Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,913   Posts: 1,556,265   Online: 866
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13
  1. #11
    Jeff Bannow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,755
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by holmburgers View Post
    Fair enough; I guess I've just had good luck with my old cameras. But it's true, I'm not doing 'work' with any questionable camera.
    Me too - I've rolled the dice before and had good luck.

    I've also lost all the photos from a 2 week trip, because I "checked out" the camera at home before hand - I ran multiple test rolls, verified speeds were on, etc. on a used RZ67 setup. Unfortunately, the light seals that came out OK at home must have shifted in transit (maybe air pressure related?). Horrible light leaks on every shot.

    Took a trip to Utah last year with friends - I suggested she CLA her Hasselblad (due to my experiences above) but she said the camera "was fine". Broke her mainspring on the first day, and ended up using my backup camera body for the whole 18 day trip.

    I guess I'm a little sensitive about that now!
    - Jeff (& sometimes Eva, too) - http://www.jeffbannow.com

  2. #12
    dmr
    dmr is offline
    dmr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    493
    Quote Originally Posted by domaz View Post
    The most important thing for the shutter is that it's working consistently, not accurately.
    I got my "baptism by fire" in camera repair about 5 years ago by repairing a flaky shutter on one of these. I will say that many of them out there have sticky shutters but when they are clean and used consistently they are very good user cameras, very reliable, and give consistently good exposures on both negative and reversal film.

    I have two of them, one as-is repaired, and the other sold to me in great shape. Shutters on both are very close, mostly tested using that "TV screen" method. Of course the proof is consistently well exposed frames.

    Other than the shutter, the two issues I've dealt with are:

    1. Light seals. The old ones turn to chunks of crud after several years. New seal kits are cheap and easy to install. (Getting the old grungy seals out is the challenge!)

    2. Batteries. Here in the States we can't get that Bad Bad Bad mercury cell anymore. There are a million work-arounds, some very simple, some very complicated. For one I was able to recalibrate it to use the "wrong" 625 cell and go up to ASA/ISO 1600. For the other I've been using a Wein cell and never touched the calibration.

    Second question: how should I expect to pay for a serious CLA on a camera like this?
    Some time ago I was quoted US$75 from a firm in New Jersey for a complete CLA including minor repair. So far I haven't had to take them up on the offer.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    northern england
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    617
    I replace light seals and mirror damper (if appropriate) as a matter of course, then run a test film through at a variety of aperture and shutter settings and process it in a favourite developer. If the negatives are correct and nothing creaks, squeaks or falls off I leave well alone. If there is an error but I like the camera well enough I'll pay for a CLA.

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