Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Nov 25, 2012 19:04:47 GMT -5
In a local junk shop, a USSR made Fed-4 body, jammed solid, missing flashshoe, and loose viewfinder lens, and all for only £1.00....no lens, no case! A quick checkover cleared the shutter jam, and the shutter is up and running..... most of the time.....the main speed dial is on a very wobbly shaft bearing or adrift a bit, if pressed down the shutter jams, normal position and it works. Speeds are quite accurate across the range, 1sec to 1/500th, including the slow speeds, and the delayed action works properly. The meter does not respond, it might be the cell faulty, or the leads displaced. Curious Soviet production all round, Fed's all seem to suffer from poor assembly and design standards, but somehow seem to work. The standard of the body are OK on the chassis and shutter, but the top is a disaster area, with dimensions altering along the top, bad pressings and variable finish, it is more like a jelly mould than a precision pressing! The knobs just seem to "be there", sticking out, easy to damage, and no thought of decent design. Utilitarian is the best description, and so typical of Russian productions of the 1960/70s. The Fed 4 dates from about 1964 with knob wind and 1969 for lever wind versions as with this one. The rangefinder is very poor, the secondary spot window is far too small, and difficult to clean. The finish of the windows and chromed surround was always poor, with a soft plastic surround to the meter window, easily damaged. At least the Soviet designers got the back right, so much better than Leica, it releases completely, secures with excellent toggle tabs, and operates fully opening Contax style cassettes as an added bonus. They were widely available in the UK, imported by Technical and Optical Ltd, (TOE), a company run directly by the Russian Embassy, just to sell optical equipment. They delighted in a completely non commercial sales effort, they sold exactly what Moscow told them to sell, not more, not less!! If sales picked up, they could not have cared less, they had sold the years batch and that was that! The amusing thing was each camera came with an inspection certificate, fully numbered and signed, and as worthless as a ticket to a USSR salt mine, the UK TOE sales Rep reckoned they employed a couple of old ladies to stamp the certificates in the Fed factory, and pop one in each box as it was packed! At least two or three of each batch we stocked were faulty, they were serviced by TOE and returned to stock, we could have sold them at a premium, as we knew they worked properly. The lenses were usually OK, they were so simple that there was little to go wrong and it was a good lens design. The best part of the Fed camera is the shutter, a Leica style cloth unit, easily serviced and robust, but the controls can be finicky if not well assembled and lubricated. The shutter is very quiet and smooth, usually as good as Leica. If it clacks it needs a service, dry bearings etc. This example has good cloth blinds, no wear or pin holes etc. They are relatively easy to replace if damaged. The interior of the camera is well made, all brass and steel, no plastic, and the engineering standards are high, it is the assembly of the various unit parts that was so bad in Soviet days. Many were made, out producing many western makes, with sales outside Russia quite high, although they were not sold in the United States much, making them rarer there these days. A new flash shoe will be needed, and a new rear rim to the viewfinder window , which is loose at the moment, and then a lube job and general clean and re-paint. The Vulcanite finish is good, no cracks or missing bits. Stephen
|
|
|
Post by John Farrell on Nov 25, 2012 23:00:52 GMT -5
I bought one of them, years ago, on an auction site. It was cheap as the shutter didn't wind on. All that was needed was to turn the rewind knob to advance.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Nov 26, 2012 5:44:41 GMT -5
Yes , the rewind knob is often the cause of jams, the grub screws on the knob can be a bit loose and the position shift, leaving it in rewind.
This one is more complex, till it's opened up more fully, I am not sure, but the main shaft for the speed setting has a large wobble of nearly 3mm side to side, maybe a previous effort at repair has left out a bearing or washer assembly.
The play is far, far, beyond normal, and behind the temperamental operation, as it distorts the release shaft operation. The release passes through the sprocket assembly, and acts on a tab in the bottom of the shutter, with the delayed action acting on the same tab. The speed settings varies the shutter gap, with slow speeds delaying the second blind, as per Leica operation.
All the visible bearings are dry, and the adjusters for blind tension are a bit slack, despite this the speeds are OK. The first blind can go up a couple of notches and the second adjusted to follow crisply, it may be each only needs one notch to crispen the operation, too much increases shutter noise and general wear.
I am pretty sure that the camera has been "got at" by a previous owner, who gave up on servicing it. the missing flash shoe, and the shaft problem indicate this, plus marks around the pin screws.
After all of this, given care servicing it should deliver good results, dependant only on the lenses.
Stephen.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Nov 26, 2012 18:12:14 GMT -5
I think, the FEDs became more "ugly" ( by design ) with the time. I like the FED 1 and 2, the FED 3 already became bulkier and the FED 4 is one of the ugliest cameras, I know ... just IMHO.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Nov 27, 2012 8:01:52 GMT -5
I think, the FEDs became more "ugly" ( by design ) with the time. I like the FED 1 and 2, the FED 3 already became bulkier and the FED 4 is one of the ugliest cameras, I know ... just IMHO. Absolutely spot on, Berndt, the Russians camera designs just went straight down the drain with this one, the Fed 2 was so much better, and the Zorki 5 the best USSR Leica clone. The bad design shows on the top cover pressing, it was stamped distorted! The whole thing is full of odd dimensions, with the thickness altering across the camera! It was strange that the interior standards went up at the time, the shutter is better finished, and parts are well engineered. I suspect that pressure to meet production targets lead to shortcuts and hasty assembly, but also typically of the Soviets once target were met they simply stopped! The UK TOE rep had a trip to Moscow to see the factories in the USSR , and was shocked to find them closed, for "maintenance", the only running one was Kiev, and they were making military equipment. On asking he was told that the factories had meet targets for the year, and Moscow would not authorise further work!! The only USSR cameras in continuous production were the Smena variants and other automatic compacts, and the Lubital TLR. TOE were forever complaining to Moscow about non delivery, lack of spares, or selling out and finding themselves in the UK with no stock to sell. The Zorki 4and 4K were the best sellers, but TOE were rationed on all orders. They sold well to enthusiasts like birdwatchers and traditional photographers, but always raised issues of reliability, but then TOE offered a good service record under G/tee. The Fed cameras sold purely on the low price, mainly going as gifts to youngsters, first time hobbyist photographers and to student purchases. We always had lots secondhand as they were quickly traded in for better cameras. But in fact the secondhand cameras were good value, as they usually had been serviced or simply had no faults. The Industar was a good standard lens, if you got bad results it was down to the photographers efforts, low shutter speeds, focus blur, bad exposure etc. Frankly they worked as well as a Leica lens, in the right hands! The Jupiter Standard on the Zorki was excellent, and the 35mm wide angle was exceptional, being a direct Zeiss clone. The other lenses were good, the 135mm were excellent, the photosniper and mirror lenses in a class of their own. Stephen.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Nov 27, 2012 20:12:58 GMT -5
I also think ( and have been surprised actually ), that the FEDs and their lenses are better than their reputation. I also checked the lenses on my digital GH1 and they deliver marvelous results, even on modern bodies.
Her is my ( just very small ) FED collection ... and I am still waiting for an Industar-69 2.8/28 lens to become delivered to my house. Curious, how the quality is, because it would also make a fine "standard angle of view" lens on a MFT ( something like 56 mm then ).
A Jupiter-3 1.5/50 is definitely still standing on my "need to get someday"-list ... but I am a little bit afraid, that the rangefinder might not be precise enough to focus perfectly ( full open ). Depending on the distance, F:1.5 can cause a pretty shallow DOF.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Nov 28, 2012 8:23:20 GMT -5
Dead right about the rangefinders, if the F2 or the F1.5 Jupiter lenses are to be used seriously at full aperture, then the rangefinder needs a service check over, and some of the Feds, like the Fed 4, have small windows and short based rangefinders. the Fed 2 is OK, the Russian designers used the longer based type, and it adjusts quite easily.
Many "Soft Shots" from the Russian lenses are down to slight miss focus at large apertures, the same problem would occur with a Leica out of adjustment.
The cam focusing lever makes little difference to the accuracy compared to Leica, it would need a lot of use to wear it out!
The British Corfield Periflex 35mm camera cures the focus problems, as it can focus via the reflex periscope viewfinder, and works exceedingly well with the large aperture Russian Jupiter lenses, and it is able to take both Leica 39mm thread and M42 versions as a bonus.
Ken Corfield also marketed a wonderfully accurate lens focus checker, a ground glass target and tube assembly, that takes the Leica, (or M42 lenses via adaptor), and allows very critical checking of basic focus. It is the same fit as the camera body and with tripod use, allows the lenses to be set, and then changed over to the camera on the same settings, a very accurate, but painfully slow way of taking photographs!
The only problem with the Periflex is not being able to use deep wide angles like the Russian 35mm, they foul the Periscope. Ken Corfield got round it by marketing retro-focus wideangle lenses, the same as later reflex cameras would use.
Stephen.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Nov 28, 2012 19:12:19 GMT -5
Wow Stephen, I am always impressed of your detailed knowledge !!! Frankly speaking, I am still a little bit confused about rangefinders with exchangeable lenses The first FED, I got ( the blue one on the picture ) seemed to be well calibrated. I run a test film and everything was in focus as it should be, even using the lens full open. Screwing the lens on my MFT-adapter, it showed, that the actual infinity was a little bit "before" the infinity on the lens scale ( which is much better than behind of course ). On my next FED ( the black one ), infinity was accurate and the rangefinder also seems to be well adjusted. But ... how can that be ? And ... what would happen, if I would exchange the lenses between both cameras ? Do you know, what I mean ? I don't know enough about rangefinders with exchangeable lenses and how the work.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Nov 29, 2012 15:19:24 GMT -5
The accuracy of rangefinder cameras and lenses is laden with problems, minor ones, but you have to approach it carefully. You have to have an accurate testable basis to check things against, and the basic one is the film to flange distance , which for a Leica mount is 28.80 millimetre +/- zero. So never assume anything is correct until checked, a camera can be checked with a depth micrometer, on to a piece of glass against the film rails, note, not against the pressure plate, which in some designs does not rest on the film rails. However you can assume a camera body in good sound condition is OK, but in particular FEDs and Zorkis should be looked at carefully as the mount is easily removed by amateur repairers, and may be "got at". The lens to be checked should then be fitted to the body with a ground glass plate attached to the rails, and at full aperture the focus can be checked at infinity and a carefully measured closer distance, against the engraved scales. A good hand magnifier of at least 5x can be used to view the glass image. Infinity should be at least 1000 metres away, (one Kilometre away), or at least 500 metres in practical terms. The horizon will usually do. The lens should be adjusted to give the cleanest clear view at the infinity mark, it may need the mount adjusted, or the front element shifted to adjust the focus. Some lens are easier to adjust the rear element. Once adjusted to work right, the rangefinder is then adjusted to work with the now tested lens, either internally, or via the adjustment holes on some models, or by adjusting the cam on the tip of the rangefinder arm. Once at this stage you have a known lens, and a known body, so comparisons can now be made with any other lenses. Digital cameras have a couple of traps for the unwary, the CCD target is not flat like film and the software corrects the focus, which works on the contrast ratio to provide auto focus, but is also software dependent on the viewing screen, even in manual focus. In other words it can look sharp when it is slightly off. You can assume the Digital Camera is set up right within reason, so fitting a known correct lens to one, and getting a different infinity means the adaptor could be out. The adaptors can be adjusted with shims under the mount face. A digital camera in focus is just that, confirmable on the screen, and should be able to test a lens straight away, but as you can see the adaptor cannot be totally trusted. However it does not matter much as the screen shows the result and that is what you are after. Part of the problems with lens focus can be solved with a focus checker, Periflex and Leica made them, I have a Corfield Periflex item, which is a tube exactly 28.80mm from glass to body flange and can check instantly any Leica mount lens. After the check the lens is adjusted to work perfectly and then may be used on the body to check the body, or set the rangefinder. Unfortunately the Leica checkers are rare, and costly, and the Periflex version even rarer, and if on Ebay, they can go for a fortune!! However they do turn up as unknown items occasionally, mine came from a shop who specialised in Leica, but happened not to identify what the Periflex item was for!! The Periflex version was also sold as a way to focus the camera, by substituting the whole thing for the camera, focusing, and then swapping over to the body. Strictly for macro work and copying etc, as it was very slow to do. The tube has identical mounts to the camera tripod screw etc. Hope these notes help, Stephen.
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Nov 29, 2012 18:09:17 GMT -5
So never assume anything is correct until checked, a camera can be checked with a depth micrometer, on to a piece of glass against the film rails, note, not against the pressure plate, which in some designs does not rest on the film rails. The lens to be checked should then be fitted to the body with a ground glass plate attached to the rails, and at full aperture the focus can be checked at infinity and a carefully measured closer distance, against the engraved scales. A good hand magnifier of at least 5x can be used to view the glass image. Part of the problems with lens focus can be solved with a focus checker, Periflex and Leica made them, I have a Corfield Periflex item, which is a tube exactly 28.80mm from glass to body flange and can check instantly any Leica mount lens. After the check the lens is adjusted to work perfectly and then may be used on the body to check the body, or set the rangefinder. Unfortunately the Leica checkers are rare, and costly, and the Periflex version even rarer, and if on Ebay, they can go for a fortune!! However they do turn up as unknown items occasionally, mine came from a shop who specialised in Leica, but happened not to identify what the Periflex item was for!! The Periflex version was also sold as a way to focus the camera, by substituting the whole thing for the camera, focusing, and then swapping over to the body. Strictly for macro work and copying etc, as it was very slow to do. Hope these notes help, Stephen. Not too many years ago camera stores used to have a "junk" box on the counter. It contained photographic goodies ranging from 5¢ to a dollar or two. This, my focus checker came out of just such a box. It is probably close to 50 years old. Made in Japan. It is only for 35 mm cameras. The finely ground side fits snugly against the film plane. A loupe completes the very simple outfit. Mickey
|
|
lloydy
Lifetime Member
Posts: 506
|
Post by lloydy on Nov 29, 2012 18:30:01 GMT -5
My Zorki 4K register distance was 0.2 mm out. And when I took the lens mount off to shim it it was obvious that it had always been that way. There were no signs that the fixing screws had ever been removed and there were no unequal shims under the mount to get it level. It's no wonder the camera showed no signs of wear, it was unusable from the factory. But now it's level the camera is a joy.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Nov 29, 2012 19:31:53 GMT -5
That plate ground glass checker looks like an AGI (Croyden), factory style, so being Japanese made may have been from a commercial camera making factory there. Few makers sold them to the public, that one looks quite professional, having the film aperture stops as well, which would act as a production check for the body casting.
Soviet stuff not working from day one were common, as I said we had to check everything as they came into the shop, and send back duff ones, about 2/3 in 10 or so. The Russians only exported for foreign exchange reasons, once targets were meet they could not have cared less about the quality.
Home market cameras were far better assembled, and stuff on Ebay from former Soviet communist countries like the Ukraine seem generally to be OK.
If you ever need ground glass, use microscope glass slides, and grind it on one side with fine grade car valve grinding compound , on a chamois cloth, or a good kitchen towel. work in all directions for a few minutes and it produces a fine matt surface.
Stephen.
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Nov 30, 2012 13:30:31 GMT -5
If you ever need ground glass, use microscope glass slides, and grind it on one side with fine grade car valve grinding compound , on a chamois cloth, or a good kitchen towel. work in all directions for a few minutes and it produces a fine matt surface. Stephen. Stephen, Would that process be suitable for the ground glass for a 4" x 5" camera? Mickey
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Nov 30, 2012 16:51:16 GMT -5
If you ever need ground glass, use microscope glass slides, and grind it on one side with fine grade car valve grinding compound , on a chamois cloth, or a good kitchen towel. work in all directions for a few minutes and it produces a fine matt surface. Stephen. Stephen, Would that process be suitable for the ground glass for a 4" x 5" camera? Mickey Yes, even easier than small areas, but is a bit slow work on a larger glass. The glass should be a good flat grade, not greenhouse!! Float glass for accuracy, but any type will do at a pinch. The key is to use the fine grade valve grinding paste, rubbed on with a leather cloth or similar material, re-charging as you go with fresh paste. You can used a slow mop in a power drill, at about 60 rpm or so, an electric screwdriver would do, the rotary motion randomises the grinding as it proceeds. Cerium Oxide paste can also be used, (as can diamond paste), in a 600/1000 grit grade or even finer. Cerium oxide is available on Ebay. It is the standard material used to grind most lenses and filters. The car valve paste finish is good enough for Rollei TLR glass etc. If it is very critical on 35mm then use fine cerium oxide in an oil base 5x4, (and 8x10), camera users, used to use old neg plates in this way, emulsion rubbed off gave the finished size straight away. Stephen.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Nov 30, 2012 20:03:00 GMT -5
Became an interesting thread How about my ( very simple ) solution ? Using just a piece of tape, like on the picture. It should be in the same position as the film, shouldn't it ? I can't check my black FED at the moment, because I still have a film inside, but I checked the other ones with this method. The blue and red one seems to be adjusted perfectly ... at least to the mounted lens ... and that is, what I can still not perfectly understand: If you have just unknown bodies and lenses, how can you say, which is correctly adjusted and which not ... without having such a depth micrometer ? They might just be perfectly adjusted to each other. I think you need either a known body or lens from the beginning to adjust the rest. Well, I bought two camera from the Ukaine ( the green FED3 and the red FED2 ) and two in Japan ( but I guess, at least the blue one is originally from the Ukraine as well ). What I have to say is, all cameras seem to be professionally refurbished and I guess, that's how the camera business works there. Professional sellers are buying at the local market and hire former FED engineers for refurbishing the cameras. Just my green FED 3 seems to be slightly misadjusted, but besides that, it's in excellent condition. Seriously, I wonder sometimes, how they can offer cameras at often still very cheap prices. I think especially of those funny "Luftwaffe" fake Leicas & Co. They do look like new and cost about 170 USD at E-Bay. That doesn't sound cheap, but the original FED 1 or Zorki is mostly traded already at 100 USD and then, it needs to refurbished, completely newly coated with engravings ... what a tremendous effort. I wouldn't do all that for 70 USD www.ebay.com/itm/VINTAGE-RUSSIAN-35MM-RANGEFINDER-GOLD-CAMERA-LEICA-II-LUFTWAFFE-WWII-EXCELLENT-/180908927126?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item2a1f032896
|
|