jt991

<p>The repairer has told me that the "something" that was wrong with this lens, is that instead of the point of focus being at the film plane, it is in effect an inch (25cm) behind the film plane.<br>

I didn't fully grasp the technicalities of the proposed remedy, which involves the cannibalisation of another Canon 50mm 1.2 lens for (was it one ?) of its element to be transplanted. <br>

So I probably won't need the Jupiter 8 I bought for a Fed some time back, as shouldn't be very long before the Canon lens comes back home.</p>

<p>OP's Update following todays conversation with the repairer:<br>

(a) There is nothing wrong with the camera and (b) he is evidently going to have to disassemble the front of the lens to fix it because something “must have gone wrong” during the reassembly prior to it being forwarded on to me. . He concluded with a promise to email me tomorrow with another update, and I am hopeful that it may be back after three days. (Human error, sincere apology, prioritisation and customer goodwill are all part of this experience)<br>

</p>

<p> Thank you Stephen for your contribution, particularly for describing the probable causes.<br>

Although the camera and lens were bought together, as I have a LTM Jupiter 50mm the camera body was sent at my request directly to me whilst the Canon lens was sent separately to be serviced. (I preferred to use the camera straightaway, rather than wait for up to four weeks for the lens) Therefore I (still) assume that presence of the camera isn't necessary for collimation as well as disassembly & reassembly of the lens. <br>

To cut along story short, the lens has gone back (together with the camera this time), to the same repairer; well known and recommended, whose name I'll withhold for now as every other time I have dealt with them turned out satisfactorily. I will post again in this thread to report the outcome.</p>

 

<p>Negatives of the second film put through my allegedly "fully working, Exc+ six months guaranteed" Canon 7 reveal that all the frames taken with the similarly described freshly serviced Canon 50mm f1.2 are unfocused, and the remainder - with a similar quality (but not recently serviced) Canon 135mm f3.5 are in focus. As I have been a keen amateur for 50 years, used RF and a SLR Leicas, SLR Nikons, etc with moderate to great success, this anomaly has completely baffled me. The only cause I can imagine is that the rangefinder actuating arm and or its roller are out of line.. though not by enough when the cam of the 135 comes by. And before any one asks, yes I turn the 135's distance scale to 1m before I put the lens on.<br>

ps All the Negatives from the first film (taken with the 50mm lens) are out of focus, which is why I tried another film just after the 135 lens was bought.</p>

<p>Thank you Gordon, for this detailed and helpful explanation. One of the photographs accompanying the listing of the 450 I saw revealed that it was engraved 55 - so no good for my 50 f/1.2 lens. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>I hope its the 450 as I've a chance to buy one ....</p>

<p>Newton Ellis in Liverpool have an excellent reputation , and as you are in London well worth contacting before you send the camera overseas.<br>

www.newtonellis.com </p>

<p>I found three of the correct Canon matched type listed among a favourite bookmarked reputable Austrian Photo Shop's web pages, and have bought the one which has its original brown leather case as well as a "proper" Canon 55mm yellow filter - which I fancy is of a similar age.<br>

If I had made my mind up earlier, they would have been here for Christmas...</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I just missed an opportunity to get a right (original type) clamp-on vented lens shade for the Canon 50 /1.2 on my 7. Although I am using a generic 55mm screw-in substitute, I would prefer a (presumably) reversible close -to-the-original kind; which would let me change filters without having to take the shade off and then back on again, etc. If any other users of one if these lenses didn't get the "proper" shade with it, I'd like to hear which alternatives are recommended. (I've heard there is a good Olympus look-alike, for example)</p>

<p>Even after paying close attention to the Instruction Book I'm having difficulty loading my newly acquired Canon 7 - specifically in hooking the film leader's second (or any) perforation/socket hole on to the take-up spool claw and having it stay there. On the first attempt I eventually got the spool to take up the leader after several attempts by sheer luck and the film advances apparently o.k. (Up to 15 out of 36 frames so far). No doubt other users of a 7 may be surprised by my ineptitude, as they regard loading their camera to be second nature, with the sprocket hole never slipping off the spool's claw.<br>

So, what is the knack to get it right ?</p>

 

<p>If you have a Canon 7 (or 7s) with the 1.2 50mm lens, have you found that when fitting a filter it touches the lens surface ? <br>

In anticipation of a 7 with a 1.2 50 lens already on its way I came across this 'warning' in a forum which recommended two Makes of filter that won't (<em>perhaps</em> Hoya and B&W) and seek advice accordingly here.</p>

 

<p>I have just bought a 7 (s/n 864***) and carefully read a copy of "How to use your Bell & Howell Canon 7 Camera"; then again to see whether the shutter speed may be set either before or after the shutter has been cocked. (Motivated by the knowledge that my Zorki's shutter should be cocked before the speed is set). The only reference found is "advance the film, then set the shutter speed" , but does it really matter ?</p>

 

If you have a Canon 7 (or 7s) with the 1.2 50mm lens, have you found that when fitting a filter it touches the lens surface ? <br />In anticipation of a 7 with a 1.2 50 lens arriving next week I came across this 'warning' in a forum which recommended two Makes of filter that won't (<em>perhaps</em> Hoya and B&W) and seek advice accordingly here.

<p>Thanks for your replies, guys.<br>

Now at the 21st frame of the first film I've loaded into the camera, I'm quite getting used to the built-in viewfinder and seriously contemplating sending the SBOOI back - hopefully for a full refund. A 440 turret finder looks a lot better prospect (and impressive) , but with only a 50mm Sonnar and unlikely to add other lenses any time soon I'm not likely to buy one in the immediate future. (Although, as I write this, there's one on Ebay in Germany going for US$329)</p>

<p>I recently bought a near-mint Contax llla with a 50mm/1.5 Sonnar; and though its viewfinder is fine, because I always wear eyeglasses just got a SBOOI accessory finder, with a mind to primarily using the camera finder supplemented by the SBOOI for framing.<br>

Obviously the extra height of the camera's accessory shoe - because of its meter - puts the SBOOI further away from the lens axis than would be considered "normal" ; so to justify the expense of buying it :-) would be interested to hear how many other llla users have the same combination.<br>

Incidentally, there is an illustration in the Instruction Book of a llla fitted with the Universal Finder for all focal lengths in its accessory shoe.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>My newly bought 1966 "vintage" Zorki 4 (6661***) has three markers around the shutter release ring - whereas images found on the web of others show only two. (Perhaps the third, if screen-printed has rubbed off ?) On mine, a black dot in the centre; with different cyrillic characters on either side. From on-line Instruction-Book reproductions (e.g. Butkus) I learnt that the right and left characters are the positions to align the ring's marker for advancing/rewinding the film (push down & turn the ring apparently). But what happens when the ring's marker is aligned with that mid-way black dot ?<br>

I may be wrong surmising that only owners of the same Zorki 4 series* will know the answer, but this is a definite case of my needing to know !<br>

* The numbers on the dials are engraved, the Zorki logo (in Cyrillic script) on the front screen-printed.</p>

<p>Sorry, for SCR read SRC !</p>

<p>As every user of a 6003 SRC 1000 knows, the film speed setting dial is on the camera, and may be that User Manuals specifically for this camera are very scarce... or even (as I suspect) non-existent, with any instructions being incorporated in a limited fashion within the 6008 (or 6008, 6003 Professional ?) User Manual/s<br>

So here's my question - directed at users of a 6003 SRC 1000 <em>with its original back and thus using the film speed dial on the camera; </em>do you always set both SCA356 and camera's film speed dials to the same ASA/DIN figure ? <br>

And if you have a copy of a Rollei Instruction Book specifically for the 6003 SRC 1000 a photocopy or scan of the "Flash" section would be gratefully received. <br>

(This is all about just having bought a Cullmann CX35 and a SCA356.... assuming both dials should be set to the film speed.....)</p>

<p>A 6003 SRC 1000 not displaying the aperture correctly.<br /> A couple of weeks ago I picked up a 6003 SRC 1000 and 80mm Planar f/2.8 which had recently been serviced/repaired by Wiese Fototechnik - described, as I understand it from the website, - to have been approved by Franke & Heidecke in 2008 . <br /> However, after using it mostly in Aperture priority mode I have found that I’m in a similar situation to Justin with his 6008i - related here on March 29 this year. ‘Fortunately’ my camera’s display shows the Aperture as only ⅓ stop wider than it really is; and with the alternative of sending it to DHW at very probably a relatively high cost - I’m regarding the problem as a fault I can live with. <br /> Particularly as I don’t “do” transparencies - just black and white and occasionally colour negative film.<br /> PS For a brief moment I almost convinced myself that the previous owner had asked for that extra third of a stop to be set on purpose :-) Or maybe I’ll just leave it on Shutter priority instead…..</p>

<p>I'd like you to compare the brightness of their displays - those in the viewfinder that illuminate to show the distance scale and shutter speed.<br>

Using the serial numbers to describe the two I own, a few months ago I bought 055XX (+ 45 and 21mm lenses), and liked it so much that not long afterwards decided that as a back-up - or so that I wouldn't have to keep changing lenses all the time :-) bought 069XXX. Both are in excellent condition and have already proved their worth in providing excellent results from the first couple of films run through them. <br>

However I am somewhat concerned that the display in 069 is very noticeably less bright (though perfectly useable)than the one in 055. Somewhat puzzling to me, as I would assume that if either display were dim, it would be the older camera affected. As both have new Panasonic CR2 Lithium Photo-power batteries fitted, that can't be the cause; so I'm wondering whether Kyocera changed the display at some stage of production, or maybe one of them is just an isolated example. <br>

On a lighter note, I hadn't planned to "cannibalise" the younger camera (for its distance scale/shutter-speed read-out) whenever that might become unavoidable.</p>

<p>(A kind of Addendum , I suppose)<br>

I have recently bought a G2 and although the Mode and Exposure counter LCDs show no signs of "Bleeding" (a problem encountered in some cases), I have taken the precaution of buying new LCDs - "just in case" from ToCAD. The situation described by Bill has evidently improved, as I got to talk to a real person, helpful and obliging. 20.00 USD for the pair + shipping. </p>

<p>A few days ago, Jens wrote that he had never heard about LCD bleeding in a G2.<br>

In comparison to Ffordes, Leicashop (in Vienna, Austria) consistently provide a set of photographs for their used cameras; currently one related to this thread, of a black G2 - including a close-up showing its blacked-out Mode LCD<br>

<a href="https://www.leicashop.com/pic.php?lang=de&order=20524_18&pic=6#6">https://www.leicashop.com/pic.php?lang=de&order=20524_18&pic=6#6</a><br>

It might be interesting to check back later to see if anybody has bought it :-)</p>

 

<p>Well, you have now, Jens.<br>

Ffordes in Scotland (occasionally commended in photo.net) have two of the eight G2 cameras currently listed affected by light bleeding. There are other instances I have discovered, which is why I am checking with the people Kyocera appointed to deal with service & repair requests to find out if the supply of new LCDs has run out - or not. Ffordes cameras don't look as though they've been ill-treated...<br>

www.ffordes.co.uk/product/12091209205481</p>

 

<p>My G2 LCDs are o.k. and I knew before I bought it about the "bleeding issue" which may inevitably afflict them...<br>

Anyone out there with a G who has had its LCDs replaced within, say, the last 18 months ? Just wondering if there are any new ones left, anywhere. Dreading the worst scenario - that day when the exposure counter blacks out altogether :-( </p>

<p>Thank-you Jens for that welcome re-assurance (and your encouraging review of the G2 published elsewhere).<br>

As mine may well already be in its second decade of service, perhaps expecting it to survive another two would be too optimistic. I have followed (to no avail) advice seen elsewhere regarding a Contax chart showing years of G1 & 2 manufacture by serial numbers, by passing the lenses' serial numbers to Zeiss in Oberkochen. All they can tell me is that they were made "in 1996 or later" Also an opinion has been expressed that the LCD display begins to "bleed" with age; which as my camera's has not, I have taken as a good sign.<br>

</p>