Even though Yoshihisa Maitani is deceased, I have an issue with him

[David Lyga]

Olympus Zuiko lenses perform along with the best, but they are either difficult or impossible to open for repair or cleaning. I think that Olympus was the ONLY manufacturer to put a bit of contact cement into the threads of the retaining rings which hold down these elements. It is almost as if they defied anyone to dare open them up!

I usually cannot bear to buy a lens unless I KNOW that I will be able to perform housekeeping on it in a manageable way. The Minoltas (SR. not ALPHA) and Pentaxes (either M42 or K), for the most part, are a breeze to service. Ditto (usually) for the Nikons and Konica Hexanons and Canon FL/FD. In fact, it seems that Olympus is the only b***buster out there.

One of Olympus's major designers, Yoshihisa Maitani (1933 - 2009) seemed to have sanctioned this. However, the Olympus rangefinder lenses (RC, RD, 35 SP) are a breeze to service. Why do the Zuikos for SLRs have to be so ridiculous? - David Lyga

 

[Dan Fromm]

David, they did it to annoy you.

 

[David Lyga]

David, they did it to annoy you.

You know, normally I would simply brush off that comment as naive, or even stupid. But I actually BELIEVE you. The 'need' Olympus had for doing this makes me wonder about 'real reasons' here. - David Lyga

 

[MattKing]

It may be related to the part of their design philosophy that emphasized small size and weight.
The tolerances may need to be tighter - thus the need to ensure no movement of the parts held by those retaining rings.
Bigger and heavier lenses could be sloppier!
Now I wonder what fdonadio will have to say about this ?

 

[David Lyga]

It may be related to the part of their design philosophy that emphasized small size and weight.
The tolerances may need to be tighter - thus the need to ensure no movement of the parts held by those retaining rings.
Bigger and heavier lenses could be sloppier!
Now I wonder what fdonadio will have to say about this ?

No I do not buy that. The Pentax lenses are just as small and they are extremely easy to take apart. With the "A" designation, it is VERY difficult to be able to remove the mount because of the tiny pins and such, but from the front there is no problem. - David Lyga

 

[MattKing]

Okay, then I agree with Dan.
Are you sure that it is contact cement and not reversible Loctite?

 

[grat]

At one time, the Toyota MR2 had seats that you couldn't adjust the position on, because the engineers didn't want the drivers upsetting the front-to-rear weight ratio.

It may be that Olympus felt there was a benefit to making their lenses non-serviceable by users.

 

[wiltw]

Not at all to antagonize anyone, I offer this anecdotal personal experience:

When I bought my Olympus OM-1MD in 1977, I bought the Olympus 35-70mm f/3.6 zoom with it. In the 1980s I was playing tourist in Germany and touring many castles along the Rhine. While walking about one castle, I was in a tight area and need to change direction, so I spun in place. The camera and lens swung out on the shoulder strap, and went smashing into a stone wall, the lens taking the full brunt of the impact along the axis of the lens. Evaluating everthing, I discovered that the zoom mechanism was damaged, the lens would no longer zoom thru the full range of FL. Getting back home from Germany, I sent the lens in to Olympus USA for repair. It came back a number of weeks later, fully functional.
My point: Olympus techs were able to disassemble the lens and fix the zoom mechanism, so it is not impossible to take apart. I still own that lens.
​

 

[David Lyga]

My point: Olympus techs were able to disassemble the lens and fix the zoom mechanism, so it is not impossible to take apart. I still own that lens.
​

OF COURSE, Olympus techs could do the repairs. How could the company survive if not? But they had ways which we mortals were not privy to. And it is not only the cement. Their threaded retaining rings too often have NO SPANNER SLOTS. This is plain nuts.

When Matt talked about Loctite being reversible: How can it be reversed? I have tried dripping a few drops of acetone or llighter fluid. NOTHING BUDGES. - David

 

[MattKing]

When Matt talked about Loctite being reversible: How can it be reversed? I have tried dripping a few drops of acetone or llighter fluid. NOTHING BUDGES. - David

There are various types of Loctite. Some are designed for release.

 

[wiltw]

OF COURSE, Olympus techs could do the repairs. How could the company survive if not? But they had ways which we mortals were not privy to. And it is not only the cement. Their threaded retaining rings too often have NO SPANNER SLOTS. This is plain nuts.

I have encountered other items which are much more eaily repaired with a particular tool that overcomes unique hardship of disassembly and reassembly for a DIY garage floor mechanic, for example.
Long ago, for my Triumph GT-6 the adjustment of Solex carburetors was greatly facilitated for me, when my usual mechanic GAVE ME a tool designed for that task. I have a similar 'special tool' to assist with disassembly of lenses. (not sure if this is usable on OM lenses, and too lazy to dig it out to check right now)

 

[warden]

I have encountered other items which is much more eaily repaired with a particular tool that overcomes unique hardship of disassembly and reassembly for a DIY garage floor mechanic, for example.
Long ago, for my Triumph GT-6 the adjustment of Solex carburetors was greatly facilitated for me, when my usual mechanic GAVE ME a tool designed for that task. I have a similar 'special tool' to assist with disassembly of lenses. (not sure if this is usable on OM lenses, and too lazy to dig it out to check right now)

Yep, having the right tools helps. I still have a strange slotted screwdriver that's about a foot long, makes a stubby ninety degree bend at the end and is shielded on one side. Its only job is to adjust the valves on the rear facing cylinders of Honda V4 motorcycle engines from the '80s without removing the engine from the bike. It's very tight in there! I forgot to give the tool to the guy that bought the bike but I have to admit that I smile every time I see it in the drawer. ;-)

(Sorry for the aside. Back to complaining about lenses and dead people.)

 

[Sirius Glass]

Blame Alexander Pope.

 

[ic-racer]

I have run into a number of lenses where the rings are held in place with adhesive.

I was totally in with the OM-1 way of thinking in the 1970s and had no love for Nikon. My brother got a pre-MD OM-1 when they first came out. However, many years later, I appreciate the ability to service my Nikon gear and am acquiring more and more Nikon components.

 

[crumbo]

Interesting. In the literally 1000's of Olympus lenses I worked on over the years (as Olympus service tech, Customer Service Manager, Service Manager, Office Manager, then owner of an Authorized Independent Olympus Service Center) there were few OM lenses that habitually posed any problems, one being certain versions of the 50mm f/1.4. If you're trying to open a reluctant 1.4, you have my condolences! I've soaked the front lens groups with acetone, heated them, drilled holes and cut notches for spanners, and still had to basically cut the lens body in half to get the front group out of some of them (before replacing the body)!

We had a few specialized lens tools, but nothing that couldn't be replicated, such as stretching hefty inner tube rubber over a round jar, pipe, or whatever, to unscrew lenses. Some lens groups, by the way, were press-fit together at the factory, and were never intended to be disassembled. There was virtually no reason to ever do so. If fungus formed, it was almost always on the outer surfaces and a breeze to clean, and the rare occurrence of debris was seldom beyond a simple cosmetic concern.

Anecdote: One fellow brought in his 50mm f/3.5 Macro where one of the internal element's edges had totally disintegrated into white powder, with what was left rattling around inside the lens. The ring that secured the element was one that was NOT held in place with thread lock (or, as we called it, "goat snot"). Amazed, I noticed he was wearing leathers and carried a motorcycle helmet. He was riding cross country on his BMW with his camera bag strapped over the rear wheel. Seems vibration caused the element to literally chip along it's edges until was nearly dissolved! We replaced the element free of charge just for the entertainment it afforded everyone. And, yes, we DID lock down that retaining ring with goat snot!

And, speaking of the 35-70mm f/3.6, that lens has something near 400 (count them!) 1.6mm ball bearings in a race to make it move smoothly enough for Mr. Maitani's standards -- do NOT try to unscrew the barrel! Those balls make a fearsome sound as they bounce across your desk onto the floor! Once you know how to do it, you can disassemble the lens without disturbing them at all -- it's a pussycat when you know how it's built. I loved working on them.

 

[wiltw]

Interesting to hear the terror of the 35-70mm f/3.6 disassembly, and the reason being the exacting standards of Maitani. I am suitably disuaded to never try to outsmart the Sensei!

 

[David Lyga]

Interesting. In the literally 1000's of Olympus lenses I worked on over the years (as Olympus service tech, Customer Service Manager, Service Manager, Office Manager, then owner of an Authorized Independent Olympus Service Center) there were few OM lenses that habitually posed any problems, one being certain versions of the 50mm f/1.4. If you're trying to open a reluctant 1.4, you have my condolences! I've soaked the front lens groups with acetone, heated them, drilled holes and cut notches for spanners, and still had to basically cut the lens body in half to get the front group out of some of them (before replacing the body)!

We had a few specialized lens tools, but nothing that couldn't be replicated, such as stretching hefty inner tube rubber over a round jar, pipe, or whatever, to unscrew lenses. Some lens groups, by the way, were press-fit together at the factory, and were never intended to be disassembled. There was virtually no reason to ever do so. If fungus formed, it was almost always on the outer surfaces and a breeze to clean, and the rare occurrence of debris was seldom beyond a simple cosmetic concern.

Anecdote: One fellow brought in his 50mm f/3.5 Macro where one of the internal element's edges had totally disintegrated into white powder, with what was left rattling around inside the lens. The ring that secured the element was one that was NOT held in place with thread lock (or, as we called it, "goat snot"). Amazed, I noticed he was wearing leathers and carried a motorcycle helmet. He was riding cross country on his BMW with his camera bag strapped over the rear wheel. Seems vibration caused the element to literally chip along it's edges until was nearly dissolved! We replaced the element free of charge just for the entertainment it afforded everyone. And, yes, we DID lock down that retaining ring with goat snot!

And, speaking of the 35-70mm f/3.6, that lens has something near 400 (count them!) 1.6mm ball bearings in a race to make it move smoothly enough for Mr. Maitani's standards -- do NOT try to unscrew the barrel! Those balls make a fearsome sound as they bounce across your desk onto the floor! Once you know how to do it, you can disassemble the lens without disturbing them at all -- it's a pussycat when you know how it's built. I loved working on them.

The lens in question IS the damn, horrible, unfathomable 50mm f1.4. I have disassembled countless normals, other primes, and even zooms. NOTHING is as horrible as this 1.4 disaster. When I got the lens, there was only a little dust and haze inside. NOW, it is a lens which is much worse off. It is IMPOSSIBLE to get inside those elements without drilling a hole though them.

My only solace through this destructive ordeal is to sit and watch, for hours on end, the ceaseless flying by that pilot next to Stearman Press. He never gets tired, never runs out of gas, never has any complaints in this world. That brings me reprieve. - David Lyga

 

[removed account4]

Sorry to hear of your difficulties David. I have always been under the impression that manufacturers did/do things with a purpose. .. whether it is oil filters and oil drain pugs being inaccessible except when a car is on a lift, to making threaded things locked. in short its to assure people who don't know what they are doing don't foul things up whether it is a lens, camera body or automobile. why not make friends with an Olympus repair man and buy the tool used to provide enough Peter ( Torque ) to unlock the threads.

I once had a device that required me to hold a button for IDK 10 minutes until the mechanism was working well enough that I could release my thumb (like lighting pilot light on a hot water heater or gas powered fireplace). The techs had a small tool to hold the button down so they aren't tied to the device. I asked a tech if I could buy the tool from them and he got one for me. It is easier to attract bees with honey not vinegar.

 

[GRHazelton]

I have encountered other items which are much more eaily repaired with a particular tool that overcomes unique hardship of disassembly and reassembly for a DIY garage floor mechanic, for example.
Long ago, for my Triumph GT-6 the adjustment of Solex carburetors was greatly facilitated for me, when my usual mechanic GAVE ME a tool designed for that task. I have a similar 'special tool' to assist with disassembly of lenses. (not sure if this is usable on OM lenses, and too lazy to dig it out to check right now)

Cars sometimes really need "special tools" to do necessary tasks. I still have a tool designed to depress the valve followers on my old long-since-deceased Fiat DOHC roadster/Spyder. To adjust the valve clearance (measured from the back of the camshaft lobe) one depressed the valve follower so one could extract the shim. Then one mic'ed the shim and ORDERED the appropriate replacement, if necessary. OMG! At least the valve clearances rarely went out of adjustment. I imagine that Fiat dealers had a little case holding a full assortment of the shims. Not I! My Datsun 510 required that the valves be adjusted HOT! No fun.....

 

[Dali]

GRHazelton, imagine when shims are UNDER the pushers and you need to adjust the valves clearance...

 

[wiltw]

The lens in question IS the damn, horrible, unfathomable 50mm f1.4. I have disassembled countless normals, other primes, and even zooms. NOTHING is as horrible as this 1.4 disaster. When I got the lens, there was only a little dust and haze inside. NOW, it is a lens which is much worse off. It is IMPOSSIBLE to get inside those elements without drilling a hole though them.

My only solace through this destructive ordeal is to sit and watch, for hours on end, the ceaseless flying by that pilot next to Stearman Press. He never gets tired, never runs out of gas, never has any complaints in this world. That brings me reprieve. - David Lyga

Interesting to hear form the mouth of a verteran Olympus repair guy that tsome versions of the 50mm f/1.4 lens is one that defeated even Olympus repair guys and gave them fits while disassembling. It truly illustrates the classic complaint 'This was never designed to ever be repaired!" Sorry you own that lens, David.

 

[crumbo]

GRHazelton, imagine when shims are UNDER the pushers and you need to adjust the valves clearance...

Reminds me of my father-in-law -- "It'll start right up if you just open them points a bit...." Got to be a regular saying anytime something didn't work right away.

 

[grat]

Cars sometimes really need "special tools" to do necessary tasks.

I had a 1/2" box end wrench that I accidentally bent enough that it had about a 5 degree curve on the handle. Discovered it was perfect for reaching the lower bolts on the SU carburetors on my MGB GT.

 

[crumbo]

The lens in question IS the damn, horrible, unfathomable 50mm f1.4. I have disassembled countless normals, other primes, and even zooms. NOTHING is as horrible as this 1.4 disaster. When I got the lens, there was only a little dust and haze inside. NOW, it is a lens which is much worse off. It is IMPOSSIBLE to get inside those elements without drilling a hole though them. David Lyga

We had a term at my shop -- "TBR", short for "Total Body Replacement". Sort of like, "lift off the radiator cap and slide a new car underneath". When we were Olympus, we could just throw parts at a difficult repair -- sealed lens groups, helicoid assemblies, etc -- free of charge. (Factory obligation, don't you know!) But once independent, it got very risky -- not only was that uneconomical, but by then parts for earlier versions of products were frequently discontinued. As I recall, there ended up being five or six versions of the 1.4, and many parts were not interchangeable from one type to the other. So a word of warning -- I wouldn't try to harvest parts from a donor lens. It's more than likely you will end up with two versions with parts that aren't compatible!

 

[David Lyga]

As I recall, there ended up being five or six versions of the 1.4, and many parts were not interchangeable from one type to the other. So a word of warning -- I wouldn't try to harvest parts from a donor lens. It's more than likely you will end up with two versions with parts that aren't compatible!

Yes, this is another point. I think that the 1.8/50 had at least three iterations and I don't know how many the 1.4 had. Honestly, something was wrong here. And, to infuriate some out there who worship Olympus, I have to say without equivocation that their SLR build quality was not so hot. As far as mechanics goes, I will take an SR-T or Spotmatic any day over an OM-1. Ditto OM-2. They work, but they are more delicate than the others. In all honesty, I will also say that their glass is equal in optics to any out there. - David Lyga