Once again it is a busy work day so not much time for cameras.
I do want to try the oil on my 3C you mention as soon as I get through this roll of film. I have some good gun oil and I could apply it using the tip of a small screwdriver as you suggest and put off the CLA for a bit. I think the CLA will cost more than the camera. Will gun oil work just as well? If not I will need to buy some good machine oil.
As both of you indicate the Zorki's seem to have a great cost / performance ratio. I prefer low cost to luxury so I'm more than willing to put up with a few anomalies. I have two bodies, two lenses, and two cases for less than one BGN condition Nikon F body only and way, way less than the price for one of the Nikon rangefinders. Those things are priced high.
Well, I wouldn't go as far as to compare them to an F.:laugh: Do you realise that a new F in say 1970, with a meter prism and f1.4 lens was 1/4 the cost of a new small car? Fs are one of the greatest bargains out there, so are F2s. But again, these will need a CLA too. It's part of using this equipment. Any camera I get, I assume that no matter how nice it's cosmetic condition, it will need a complete overhaul.
Originally Posted by Lamar
Lol, no clues about gun oil, I've never had such thing in my hands. My guess is it would work, but maybe someone else will know better. Watchmakers may supply you with the quantity you need - 1-2 ml should be enough to attempt to lubricate whole camera.
Watch oil - http://www.ofrei.com/page246.html It will be an absolute waste to use this oil on anything you haven't cleaned - and by cleaned, I mean disassemble, brush with solvent, zap it in the ultrasonic. Oil only works as it should on clean surfaces.
For your purposes, use something like "Break Free" or "TriFlow" and consider what you are doing as a temporary (very temporary, for evaluative purposes only) measure at best.
The trouble with oiling contaminated/dirty mechanisms is that the oil you apply mixes with the dirt, spreading it everywhere, and causing greatly accelerated wear if any abrasive particles are present. You may also be creating more work for whomever does the CLA. The two products I mentioned are intended for use on dirty mechanisms, but they are not a substitute for cleaning.
Do NOT use WD 40, it dries to a waxy residue that is very difficult to remove. 3-in-1 oil sucks too. ;)
I'll just stay away from any oil for now until I can get it cleaned. I knew not to use the WD-40. As far as the CLA, half of me wants to dig into it and the other half says to send it off.
I had no idea the F's were that expensive new. I bought an F Photomic FTN a couple of years back for $140 in great condition, meter works great and everything. Since then I've shot more frames with it and my F2 than any of my other bodies combined, including digital if you don't count paid work. F2's are a different story. I went through several F2's before I actually found one I didn't send back. Most were badly worn or had issues with the power switch or meter. I finally kept an F2SB that was fairly clean. The meter didn't work so they cut the price to $79. I had to send the meter off to Sover Wong to get fixed but it works like new now. All totaled I paid the average going price for an excellent condition F2SB but the fact that the meter is essentially new makes it a good deal. I wonder how many of these new digital cameras will be around and working in 40 or 50 years........ Will there still even be file support for them?
I had a black F/ FTN, 50/1.4 made in 1972, it still had the bill of sale in the case - $460~. In '72 you could drive home a new Toyota for about $1800.
Originally Posted by Lamar
A modern top line DSLR is still about a quarter the cost of a new car, in 40 years it will be a useless curiosity - an F can be kept going as long as you want it to.
If you don't have experience working on small mechanisms, as well as the proper tools and a decent work area, send it off. Get some junk cameras like old SLRs to learn on
Today's digital cameras getting into their 40? None, not even a single one will make that long. The reason being all the crucial electronic components will simply get old, and there will be no replacement parts to salvage in 10-15 years. And it's not "old camera", when it's crucial 30% was replaced. Does anyone make replacements for late 90-s CCD sensors? Not a single model is being produced more, than a couple of years without revision. In 40 years, however, I expect the gear to have adaptable qualities. You want T50, it becomes like T50, you want D3000, it becomes like D3000, just add water... It kinda starts now, with 3D printing and flexible electronics.
Modern, computerized society lives on a very thin and temporal hologram. This occasionally breaks, like when to run a drum scanner, you need to set up a VM with Win 95 on it and purchase SCSI interface card. Wait for PCI and PCIMCIA to become our past and it's all done. Same with USB, memory cards...
We live without much attachment to items and permanence, caring more about comfort, quality of service and high performance - this is what you are as a society, and this is where we're going as well. Which is all wrong and wasteful, but we kinda accept the fact, that this is how we want to live, and this is how fast the world turns. Noone curses scientists for their discoveries or engineers for making things perform better. So, I think, apart from museums, there will be no 40 years old digital cameras in working condition.
I think Zorkis are good cameras to start learning to service such stuff: crucial elements, like slow speed escapement, are "encapsulated", mechanisms are fairy simple compared to any advanced SLRs. And this is what will survive next 50 years or so. One indeed needs some strange materials and esoteric knowledge: curtain cloth, ribbons, adhesives, lubricants, solvents, and how to use it all... But isn't that the case for other cameras too? Maybe Smenas would be better to start indeed, but what to CLA in a Smena, huh? There's hardly anything in it.
Since you have one camera working, if money is not the problem, I'd rather put some lube into the rollers and pay to have the other camera thoroughly serviced in a couple of years. 5-10 years of peaceful photography is what you pay for. And this is exactly what I've done (not to justify myself, I just think it's reasonable).
With the exception of the mirror box, many early & very inexpensive - Yashica Tls, for instance, or pre-Spotmatic Pentaxes, are no more complex, and can be had (at least in the rural northern New York section of the US) cheaper than the FSU cameras. I bought a Yashica TL Super for $ 2.15, the seals had turned to goo and deranged the shutter. The lens is a 50/2 Yashinon, and a very good lens. This will be overhauled and either put to use - it's M42 mount - or given to some interested young person, I have too many M42 bodies. I see cameras like these at thrift shops in the $5 range a few times a year, they would be a good way to familiarise yourself rather than on a camera you value as a user.
Originally Posted by q_x
Just developed the first roll out of the Zorki-3C. Exposure for shutter speeds 1/25th thru 1/1000th all look good. I didn't even try the slower speeds, I know they are bad. Frame spacing is good too. The roll is drying now. I will scan tomorrow and post some pics. The 3C is my favorite of the two. They are essentially the same but somehow the 3C just feels a little bit more solid in the hands...... I really like these little beasts....
Scans from the Zorki-3C with the Jupiter-8. Kodak Tri-X 400 developed in XTOL.
Attachment 78400 Attachment 78401 Attachment 78402
Attachment 78403 Attachment 78404 Attachment 78405
And the only thing that bothers me about this camera is the film offset. The 4 wasn't too bad but the film is really offset in the 3C. q_x, i believe you mentioned the older ones were worse about this. I have seen it first hand now.