brobbins
Established
Hello,
I recently acquired a Canon SII, marked Canon (not Seiki Kogaku) on the top plate, marked MIOJ and CPO on the base, along with a case marked MIOJ and CPO. The camera is nonfunctional. The shutter is extremely sluggish and the rangefinder does not adjust as one focuses the lens. Does anyone know who works on these cameras? Is it worth getting this fixed?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
I recently acquired a Canon SII, marked Canon (not Seiki Kogaku) on the top plate, marked MIOJ and CPO on the base, along with a case marked MIOJ and CPO. The camera is nonfunctional. The shutter is extremely sluggish and the rangefinder does not adjust as one focuses the lens. Does anyone know who works on these cameras? Is it worth getting this fixed?
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
harry01562
Registered semi-lurker
Hard to make a judgment based on what you've told us. The camera dates from the late 40's, and probably has never had any maintenance performed. Any lubrication has no doubt gotten very thick, or has even hardened, making normal functions sluggish or impossible. I'd first recommend that a qualified tech look the camera over, and decide if a CLA (clean, lubricate, adjust) will bring the camera up to normal operation. If it will, the cost will vary from $85-150 depending on the person doing the job. I'd recommend a tech here in Mass. who is good and reasonable. He does not do lenses, however.
If you don't have a lot invested in the camera, and if the cosmetics are excellent or better, than it would be worth it to do a routine CLA. At a minimum that would remove the old lube and replace it with modern ones, as well as adjusting and cleaning the RF, shutter and film transport mechanism. These are simple cameras, all mechanical, and respond well to knowledgeable repair.
One area of cosmetics is the "leather", which is usually less than good on this model. You will find that it may have shrunk, and have gaps where it fits together. The Japanese had material shortages at the period, and they did the best they could. I have a couple, and one has shrunk so that it is away from the chrome top and bottom. It will remain that way, because I don't want to replace it with something not original.
Anyway, this is really getting long. As you can see, the question isn't that easy to answer, without input.
Harry
If you don't have a lot invested in the camera, and if the cosmetics are excellent or better, than it would be worth it to do a routine CLA. At a minimum that would remove the old lube and replace it with modern ones, as well as adjusting and cleaning the RF, shutter and film transport mechanism. These are simple cameras, all mechanical, and respond well to knowledgeable repair.
One area of cosmetics is the "leather", which is usually less than good on this model. You will find that it may have shrunk, and have gaps where it fits together. The Japanese had material shortages at the period, and they did the best they could. I have a couple, and one has shrunk so that it is away from the chrome top and bottom. It will remain that way, because I don't want to replace it with something not original.
Anyway, this is really getting long. As you can see, the question isn't that easy to answer, without input.
Harry
CanonRFinder
Well-known
HI Be interested in the serial number of both camera and lens.brobbins said:
Thanks in advance Peter
W
wlewisiii
Guest
I'd say that a CLA is in order and I'd recommend DAG to do it. See http://www.dagcamera.com/ for more on his services. I'd want to have it done simply to be able to burn film in such an early Canon.
Good luck!
William
Good luck!
William
brobbins
Established
I thank all of you for your responses. I think I will go ahead and get a CLA.
Harry, the cosmetics are quite good - no dings or dents, just a couple of bright marks and a small scratch on the base. The leather is good, and the RF/VF combination is clear and bright. There is one scratch on the barrel of the lens. The shutter appears in good shape. There is some blue-green residue between the film advance knob and the shutter speed knob. It looks the color of oxidized copper. It may come off; I have not tried. Operationally, the lubricants appear to be all gummed up, and there appear to be oil droplets between the elements of the lens. Please let me know who you use for repairs in Massachusetts; I have spoken to Youxin Ye in the past and he is terrific, but I believe he works only on Leicas.
Peter, I do not have the camera with me now, but i will sent you a PM this weekend with serial numbers.
By the way, I am most impressed with quality of the leather case for the camera. The embossed Canon logo and symbol are well done.
Harry, the cosmetics are quite good - no dings or dents, just a couple of bright marks and a small scratch on the base. The leather is good, and the RF/VF combination is clear and bright. There is one scratch on the barrel of the lens. The shutter appears in good shape. There is some blue-green residue between the film advance knob and the shutter speed knob. It looks the color of oxidized copper. It may come off; I have not tried. Operationally, the lubricants appear to be all gummed up, and there appear to be oil droplets between the elements of the lens. Please let me know who you use for repairs in Massachusetts; I have spoken to Youxin Ye in the past and he is terrific, but I believe he works only on Leicas.
Peter, I do not have the camera with me now, but i will sent you a PM this weekend with serial numbers.
By the way, I am most impressed with quality of the leather case for the camera. The embossed Canon logo and symbol are well done.
John Shriver
Well-known
The S-II came with a very nice case, very limber leather. The later cases for the II, III, and IV series were drier leather, more cardboardy.
brobbins
Established
CPO Designation - Uncommon?
CPO Designation - Uncommon?
Iwould be interested in finding out whether anyone knows how prevalent the CPO marking is on the early Canon rangefinders.Thanks.
CPO Designation - Uncommon?
Iwould be interested in finding out whether anyone knows how prevalent the CPO marking is on the early Canon rangefinders.Thanks.
Mael
Established
I work regularly on this type of cameras. All your troubles can be fixed, including new shutter curtains and general overhaul.
CanonRFinder
Well-known
Generally the <CPO> along with the MIOJ mark appear on the baseplates of S-II after Canon changed the company name from Seiki Kogaku to Canon Camera Company (CCCo) in September 1947. The <CPO> mark usually appears above the MIOJ mark but I have in my collection an early CCCo S-II #18241 where the <CPO> mark is on the same line as the MIOJ mark. I have recorded six CCCo S-II with the <CPO> mark above MIOJ and yours is the seventh example. Although I haven't emailed all sellers of CCCo S-II's requesting information I have recorded a mark if it appears in a photograph in the auction. This second variation of the markings appears after CCCo S-II #21970 with the highest example being #22752 and the first recorded CCCo S-II with a <Japanese Ideograph> mark is #23344. The <CPO> mark was replaced with Japanese characters in the Rhombus shape after Canon introduced the model IIB camera in April 1949. I have recorded many more examples of IIB's with <Jap Ideo> markings than CCCo S-II cameras. Not all S-II I have recorded have the MIOJ marking which indicates that the camera was purchased outside the US Military PX stores in Japan. Alas the baseplate is one item that can be switched from camera to camera so I hope my database will give some indication when events did happen. Peter Kbrobbins said: