Question for camera repairers - "What does a CLA include?" - particularly for full mechanical cameras

[Chan Tran]

When you do a CLA to a full mechanical camera like a Pentax Spotmatic, Yashica FX-2, Minolta SrT-101 etc.. what do you do? Assuming the camera is working OK. Shutter speed is not capping and while not very accurate but OK. How much disassembly do you do? And how much time would it take you?
I ask because I don't know how to disassemble or assemble a camera myself but watching video and read service manuals I feel it requires a lot of work and to do a honest CLA and to make a living doing that a tech has to charge serveral hundreds of dollars to do that.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

Unfortunately, I don't know much about mechanical cameras. Perhaps @Dan Daniel can say something about that.

Basically, however, I would do the same as with electromechanical cameras. Only improve what is necessary with the least possible effort. Any disassembly brings risks.

Mechanical parts can also be cleaned when assembled by rinsing with benzine/lighter fluid and oiling where necessary.

I will deal with this topic when I get to the Minolta Winders and Motor Drives.

I am skeptical about the popular CLA.

The question is what exactly is being done.

Completely disassembling, cleaning, lubricating and adjusting a mechanical camera is a lot of work and takes time. The question is whether it is necessary.

I would discuss this with a trustworthy workshop so that it is clear what is being done, why and what you are paying for.

 

[retina_restoration]

When you do a CLA to a full mechanical camera like a Pentax Spotmatic, Yashica FX-2, Minolta SrT-101 etc.. what do you do? Assuming the camera is working OK. Shutter speed is not capping and while not very accurate but OK. How much disassembly do you do? And how much time would it take you?
I ask because I don't know how to disassemble or assemble a camera myself but watching video and read service manuals I feel it requires a lot of work and to do a honest CLA and to make a living doing that a tech has to charge serveral hundreds of dollars to do that.

Because I do CLAs for a living (since the pandemic), I do a complete disassembly of the camera/shutter/lens. (Kodak Retina models only) Yes, it absolutely is a lot of work to do it properly. I do not do "partial CLAs", as this is false economy; there are always multiple systems that need cleaning, and fixing just one problem means you're sure to need it serviced again in the near future. It typically takes 8-10 hours of labor to service a camera, and I charge $200 for the job. If I charged much more than that, I believe it would eliminate a substantial portion of my clients. If I was servicing Rolleiflexes or Hasseblads, that would be a different matter - those technicians can easily charge substantially more.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

Here you can see part of the mechanics of one of the motor drives in the Nikon F4.

I wouldn't take it apart to clean it because I know I probably won't be able to put it back together correctly. At least the adjustment would be out of whack.

But using lighter fluid, moving it around, blowing out the lighter fluid/oil emulsion, repeating this several times and then lubricating it should do the trick.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

I follow Thomas Tomosy with conviction, also here regarding mechanical cleaning:

So how do you clean the mechanism? Unless the mechanism is badly contaminated or corroded you don’t have to pull the parts. What you do is just squirt a few drops of lighter fluid onto the parts (shafts, bushing, gears, escapement, etc.) and work the mechanism.

Thomas Tomosy, Camera Maintenance & Repair, Book 1, Buffalo: Amherst, 1999

 

[Andreas Thaler]

But there can be no general rule here.

If someone has mastered the mechanism of a mechanical camera, a complete disassembly, cleaning and lubrication is of course the more sustainable method.

 

[Cerebum]

I had my MX expensively CLAd and the engineer did very little, despite charging me £135. The camera failed within 12 months. It is now with a different engineer who has stripped it down, replaced all the internal foam (sludge), cleaned out the detritus and fixed the capping. I have a virtually new MX and paid £70. Given the job he has done i would have paid far more quite happily. It seems a full service on an MX can be done in 6 hours. It is also very evident that there are honest engineers and charlatans out there so get recommendations.

 

[retina_restoration]

I had my MX expensively CLAd and the engineer did very little, despite charging me £135. The camera failed within 12 months. It is now with a different engineer who has stripped it down, replaced all the internal foam (sludge), cleaned out the detritus and fixed the capping. I have a virtually new MX and paid £70. Given the job he has done i would have paid far more quite happily. It seems a full service on an MX can be done in 6 hours. It is also very evident that there are honest engineers and charlatans out there so get recommendations.

Sadly, there are some repair shops that will happily charge $$$ and only do the minimal amount of work to get the device working again, if only temporarily.
Two things I'd say to this: stick with a shop that specializes in the camera you want serviced, and don't engage the shop that offers you the lowest price. Also, ask before sending the camera in: "exactly what do you do to address the issues I've described?" Don't make assumptions about what you're getting for your money - ask specific questions and carefully evaluate the response you get.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

Sadly, there are some repair shops that will happily charge $$$ and only do the minimal amount of work to get the device working again, if only temporarily.
Two things I'd say to this: stick with a shop that specializes in the camera you want serviced, and don't engage the shop that offers you the lowest price. Also, ask before sending the camera in: "exactly what do you do to address the issues I've described?" Don't make assumptions about what you're getting for your money - ask specific questions and carefully evaluate the response you get.

I agree, three workshops - quite reputable - and three similar experiences:

„What have you done with the camera or what would you do?“

1. „Service“
2. gruffly: „What should we say about that?"
3. „Sorry, we can't answer that.“

The prices were/would be high.

I don't have that much trust anymore. I want to know what exactly is being done and what I'm paying for.

But some customers are intimidated and don't even ask.

 

[Cerebum]

Sadly, there are some repair shops that will happily charge $$$ and only do the minimal amount of work to get the device working again, if only temporarily.
Two things I'd say to this: stick with a shop that specializes in the camera you want serviced, and don't engage the shop that offers you the lowest price. Also, ask before sending the camera in: "exactly what do you do to address the issues I've described?" Don't make assumptions about what you're getting for your money - ask specific questions and carefully evaluate the response you get.

The repairer who had it first is a "Pentax specialist"! The good ones (I have two go to guys) are just old school engineers. Sadly one is now 70yo and will be retiring this year. The latter serviced my Retina iic beautifully

 

[retina_restoration]

The repairer who had it first is a "Pentax specialist"! The good ones (I have two go to guys) are just old school engineers. Sadly one is now 70yo and will be retiring this year. The latter serviced my Retina iic beautifully

Engaging a specialist is the better choice, but that does not guarantee optimal results every time. Even skilled specialists can make mistakes or miss a subtle problem. I speak from experience. There are numerous ways in which a misbehaving camera can hide a problem from a repair technician - a problem which will only become evident once the camera has been returned to the client and put back in service. Those issues are the technician's responsibility, but not their fault.

 

[MattKing]

Thread title updated - to aid those who come later.
And because Andreas Thaler has already responded

 

[4season]

I disassembled my Minolta SRT101 this much:

Initial problem was that mirror mechanism moved sluggishly. There are YouTube videos which show an easy fix of lubricating one area under the bottom cover. And this did help, but IIRC, the camera still seemed iffy. Removing the SRT's mirror box allows great access to shutter rollers, self-timer and more.

Downside is that it also means undoing all of those strings! And it's at times like this where I take a deep breath, and remind myself that once upon a time, skilled assemblers were putting these together quickly! I didn't have the benefit of an experienced mentor, so I had to figure out the techniques for myself, but yes, it can be done.

I do not attempt to disassemble items like self-timer or shutter speed escapements, because (1) they are often crimped shut, (2) there is little need to do so because they can simply be flushed with cleaning solvent and relubricated and (3) if you nevertheless insist on doing so, they can be a real pain to reassemble!

I found that the completed camera had a nice "crisp" snappy action, with factory spring tensioning providing more than enough force.

Regarding shutter speed accuracy: If you review old Modern Photography bench-test results, you'll realize that even when new, +/- 1 EV deviations were very common, and this is true of factory-fresh Leica M6s too. I personally would rather have things running a little on the slow side if it allows me to use the lowest possible spring tensions.

Largely because of all of those strings and pulleys, I consider Minolta SRT to be kind of a challenging camera to service.

 

[4season]

I haven't worked on Pentax Spotmatic, but I expect that the earlier ones with stopped-down metering would be pretty straightforward.

Although it's considered an electronic camera, the Pentax P30/P3 appears to similar in design to the older ME, and probably other legacy designs. I find that once I get over the psychological block of needing to unsolder a bunch of wires (it actually can be done in few minutes, but take notes as to which wire goes where!), it's not bad.

With these cameras, removing the mirror box is pretty much a given, because a vibration dampener pad deteriorates, causing a wind-on problem which is super-common in these models. I've tried squirting oil on the part, hoping that it would prevent further sticking, but that only provides temporary relief at best: Leave the camera sitting idle for a number of weeks, and camera starts skipping frames again.

But with the mirror box removed, the offending part is easily replaced by removing a single screw. And the rotting foam dust seal near the front can also be replaced with ease.

 

[Chan Tran]

I think I get the answer or rather a confirming of what I thought. Unless you can do the CLA yourself and the enjoyment of doing it is the reason you can't have a camera like the Minolta Srt-101 CLA by someone and it makes sense. The cost of a good CLA would be more than the replacement camera in good condition.
Retina you spend 10 hours and earn only $200 it's rather a low rate. Even if you considered your labor is only worth $20 an hour you still have to charge more for your overhead. So if you make a living doing it you do have a source of income somewhere like retirement fund or something.

 

[retina_restoration]

Retina you spend 10 hours and earn only $200 it's rather a low rate. Even if you considered your labor is only worth $20 an hour you still have to charge more for your overhead. So if you make a living doing it you do have a source of income somewhere like retirement fund or something.

All true, yes. I say that I "make my living" doing this, but that's not true, strictly speaking. My expenses are quite low compared to most urban dwellers, but still, my income doesn't cover all of my expenses. Our retirement investments are bridging the gap. My camera repair income helps relieve the burden on our savings is all.
If someone expects to make a living wage doing what I do, they'd have to charge twice what I do. But I can guarantee you, most people looking to get a "complete, thorough CLA" are not willing to spend what the job is worth, so many people end up paying far less and getting only half the job done. You DO get what you pay for. Believe me, folks - if someone wants $500 to do a proper CLA on something like a Rolleiflex, it's worth the price.

 

[Paul Howell]

Two years ago I paid $185 for a CLA on a Nikon F, Tempe Camera agreed only because after an initial inspection did not find that any parts that needed to be replaced, and shutter was in tolerance, and it is unmetered. They lubed what could be lubed what they could without stipping the camera apart, cleaned the mirror and prism and viewfinder, and replaced the light seals. No warranty, and I was told I could work for years for an hour, no way of telling. In most cases they do not work on vintage cameras, case by case.

 

[Cerebum]

I couldn't agree more film cameras can be capricious beasties in my case, engineer number two sent me a long list and photographic evidence to show that engineer 1 had done the bare minimum. I can't say he is bad, just that he clearly has different ideas on what constitutes a service.

 

[Chan Tran]

All true, yes. I say that I "make my living" doing this, but that's not true, strictly speaking. My expenses are quite low compared to most urban dwellers, but still, my income doesn't cover all of my expenses. Our retirement investments are bridging the gap. My camera repair income helps relieve the burden on our savings is all.
If someone expects to make a living wage doing what I do, they'd have to charge twice what I do. But I can guarantee you, most people looking to get a "complete, thorough CLA" are not willing to spend what the job is worth, so many people end up paying far less and getting only half the job done. You DO get what you pay for. Believe me, folks - if someone wants $500 to do a proper CLA on something like a Rolleiflex, it's worth the price.

I fully agree with you. So a CLA isn't economically feasible. I am afraid that a lot of people willing to pay half and get no work done. How do they know if something is done to the camera?

 

[BrianShaw]

The term "CLA" is ambiguous unless the repair shop specifies what that really entails for each specific instance. I prefer to see that annotated on my estimate so there is a "committment" to providing specific services. But that isn't common in my experience, so relying on the repair shop reputation is the best one might be able to do.

I prefer to see the terms "complete overhaul" or "repair" used rather than CLA.

How do we know what's really done? We don't really, unless there was a fault when the camera was sent for repair and that fault does or does not exist when the camera is returned. I have vague memories of people posting pictures they got from their repair shop showing hteir camera in a million pieces. In that situation I'd really believe that the camera was completely disassembled and I would hope that it was correctly cleaned, lubricated, and adjusted during the reassembly.

Economic feasibility is a completely different topic. Highly individual; too individual to generalize in my opinion.

 

[kl122002]

I fully agree with you. So a CLA isn't economically feasible. I am afraid that a lot of people willing to pay half and get no work done. How do they know if something is done to the camera?

Check the screws.
1.For any camera that has opened , the screws could be loose, or easier to loose.
2. Look and see if there any worn marks on the screws.
3. after opening it, see if there are any original seals broke, or renewed.

----------

As I always told my friends , many "modern" old film cameras(from 1980s) has been 40 years old already. They are not "new" and won't be new again even after CLA. Many gears that made by soft brass could have been worn, nylon parts got fragile, screws could break, springs lot it elasticity . This why a user could always feeling "something is not right" but the it is still working in order even after CLA.

An ideal "CLA", I 'd rather prefer the term "restoration" , which is specifically remade and replace the worn parts with a new one, almost rebuilding a new camera, which is much more expensive.

 

[4season]

To get back to the original query, to some extent, "It depends". I think that by the time we get to cameras designed in the 1990s, you might do a bit of cleaning and replacing of broken or deteriorating parts. But there's likely to be little or no lubricating or adjusting to be done. The interiors of some later-model cameras look less like legacy camera designs from the 1960s, and more like a printer or other piece of consumer electronics.

 

[Laurent]

I disassembled my Minolta SRT101 this much:
View attachment 366245

Initial problem was that mirror mechanism moved sluggishly. There are YouTube videos which show an easy fix of lubricating one area under the bottom cover. And this did help, but IIRC, the camera still seemed iffy. Removing the SRT's mirror box allows great access to shutter rollers, self-timer and more.

Downside is that it also means undoing all of those strings! And it's at times like this where I take a deep breath, and remind myself that once upon a time, skilled assemblers were putting these together quickly! I didn't have the benefit of an experienced mentor, so I had to figure out the techniques for myself, but yes, it can be done.

I do not attempt to disassemble items like self-timer or shutter speed escapements, because (1) they are often crimped shut, (2) there is little need to do so because they can simply be flushed with cleaning solvent and relubricated and (3) if you nevertheless insist on doing so, they can be a real pain to reassemble!

View attachment 366249

I found that the completed camera had a nice "crisp" snappy action, with factory spring tensioning providing more than enough force.

Regarding shutter speed accuracy: If you review old Modern Photography bench-test results, you'll realize that even when new, +/- 1 EV deviations were very common, and this is true of factory-fresh Leica M6s too. I personally would rather have things running a little on the slow side if it allows me to use the lowest possible spring tensions.

Largely because of all of those strings and pulleys, I consider Minolta SRT to be kind of a challenging camera to service.

your tool seems interesting! I'm about to make some myself, and did not think of 3D printing for this. Is this a design you found, or did you do it yourself?

 

[Andreas Thaler]

I disassembled my Minolta SRT101 this much:
View attachment 366245

Initial problem was that mirror mechanism moved sluggishly. There are YouTube videos which show an easy fix of lubricating one area under the bottom cover. And this did help, but IIRC, the camera still seemed iffy. Removing the SRT's mirror box allows great access to shutter rollers, self-timer and more.

Downside is that it also means undoing all of those strings! And it's at times like this where I take a deep breath, and remind myself that once upon a time, skilled assemblers were putting these together quickly! I didn't have the benefit of an experienced mentor, so I had to figure out the techniques for myself, but yes, it can be done.

I do not attempt to disassemble items like self-timer or shutter speed escapements, because (1) they are often crimped shut, (2) there is little need to do so because they can simply be flushed with cleaning solvent and relubricated and (3) if you nevertheless insist on doing so, they can be a real pain to reassemble!

View attachment 366249

I found that the completed camera had a nice "crisp" snappy action, with factory spring tensioning providing more than enough force.

Regarding shutter speed accuracy: If you review old Modern Photography bench-test results, you'll realize that even when new, +/- 1 EV deviations were very common, and this is true of factory-fresh Leica M6s too. I personally would rather have things running a little on the slow side if it allows me to use the lowest possible spring tensions.

Largely because of all of those strings and pulleys, I consider Minolta SRT to be kind of a challenging camera to service.

When removing the mirror box, which also holds the lens bayonet, I'm worried that the flange focal distance - the distance between the lens and the film - will no longer be correct.

What are your experiences with this?

 

[Laurent]

Back to the subject of CLAs, 3 out of 4 times I had one done (3 different repairers I know, one I don't know but works for a well known shop), I've had a thorough explanation about what needed to be done (generally in two parts: one before sending the camera, with a rough estimate of price and description of what is generally done, and one after they had the camera in hand and could inspect it at will. This second part leads to an estimate which I as asked to approve, and I had to pay for theit time IF I refused this estimate).

Then I've got a bill indicating the work, which also serves as a guarantee.

In one of the cases I've had almost the same info but the work was not that satisfying (my Rolleiflex is no longer as smooth as it was, even if it works flawlessly), . This one was from the guy I do not know

The cameras were my Rolleiflex MX-EVS, and Leica M4.

In fact, I realize there has been another CLA on a Canon AE1P to get rid of the squeak and service the camera, and for this I had the same details.

I may be lucky, or it may be due to some French laws about repair? One of my repairers (now retired) founded the Leica repair shop in France many years ago, and trained generations of young repairers. One of them is still active, and I think he came here to tell us about his shop. I can share his details if this is allowed/if you want them.