Mamiya 645 1000s. Light Leak or something else?

KEH charges a flat rate of $265 to overhaul a Mamiya 645 body.

 

- ROFL!

That's only about twice what an old metal Mammy 645 body is worth. Even less for the crappy plastic ones.

 

The camera has a light leak. At worst it's a shutter fault, but could just as easily be something as simple as a displaced strip of black fabric. Throwing several hundred dollars at repair is completely disproportionate before eliminating more serious causes, or even returning the camera whence it came for a refund.

 

A complete replacement of all the foam body seals takes about 2 hours of tedious but unskilled work and costs perhaps $10 tops in materials.

 

If it's not fixed by that, then there's a serious case for cutting losses and just buying another camera body. Not for throwing good money after bad.

"peterphotography was last seen: Monday at 12:00 AM"

 

I'm really hoping the OP checks back again with a progress report.

 

Abandoned 'puzzle' threads with no resolution are really annoying!

 

I totally agree with that as well ;)

 

So update: I went ahead and resealed it with new body foam. Same problems. On top of that, I pretty much covered the entirety of the camera (I'm talking about over-the-top level of gaffer tape) and still had 1-2 photos with markings.

 

In terms of lens cap, I always keep it on during film advancement so I guess that didn't seem to work?

 

Since I bought for $180AUD or $132USD, and the rare camera repair store in Sydney which charges $100 for the initial quote, I've decided to sell this camera off for whatever peanuts I can get and just buy a different M645 1000s.

What about the films themselves, were they imported and went through airport customs xray machines?

^ That's a good thought but the OP seems to be saying the light is only within the exposed frame on the film; not beyond it.

What about the films themselves, were they imported and went through airport customs xray machines?

 

I'd assume so. I bought it on eBay from another city, but I also bought 35mm film in the same order and there's never been any troubles.

"from another city"

 

The films could be a mixture of imported rolls from different places then sold by the one seller. Were all the films new, were they expired, were they sold by a reputable eBayer ? Short story: I bought a few films on eBay once and one of the rolls was already exposed. By a quirk of fate I accidentally developed it before putting it through a camera. Not bad shots as well. Just as well I didn't multi expose them, but they're no good to me, trying to get someone to post them on facebook so owner can retrieve them

 

Regarding camera faults, the attitude I adopt is always imagine the camera when it was new, working properly and with no light leaks etc, and then proceed to get the camera back into it's "like new" working condition again, or almost like new, but as long as all the functions are back very close to original specs

 

I'm betting that your shutter is at fault, I've thought this all along even though, in one post, I said it may be a light seal problem. Everything has been covered, you used tape to block light, you resealed the back, you exposed more film but the problem persisted. So it's either Joe's suggestion of a worn seal near the mirror hinge, or a "hesitating shutter. But because of the sharp edge of the light mark on your film, I'd say it's a shutter problem. Probably the second curtain is momentarily hesitating halfway and exposing half the image an extra stop or so, but not happening every time

 

Possibly a helpful link ...

F3 shutter problem

"from another city"

 

The films could be a mixture of imported rolls from different places then sold by the one seller. Were all the films new, were they expired, were they sold by a reputable eBayer ? Short story: I bought a few films on eBay once and one of the rolls was already exposed. By a quirk of fate I accidentally developed it before putting it through a camera. Not bad shots as well. Just as well I didn't multi expose them, but they're no good to me, trying to get someone to post them on facebook so owner can retrieve them

 

Regarding camera faults, the attitude I adopt is always imagine the camera when it was new, working properly and with no light leaks etc, and then proceed to get the camera back into it's "like new" working condition again, or almost like new, but as long as all the functions are back very close to original specs

 

I'm betting that your shutter is at fault, I've thought this all along even though, in one post, I said it may be a light seal problem. Everything has been covered, you used tape to block light, you resealed the back, you exposed more film but the problem persisted. So it's either Joe's suggestion of a worn seal near the mirror hinge, or a "hesitating shutter. But because of the sharp edge of the light mark on your film, I'd say it's a shutter problem. Probably the second curtain is momentarily hesitating halfway and exposing half the image an extra stop or so, but not happening every time

 

Possibly a helpful link ...

F3 shutter problem

 

The films were new and they got it from the supplier from US to Aus.

 

Thanks for the link! I'll investigate it further and I also share the similar rhetoric of restoring the camera to as-new as I can. But given the lack of repair shops around me and the need for the CLA which will likely cost more than the actual camera... I may sadly need to replace it.

The fogging looks nothing like X-ray damage. There was an example in another thread recently, which resulted in the backing-paper numbering being printed through, and an overall speckling appearing on the film.

 

This is just plain light fogging, but from where is the mystery.

- ROFL!

That's only about twice what an old metal Mammy 645 body is worth. Even less for the crappy plastic ones.

 

The camera has a light leak. At worst it's a shutter fault, but could just as easily be something as simple as a displaced strip of black fabric. Throwing several hundred dollars at repair is completely disproportionate before eliminating more serious causes, or even returning the camera whence it came for a refund.

 

A complete replacement of all the foam body seals takes about 2 hours of tedious but unskilled work and costs perhaps $10 tops in materials.

 

If it's not fixed by that, then there's a serious case for cutting losses and just buying another camera body. Not for throwing good money after bad.

 

True enough but it's worth it to me to have a camera that I know will work correctly. I take my 645 mostly when traveling and when I'm overseas I can't take the chance of a body failure like the OP has. Buying a used early M645 is a crap shoot. I just bought 3 crappy M645 bodies off of eBay for $25 + shipping. I will get one good one, maybe two and the 3rd one will be a parts camera. Once serviced they are fine. My next trip to Asia I'm bringing a 2nd body for backup/colour film. Both bodies will be serviced and of course I'll run a test roll through each just prior to departure.

 

In Oct I visited Israel & Jordan for 2 weeks. I took three OM-2/OM-1 film bodies - all have been recently serviced by John Hermanson Zuiko.com. No issues at all. Well, the guy using them took some horrid shots but that's not the camera's fault :) !

Why not buy a Bronica ETR or ETRsi. The research I did before purchasing a 6x4.5 revealed trouble with Mamiyas and reliability with Bronica (electric leaf shutter). So the choice wasn't hard, I bought a Bronica ETRsi with motor drive and AE11 finder - for A$400. That was a few years ago, and I still have no regrets buying it

 

I have had no trouble with my 645 Pro. I bought it kind of young-second-hand, and it doesn't get heavy use, or rough treatment. Rodeo Joe rarely misses an opportunity to diss the later Mamiyas on here, and I guess we who have had good experiences of them are too busy or tired to keep replying, but a thread devoted to a 1000s that seems to have gone wrong is an odd place to be criticising the later cameras. I have other good cameras, but the Pro is one of my best purchases. Another, incidentally, is my crappy plastic Century Graphic; the 'mahoganite' body (Graflex's resin plastic) means it hasn't rotted or rusted, or bent, or warped, or softened since 1962, as a wooden or metal body might have. Of course, I could drop it on the floor and break it.

If you don't want or need the nicety of interchangeable backs, I've found the old metal Mamiya 645s to be extremely reliable. I've got 2 1000S bodies, an M645 and a couple of Js. Apart from the leathercloth peeling away in parts - and which could easily be glued back - they're all working fine. Dead simple to repair if it ever becomes necessary too. So a $265 dollar charge probably costs out at close to $100 per hour of technician's time.

 

"I have had no trouble with my 645 Pro."

 

- Lucky you then Dustin.

I've had 3 of them, 2 Supers and a Pro-TL, all of which have been gently used and still have all needed extensive repair. The latest to turn its toes up is the Pro-TL, which now refuses to fire at all.

 

"Rodeo Joe rarely misses an opportunity to diss the later Mamiyas on here..."

 

Just giving fair warning of their unreliability from my own experience, and pointing up the widely recognised issue with the mirror rest/brake.

 

I have no issue with the plastic body-cladding per se, but I've see many of the plastic magazines with cracks, warps and poor fitting that will compromise their light-tightness or focus integrity.

Edited November 18, 2018 by rodeo_joe|1

I bought my 1st Mamiya 645 in 1977. I traded it in on a new Hasselblad 500C/M as I got a deal that I could not say no to. In 1982 I bought my 2nd Mamiya 645 1000s and used it until around 1989 when bills made me sell it. In 2006 I bought my 3rd Mamiya 645 1000s which I still use today. Never had an issue - period.

 

I never bought a Bronica ETR as I prefer the focal plane shutter - I also used a Hasselblad 1000F and currently have two Hasselblad 2000FC/M cameras. I do like my 1969 Hasselblad 500C but I find the focal plane shutter more flexible.

 

My brother has a Bronica SQ (not sure which exact model) and has had nothing but issues with it.

 

All cameras need service at some time. They are mechanical devices and as such they do wear out. Service them and they will serve you well.

I know that this is a quite old thread and I hope "peterphotography" has solved his Problem in the meantime. But I have to add a few comments, because I had the same Problem (see attachment):

 

The 645's most common light leak is not at the hinge of the back, but at the lock. The cause is that the lock bolt is scraping over the sealing material and damages it. The mean thing is: The affected frame is always the next one, because the "wrong light" hits the piece of film between the supply reel and the film gate. The "razor sharp edge" is the shadow the supply reel casts. This also explains, why it is not at the same position in every picture: At the film start, wehn the reel is full, it is higher up than at the end.

 

Unfortunately, I have not come up with a real solution yet. So after many desperate attempts to get this camera light-tight, I switched to a 645 ProTL.

 

IIRC the light sealing for the back-catch is a slit piece of thin black material. The catch on my Mammys clears this material easily and doesn't rub it at all. So maybe the catch simply needs bending away from the light seal?

 

There's a round 'pin' on the end of the catch that should only just engage the cutout in the body. The foam in the light-trap channel should hardly get touched by the rounded pin; certainly it shouldn't get scraped away.

 

That's a massive light leak by any standard. Far too wide and deeply fogged to be caused by a tiny gap in the sealing foam, and too wide for a gap in the back lock mechanism as well I would have thought.

 

However, it's certainly caused outside of the film gate.

 

Too bad you've given up on the old metal Mammy, and good luck with its placky replacement, because you'll need it!

Okay, this is one of the most extreme examples of this kind of light leak I have. When I shot this image I had carried around the camera over the shoulder in bright sunlight for hours before (remember: it's always the next frame which is affected). But I made tests later (with photographic paper), with/without black adhesive tape around the edges of the film chamber door and so on, and my results were evident: The cause is definitely the lock mechanism.

Yes, I also prefer the haptic of the old ones and I'm kinda sad about that, but: I have two of them. In one I replaced the seals by myself (with original Mamiya seals), in the other one they were replaced by a specialized camera workshop and nevertheless, both are not light tight. I'm just tired of failed images and until now (that's already another couple of years now) the ProTL works fine...

the ProTL works fine...

Yeah, mine did as well for a few months!