Robin Harrison
aka Harrison Cronbi
Over three months ago I sent three lenses and one body for repair/service/adjustment to a UK-based camera shop that has been recommend for M equipment.
The CL was returned untouched as they couldn't fix the meter (c'est la vie), and both the 90mm and the 28mm seem much improved (the 90mm focus had been way off, the 28mm had become a little 'soft focus' in use).
But the 35mm pre-Asph Summilux I was most eager to have serviced has been returned in a far from satisfactory state for four reasons:
1) The main problem I had with the lens was the focussing. This doesn't seem to have been addressed, or if it has, the repair has fallen way short. My original complaint was that the plane of focus was way in front of where the rangefinder says it should be. This is still the case. The technician spoke to me on the phone about testing focus my measuring distance to targets and setting the distance on lens - this does not take into account the position of the rangefinder cam, and critical focus is done with the RF, not by scale focus!
2) The focus is now a lot stiffer, as a result of trying to reduce play, I understand. This isn't ideal, but of more concern is the obvious presence of excess grease on the helicoid, which I fear could contaminate lens elements over time.
3) There is a large spec of some substance somewhere in the middle of the lens elements. This wasn't present when I sent the lens.
4) Most worryingly, the aperture blades appear to have become misaligned. Beyond f5.6, the aperture becomes horribly asymmetrical. Some blades are not moving in the same linear fashion as others. I've seen this beyond f11 on some old, 6 blade SLR lenses, but none of my RF lenses exhibit this problem, and this lens certainly didn't when it was sent.
Any advice as to what to do? I don't want to send the lens straight back, because I don't want to be without it for another three months, and I have no confidence they can fix it properly. I don't want to simply ask for my money back as the lens is in a far worse state than when I sent it to them. Ideally I would have them pay for the lense to be repaired elsewhere, but are they under any obligation to do so?
Frustration.
The CL was returned untouched as they couldn't fix the meter (c'est la vie), and both the 90mm and the 28mm seem much improved (the 90mm focus had been way off, the 28mm had become a little 'soft focus' in use).
But the 35mm pre-Asph Summilux I was most eager to have serviced has been returned in a far from satisfactory state for four reasons:
1) The main problem I had with the lens was the focussing. This doesn't seem to have been addressed, or if it has, the repair has fallen way short. My original complaint was that the plane of focus was way in front of where the rangefinder says it should be. This is still the case. The technician spoke to me on the phone about testing focus my measuring distance to targets and setting the distance on lens - this does not take into account the position of the rangefinder cam, and critical focus is done with the RF, not by scale focus!
2) The focus is now a lot stiffer, as a result of trying to reduce play, I understand. This isn't ideal, but of more concern is the obvious presence of excess grease on the helicoid, which I fear could contaminate lens elements over time.
3) There is a large spec of some substance somewhere in the middle of the lens elements. This wasn't present when I sent the lens.
4) Most worryingly, the aperture blades appear to have become misaligned. Beyond f5.6, the aperture becomes horribly asymmetrical. Some blades are not moving in the same linear fashion as others. I've seen this beyond f11 on some old, 6 blade SLR lenses, but none of my RF lenses exhibit this problem, and this lens certainly didn't when it was sent.
Any advice as to what to do? I don't want to send the lens straight back, because I don't want to be without it for another three months, and I have no confidence they can fix it properly. I don't want to simply ask for my money back as the lens is in a far worse state than when I sent it to them. Ideally I would have them pay for the lense to be repaired elsewhere, but are they under any obligation to do so?
Frustration.
