Re: [Leica] Lens CLA Problem

["Robert G. Stevens" <robsteve@hfx.andara.com>]

Patrick:

Sounds like your aperture blades have come out of place.  With a range 
finder, oil on the blades is of no concern because they do not have to open 
and close instantly like with a SLR.  The lube probably had nothing to do 
with it.  Some lenses were just notorious for the aperture blades coming 
out of place.  This just may be one of those lenses.

On each end of the blade is a pin that indexes into a hole in the ring that 
moves them.  There is then another ring or part of the lens that screws 
down on top of all these blades to keep them in their holes.  If this ring 
is too tight, the aperture is hard to move.  If it is too loose, they pop 
out of the index holes and you get the problem you mention.

Send it back to them and get them to fix it.  Your problem is you started 
complaining about the wrong thing; something that is really just 
cosmetic.  You should have been telling them that one of the aperture 
blades is out of place.

Regards,

Robert



At 10:04 AM 1/6/2003 -0800, Patrick Jelliffe wrote:
>Thanks, John
>
>We've had several email exchanges regarding this and
>he's adamant that 6 months is his usual warranty, and
>he might stretch that to a year, but, darn, I'm even
>over that generous extension.  (I did contact him at
>the one year mark, and told him of the stiffness,
>before it got really bad, and he told me not to
>worry.) At this point, I don't wish to besmirch his
>reputation, I just won't do business there again.
>Pretty sure it's just a matter of using a little too
>much lube, or one with a (too)low viscosity for this
>lens.   Nothing to lose business over or have an ego
>reaction about.
>
>--- John Collier <jbcollier@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > Could you tell us who did the work? If it was
> > someone familiar, we can
> > tell you if they are just trying to brush you off. I
> > use Gerry Smith at
> > Kindermann Canada and have heard good things about
> > DAG as well. Some of
> > the others can be a little difficult to deal with at
> > times and not
> > willing to acknowledge potential errors or
> > omissions.
> >
> > There are lenses that are famous for poor diaphragm
> > construction such
> > that it is recommended you do not use the lens if
> > you find one that
> > works! As far as I know the Canon 50/1.2 is a good
> > user lens though the
> > Canon 50/1.4 and Nikon 50/1.4 were better
> > performers.
> >
> > John Collier
> >
> > On Monday, January 6, 2003, at 09:54 AM, Patrick
> > Jelliffe wrote:
> >
> > > Can I get your opinions?
> > >
> > > 13 months ago I sent my Canon sm 50mm 1.2 lens for
> > a
> > > CLA.  The glass was very clear, but both the
> > aperture
> > > and focus were stiff enough to be a problem.
> > There
> > > was oil on the aperture blades.  The $100 CLA
> > seemed
> > > to do the trick until 2 months ago, when I noticed
> > the
> > > aperture was stiff from 2.8 to 1.2, and observed a
> > > small amount of lubricant near the inner 1/4 of
> > > several blades.  After a roll or two, that
> > migrated,
> > > and now lubricant covers all the blades, causing
> > two
> > > of them to hang-up at 2.0.  I've stopped using the
> > > lens for fear of breaking anything.  The repair
> > > facility has refused to back their work saying
> > that
> > > the Canon 50 1.2 is prone to this lubricant
> > migration.
> > >  The lens was never in extreme conditions--no Gobi
> > > Desert, no glove box storage, etc., and has not
> > seen
> > > much use, (literally under 10 rolls).  Am I wrong
> > to
> > > be annoyed about this lack of service?  Have
> > others
> > > had this problem with this lens?
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
>http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html