Do you need a "break in" period after CLA?

[BLKRCAT]

:bang: Well I'm back. Some may remember me from the "I'm unimpressed with my M2" thread that kind of blew up.

I had more consistent crap rolls and decided to get to the bottom of it. When I bought my camera I was told it was CLA'd about a month before. So I asked the guy who sold me my camera what was done to it and who did it. Turns out the camera WASNT CLA'd as I was told and that the previous owner just brought the camera in for a "cheap fix" (rangefinder was off, frame lines wouldn't engage for the lens.) Sounds great...🙁

The camera went to a credible repairman and was overhauled. I complained the camera overexposed in cold temperatures so a winter grease was used to relubricate the camera. I'm told that this grease will also perform in warmer climates fine as well.

Also turns out that the camera had been worked on by someone who didn't have proper tools and did some damage as well. Overall life may be effected, but there is no way to know for certain. Everything was tuned up to leica spec and the camera is back in my hands.

I shot a roll with it today out in -7C to probably 0C. Camera advanced smoothly, everything was peachy. I even brought my digital along to check some exposures to make sure i was metering correctly. Metering seemed fine.

Shooting Agfa Ultra 100 the neg came back with everything underexposed probably 1 or 1.5 stops. I begin to scan...

Other than pronounced grain and reduced sharpness and contrast from bumping up the exposure of the film everything seemed fine except for a few shots in the middle of the roll...

Something seemed fast about that second curtain just from looking at those images. I was warned that in extreme cold that Leicas can increase shutter speed but I would expect to see a consistent exposure regardless. With this and the overall underexposure of the film I end on my question. Is there typically some sort of break in period where the camera needs to work in the new grease/oils after a fresh CLA? It seems to me that that makes sense, just wondering if I should bring this up with the repairman or wait for a few rolls before saying something. No sense in wasting good film and time if the results will be predictable.

Thank you, and sorry for the novel (tried to include some images to make it more interesting).

 

[lonemantis]

If it's a good repair from someone who knows what they're doing, there shouldn't be any "break-in" period. My M3 was overhauled a few years ago, and I regularly use it out in temperatures down to -15C without problems. I'd recommend sending it back and saying it's still not working properly - hopefully you got a warranty on the repair.

 

[BLKRCAT]

Yes I have warranty, I have 6 months to report any issues.

 

[redisburning]

still using that vc meter?

look, Im gonna be real with you here, but unless you are using a spot meter properly it's hard to know if your exposure is perfect, especially as "perfect" exposure can depend heavily on your goal given the scene.

do you have a dslr whose base ISO rating you can trust? that can substitute for a proper spot meter in most cases. point it at an 18% grey card and then extrapolate from there to test your camera. either that or get a shutter timer.

look, you're in Canada so this time of year you are still looking at f11 for 1/box speed in direct sunlight if not f8 (I was still getting ~f11 as of last week). start with f8 at 1/box speed and close down even further to get to your slow speeds and if you're still underexposing then you probably have an issue. I dont know maybe you were shooting at that kind of EV but you didnt' really specify.

 

[paradoxbox]

you need to actually test your camera using an exposure chart to verify if your camera is actually underexposing, or if it's your meter, or what. before then don't bother the camera repair guy. use a reliable meter to do the testing, borrow one or do it at a camera shop which will have one if you need to. test at all exposures. you'll want to waste a roll of film for this but you'll then be certain of your exposures.

 

[rjbuzzclick]

You might also want to make sure you use a fresh roll of film when you test. You mentioned that you were using Agfa Ultra 100, which has been discontinued for several years.

 

[Monochrom]

Hi, ...on the first two pics you SHOULD underexpose since sky always do that cheat...on the next two there´s also an underexposure but you should tell which kind of exposure meter did you use....

Because the lightmeter will give you different readings depending on the degrees it captures light...a spot meter has a narrower anlge of getting lght into it and a selenium meter of course will give you a ultra broad angle...and will be comtaminated by any kind of reflected/incident light like skies...

For instance i had a minolta cle thta had a similar issue...it was clearly faulty in dimm light since any white surface forced it to underxpose badly...

In my experience you don´t need a break in period after cla´d it´s not like old engines 🙂 ...timing of the shutter can be fixed and if a non pro ignorant repairman got into your camera before he could have tampered the timing mech and leave your cam underexposing...

Well hope you get your camera in perfect condition and enjoy it as it should!

Cheers!

 

[BLKRCAT]

You might also want to make sure you use a fresh roll of film when you test. You mentioned that you were using Agfa Ultra 100, which has been discontinued for several years.

After a few days of thinking, and checking some neg Im leaning a little more towards this conclusion.

I have a roll of that pesky neopan 400 (fresh) that I have yet to process. Likely on the weekend.

Monochrom, Im aware of the potential metering issues by using a meter that has a very wide angle. I had used this meter in the past with no issues on my IIIa. Compared with my Gossen meter and Sunny 16 this meter is bang on. Only reason i dont want to use my gossen is since it's an older meter it's selenium cell is starting to get old and tending to underexpose. However its only off by about 1/3 of a stop. I use it with my bronica and have no problems.

size and convenience is also great too. Im confident that i'll get some great shots from this next roll.

 

[bensyverson]

Also, how are you scanning? These are pretty rough-looking.

 

[BLKRCAT]

Epson V700, Silverfast

 

[lam]

Yeah looks like the scanner was pushing hard to get some images through those negatives (dense due to age?) Try a fresh B&W roll and see how it is.

I just got my CLA'd M2 back and just started immediately shooting, works good for me.

 

[BLKRCAT]

they were very thin hence the underexposure. Im thinking next time i shoot with this film i'll rate it at 50. Love the color saturation it produces. Nothing like it.

 

[BLKRCAT]

Alright So processed that roll i did last week, some good exposures, some poor exposures.

I went out today to get to the bottom of this once and for all. I took my Fuji X10 and my Leica loaded with FRESH Tri-X I basically double shot every shot on the leica with the X10. Exposure readings were 95% accurate from my meter both Handheld and the VC Meter. With 5% off being off by only one stop maximum.

Just processed it and the negatives are THICK. I'll be scanning them shortly, but I dont see any punchy contrast, no black blacks no white whites. All very muddy. If this shows through in the scans the camera is going back to the repairman.

Im pretty ****in angry over this. Everything looks great in the digital shots. So i know its not just me.