Hi; this probably falls under the category of Sputnik maintenance or repair and I'm a new member so possibly I'm asking something stupid but I can't seem to find any obvious reference to it when searching archived messages.

I've recently acquired a Sputnik and have shot a single test roll so far, establishing that the optics are essentially good and that the two lenses seem to be in general agreement about focus and exposure.

However there seems to be a minor fault with the focussing lens — the metal pin that prevents you dialling any further anticlockwise than infinity catches on the left lens when dialling clockwise, with focus just beyond 2.8m. I can apply sufficient pressure to turn it further and get right the way down to a bit less than 1.4m but it doesn't feel very good.

With reference to my general clumsiness, lack of tools and the fact that the lenses already otherwise seem to be in general agreement, is there any minor surgery I can perform to correct for this?

On 1/2/2012 5:56 AM, thomasharte wrote:

> Hi; this probably falls under the category of Sputnik maintenance or repair and I'm a new member so possibly I'm asking something stupid but I can't seem to find any obvious reference to it when searching archived messages.
>
> I've recently acquired a Sputnik and have shot a single test roll so far, establishing that the optics are essentially good and that the two lenses seem to be in general agreement about focus and exposure.

Good for you! A Sputnik can make some excellent images. Dig
through the archives here for lots of information. Go _way_
back. There is a lot of good stuff.

> However there seems to be a minor fault with the focussing lens — the metal pin that prevents you dialling any further anticlockwise than infinity catches on the left lens when dialling clockwise, with focus just beyond 2.8m. I can apply sufficient pressure to turn it further and get right the way down to a bit less than 1.4m but it doesn't feel very good.

On my Spud, I can see that the pin does pass the left lens
assembly when focused at about 2.8m. After that, the pin is
exposed to the air until it reaches the right lens assembly
somewhere between 2.0m and 1.4m

Are you sure it is the pin striking the lens assembly which
is the problem? It sound to me like there might be dirt in
the focusing threads.

> With reference to my general clumsiness, lack of tools and the fact that the lenses already otherwise seem to be in general agreement, is there any minor surgery I can perform to correct for this?

The best solution is one which I dislike receiving when I ask
others for help.... "Don't do that."

Please consider your goals and ask yourself if you really
need to be focusing your Sputnik at distances less than 2.8m
At 2.8m and f/16, your depth of focus is only going to reach
out to about 4m. Do you really have images for which you want
a 2m depth of focus?

If you really do have images in mind for which you will need
to focus at (and below) 2.8m, and the focus-action concerns
you, I think you're going to have to delve into the optics.
Start by further examination of exactly where and when the
grinding occurs. Is it _really_ related to the limit pin?

Something simple you can do is try to insert a thin feeler
gauge between the pin and the assembly of the taking lenses.
Can you get anything in there? Is it really hitting?

The viewing lens threads directly into the camera body. As
you focus closer, the lens extends farther from the body.
Sputnik grease is notorious for gumming up. You may simply be
pulling lens threads gummed with dried grease into the
body-thread. Three screws hold the finder down to the body.
If those are removed, the thick "focusing glass" is
sandwiched in and can be lifted out. That leaves the mirror.
Just ignore it and examine the threads on the back of viewing
lens. Are they gunked up?

fwiw, my Sputnik has spent almost all of its life focused
somewhere between 8 and 10 meters.
________________________________________
John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, John Thurston wrote:

> Good for you! A Sputnik can make some excellent images. Dig
> through the archives here for lots of information. Go _way_
> back. There is a lot of good stuff.

That's absolutely the plan. I am an extraordinarily poor photographer all around, having only recently taken up the hobby, but a very good reader.

> Are you sure it is the pin striking the lens assembly which
> is the problem? It sound to me like there might be dirt in
> the focusing threads.

I'm pretty confident but inevitably not certain. That said, the problem seems to be becoming less acute (or I'm becoming accustomed to it) as I continue to test it, which would suggest a different problem as I understand Bakelite to be brittle rather than soft.

> The best solution is one which I dislike receiving when I ask
> others for help.... "Don't do that."

In this case I think I actually quite like that advice. These cameras aren't cheap (at least by the standards of their contemporaries, and given that there seem to be plenty of Sputniks about) and I've never worked on any mechanical device at this scale before.

> Please consider your goals and ask yourself if you really
> need to be focusing your Sputnik at distances less than 2.8m
> At 2.8m and f/16, your depth of focus is only going to reach
> out to about 4m. Do you really have images for which you want
> a 2m depth of focus?

I can think of a few occasions, primarily to photograph individuals, indoors — particularly as I'm based in London at present, meaning that most accommodation is relatively small.

That said, I admit that framing stereoscopic photographs is something I've yet to find an instinct for and as you imply there would seem not to be much benefit to stereoscopy if the depth of focus is so small. So I think your comments are quite accurate — the amount of time I'm going to spend crossing that 2.8m threshold is going to be absolutely tiny and, in any case, it isn't an absolute barrier as I am able to negotiate it.

As you're based in London right now, would you like to have a play with my Sputnik so you can see if it's substantially different from yours?

I'll be away for a week from Thursday, but after that... And The Stereoscopic Society has a meeing in London on 14th January...

Bob Aldridge

On 03/01/2012 16:01, thomasharte wrote:

 

I can think of a few occasions, primarily to photograph individuals, indoors — particularly as I'm based in London at present, meaning that most accommodation is relatively small.

thomasharte wrote:

> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, John Thurston wrote:
>> Are you sure it is the pin striking the lens assembly which
>> is the problem? It sound to me like there might be dirt in
>> the focusing threads.
>
> I'm pretty confident but inevitably not certain. That said, the problem seems to be becoming less acute (or I'm becoming accustomed to it) as I continue to test it, which would suggest a different problem as I understand Bakelite to be brittle rather than soft.

The viewing lens is not threaded directly into the bakelite.
There is a threaded metal ring mounted there. It doesn't
mean its robust, but it does mean it's a little sturdier
than the minimum possible!

If the problem is becoming less acute with exercise, that
lends a little support to the "gummed up grease" hypothesis.
Of course, it could also mean the lens is getting ready to
fall off in your hand :)

>> Please consider your goals and ask yourself if you really
>> need to be focusing your Sputnik at distances less than 2.8m
>> At 2.8m and f/16, your depth of focus is only going to reach
>> out to about 4m. Do you really have images for which you want
>> a 2m depth of focus?
>
> I can think of a few occasions, primarily to photograph individuals, indoors — particularly as I'm based in London at present, meaning that most accommodation is relatively small.

A'yep. Those are exactly the conditions in which you will
want to focus more closely than 8m.

Have you tried the flash connector yet? I suspect you're
going to want that if you will be shooting inside.

If your camera is so equipped, I suggest not trying to use
the self timer. It is my experience that the clockwork timer
is very finicky, prone to jamming, and may or may not trip
the shutter. Just leave it alone and it can't hurt you. When
jammed, you may not be able to cock or trip the shutter.

If you do nothing else to your Sputnik, install flocking
paper inside the film chambers. It will reduce the flare and
increase the contrast of your images.

> That said, I admit that framing stereoscopic photographs is something I've yet to find an instinct for and as you imply there would seem not to be much benefit to stereoscopy if the depth of focus is so small.

I think, in most cases, the depth of focus should include
everything in the scene. If there is infinity in the scene,
it should extend that far. If you are shooting inside, there
are no open windows and the far wall is only 4m away, then
it need only extend that far.

Find your near and part points, and use your depth of field
calculator to find a focus distance and aperture combination
which will cover them. Set the two and fire away. I have
never tried to focus my Sputnik on the "focusing screen".

Look at Depth of Field Master for a printable, portable, DOF
calculator. http://dofmaster.com/

--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us

John Thurston wrote:

> thomasharte wrote:
>
> If you do nothing else to your Sputnik, install flocking
> paper inside the film chambers. It will reduce the flare and
> increase the contrast of your images.

If you look around the Internet long enough you should be able to find
some templates you can use to cut out flocking paper to fit the
Sputnik interior. Rocky Mountain Memories used to sell a Sputnik fix
up kit that had temples for baffles to insert behind the lenses, but
after having both I think that flocking the entire interior works just
as well. You'll also want to do something about the edges of the film
doors in order to prevent light leaks.

> > That said, I admit that framing stereoscopic photographs is
> > something I've yet to find an instinct for and as you imply there
> > would seem not to be much benefit to stereoscopy if the depth of
> > focus is so small.
>
> I think, in most cases, the depth of focus should include
> everything in the scene. If there is infinity in the scene,
> it should extend that far. If you are shooting inside, there
> are no open windows and the far wall is only 4m away, then
> it need only extend that far.
>
> Find your near and part points, and use your depth of field
> calculator to find a focus distance and aperture combination
> which will cover them. Set the two and fire away. I have
> never tried to focus my Sputnik on the "focusing screen".
>
> Look at Depth of Field Master for a printable, portable, DOF
> calculator. http://dofmaster.com/

You can also get DOF Master for various portable devices.

I have another trick I use for close/indoor shots. I use a string
monopod (a 1/4x20 eyebolt screwed into the tripod socket with a rope
tied to it) to steady the camera. I've knotted the rope at the
distances marked on the Sputnik's focusing scale. Once I have my
position set, I have my assistant (usually my daughter Grace) hold the
rope near the subject in order to measure the distance. After I've
set the focus I have her drop the rope, I step on it, apply a little
tension, check my bullseye level for level and vibration, and then
take the shot. If you try this make sure you use a rope that will not
stretch when you apply tension.

--
Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
reynolds@panix.com | You push some buttons and see
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ | what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
NAR# 54438 |