Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,729   Posts: 1,515,245   Online: 805
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,039
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    If having reliable equipment is important, you pay for it. And one cannot be serious without reliable gear, whatever it is. When one looks at the cost of say a Nikon F on the used market plus the cost of a CLA by a competent tech, and compares it to the cost of an F when it was new (roughly 1/4 the cost of a small car) - it looks like a steal.
    The alternative is an endless series of dysfunctional cameras.
    If you want unreliable crap, spend your money at lomography.
    Emil I own dozens of cameras some needed a CLA and some haven't had a CLA since the time they were bought 40 to a 100 years ago amongst them a Nikon F. Yes I will do a CLA if necessary but I also believe that a lot of people that buy bargains expect or hope that their cameras will work without expensive CLA. Dismissing anybody that can't afford a CLA but still wants to take photograph as someone who want subpar quality is a bit much imo.

  2. #12
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,632
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    If having reliable equipment is important, you pay for it. And one cannot be serious without reliable gear, whatever it is. When one looks at the cost of say a Nikon F on the used market plus the cost of a CLA by a competent tech, and compares it to the cost of an F when it was new (roughly 1/4 the cost of a small car) - it looks like a steal.
    The alternative is an endless series of dysfunctional cameras.
    If you want unreliable crap, spend your money at lomography.
    My view entirely,well said.
    Ben

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,699
    Like others have said get it clean!

    Jeff

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,971
    If you're willing to pop the top & clean the transport, more power to you.
    It's not difficult.
    You're already aware of lubing the transport, so the meter follower is next.

    Relying on my faulty memory, the lollipop is a mechanical linkage on the top, rewind side of the camera & is pretty obvious when the top is removed. It may simply be stuck from sitting.
    Heavily sedated for your protection.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    870
    Yes, I DO expect an old cheap camera to work smoothly right out of the box, and if not, I can usually straighten them out. Why pay someone when I can do it myself? That's the fun of these old cameras, and more than half the time I have had to send cameras back to "the experts" to have them fix what should have been fixed the first time. More aggravation than it was worth and a waste of good money. These mechanical cameras ain't exactly rocket science. If you have mechanical aptitude and common sense you can fix most anything. Thanks for the good tip John. I suspect the lollipop is just stuck.

    I decided to just load it w/ film and say the heck w/ it for now. Strangely, it is smoother w/ film loaded. There are some light leaks to fix (seals in the back from the look of it), but the shots are pretty nice for the first roll, and the light leaks surely dropped the IQ some.
    The lens is one of those old chrome nose 50 1.4 lenses. Samples below are Tri-X w/ a yellow filter shot at box speed, and developed in Acufine 5 1/2 minutes full strength @70 degrees. The coffee cup was shot at 1.4 and there sure isn't a lot of DOF at that aperture, but it's sharp.

    Someone hollered "nice camera"! while I was out on my bike w/ it today. This old baby is much nicer than the A1 that I sold. I like it so much that I just bought two more from Roberts Camera. $31 for a chrome one, $37 for a black one (free shipping on both). They're tested and guaranteed to be working properly, and come w/ 6 month warranties. It's a fine way to start the new year, and makes up for some of those purchases that didn't work out too well. I'll replace the seals in this one, then address the film advance and lollipop.....next year.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	small f4.jpg 
Views:	12 
Size:	400.7 KB 
ID:	79279

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	small cropped f1.jpg 
Views:	12 
Size:	407.9 KB 
ID:	79280

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	small f6_filtered.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	214.2 KB 
ID:	79283
    Last edited by momus; 12-31-2013 at 09:27 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,291
    Quote Originally Posted by MDR View Post
    Emil I own dozens of cameras some needed a CLA and some haven't had a CLA since the time they were bought 40 to a 100 years ago amongst them a Nikon F. Yes I will do a CLA if necessary but I also believe that a lot of people that buy bargains expect or hope that their cameras will work without expensive CLA. Dismissing anybody that can't afford a CLA but still wants to take photograph as someone who want subpar quality is a bit much imo.
    I'm not dismissing "someone who can't afford a CLA" - I'm pointing out the false economy of buying another old camera. Although, anyone buying/using gear 20+ years of age and expecting it to keep running without maintenance is either poorly informed or delusional. I expect to work on any camera, shutter, etc. I get. Anything I use and expect reliable results from (which means everything) is serviced and functions as new. Even the stuff made before WWI.

  7. #17
    benjiboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    U.K.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,632
    If I buy a camera more than 20 years old that I want to use for serious work before I part with my money I find out how much a C.L.A would cost, and if the total cost is too much I don't buy it.
    Ben

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    870
    I fixed it. Getting the top off was not so bad at all using the link below. Once it was off I turned the camera upside down and two screws fell out, as well as half of a broken chrome crescent piece (see photos below). I managed to pry the rest of the broken chrome arm out without further disassembly. If I hadn't, it looked to be somewhat more difficult to remove w/ lots of springs here and there, so I got lucky on that.

    Strangely, everything works fine now, and all the speeds are as good as before. Wonder what that arm did anyway? It's obvious that the screws fell out when the camera took a big header (never did see where those screws came from either, but I didn't look too hard) and jammed things, causing the chrome crescent arm to break and lock everything up. The screws may have come from inside the battery housing as there are two small holes in there, but they didn't seem to quite be long enough when I tried them. Or more probably they came from the hot shoe internal attachment, which is right by where the big top dent is. While the camera was open everything got a little lube and I cleaned up the prism/viewfinder. I'll fix the dent in the top housing and the stuck meter lollipop later. Time to repair camera - 1 hr. Bill to myself - $125, from what I can see looking at other people's repair rates. I'll spend it on some good cheap wine and more Tri-X. Now to go out and shoot the camera after replacing the foam seals and mirror bumper foam.

    Thanks to a tip on Matt Denton's website, I went down to Walmart and bought a big pack of self adhesive 2mm closed cell foam sheets for $4. Eight of the sheets were different colors and only two were black, but those two 8x10 sheets will do a LOT of camera seal jobs. I wonderg why people recommended sending the camera out. Thought this was the camera repair forum.

    http://mattsclassiccameras.com/light_seals/

    http://www.rangefinderforum.com/clas...tml?1168658480

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSCF3226.JPG 
Views:	20 
Size:	330.1 KB 
ID:	79430

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSCF3225.JPG 
Views:	18 
Size:	249.9 KB 
ID:	79431

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSCF3227.JPG 
Views:	19 
Size:	352.1 KB 
ID:	79432
    Last edited by momus; 01-03-2014 at 01:44 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  9. #19
    pentaxpete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Brentwood, Essex, England
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    147
    Images
    64

    Canon FTBn clean

    Very helpful link to Matts Classic cameras BUT the other link did not work -- I have taken off the base-plate of my FTBn cameras and lubed the cogs and pivots -- I put a drop of oil into a dish and pick up a minute amount on the end of a piece of fuse=wire and touch the cogs and things and it works well. Americans seem to mention 'Windex' to clean out the old foam -- never heard of it in England and we do not have those 'Walmart 'stores either.
    An 'Old Dog still learning New Tricks !

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin