Canonet lens needs a cleaning ?

[Isaiah Dominguez]

How about looking for cameras of this website's Classifieds?

I had no Idea there was thay option lol thx

 

[__Brian]

You can learn to use a rangefinder for a lot less money than $200. First thing to get used to: everything looks in focus through the viewfinder. You need to get used to aligning the images- sounds trivial, unless you've never done it. I was 11 when I started using them in 1969.

Post a Want to Buy ad. Pick up something cheap to see if you like the RF system. If you want something with Automatic Exposure and Manual exposure, list that. If you want something cheap to learn with- opens things up. Canonets are nice. Everybody knows them. The Shutter release is nice- the winding mechanism charges the trap-needle system. They are fairly compact. At $200, wow. just wow. I would not do that to anybody.

 

[MattKing]

Post a Want to Buy ad

Good idea, but to post most ads in the Classifieds, you need to first become a paying subscriber here.
I suggest that being a paid subscriber is a really good value, but I am biased.
There is nothing stopping a non-paying member from buying things listed in the Classified section.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Good idea, but to post most ads in the Classifieds, you need to first become a paying subscriber here.
I suggest that being a paid subscriber is a really good value, but I am biased.
There is nothing stopping a non-paying member from buying things listed in the Classified section.

We get good advice and encouragement to buy more cameras and lenses aka GAS* for what we pay.

* GAS == Gadget Acquisition Syndrome

 

[albada]

.GAS == Gadget Acquisition Syndrome

I thought it was Gotta Acquire Stuff.
Different words; same result.

Mark Overton

 

[__Brian]

I've received Six RF lenses in the last week. Ranging from a 1932, batch of first 100 made, 5cm F1.5 Sonnar to the new Voigtlander 50/1.0 Nokton, also in the first 100 made.
Must admit- an unusual week for me.

 

[Isaiah Dominguez]

The Slow Speeds will have a winding sound, it uses a clockwork mechanism- kind of like a toaster oven.

For $200 you should expect better.


Hey I took it to my local repair shop just to make sure and within 2 hours after dropping it off they told me there was nothing to clean i also sent them the pictures I posted here ans said most like condensation bcz they aren't seeing anything to clean.

Have you tried a "Want to Buy" ad here, or on other Camera Forums?

 

[__Brian]

I've had that happen once on a Kodak Retina 135/4, that was shipped by air. Inner surfaces all hazed up. I had to pop the glass to get the condensation off.

That is good news, and looks like you got a good camera. I looked through my Canonet, was clear. I have a Minolta 7s-II that had some fungus that cleaned off, no effect on images. But the pictures you showed- looked like Canonets that I had to replace the glass.

I was just waiting for a "I just want to try an RF camera", THAT- I can do something about!

 

[Isaiah Dominguez]

I've had that happen once on a Kodak Retina 135/4, that was shipped by air. Inner surfaces all hazed up. I had to pop the glass to get the condensation off.

That is good news, and looks like you got a good camera. I looked through my Canonet, was clear. I have a Minolta 7s-II that had some fungus that cleaned off, no effect on images. But the pictures you showed- looked like Canonets that I had to replace the glass.

I was just waiting for a "I just want to try an RF camera", THAT- I can do something about!

Yeah but idk I can still see the hazyness if I look with a flash light n scratch/hair in the lens. Idk about lens at all lol but still looks dirty to me Imma find someone willing to clean it, but yes everything else looks brand new.

 

[__Brian]

At this point- just use this 40+ year old camera. If the repair Tech thought it not worth opening up to clean, that's because it is clean enough to use and a repair attempt might make things worse. "Been There, Done That, Regretted It, Learned that 95% is good enough". The images made through this lens will tell you what you need to know, rather than a flashlight test.
Post some images back. I've put some up with my Canonet that I consider to be clean.

 

[Isaiah Dominguez]

At this point- just use this 40+ year old camera. If the repair Tech thought it not worth opening up to clean, that's because it is clean enough to use and a repair attempt might make things worse. "Been There, Done That, Regretted It, Learned that 95% is good enough". The images made through this lens will tell you what you need to know, rather than a flashlight test.
Post some images back. I've put some up with my Canonet that I consider to be clean.

Thanks man

 

[eli griggs]

There is at least one very good lens cleaning video for the QL17, in which it shows both front and rear entry.

Canon glass in these cameras is soft, but you can clean the lenses.

I prefer Eclipse cleaning solution with PEC Pads, as a final treatment, but cigarette lighter fluid and Hydrogen Peroxide 3% as well as alcohol all have a part to play

Use a standing pad soaked in HP if you suspect fungus/mold, it will destroy that material.

Use the Eclipse with the PEC PADS, using a technic of dragging off the lens, any potential grime by no lifting the lens element, but by moving to the side of the lens and off the side.

Good luck, whatever you choose to do.

Eli

 

[__Brian]

I found the attachment with my camera- mine is the Canonet QL17L, the version before the GIII came out. Some subtle differences, metal light baffle for the RF internally, uses needle for battery check instead of a lamp, and most were made in Japan.

View attachment 232729

This one- "Pick of the Litter" lens out of a dozen or so QL17l and GIII cameras that I went through. I fixed quite a few of these.
This one is a "Panda", top and bottom plates transferred froma very-dead black body, the chrome top and bottom went to fix another body.

 

[eli griggs]

Nice camera, thanks for showing us

 

[__Brian]

Thankyou- The GIII is well known, many more produced than the "new Canonet Ql17" and the "Canonet QL17L". These models often get overlooked, not as many made, and was not marked as the GIII model was. I picked them up cheaper than the GIII, found the overall quality a bit better.

https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film74.html

 

[beemermark]

At this point- just use this 40+ year old camera. If the repair Tech thought it not worth opening up to clean, that's because it is clean enough to use and a repair attempt might make things worse. "Been There, Done That, Regretted It, Learned that 95% is good enough". The images made through this lens will tell you what you need to know, rather than a flashlight test.
Post some images back. I've put some up with my Canonet that I consider to be clean.

Stop with the flashlight, almost any older lens will look horrible. Shoot a roll of film with the camera and another roll in a camera that passes the flashlight test. Do the same scenes. Then compare the results. I listed some nice rangefinders here and then withdrew the ad because people wanted me to shine a flashlight through them. They both tale lovely contrasty photos so I'll just keep them. I was asking $100 for my Canonet G17 but you wouldn't have liked it.

 

[__Brian]

I did a flashlight test for the last lens I sold- for $2500! I wanted the person to see every flaw, would have been fine with them turning down. They took it, cleaning marks and all. The Profit on the lens paid for the 50/1.0 Nokton, and a set of KMZ Jupiter-3, Jupiter-12, and Jupiter-9.

But for selling a camera for $50 to $150, not worth the hassle. These are 40+ year old items. Some cleaning marks will make no difference at all. Etched glass- that can be a problem, and should be disclosed before selling.

 

[Chan Tran]

Thankyou- The GIII is well known, many more produced than the "new Canonet Ql17" and the "Canonet QL17L". These models often get overlooked, not as many made, and was not marked as the GIII model was. I picked them up cheaper than the GIII, found the overall quality a bit better.

https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film74.html

I have a GIII (I paid $3 for it) but I would prefer the older ones that made in Japan.

 

[__Brian]

I would NOT pass up a GIII for $3! 15~20 years ago you could get non-working ones for $15~$25 each, I had a 75% success rate fixing them, would pass on for $50 to $75.

Luck happens. I picked up a Black Leica III with Elmar and a chrome Leica III with Summar for $15 each at an antique shop. The old gentleman at the counter remarked "I knew you were going to buy those the moment you walked in".

 

[Isaiah Dominguez]

Thankyou- The GIII is well known, many more produced than the "new Canonet Ql17" and the "Canonet QL17L". These models often get overlooked, not as many made, and was not marked as the GIII model was. I picked them up cheaper than the GIII, found the overall quality a bit better.

https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/film74.html

Hey since you seem experienced with canonets I was wondering do I need an adapter for a lr44 1.5v battery of can I use it without one ?

 

[Chan Tran]

Hey since you seem experienced with canonets I was wondering do I need an adapter for a lr44 1.5v battery of can I use it without one ?

The LR-44 is too small and the voltage is too high (which doesn't damage the camera) so you would need adapter both to fit and to have the correct voltage. That is why I use the alkaline 625A which fits perfect.

 

[__Brian]

The LR44: I've used these in this Canonet with a little home-made spacer to keep it in place. The voltage is 1.5v, as is the 625a. The discharge curve of the 625a is steeper.

"Years ago", when I was cleaning the VF/RF of the Canonet: I adjusted the pots on inside the camera for the meter to work properly with the 1.5v batteries, matching exposure using my Nikon F2AS.

 

[eli griggs]

The QL17 GIII will accept a shotkey diode so you can use both SR or LR 44 batteries.

There is video on YouTube but even if you never do it, go ahead and stock-pile the proper diode, as they are getting scarce, IIRC, and having them give you or your shooting buddy an opportunity that may pass by completely in a few years.

IMO.

 

[eli griggs]

There is an ongoing discussion about using lr44 or sr44 batteries in a QL17 GIII, with some claiming it only matters a little and others claiming you are chancing Purgatory for film if you do no use the correct battery substitute.

Use an 'O' ring from Harbor Freight, which come in inexpensive assortments of SAE and Metric, to center the SL or LR 44 battery and do no look back, or install or have a experienced workman install it for you; it's a tight fit.

Otherwise forget the meter, and shoot "Sunny 16" really f11, or use another meter for critical work.

Enjoy your camera and do no let battery choices hold you up.

IMO

The LR44: I've used these in this Canonet with a little home-made spacer to keep it in place. The voltage is 1.5v, as is the 625a. The discharge curve of the 625a is steeper.

"Years ago", when I was cleaning the VF/RF of the Canonet: I adjusted the pots on inside the camera for the meter to work properly with the 1.5v batteries, matching exposure using my Nikon F2AS.

 

[__Brian]

There is an ongoing discussion about using lr44 or sr44 batteries in a QL17 GIII, with some claiming it only matters a little and others claiming you are chancing Purgatory for film if you do no use the correct battery substitute.

Use an 'O' ring from Harbor Freight, which come in inexpensive assortments of SAE and Metric, to center the SL or LR 44 battery and do no look back, or install or have a experienced workman install it for you; it's a tight fit.

Otherwise forget the meter, and shoot "Sunny 16" really f11, or use another meter for critical work.

Enjoy your camera and do no let battery choices hold you up.

IMO

I will state IT DOES NOT MATTER. I use Auto Exposure on mine with the LR44. Low-Light shots on previous page. My camera is accurate across the metering range. Who makes up this stuff and how do they prove it? Badly exposed images? Don't blame the battery, learn how to use the camera.

50 year old CDS cells are likely to change sensitivity. Not a bad idea to check the calibration against a known good camera and to set the Pots on the Canonet.

https://pentax-manuals.com/manuals/service/g-111_17-4.pdf

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-30.html

Put in a battery of the type you plan to use, calibrate it- good for the next 20 years. Like Mine is.