Re: [Leica] glitch in 35 f1.4?

[Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@pacbell.net>]

John

I will certainly endeavour to be nicer to you if
I ever have the need to point out a correction.

I certainly accept you as an expert in the care
and feeding of  Leicas.  I consider you as the
Leica analogue of the Rollei list's Todd Belcher.

This is not a faint praise, as anyone on the RUG
knows.

My comments are usually tempered by the fact
that my idol in interpersonal relations is Don Rickles.

Jerry

John Collier wrote:

> I think I gave a measured response but perhaps Jerry is right in that I
> should have gone further.
>
> Stiff spots in the focusing helical is not unusual and can have several
> causes depending on the lens in question and the age of that lens. Now
> the lens was described as a chrome 35/1.4 M lens. This leaves a great
> deal to the imagination as it could be an early 35/1.4 from the
> sixties, a custom one from the seventies (yes Leitz did do custom work
> for those who asked and were willing to pay) or it could be a chrome
> version of the 35/1.4 Asph. I think we can safely leave out the middle
> option which leaves an old lens or a new one.
>
> The chrome 35/1.4 lens came with a metal focusing tab so this leaves
> out the common 35/1.4 problem of a breaking plastic focusing tab which
> can result in the tab retaining screws jamming up the works. Also this
> is seldom described as a "slight hitch" as the focusing jams solid. So
> it may be a lubrication problem with some old grease soap residue
> gumming up the works. As the focusing helical is constructed to be to a
> large extent self lubricating, and, as it is not under any particular
> tension, I think it would be safe to work the helical back and forth to
> see if the grease can be remixed. It certainly will not cause any harm.
>
> If it is a 35/1.4 Asph in chrome finish, then it most likely the hitch
> is caused by an impact or, again, a grease problem. I have not heard of
> any problems with the tab screws backing out with the 35/1.4A as I have
> heard with the 50/2 and 35/2. This does not rule out the possibility
> but does make it less likely. Again, if this was the case. this would
> seldom be described as a "slight hitch" as the metal to metal contact
> (and not with two surfaces that were once machined to mate) usually has
> a horrible grinding feel to it. It is however not unusual for the
> 35/1.4A with its big hood to get a significant side impact in the
> course of our heated photographic wrestling with truth and justice.
> This dents the brass helical and creates a tight spot. There is no
> grinding of unhappy bedfellows nor any knocking about of parts at loose
> ends. Just a slight tight spot, a slight, dare I say, hitch in the
> focusing travel. Working it back and forth is unlikely to both improve
> or worsen the situation.
>
> So this brings us back to grease problems which are not as unusual as I
> would like to report. Certain lenses actually seem to rather have a
> difficult time with lubrication. I have had, and have heard of many
> other, lenses which improved greatly or, dare I say, were fixed, by a
> little time spent moving the focusing ring back and forth. My 90/2AA
> was such a lens and this is not an uncommon occurrence in Leicadom.
>
> Back to whatever it was we were originally talking about leaves me
> thinking that the slight hitch is most likely caused a previous side
> impact if it the lens in question is the 35/1.4A; and, by grease
> separation, if it is a chrome 35/1.4. In either case a bit of back and
> forth will do no more harm and might jolly well fix it. It is worth a
> try.
>
> However I agree with Jerry, in that the human capacity for
> understatement should have had me add the proviso that if it is a nasty
> grinding grating sort of slight hitch, you should bundle it off to your
> LLRPOM (Local Leica Repair Person of Merit) right away.
>
> John Collier
>
> PS: My 35/1.4A, not chrome mind you, developed just such a slight
> hitch. Undoubtedly due to my enthusiasm during a moment of photographic
> debauchery of which all memory has faded. I moved it back and forth for
> the requisite period of time to no avail -- no difference at all
> actually -- and finally sent in in to be repaired. The cost was the, by
> Leica standards, modest amount I alluded to in my earlier post.
>
> PPS: I do hope this post is more to your satisfaction Jerry. I do
> endeavor to please. Please do continue to expand upon any posts I make.
> I live I learn.
>
> PPPS: It would be nice if the "rabid dog who has taken a sudden dislike
> to ones taste in clothes" manner that so often flavors your corrections
> to me could be softened somewhat. Something a tad more congenial
> perhaps?
>
> On Saturday, March 15, 2003, at 11:28 AM, Jerry Lehrer wrote:
>
> > Right, move it back and forth by working the focusing mechanism
> > throughout the "stick/hitch" area.  This ensures that the chips will
> > fall
> > in the focus helix which will be cleaned when you send it to a repair
> > technician.
> >
> > Technicians just love working on cameras that have been "home
> > repaired" and given up on.  They can justifiably charge more.
> >
> > I know some who will just return the camera in the same bits and
> > pieces in which it came, with a polite refusal to do any work on it.
> >
> >
> > John Collier wrote:
> >
> >> Spend an half an hour moving it back and forth. It may help. Other
> >> than
> >> that you can either live with it or send it in for repair. The repair
> >> should not be expensive by Leica standards.
> >>
> >> John Collier
> >>
> >> On Friday, March 14, 2003, at 11:58 PM, leica-user@ispwest.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> I recently bought a 35f1.4 Crome M, however it has a slight
> >>> stick/hitch on the focus barrel.
> >>> What should I do...is there a home remedy I can perform or do I have
> >>> to give it back.  Sad
> >>> to say it was not under the lucrative Passport warranty so...help!!!
>
> --
> 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