Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/01/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Robert, Thanks for your input. Maybe I'm wrong, but friction caused by lube on the blades can cause some torsional forces which could pull a blade out of place. This hasn't happened yet--two of them are kind of hanging up, and after a moment, do return. It was never a cosmetic problem--the stiffness occured at the same time as the lube appeared on the blades. It's off to Ken Ruth tomorrow. He's always performed excellent work and stands behind it. Regards, P - --- "Robert G. Stevens" <robsteve@hfx.andara.com> wrote: > 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 __________________________________________________ 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