Separating cemented elements is never risk free.I doubt the repair person did anything wrong, sometimes this happens w/ old glass simply because it's old. We don't know that the repair person destroyed anything, they may have been going about the job just as expected. But again, w/ old stuff, it's impossible to predict everything that might happen during a repair.
That depends on whether they are really in your life. The OP seems merely have a very good and long acquaintance in the repairman. Length of a relationship has very little to do with quality of relationship.Its a bad idea to value stuff more than the people in your life.
Good advice. Whether this will eat away at you probably depends on whether you’d have said go ahead or not given the warning.I think one big question I have is: if he had told you that the lens elements could be damaged in trying to separate the cemented doublet, would you have said “go ahead- I’ll take the risk.” If you would have then I think you should move on. Also, could the elements have been irreparable due to fungus etching anyway? I think the insurance claim is out of the question. My business insurance deductible is $1000 which is pretty standard. With the fungus in the lens it would have a value of what, $1500 to $2000? As a business it is not worth making the claim- you’re out the thousand and either having your rates increase or just get “non renewed” at the end of the year.
I hate these situations. That’s one reason my shop won’t work on stuff over 20 years old- you can’t get parts if something goes wrong and you can end up right where Karl and his repair guy are. I gotta hand it to these old guys that will work on this old “classic” gear with no replacement parts available for a lousy $100-200.
If it were me I would be on the lookout for a junker with the undamaged elements needed and keep my 40 year relationship intact. I feel for you, but it’s just one of those curve balls you get once in awhile. IMHO
I have to agree, a lens with Fungus is a long way from being mint optically,, although maybe cosmetically at first glance.
^ Plus several million. ^The overuse of "mint" bothers me so much. Especially when you see "mint" in an ebay ad and then it has scratches and fungus... ugh.
There's no such thing as just cosmetically mint. Mint is -- mint. It either is completely perfect, or it is not mint. The term means a coin that has never been touched by human hands, never circulated, with zero flaws. Literally, straight out of the mint.
For anything other than coins, that means it should be absolutely perfect, like new, in all ways. Anything that has fungus is decidedly not mint.
Be fair.Unfortunately, I (and the others sharing my viewpoint) got attacked by the legal eagles, especially some rather unforgiving European posters here.
I agree that this attitude should be an overriding principle. That being said, if you have something else that you feel confident your repairman can handle, maybe you could negotiate a "house credit" going forward. That way you can maintain your relationship and still realize some compensation for the accidental loss of a lens.Another way to think about it...if the lens had so much fungus in it that you and he thought it acceptable to separate elements...the lens wasn't really worth much in the first place.
To me, no lens is worth loosing a friend over.
Let it go. Forgive and move on with your life.
Maybe, buy a different lens.
It's just stuff....
You can’t just “swap glass” with lenses of this class.Yes, I think if he agreed to swap the glass at no charge, I'd be OK with that.
Thanks for the suggestion.
I agree with this, too. Especially the "let it go" advice. It will, indeed, forever be a reminder of bad and negative feelings.I would get rid of whatever is left of the lens ASAP. Get rid of it immediately! It will forever be a reminder of bad feelings. Dump it, quit trying to assign blame, let it go. move on.
The overuse of "mint" bothers me so much. Especially when you see "mint" in an ebay ad and then it has scratches and fungus... ugh.
There's no such thing as just cosmetically mint. Mint is -- mint. It either is completely perfect, or it is not mint. The term means a coin that has never been touched by human hands, never circulated, with zero flaws. Literally, straight out of the mint.
For anything other than coins, that means it should be absolutely perfect, like new, in all ways. Anything that has fungus is decidedly not mint.
Alas, I have no good advice for the OP other than to suck it up. This is awful, and you can be very disappointed, but attempting to clean fungus in that location is tough. It's a parts lens now. Time to find a junker with good glass and hope your lifelong acquaintance can make them into one great lens.
If you know this repairman already 40 years, it might be that he needs retirement because he’s getting a bit careless or thinks that his competence is higher after all these years than it actually still is. You are in doubt if you want to lose him as a repairman, but I certainly would find a fresh young dog that has to build up a reputation yet and certainly would have warned you in advance.
So true. Most things on Ebay that claim to be MINT simply are not. Same for MINT- and Near Mint. Japanese sellers constantly make this claim. In my book, Mint means "as new."
I don't want to lose him forever as a repairman due to this mistake, but I feel that he should somehow make it right.
In your opinion, what should we do?
The overuse of "mint" bothers me so much. Especially when you see "mint" in an ebay ad and then it has scratches and fungus... ugh.
There's no such thing as just cosmetically mint. Mint is -- mint. It either is completely perfect, or it is not mint. The term means a coin that has never been touched by human hands, never circulated, with zero flaws. Literally, straight out of the mint.
For anything other than coins, that means it should be absolutely perfect, like new, in all ways. Anything that has fungus is decidedly not mint.
Alas, I have no good advice for the OP other than to suck it up. This is awful, and you can be very disappointed, but attempting to clean fungus in that location is tough. It's a parts lens now. Time to find a junker with good glass and hope your lifelong acquaintance can make them into one great lens.
Right. I recently looked at an ad for a Pentax film camera on eBay from a US seller and it described the camera as 'Mint'. The photos clearly showed areas of wear on the camera. I sent the seller a message politely telling him that the camera did not appear mint in the photos. He responded saying that 'well, considering the age of the camera...', to which I again (politely) replied 'Mint is an absolute term, and the age of the camera has no bearing on it'. Later that day I noticed that the seller amended his ad to say 'Excellent condition' instead, which was more accurate. At least he took the feedback as constructive and acted on it.So true. Most things on Ebay that claim to be MINT simply are not. Same for MINT- and Near Mint. Japanese sellers constantly make this claim. In my book, Mint means "as new."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?