Yesterday I squashed my camera ...

Discussion in '35mm Cameras and Accessories' started by AOCo, Jul 8, 2013.

  1. AOCo

    AOCo Member

    Messages:
    69
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2013
    Location:
    Bretagne
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    ... and now I know why I must not buy an expensive leica...

    Yesterday afternoon, I suppose the heat has really taken its toll on my overall awareness. I was stepping back to take a wide angle shot of a building, and I stepped into the void of a flight of steps. I completely lost my balance, was getting ready to feel myself hurting, when I heard the sound of my Pentax SV (+ mint SMC Takumar 3.5/24 Takumar) hitting the pavement.

    I have not suffered any injury luckily, but my camera was badly affected : the lens mount was ripped off, still attached to the lens. The top plate now had a big bump in the corner (not the first one, mind you), and was bent to the extent of preventing the back to open, and raising the prism housing, leaving some space underneath. Lens itself only suffered a filter ring being bent, the glass seems not impacted.

    Dammit, can't I just pay attention ? I was mad at myself, and so sorry, since I thought this must be the end of a 50 years old camera.

    Anyway, later in the day I managed to dismount the front part of the camera, and eventually fix most of the damage ! These cameras are just plain incredible ! I have noticed that the camera now focuses pas infinity, although there is no sign of the lens mount being pushed in. This I hope will not affect pictures.

    I will keep this as my battlefield camera, I guess. Pentax made such amazing products by then... Unbelievable.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 8, 2013
  2. elekm

    elekm Member

    Messages:
    2,056
    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2004
    Location:
    New Jersey (
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Buy another body and keep this one for telling stories. If your interest is taking photos, get a reliable camera. A Spotmatic isn't rare or expensive, so replace it.
     
  3. darkosaric

    darkosaric Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,156
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2008
    Location:
    Hamburg, DE
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Nikon F2 - they don't call it the tank for no reason.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 8, 2013
  4. Salem

    Salem Member

    Messages:
    47
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Location:
    Brighton, UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I usually go farther than I need too then move forward for final composition. Mainly because I had few close misses and would hate to break a leg over a photo.
     
  5. Karl K

    Karl K Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,612
    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2006
    Location:
    NJ
    Shooter:
    35mm
    If the lens is optically and mechanically OK, then by all means, keep shooting!
    I agree with elekm, replace the body.
    They are very inexpensive and not worth spending a lot of time and/or money to repair it.
    Your lens is worth 5X to 10X the price of a body.
     
  6. summicron1

    summicron1 Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,994
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Location:
    Ogden, Utah
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    yeah, an F2 or Leicaflex SL would have dented the floor....i agree with the others, glad you were not hurt, find another body and proceed. It will set you back maybe $30, max.
     
  7. Vilk

    Vilk Member

    Messages:
    443
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    Location:
    hegeso.com
    Shooter:
    35mm
    F2
     
  8. jeffreyg

    jeffreyg Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,411
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2008
    Location:
    florida
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    If you stick with that lens test it for focusing accuracy before photographing something important. Several years ago a friend had me photograph his visiting family with his camera and all the photographs were out of focus even though I carefully composed and focused each frame with the camera on a tripod. He happened to be an ophthalmologist and suggested that I make an appointment to have my eyes checked. They were fine and he happened to remember having dropped the lens but it showed no damage. He sent it back to Nikon and they found a lens element had shifted.

    http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/
     
  9. Jeff Kubach

    Jeff Kubach Member

    Messages:
    6,926
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Location:
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Look up KEH.

    Jeff
     
  10. pen s

    pen s Member

    Messages:
    241
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2011
    Location:
    Olympia, wa.
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Yeah, get another SLR. The digital onslaught has made for some real bargains. If you have a lot of m42 mount glass a clean Spotmatic is reasonable. Just this April I picked up a near perfect Fujica ST605n body for $20, all it needed was foam replacement. A SLR where the screen focus does not agree with the film plane focus is useless, hope your 24mm f3.5 Takumar survived. It would be very expensive to replace.
     
  11. ToddB

    ToddB Member

    Messages:
    1,136
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    \Aahh yes.. the durabilty of real camera. If that would of been a digital camera, would cost a fortune for repair work.

    Todd
     
  12. E. von Hoegh

    E. von Hoegh Member

    Messages:
    3,921
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Location:
    Adirondacks
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Durability???:blink: The camera's trashed, there's a good chance the lens is too. How is that "durable"?


    No camera and lens can go through an event like this without sustaining some damage/misalignment, anyone who thinks otherwise is indulging in fantasy.
     
  13. ToddB

    ToddB Member

    Messages:
    1,136
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    My bad.. I thought he said it was ok?

    Todd
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. E. von Hoegh

    E. von Hoegh Member

    Messages:
    3,921
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Location:
    Adirondacks
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    "...the camera now fucusses past infinity" which means it's unuseable.
    Todd, the camera sustained enough damage that the lens with the mount still attached was separated from the camera. There's a high probability that the lens is now internally misaligned, and who knows what else is wrong with the body.
    This is why I won't get any gear with any sign of impact damage, not even a dented filter ring - actually especially a dented filter ring, even if it appears to be OK. There are too many things that can be lurking.
     
  16. Peter Simpson

    Peter Simpson Member

    Messages:
    230
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Location:
    Outside Bost
    Shooter:
    35mm
    F3 story

    Before heading out with my wife in her Jeep, I opened up the back, saw her fleece, and wrapped my F3 in it so it wouldn't get bounced around.

    She wanted to wear the fleece. As I was doing something else, she opened the back of the Jeep, grabbed part of her fleece, pulled it out of the Jeep, and dumped my F3 from a height of 2 ft onto the driveway.

    After a moment of panic, I realized it had landed on a bottom corner, and that everything was working normally. Lens wasn't even scratched. I had to look hard to even even see the scratch on the body.

    It's my "beater" F3 anyway, I have two more in nicer condition :smile:
     
  17. ToddB

    ToddB Member

    Messages:
    1,136
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Thanks EVH for the clarification.. That is sad. Must admit, I skimmed over his posting and saw the word OK.
     
  18. Tony-S

    Tony-S Member

    Messages:
    786
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2009
    Location:
    Fort Collins
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yes, that's safer than a Canon F-1n because the F-1n would have damaged the pavement. :smile:
     
  19. Tom1956

    Tom1956 Inactive

    Messages:
    2,025
    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I've got a Piper Cub RC plane hanging from my ceiling. A few years ago the nitro engine went dead after takeoff. The plane was smashed into absolute smithereens. I mean particles. Determined not to let that be the end of it, I rebuilt it. It's still holding up. There's a good bit of wood holding all that glue together.:D
     
  20. E. von Hoegh

    E. von Hoegh Member

    Messages:
    3,921
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Location:
    Adirondacks
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Once when I was working on a camera I mixed up the shims which ensure that the lens mounting flange is the corrrect distance from and parralel to the filmplane. Here's what I did: The flange is mounted on a diecast plate which is fastened to the main body casting by four screws. The shims went between this plate and the main casting.
    I set the body (with the back removed) on a granite surface plate, supported by .5000" gauge blocks on the film rails. Using a .0001" resolution dial indicator set to zero at the flange distance + .5000, I shimmed the front plate until it was parralel to and the correct distance from the filmplane, taking the time to rub the shims on a stone until the flange was spot on, within the ability of my measuring tools - say within .000020".
    Then, I put a groundglass at the filmplane and adjusted the focussing screen until the focus at the filmplane matched the focus in the viewfinder, using a viewfinder magnifier.

    My point here is, once a camera becomes misaligned it's no small job to put it right - and one needs special tools; I did this in the gauge room of a machineshop which I am very lucky to have access to, using tens of thousands of dollars worth of tools and equipment which most people don't have access to.
     
  21. AOCo

    AOCo Member

    Messages:
    69
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2013
    Location:
    Bretagne
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Not too sure about this one. If I can get the image nicely focused on the ground glass, won't it be in focus on the film plane ? After all my view camera focuses past infinity and is very usable.
    Then it's only a question of film advance and shutter speed, which both seem unaffected.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 8, 2013
  22. Sirius Glass

    Sirius Glass Subscriber

    Messages:
    20,714
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It may be 50 years old, but I will not cost you much to replace it as it originally costs adjusted for inflation.
     
  23. gleaf

    gleaf Subscriber

    Messages:
    270
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Definition - Flatulance- ambulance for things run over by road rollers......
    I am so glad you did fail to topple down the stairwell.
    I'm have a nice Nikon digital telephoto with dangling camera ribbon cables and parts on my lab desk.
    It's my be careful reminder.
    Best wishes for your further shooting with the new body.
     
  24. Tom1956

    Tom1956 Inactive

    Messages:
    2,025
    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Shooter:
    Large Format
  25. AOCo

    AOCo Member

    Messages:
    69
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2013
    Location:
    Bretagne
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks for the link. I have a couple of very good shape Spotmatic F's that I should wear out before I get another camera on the shelf, maybe I won't live long enough for that... I will try to be careful, these being as old as me deserve some precautions. Pentax SVs are not that frequent though. I found that the film rewind is so much smoother that the spotmatics, I might still try to find another one.
     
  26. Tom1956

    Tom1956 Inactive

    Messages:
    2,025
    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Location:
    US
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    What kind of camera were you working on that had shims in it? I've worked on a number of Japanese 35's and have not run up on any shims yet. Thanks.