Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/18

[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: Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@pacbell.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 21:09:02 -0800
References: <14F29ECF-59BD-11D7-80DD-0050E42E6E0B@shaw.ca>

John

I hate to interject the possibility of the oil re-depositing
itself on the inner lens surfaces as a visible haze.  It may
do this over time. Not visible right away, buuuut----?

Jerry


John Collier wrote:

> It sounds like they described it accurately to me. If the aperture
> moves freely I would not worry about it. Oil on the aperture blades is
> more of an issue with SLR auto diaphragm lenses.
>
> John Collier
>
> On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 07:49 PM, Richard F. Man wrote:
>
> > What a hunk of a lens. Titanium finish, looks good and handles well on
> > the black M7. Now perhaps a problem, keh.com listed it as "EXC," which
> > means:
> >
> > ****
> > "Excellent" 80-89% of the original condition. Shows moderate wear. May
> > have small dings, pecks and slight finish wear. Glass may have some
> > dust, but no marks.
> > ****
> >
> > The finish actually looks pretty good, but there seems to be teeny
> > spots of oil on some of the aperture blades, say may be about 6.
> > Should I complain to keh.com and see if they would clean it?
>
> --
> 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

Replies: Reply from "Don Dory" <dorysrus@mindspring.com> (Re: [Leica] 35 Summilux from KEH, should I complain?)
In reply to: Message from John Collier <jbcollier@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] 35 Summilux from KEH, should I complain?)