the mother of all exasperation ...

[bernard_L]

someone who was too cheap to send a slightly damaged example off to be seen by qualified service techs...

A couple of posts like this before breakfast make you feel good for the rest of the day?

 

[bernard_L]

qualified service techs...

Like, the qualified service tech who charged just a little less (coincidence, of course) than the purchase value of my GS645W to fix a slightly tight shutter release and clean the V/F; a few years later, being too cheap to pay again 300€ when the lens ring stack started falling apart, I discovered the qualified service tech had literally doused in oil the lens rings, causing the screws at the base of the ring stack to come loose. The camera is now fine, thank you.

Or another qualified service tech who sat 3 months over an acquaintance's MjuII left in his hands for a repair estimate; at first said he was waiting for a part from Japan, and then declared the camera unrepairable. Nevertheless charged 50€ for the estimate. I had a look, took off the clamshell, actuated the opening sensor lever, and saw the camera was reacting (not a bad contact) but not properly (not the proper lens motion).. Probable cause CPU malfunction. Put back the clamshell. 5 minutes. Methinks I'll open a camera repair shop: keep customer's camera 1 month (fast turnaround), declare un-repairable, 50€ please, thank you.

To be fair, there is that other tech who serviced two of my Mamiya TLR shutters (were sticky, now perfect) for a total of 32€ (!!).

 

[David Lyga]

Why oh why do photographers think they can also fix photographic equipment ?, I consider the costs of having my equipment professionally maintained occasionally as part of the expense of being a serious photographer which is probably (although it was all bought second hand) why it's still working fine after using it for more than thirty years.

Ben, when you buy a lens 'for cheap' and there is something wrong with it (in my case, oil on the aperture blades but getting to those blades was the difficult part) there is temptation to try to fix it, since all else is well. I see nothing wrong with that and everything to learn from. I have learned a lot through the years doing just that, The alternative is throwing it away, My decision was sound.

Even lenses that are perfect NOW can become problems later. For example, heat causing the helicoid grease to liquify. I sense that you are really upset with such efforts, Ben, but, with this, there is nothing to lose and everything to gain. - David Lyga

 

[David Lyga]

I've read that some manufacturers use a thread-locker which must be thinned with solvent before the elements can be unscrewed.

And it is this toxic overkill that I will be vehemently cursing until the day I die. - David Lyga

 

[David Lyga]

Worse than that are screws that are reverse threaded.

I have NEVER come across SCREWS that are reverse threaded, but I HAVE dealt with NUTS that are reverse threaded, albeit not in lenses but in SLR bodies, especially under that film advance lever. This is a true bitch to deal with, as you must tighten to find out which way to turn, and even the same model (early vs late Spotmatics) can incorporate either. - David Lyga

 

[David Lyga]

... or have tinkered with mechanics since childhood days. This of course does not make you a camera repairer but is a good starting point to be added by textbooks, service manuals and ... trial & error.

'Camera Repair' is a continuum. Some things are easy and some are difficult. Expertise follows this continuum. I see nothing wrong with learning and succeeding within this endeavor. - David Lyga

 

[David Lyga]

I do not remember such at a lens (but would not be really surprised either) but at camera bodies there are such.

The main reason for such is a screw that holds a lever or similar that only in one direction is moved under such force that it may by friction turn loose a standard screw.

This is correct, but, I think maybe unnecessary overkill from my experiences. However, theoretically AgX is correct. - David Lyga

 

[AgX]

I have NEVER come across SCREWS that are reverse threaded, but I HAVE dealt with NUTS that are reverse threaded.

Any reverse threaded nut sits on such screw.

 

[Luckless]

A couple of posts like this before breakfast make you feel good for the rest of the day?

Given that it was poking fun at both the sketchy ethics of modern business, and a friend who wrote off a lens due to ripping apart reverse threading trying to get lens elements apart... Yes. Yes it does.

You however sound like someone who could do with finding some better service techs, or possibly dive into more tinkering on your own and take your risks with surprise reverse threading...

 

[benjiboy]

Ben, when you buy a lens 'for cheap' and there is something wrong with it (in my case, oil on the aperture blades but getting to those blades was the difficult part) there is temptation to try to fix it, since all else is well. I see nothing wrong with that and everything to learn from. I have learned a lot through the years doing just that, The alternative is throwing it away, My decision was sound.

Even lenses that are perfect NOW can become problems later. For example, heat causing the helicoid grease to liquify. I sense that you are really upset with such efforts, Ben, but, with this, there is nothing to lose and everything to gain. - David Lyga

David, in these days the reason old equipment ( the sort we film enthusiasts) can be "bought for cheap" is that the cost to service it is greater than the resale value, you may think I'm crazy but I have often paid much more to have an item that I really liked refurbished than it was worth, and since I had bought it for use and never intended to sell it how much I could sell it for is irrelevant . I have several such items whose useable life has been extended by 20 to 30 years that I can continue enjoy using for the rest of my life that I consider an investment in my pleasure.

 

[Robin Guymer]

How many of you ever attempted to remove all the elements from a complicated zoom ... and lived to tell the truth? - David Lyga

One success & 2 failures.
Looking for a Nikkor 35-135 AF for my F4 and found one attached to a F65. But on arrival the camera was faulty (fixed that) and the lens had fungus growing on every element. Pulled it apart and it cleaned up near perfect. Used it for a while on the F4 and tested it against some other lenses on a Sony Nex. It was great, should have been happy with that. But could still see a twinge of fungus. Thought I was well experienced by now but forgot about the metal feather connector for the auto focus motor and tore it when I pulled the lens apart - it is in the parts bin now. Interestingly in the middle of this lens is a double element that is completely sealed. The fungus was in between these elements. They are factory sealed into the plastic surround. Thinking about it later maybe a hole could be drilled into the casing to insert a small tool to clean the inside of these lenses but it is a mystery how fungus starts in a completely sealed section! Not a complete failure though, the lens element attached to the aperture frame makes for a great loupe.

 

[David Lyga]

David, in these days the reason old equipment ( the sort we film enthusiasts) can be "bought for cheap" is that the cost to service it is greater than the resale value, you may think I'm crazy but I have often paid much more to have an item that I really liked refurbished than it was worth, and since I had bought it for use and never intended to sell it how much I could sell it for is irrelevant . I have several such items whose useable life has been extended by 20 to 30 years that I can continue enjoy using for the rest of my life that I consider an investment in my pleasure.

Ben, I certainly do not attempt to deny you this pleasure and, to you, real meaning with what you love. There is an alternate side to this: with stuff being so cheap, it is tempting to try to do this on one's own. This is what this hobby is all about; to each his own.

Now, the real question remains: Which is worse, The Trump Card or Boris Johnson? - David Lyga

 

[David Lyga]

One success & 2 failures.
Looking for a Nikkor 35-135 AF for my F4 and found one attached to a F65. But on arrival the camera was faulty (fixed that) and the lens had fungus growing on every element. Pulled it apart and it cleaned up near perfect. Used it for a while on the F4 and tested it against some other lenses on a Sony Nex. It was great, should have been happy with that. But could still see a twinge of fungus. Thought I was well experienced by now but forgot about the metal feather connector for the auto focus motor and tore it when I pulled the lens apart - it is in the parts bin now. Interestingly in the middle of this lens is a double element that is completely sealed. The fungus was in between these elements. They are factory sealed into the plastic surround. Thinking about it later maybe a hole could be drilled into the casing to insert a small tool to clean the inside of these lenses but it is a mystery how fungus starts in a completely sealed section! Not a complete failure though, the lens element attached to the aperture frame makes for a great loupe.

It is truly that 'twinge of fungus' which becomes more tempting to eliminate than anything else in life. We perfectionists are not happy with 99%, but we opt to have it all and, in the meantime, we dig our collective grave. Yes, I have done this when I should not have done this. These damn 'feathers' are one of the most annoying components of the new AF stuff. - David Lyga

 

[M Carter]

Just a note regarding testing lenses after re-assembly - ortho-litho film is fabulous for this. Get a pack of 4x5 for a few bucks, cut it under safelight and stick in the camera. It does take a lot of light, but the speed of working with it is fantastic. Handle under safelights, develops in a tray with paper developer in about a minute. Really, really handy and a huge time saver.

 

[Luckless]

Just a note regarding testing lenses after re-assembly - ortho-litho film is fabulous for this. Get a pack of 4x5 for a few bucks, cut it under safelight and stick in the camera. It does take a lot of light, but the speed of working with it is fantastic. Handle under safelights, develops in a tray with paper developer in about a minute. Really, really handy and a huge time saver.

A handy tip, but it is good to keep in mind ortho film or paper can catch you with a false positive test if you then switch to a panchromatic film and weren't paying overly close attention while checking the lens.

 

[ciniframe]

Don’t have your courage but the most complicated lend I’ve taken apart was a 150mm f4 Zuiko for my Pen F. Focus was jammed and I kinda fixed it but the lens is still in rough cosmetic shape. I did take a chance on a 25 mm f4 Zuiko for the Pen F mount that had a stuck aperture. That turned out to be a spring that had come off and .froze the aperture, took maybe all of 10min. to fix that one.
Thats my limit.

 

[David Lyga]

Just a note regarding testing lenses after re-assembly - ortho-litho film is fabulous for this. Get a pack of 4x5 for a few bucks, cut it under safelight and stick in the camera. It does take a lot of light, but the speed of working with it is fantastic. Handle under safelights, develops in a tray with paper developer in about a minute. Really, really handy and a huge time saver.

Years ago I bought a few 100 ft rolls of 35mm UNperforated Kodak ImageLink microfilm. This is the BEST for judging contrast. For shooting in low contrast scenes, it is unsurpassed. However, with sunlit scenes with shadow detail, it is a disaster. It is the most unforgiving film out there, but resolution is tops, bar none. - David Lyga

 

[M Carter]

A handy tip, but it is good to keep in mind ortho film or paper can catch you with a false positive test if you then switch to a panchromatic film and weren't paying overly close attention while checking the lens.

Years ago I bought a few 100 ft rolls of 35mm UNperforated Kodak ImageLink microfilm. This is the BEST for judging contrast. For shooting in low contrast scenes, it is unsurpassed. However, with sunlit scenes with shadow detail, it is a disaster. It is the most unforgiving film out there, but resolution is tops, bar none. - David Lyga

I use it strictly (in these cases) to check things like overall focus (I've modded some old cameras to be flipped-lens and wanted to adjust focus to portrait or infinity). It's also great for finding light leaks.

In the darkroom I use it for masking, and have found I can get more pictorial contrast or high-contrast, it's pretty easy film to suss out. Main thing is it's so dang cheap - I've made 16x20 paper plane masks before I had my pin registration setup.

 

[AgX]

A handy tip, but it is good to keep in mind ortho film or paper can catch you with a false positive test if you then switch to a panchromatic film and weren't paying overly close attention while checking the lens.

I don't get your point.

I understand that for general testing a Orthochromatic film is the lesser choice as it does lesser disclose chromatic abberations than a panchromatic film. But then again colour filmn is the best choice for such anyway.

But I do not undertand why orthochromatic film is not apt for just checking a reassembly of a lens.

 

[David Lyga]

Ortho is excellent. My ImageLink is panchromatic but Ortho has great contrast and sharpness. AgX is correct. - David Lyga

 

[Luckless]

I don't get your point.

I understand that for general testing a Orthochromatic film is the lesser choice as it does lesser disclose chromatic abberations than a panchromatic film. But then again colour filmn is the best choice for such anyway.

But I do not undertand why orthochromatic film is not apt for just checking a reassembly of a lens.

Well that was kind of my point. It is perfectly fine for testing a lens after assembly, if you remember to run further detailed tests against chromatic aberrations.

That is, assuming you use pan films at all at least. If all you're using is ortho films, and your focus tests pass with that film, then you're good to go - If you're never measuring anything towards the red range, then you don't have to care whether or not it is in focus.

If you allow yourself to be overly focused on too narrow of a range while testing, then it becomes easier to overlook errors or flaws. Depending on the camera and focusing system it can be easy to dismiss your initial thoughts that the 'best focus' you could achieve seemed a bit soft or weird if you put too much faith in your testing method without considering its short comings. "The image looks sharp under a loupe on film..." is a good way to reinforce in your mind that everything is fine. After all, a small aberration can be hard to see in a view finder if you're not actively testing for it, but still be enough to muddy enlargements.

I learned this lesson 'the fun way' at a job years ago thanks to part of the calibration on the big lenses we were using relying on some big sheets of film with a narrow response range. [I think it was some kind of xray film.] Using it let us record the entire image circle in one go to use as part of the baseline tests that everything was aligned correctly. System in question was designed to use one or more small sensors that could be moved around within an oversized image circle.

Film tests of 'the whole image circle' passed, but were failing when run against the smaller sensors. Eventually tracked it down to a flipped cell. The few elements in it didn't do a lot to the light, but the right way round was supposed to make some minor correction, while the wrong way round just made things 'a little bit worse'.

Turns out one of the engineers had stated that the "Big obvious arrow" engraved on the otherwise symmetrical subassembly barrel pointed towards the 'target', as in where we were targeting the light to be collected... While another engineer had understood that 'target' was the thing we were pointing the camera system at...

In short, it is hard to see errors that you're not actually looking for if they're small enough.

Another great lesson learned from that project is that being the only native English speaker on a team officially communicating in English can be very fun and 'interesting'.