suggested a #4 and #5 Ilex shutter, respectively.
>
>He can provide these shutters, but at a premium price. Hence, I thought I'd
>track them down myself.
>
>When you're shopping for bare, used shutters, where do you look?
>
>Thanks for your assistance.
>
>TS in Mpls.
>
About the only place I see old shutters is on eBay. Medium sized
Ilex's show up there occasionally. You might also check in Shutterbug,
both the want ads and for dealers specializing in LF stuff.
Be careful that you don't get someone's beater. A lot of Ilex
shutters are replaced because they are worn out. I've very
occasionally seen shutters at the local camera sales.
Also check the news group rec.photo.marketplace.large-format you may
find something there or post a WTB there. Don't post it to this group.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: Todd Maurer maurert@ameritech.net>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Source for used shutters?
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001
I've seen shutters on E-bay and on dealers' web sites. On Ebay the brand is
often known but not the size/number. This is particularly true when you are
buying a shutter and a junk lens combo.
Also something to consider about Mr. Grimes' "premium" price. If you buy a
shutter from any source, you will probably decide to get a CLA (Clean,
Lubricate, Adjust). That will cost you something over the cost of the used
lens. If Mr. Grimes' premium price includes this service, then the "premium"
price may not be a bad as it looks.
Another hint is to go to a search engine: www.northernlight.com,
www.altavista.com, and www.yahoo.com are my favorites. search for Ilex,
shutter, and 3 or 4 number. I only get 200 or so hits at northernlight. Almost
all are related to large format photography.
You could also write to Mr. Grimes and see if your search could include such
brands as Alphax and Betax. That might give you more options. Be sure the cost
to mount in shutter is the same for these other options. A shutter that happens
to be the exact size for a pair of lens cells to screw into, such is the case of
a 15" TeleOptar to Alphax #4 will require the least work and therefore the least
cost.
Todd
The Sleighteem wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Thanks for reading my post.
>
> I have a couple of barrel lenses which I'm thinking of mounting in shutters.
>
> I've sent them a 260 Hexanon and a 480 Nikkor to S.K. Grimes, and he
> suggested a #4 and #5 Ilex shutter, respectively.
>
> He can provide these shutters, but at a premium price. Hence, I thought I'd
> track them down myself.
>
> When you're shopping for bare, used shutters, where do you look?
>
> Thanks for your assistance.
>
> TS in Mpls.
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
From: Marc James Small msmall@roanoke.infi.net>
Subject: Re: [Rollei] springs and tension
Matthew Smith wrote:
>
>I=92ve always operated under the assumption that, when left idle for long
>periods of time, springs should NOT be left in their tensioned position.
>For this reason, I try not to advance my cameras if I=92m going to put them
>down for a while.
Deckel and Gauthier have always recommended that their Compur and Prontor
shutters be stored cocked. Hasselblad makes quite a production about this,
incidentally.
Marc
msmall@roanoke.infi.net
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Rollei] springs and tension
you wrote:
> B. D. Colen wrote:
>>So Rollei Compur shutters should be left cocked then?
>
>That is what Deckel said. I'm not certain that it is all that important,
>though.
>
>Marc
>
>msmall@roanoke.infi.net
Hassy shutters need to be stored cocked because the design of the camera
is such that they can't be interchanged when in the fired condition. Hassy
provides a key for cocking them off the shutter. I never saw a
recommendation for storing old style Compurs cocked.
Springs mostly get weak from metal fatigue from much use. Most springs
will not change if simply left stretched or compressed, providing they are
not stressed beyond the elastic limit of the material. This seems counter
intuitive but is nontheless correct.
I would avoid storing old style Compur or Kodak Supermatic shutters with
the speed selector in the highest speed, whether cocked or not, because the
stressed booster spring puts a lot of pressure on some of the parts.
Rollei Automats often must be left cocked between shots. The self timer
is cocked with the first winding and stays cocked until used. Probably
stays cocked for years at a time on some cameras.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: RE: [Rollei] New member
you wrote:
>I was just about to ask why I couldn't set the shutter
>speed to 1/500 today when I was sure I did it
>yesterday!
>
>You must be clairvoyant! How did you do that!
>
>
>--- Siu Fai siufai@dds.nl> wrote:
>> FWIW, on this model you cannot set the speed to or
>> from 1/500s when the
>> shutter is cocked. So don't try this or you'll break
>> it.
>>
>> Have fun,
>>
>> Siu Fai
>>
>
In the older Compur shutter the highest speed is obtained by tensioning a
second booster spring. The spring is on the shaft which operates the blade
ring. It always rides the shaft but at all but the top speed the free end
is not held by anything. At the top speed a cam on the speed ring pushes
against the free end partially compressing it. That's the resistance you
feel when setting the shutter to its top speed and reason that the distance
on the speed scale is so long between the penultimate speed and top speed.
When the shutter is cocked the shaft turns compressing the booster spring
even more.
If you try to set the shutter to its top speed when its cocked the cam
must compress the booster spring while its other end is already moved in
the tensioning direction by the shutter mechanism. The result is that the
speed cam must apply a very large amount of pressure against the spring,
which tends to wear both cam and spring surfaces and the end of the spring
may be forced under the cam, which will very effectively jam the shutter.
You can actually move the speed setting to top speed (1/500th on most
Rolleis) but you will find it takes a tremendous amount of force to do it.
Setting it to a slower speed while cocked also applies a lot of force to
the sliding surfaces but doesn't have the risk of jamming the shutter.
The later Compur is of a different design with a single spring of the
clock motor kind (spiral spring). The spring is always partially wound and
is only give an final winding by cocking the shutter. This kind of shutter
allows free changing of speeds whether cocked or not. One way to tell which
shutter you have is simply to set the shutter to its top speed and see if
there is some resistance. If so, its the older type. E and F Rolleis all
have the later type shutter. I am not sure about late Automats with EVS. I
think the EVS shutters are all of the later type but someone on the list
probably knows for sure.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Rollei] E series reliability
you wrote:
>I've seen a couple of references on the web asserting the Rolleis with the
>EVS feature that can be linked or unlinked (like the MX-EVS type 2) are
>more prone to shutter problems and repair problems in general.
>
>Any truth to this assertion?
>
>I was looking at a 2.8 E3 recently.....the recent comments about the 2.8
>versus 3.5 lenses and shutters and the reliability issue questioned above
>make me wonder if I should avoid.
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
>John
>
I suspect this is confusion because 3.5 Rolleis used the smallest #00
Compur, which many repair people find hard to work on.
The EVS coupling is part of the camera, not the shutter. The main
difference in the shutter is the choice of speeds and the arrangement of
the iris coupling so that it matches the speed coupling.
The same basic shutter was supplied with many other lenses, for instance,
on Schneider Super Angulons. For view camera lenses it has the disadvantage
of not having a Time setting, requiring a locking cable release for ground
glass viewing. Eventually, Schneider discontinued the use of the size 00
shutter and went to the next larger size which does have a T setting, and,
I think, is available with a blade arrestor.
The Size 00 Compur was available with a self timer, both my Super
Angulons have them, but I don't know if this feature was used in the Rollei
3.5 E or not, at least not without opening up the repair manual. Older
Rolleis used a separate time delay mechanism which was part of the camera.
My 2.8E uses the delay built into the shutter.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: RE: [Rollei] E series reliability
you wrote:
>> Any truth to this assertion?
>>
>> I was looking at a 2.8 E3 recently.....the recent comments about the 2.8
>> versus 3.5 lenses and shutters and the reliability issue questioned above
>> make me wonder if I should avoid.
>
>I don't think so. The E3 is basically an F without the meter coupling.
>Shutter and lens are the same. The only difference is the EVS, which is very
>simple system and most people have turned it off anyway.
>
>I think the E and E2 models uses a slightly different shutter which don't
>contain gears for the selftimer. Even then, I don't think they are more
>prone problem than the later models.
>
>This may be the wrong list to postulate this, but I think the Compur
>shutters used in Rolleis are more prone for "sticky blades" then others.
>Often it's the grease in the gears that got hard that cause the problem and
>I suspect F&H; ordered different grease on their Compurs. Other shutters
>(even from Compur) don't show this high percentages of failure as F&H.;
>
>Any other who wants to share his/her opinion?
>
>Siu Fai
This doesn't quite make sense. Shutters are lubricated in a number of
places. A very small amount of very light, non-migrating, oil (watch oil)
is used on the spindles of the gears of the retarder-regulator mechanism.
Very light grease is used on the spiral spring and on some sliding
surfaces. No lubrication is used on any part of the blade drive or blades.
The finish of the blades is supposed to be anti-friction.
Its possible that something might get on the blades by evaporation since
the inside surfaces of lenses get hazy from the same cause. It would take
years.
The trend in shutters was to reduce the lubrication to the minimum. A few
years ago I was told by the Compur distributor of the time that they
recommended running the shutters dry, if possible, except for a little
Molykote light grease on the drive spring.
Any shutter needs to be cleaned periodically. Some seem to run along for
many years between cleaning, but the surrounding atmosphere and the amount
of use probably are factors (constant use keeps them running). Long storage
will result in oxidation of lubricants all over the camera showing up as
stiff focusing, jamming of the wind mechanism, slow or non-operative
shutters. All cured by an overhaul.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
From: Marc James Small msmall@roanoke.infi.net>
Subject: Re: [HUG] 500C/M body vs 500C or 501CM
Patrick Bartek wrote:
>The camera techs, who worked on my equipment (There were several, I=20
>used, whose opinions I trusted.), didn't much care for the old Prontors=20
>used in view camera lenses. They said that Compurs were more durable=20
>and accurate. When Hasselblad switched to Prontors, they were wary,=20
>but after looking at them, said they were "fine." But they still liked=20
>Compurs, because of the efficiency of the design.
Patrick
Relying on war stories from repair dudes is akin to relying on the "latest
word" from the clerk at your village camera store.
The "Prontor" shutters used by Hasselblad are not "Prontor" shutters --
these are Deckel designs acquired by Gauthier when they bought out Deckel's
assets. These "Prontor" shutters are "Compurs" in all but the name-plate.
Marc
msmall@roanoke.infi.net
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Ektar lens
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com>
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
> To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Rollei] Ektar lens
>
> The other good large shutter is the old Deckel Compound. This
> uses an air-brake to regulate speeds so is affected by altitude but
> otherwise is a smooth working, reliable shutter. They were made for
> something like seventy years, which says something for them.
Although not often seen for sale there were also the big Compur Electronic
shutters. My 300mm Apo-Lanthar is mounted in a Number 5 Compur Electronic
and it is still accurate in speeds and really nice to use. Since the
control box is connected to the shutter by a cable, you can keep the control
box at the back of the camera and set everything from there. Makes for
speedy and efficient operation.
Bob
From: "skgrimes" skgrimes@ma.ultranet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Polaroid Shutters
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
Polaroid used specially made variants of the #1 Press shutter for their
applications. Both Prontor and Copal brands were used. The Prontor
shutters tend to be less reliable than the Copal (at least in the Polaroid
versions) Many of them were made with no adjustable iris and those are
useless for most applications.
See: http://www.skgrimes.com/press/index.htm for info about the standard
type Copal press shutters.
--
S.K. GRIMES -- MACHINE WORK FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS
153 Hamlet Ave. (5th floor) Woonsocket RI, 02895
+ Lenses mounted into shutters.
+ Shutters repaired, restored.
+ For more info-- http://www.skgrimes.com.
(updated 8-01-01 Site Map)
Now: flat and pointed tip Spanner Wrenches
http://www.skgrimes.com/span/index.htm
"Joseph Schutz" jfreischuetz@home.com> wrote...
> Friends,
>
> Can any of you tell me how the Polaroid shutters compare with
> the standard sizes?
>
> What size if the Polaroid MP4 Copal Shutter? Is it a Copal #3?
>
> Did Polaroid use any other sizes?
>
> Are these good shutters?
>
> Joe
From: "skgrimes" skgrimes@ma.ultranet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Polaroid Shutters
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001
Yes.
The Polaroid shutters are made to the same #1 thread specs as the ordinary
Copal #1 shutters. To that extent and with the caution to be sure they have
an adjustable iris if you need that feature, they can be used the same as
any other Copal #1 shutter.
--
S.K. GRIMES -- MACHINE WORK FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS
http://www.skgrimes.com/span/index.htm
"Joseph Schutz" Joseph.Schutz@intel.com> wrote...
> Will these shutters work on other lenses, besides the Polaroid ones?
>
>
> "skgrimes" skgrimes@ma.ultranet.com> wrote...
> > Polaroid used specially made variants of the #1 Press shutter for their
> > applications. Both Prontor and Copal brands were used. The Prontor
> > shutters tend to be less reliable than the Copal (at least in the
> Polaroid
> > versions) Many of them were made with no adjustable iris and those are
> > useless for most applications.
> >
> > See: http://www.skgrimes.com/press/index.htm for info about the standard
> > type Copal press shutters.
> >
> > --
> > S.K. GRIMES -- MACHINE WORK FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS
> > http://www.skgrimes.com/span/index.htm
> >
> > "Joseph Schutz" jfreischuetz@home.com> wrote...
> > > Friends,
> > >
> > > Can any of you tell me how the Polaroid shutters compare with
> > > the standard sizes?
> > >
> > > What size if the Polaroid MP4 Copal Shutter? Is it a Copal #3?
> > >
> > > Did Polaroid use any other sizes?
> > >
> > > Are these good shutters?
> > >
> > > Joe
From: 76266.333@compuserve.com (Dan Fromm)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Polaroid Shutters
Date: 30 Aug 2001
"Joseph Schutz" jfreischuetz@home.com> wrote
> Friends,
>
> Can any of you tell me how the Polaroid shutters compare with
> the standard sizes?
>
> What size if the Polaroid MP4 Copal Shutter? Is it a Copal #3?
>
> Did Polaroid use any other sizes?
>
> Are these good shutters?
>
> Joe
To answer this question and your question in response to Mr. Grimes'
reply, the MP-4 shutter is a Copal #1. It has no diaphragm. A
variety of factors willing, lenses with diaphragms can be mounted in
front of it. The only other use for the things is with lenses made
for the MP-4.
Other Polaroid cameras, e.g., the CU-5 and DS-3x series, have a lens
IN, not in front of, a Copal or Prontor press shutter. Sometimes #0,
sometimes #1, depends on the lens. There's a character who seems to
be making a career of getting these things, removing the lens, and
offering the shutter with a better/different lens on eBay. He also
sells the removed lens cells.
Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2001
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Non-Rollei Accessories
you wrote:
>PK,
>
>I've never had an F, but I could run down what I've been doing with my
>Automats. I've been looking around in san Diego for some watch or clock
>oil, but haven't found any yet. Much more critical for the shutter than
>for the advance mechanism. Since I haven't found the right stuff yet
>I've been leaving them dry but for the 1/500 cam, which gets the tiniest
>bit of grease you can imagine. I'm real busy right now but I'll get it
>together tonight.
>
>Gene
>
>"Print It, Inc." wrote:
>>
>>
>> > First, the Abrahamsson Soft Release - a little button that screws onto
the
>> > shutter release, and
>> > nominally intended for Leicas.
>>
>> Mine isn't an Abrahamsson, I don't know what it is, just says 'Japan'. I use
>> it on my 3.5F 'cuz the shutter release is as jerky as a teenager's first
>> driving lesson on a Model A Ford. I'd like to clean and lube it, but haven't
>> gotten around to it. Maybe Gene J would post a nice run-down of the
>> procedure, as in his post on film advance clean/lube. BTW, I think clock oil
>> would be better than regular light oils such as sewing machine or 3 in 1.
>> Comments?
>>
>> pk, well paul if you insist, but pk preferred.
>> Hood River, Ore
I was told by the last distributor of Compur that they recommended
running late Synchro-Compur shutters dry except for a small amount of
Molykote grease on the drive spring.
Do NOT use 3-in -One oil, it will gum after a while and is too viscous.
The recommended oil for escapements is watch oil, a fine synthetic oil
which does not gum and does not flow away from where it is applied. There
are a couple of types available. Try a watchmaker's supply place. You can
also use Nyoil, available from Small Parts Inc., or the fine LeBell oil
available at hobby shops specializing in model trains.
For wind mechanisms probably running dry is best although some surfaces
need an oil similar to the above.
The Compur repair book specifies about four types of lubricants, all
German types. I have no idea where to get them or even if they are still
made.
Be very careful when working on shutters to leave no trace of anything on
the shutter or diaphragm blades. Neither are lubricated other than by
finish. I've seen at least one book suggesting lubricating them with a
slurry of fine graphite in naptha (Thomasy's book). Wrong! leave them dry
and free of any residue. In general the less lube you can use the better.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2001
To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
From: Richard Knoppow dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: Home Shutter Cleaning
you wrote:
>Thanks Richard,
>
>The first time I did anything with a shutter I was armed with a post of
>yours saying pretty much what you just said. I'm starting to get a clue
>as to how they work, but I'd love to have some kind of manual.
>Fortunately, these small Compurs were used in a lot of old cameras and
>I've been able to take a few apart and recently, even put them back
>together again. As soon as I get a little time I'll put together a
>step-by-step for cleaning the shutter on an automat, which is pretty
>simple.
>
>Gene
There is a reprint Compure manual available from both Petra Keller and
John Craig. I think it is the same manual. About $30 when I got mine.
Petra Keller: http://www.camerabooks.com
John S. Craig: http://www.craigcamera.com
John Craig also has original and reprint instruction manuals for a great
many cameras and other photographic equipment.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
From: dickburk@ix.netcom.com (Richard Knoppow)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: Re: Anyone know how much to CLA a Flash Supermatic shutter?
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001
"GK" eok.3@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Just got a nice 2x3 Century Graphic in the mail today. It has a Kodak Ektar
>101mm 4.5 lens in a Flash Supermatic shutter. Well, low and behold, the
>shutter isn't doing much besides firing at about 100th of a sec. Half the
>times the blades of the aperture don't even open up all the way.
>
>I tried working it for about a half hour, and no change. Now I'm looking at
>either a return, or seller-paid CLA. Does anyone know how much it might cost
>to get one of these bad boys back up to speed?
>
>I'm a little dismayed. I'd heard that these shutters were damn-near bomb
>proof!
>
>Thanks,
>GK
>
It needs cleaning. You can probably do it yourself. Take the lens
cells out and take the shutter off the lens board.
You can almost clean Supermatics without further disassebly since
the inside works are visible when the lens cells are out. Its easier
if you take the faceplate and speed cam off. There is a single screw
in about the top center of the faceplate, just under the word Kodak.
Take that out (and don't loose it, its a special shoulder screw). Take
the f/stop pointer off (there is a small screw on its side). The face
plate will rotate counter-clockwise a little and come off. Its held by
a sort of bayonet arrangement. The speed cam will come off at this
point. Under the screw holding the face plate is a small cam with a
spring around it. Both cam and spring come straight up. The two form a
booster spring for the highest speed. They are easy to loose so should
be put asside carefully.
Once open the shutter can be soaked in lighter fluid. Ronsonol is
nearly pure Naptha, which is a good cleaner. Soake it for a few
minutes and blow out the residue with canned air. Do this a few times
with fresh solvent each time, until you don't see any residue left on
the shutter blades, etc. Let the shutter dry thoroughly.
It should work dry if really clean. The gear train used to regulate
the slow speeds may need a very small amount of a very light oil, like
watch oil, on the pinions of the gears and on the pallet to make it
run smoothly. The least amount of oil the better. I've found that
DeoxiT D-5 contact cleaner, very sparingly applied, works OK as a
lubricant. You may need a very small amount of light grease around the
edge of the speed cam where it bears on the shutter body in order to
make it turn smoothly. No other lubricant is needed.
The booster spring goes in only one way. Look at it carefully before
removing it. There is a pig tail which sticks down. This fits into a
hole in the crank the shaft for the cam the spring rides on sits. This
is the shaft the screw holding the cover plate fits into.
You can do the cleaning without the disassembly but lubing the gear
train is more difficult. It can still be done but you have to reach
into the shutter with toothpicks or similar to do it.
The gear train for the flasch synch should also be lubed although
they will generally run dry. Non-synch Supermatics have a time delay
instead of the flash synch. The time delay gears should lubricated in
the same way as the speed regulator.
Three versions of the Supermatic were made:
1, The plain Supermatic, with no flash synch but with a 15 second
self-timer.
2, The Flash Supermatic. This has synch for both flash bulbs and
strobe. There are two sets of contacts. The flash syncronizer must be
cocked separately from the shutter when flash bulbs are used. The
slider on the front of the shutter controls the time the delay runs. F
sets it for 5 millisecond bulbs, M sets it for 20ms bulbs.
If the synchronizer is not cocked only the strobe contacts work
triggering at the point where the shutter blades just come fully open.
These contacts always work. They have a high value resistor in
series with them bo prevent setting off flash bulbs. Most strobes will
trigger with the resistor in place but it can be bypassed when
necessary although that takes a little surgery.
Supermatics can run slow at the top speeds due to weak main springs
but will have consistent speeds nonetheless. I don't know of a good
source for new springs.
Supermatics are very rugged and can generally be brought back to
life.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
To: camera-fix@yahoogroups.com>
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002
Subject: Re: [camera-fix] camera terms and parts
Mark Overton at mark@sdd.hp.com wrote:
> I've been daydreaming about writing a book about repairing leaf shutters.
> So you have terms like pallet, starwheel, escapement, mainspring, etc.
Those are watch and clock terms as well. It may be that a basic book on
watch and clock repair would be useful for beginners in camera repair.
I tinkered with watches for a while. Parts pretty much the same, but just
too darned small! At least you can work on most camera stuff without
magnifiers!
BTW, one of the best basic texts on shutter repair is the US Military
repair book for Graphic cameras. I picked one up ages ago at a used book
store. It covers in good detail how both the focal plane and leaf shutters
work, and how to fix them. Funniest part is where it tells you how to
render cameras unusable if captured by the enemy. Suggests running over
them with tanks, chopping up with axes, blowing up with explosives, and
other good stuff. I know there is also a military manual on Leica but I
have never found one.
Bob
To: camera-fix@yahoogroups.com>
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001
Subject: Re: [camera-fix] Canon AE-1 shutter won't work at 1000?
You're exactly right. In a leaf shutter, except in one or two
non-reciprocating designs, the blades must open all the way, stop,
change direction, and then close all the way. So at any speed the
shutter is open longer in the middle than at the edges, but it
evens out on the film and you get whatever the marked speed is if
the shutter is adjusted right. But only with the lens wide open.
As you stop down, this evening out becomes less and less. This is
most noticeable at high speeds. Hasselblad has always recommended
compensation for this effect when using fast shutter speeds and
small aperture to avoid over exposure. Rollei's 6000 series ( which
has some leaf shutters which go to 1/1000 second!) has the compensation
built into the metering system, so if you use the camera's meter you
don't need to worry about it.
Bob
> From: "J-2" nikitakat@edsamail.com.ph>
> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001
> To: camera-fix@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: Re: [camera-fix] Canon AE-1 shutter won't work at 1000?
>
>
> The concern should be errors with *ACTUAL EXPOSURE TIME* rather than uniform
> exposure. A leaf shutter cannot make uneven exposures on a frame at high
> speeds, rather, it can be prone to produce slight overexposures when used at
> high speeds in combination with small apertures. This could be due to the fact
> that the central part of the shutter is open for a longer time than the rest
> of its area. The blade open first at the centre, then the rim. When its
> cycle completes, the rims close first, going towards the centre.
>
> Kodak addresses this problem (can't be noticed with negative stocks or slower
> reversible emulsions, but quite obvious with fast 'chrome' films) by
> suggesting the use of 1/3 to 1/2 stop less exposure when something like 1/500
> at f/16 is called for to prevent slight overexposures. In such a lens/shutter
> setting, only the central portion of the shutter is unblocked by the
> diaphragm.
>
> Jay
From: Michael Briggs MichaelBriggs@EarthLink.net>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: A bit on lenses and shutters and such...
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002
mnahkola@aurinko.ntc.nokia.com wrote:
>
> For one, has anyone assembled a page on different shutters that we see on
> the cameras/lenses? I mean, a Compur/Synchro-Compur/Compur-Rapid and what
> ever, and a Vebur and Prontor and Copal and Seiko and "Synchro-MX" and
> ... are there any real differences there and what's the deal
> really? Should one be preferred over another?
Compur made shutters for many years and periodically made design
improvements and/or changed the names. And there are of course, other
manufacturers. Reasonably modern Compurs, Copals and Prontors tend to
be highly regarded. Prontors are rare compared to Compur and Copal.
Older dial-set shutters (have a dial to set the speed rather than
rotating the rim) are very old now and probably not so reliable.
S. K. Grimes has a lot of good information:
http://www.skgrimes.com/sitemap/index.htm. For the Compurs:
http://www.skgrimes.com/compur/index.htm
>
>
> Then I've been wondering why I can't seem to find a 105mm f/2.8 Schneider
> Xenotar mentioned anywhere on the 'net - it's not even on the Schneider
> vintage lens pages! I mean, there's a 100 and a 150, but no 105 ...
105 mm seems to be an uncommon focal length for the Xenotar. You
should be able to use the data for the 80, 100 and 150 mm focal lengths
(on Schneider's web site) to understand the properties of the 105 mm.
Typically but not invariably the lens properties scale with focal
length, e.g., to find the diameter of the circle of coverage of the 105
mm lens, multiply the diameter of the circle of coverage of the 100 mm
lens by 1.05. This is because the angle of coverage is a
characteristic of the lens design and the linear dimensions are thus
proportional to the focal length.
>
> And further... there was the thread about using Hassy lenses on a view
> camera. This lead to me thinking that 6x7 is a bit more than 6x6, and
> then view cameras use bellows for focusing... could a Mamiya RB67 lens be
> fitted? Not to mention that 6x7 roll backs aren't exactly uncommon.
Yes, any MF 6x7 lens could be mounted and used with a 6x7 rollfilm
back. You need to make an adapter somehow. And this also assumes that
the two standards of your camera can move close enough together.
--Michael
From leica topica mailing list:
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001
From: Jim Brick jim@brick.org
Subject: [Leica] Mirror flapping and tripod dissertation
Henry Ting wrote:
> but quite frankly mirror flapping is
>only detrimental to closeup macro.
Actually, the SLR mirror effects ALL photographs taken with a shutter speed
between a 1/30 and 1/4 second. Not just close-ups. It kills the recording
of fine detail. The reason is that the mirror hits the top and the
diaphragm closes down just before the shutter opens. The mirror vibration
is at its peak just when the shutter is open and the vibration lasts for
roughly 1/30th second. Long enough to be fully captured with a shutter
speed between 1/30 and 1/4 second. Shorter shutter speeds (1/60 and
higher) are over before the vibration wave hits its peak. With longer exposures
(1/2 second and longer,) the vibration is a very small percentage of the
total exposure time and therefore is not recorded.
Carbon fiber and wooden tripods will help dampen camera vibrations by
absorption while steel and other all metal tripods tend to echo the
vibration, and in some cases, amplify the vibrations putting the vulnerable
shutter speeds all the way down to 1 second. The vibration wave sent
through the metal tripod echoes back into the camera as a second vibration
thus extending the vibration period.
Throw a rock into the center of a small pond. The waves radiate out from
the rock hit, toward the bank then echo back, from the bank, to the center,
where the rock hit. It is the same in a metal tripod. The camera vibrations
radiate out (down the legs) and echo back to the camera. This does not
happen in either a wooden tripod or a carbon fiber tripod.
If you have an SLR without MLU and want to photograph in the 1/30 to 1
second range, buy wood.
Jim
[Ed. note: the gravity slit shutter is a very low cost front of the lens shutter
in which a cardboard with a hole in it is dropped in front of the lens...]
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003
From: mevansmi mevansmi@cbpu.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.large-format
Subject: gravity slit shutter speed test
I thought I might pass along my experiment with a test model of a
gravity slit shutter for anyone interested in making one for their own
barrel lenses.
I used a 4x6inch piece of hard brown fiber board I had lying around to
use as the back which goes against the front of the lens. I drilled a
one and a half inch hole in the center to go over the lens.I then
mounted two guide rails made from metal picture frames to run lengthwise
on the board and positioned about 2 3/4inches apart.
For the sliding gravity part of the shutter I used a 2 1/2inch wide and
about 5inch long piece of double sided copper PC board from radio shack.
I then cut a slit across the slider that was 2 inches long and 3/8ths of
an inch wide.
I had originally thought of using rubber bands to accentuate the fall
but decided to try three high energy magnets from radio shack
Cat.No.64-1877,and they measure17/8 x 7/8 x 3/8 each.
One magnet was attached to the bottom of the slider below the slit and
the other two were positioned at the bottom of the board such that they
would be in contact when the slit had crossed the opening for the lens.
I did tests with the calumet shutter tested as proscribed for focal plane shutters
and found a shutter speed to be 1/125 of a second. I guess one could
adjust to slower speeds by using a wider slit based on their own testing
but it certainly looks like it would be practical and economical.
Attaching such a shutter to the lens might be done by placing two L
shaped brackets above and below the center of the lens hole and use a
rubber band similar to the Lee filter holder attachment.
Anyway, I thought I would pass this along to anyone with barrel lenses
and the desire to experiment.
mevansmi