Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] 35 Summilux from KEH, should I complain?
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 18:30:56 -0500

Patrick,

> I did have a Canon 50 f/1.2 screw mount lens serviced
> by Focal Point.  Apparently, VanStelten used a GREASE
> with a high viscosity.  It migrated over a period of 9
> months, and a total of TWO rolls of film using that
> lens, no extreme temperatures either in use or
> storage.  Because it wasn't oil, the grease caused the
> blades to bind and rendered the lens unuseable. Even
> under examination, because of the use of grease and
> not oil, there was no shiny telltale sign. Your case
> is totally different, but mine is an example of
> improper repair technique, and probably improper
> volume of lubricant.

This is an astounding story, Patrick.  John is the best known lense repair
expert on the planet.  This is the very first, out of hundreds of people
I've known use him, that I've heard a thing bad.

Did you call him and ask him about this?  If not, why not?  If so, what was
the rest of the story?  I just can't imagine him doing as you suspect,
"botching" a repair, or him not making it right for you if in fact he was at
fault for some reason.

Regards,

Austin

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

Replies: Reply from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> (Re: [Leica] 35 Summilux from KEH, should I complain?)