Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/12/18

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] bitten by the SL bug
From: thibault collin <tc-lnc@u-picardie.fr>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 10:10:17 +0100

Patrick,
I really do think that you did not make any mistake buying an old SL. At
least, if the camera is not in mint shape, it is still a beautiful object to
carry!
I recently bought an SL2 and found it was really a wonderful tool and with
the 50mm sumicron, it's even better! What a sharp lens!
Thib.

At 18:29 17/12/1997 -0800, you wrote:
>At 08:35 PM 12/17/97 -0500, Dan Post wrote:
>>BTW, in a more serious vein- if you've had repair work done on an SL, I have
>>a question. Is the 'seperation' in the viewfinder that Leica advised me of
>>endemic? Just what seperates? I have a black SL-Mot, and the prism is
>>de-silvering ( VERY dim), so it's hard to say if there is seperation. The
>>chrome SL I have has a slight darkening at the edge of the viewfinder, but I
>>didn't notice it until Leica pointed it out!
>
>I don't do camera repair, but in "Leica Reflex Photography," Brian Bower
>points out that "staining" around the edges of the finder are an indication
>that the balsam cementing the finder components is deteriorating.  I don't
>think this is necessarily a disaster (unlike a black RF in an M3, which I
>have not heard of anyone being able to repair).  The reason I don't think
>it's necessarily a disaster is that there are repair people who can
>recement lens elements, and so I would guess that the same would be true of
>finder components.  I don't actually know it's possible to repair these --
>I'm just guessing, based on the fact that S.K. Grimes, for example, can
>replace the balsam in a separating lens.
>
>-Patrick
>
>
>