Canon QL17 Giii

[robert_segal3]

<p>Hi,<br>

I received this camera today via purchase on eBay. The camera was represented to be freshly overhauled and working perfectly. It does seem perfect both mechanically and cosmetically (although I haven't had any film developed yet), except the inside of the viewfinder appears to have a small blotch of "bleeding" on the right side in the yellow vertical rectangle where the meter needle is located.<br>

It is just a small circle, but is a bit distracting when you look through the viewfinder.<br>

Would this have been corrected in an overhaul? Should it have been? Can it be?<br>

I paid top dollar for the camera, I think ($195) on the basis of its represented condition.<br>

Your thoughts are appreciated.<br>

Thanks.<br>

Robert</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>My guess is that bleeding was introduced by the overhaul. </p>

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>Wouldn't be a finger print or grease spot would it? The Tech who did the CLA may have been eating French fries!<br>

Will not affect your images though it can be annoying. These are fine cameras and I hope it works out for you.</p>

[Gus Lazzari]

<p>You no doubt paid at the highest range of current pricing for that unit. <br /> It should therefore be in "Mint" condition; which is to say, close to New. <br /> A flawed (<strong>could get worse</strong>) RF system <strong>isn't</strong> "New"</p>

<p>I'd offer to keep it if an adjustment/discount of the paid price is made for this misrepresentation/error.<br /> If not, no matter what was stated in the AD, Ebay will fully refund once package is returned.</p>

<p>This was perhaps the most popular "fast optic" rangefinder camera ever built, so many more out there to buy...</p>

[jeff_guthrie]

The window in the viewfinder which shows the aperture settings is a piece of thin plastic film which sits behind the

meter needle. It was probably cleaned in the overhaul, but probably too firmly, and was damaged as a result. it is a

part which can be fairly easily replaced without removing the rangefinder. As the seller if he will fix it for you.

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I think the camera was sold new in 75 for around $80. Even if figure in the inflation that's about $320. For $195 it's way up there for an almost 40 year cold camera.</p>

 

[chuck_foreman1]

<p>IF you'RE dissatisfied .. then complain! Like another said. For that money it better be right and if not send it back! That sounds tough and this is so not meek little me, but I encourage this attitude, certainly the seller needs to help resolve the situation! </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Jeff's description sounds right. I cleaned the viewfinders on my Canonets but no longer have them to check for that particular detail. Fortunately the GIII QL17 viewfinder is relatively easy to access for inspection and cleaning.</p>

[jodys]

<p>A 'CLA' (especially on the 'bay) does <strong>not</strong> mean that the camera was torn down into individual components or assemblies, and that each was meticulously cleaned in an ultrasonic cleaner, reassembled, then lubed. There may be some Leica servicers who do that, but they charge a premium for their services. Generally, if it isn't broken, no one tries to service it (*). If a rangefinder assembly is accurate and clean, no one is going to mess with it. It would take a significant blemish in the viewing area for me personally to replace the mask in question. Of course whether I would mention a blemish in an auction is a matter of personal judgment, and I can't comment on your 'bleeding' without seeing it (as a photographer, I personally tend to notice and mention this sort of thing... if I were a professional reseller, then no). Bottom line: it's a 40 year-old camera. It wasn't kept in a temp- and humidity-controlled vault for those 40 years.</p>

<p>*- I realize people who have commented on this thread will dispute that assessment. I'm talking about 'common practices', and not the work of any particular repairman or service center. Obviously some are very thorough, others are lazy, and many are incompetent.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>I've had two of these and love them but $195 is way out of line to start with. I paid about $40 for my current copy and couldn't see going more than maybe $100 for one in mint condition. If it's not perfect and you're not happy I would definitely send it back. Even if it doesn't affect the pictures, it's one of those things that's going to be annoying every time you look through the viewfinder.</p>

[bobbollinger]

<p>I overpaid for two of those cameras in "very good" condition a few years ago and after running a half dozen rolls of film through them the aperture blades stuck in both units. I think I would also advise that you either return for refund or insist on a repair. A lot still could go wrong, though, and the stuck blades is a fairly common problem with them, so the refund approach may be your more appealing solution. </p>