as you have proven in this thread, lens repair is not for untrained newbies.
I suggest you get the lens and camera to a professional tech before you mess it up to the point that your repair bill will be increased exponentially
in order to get it all right.
Stephen
I suggest you get the lens and camera to a professional tech before you mess it up to the point that your repair bill will be increased exponentially
in order to get it all right.
Stephen
cassel
Well-known
Stephen-
I have always received good advice, products, and service form you over the years and I value your expertise. However, I don't really appreciate the implication that I may "mess it up". I don't approach these issues carelessly and I have not made anything worse. I won't force anything or use inappropriate tools. YES, I'm untrained... but not careless.
Bottom line- the lens is in exactly the same shape (not focusing accurately) as when I received it- the only change is the aperture ring is now not loose- I carefully tightened the grub screws that hold the ring in place. My attempts to open it up have NOT resulted in damage- nothing was forced- my attempts simply failed at which point I turned it back to where it was.
The decision to even attempt an exploratory try is my choice- obviously. Full disclosure- I paid $222 for this lens which was advertised as working-my mistake may have been forgetting that- if something is cheap- you get what you pay for... Front element has lots of marks/scratches - barrel has lots of wear. Seller was stubborn about a return- eventually I quit trying and decided that the price was low enough that it may be worth a repair and that the light scratches would not be a significant penalty on performance--- I like to use this old stuff not just collect.
As I'm sure most people bothering to read this know- the lens may bring $500-$800 in decent (vague, I know) condition. My copy is not really decent- BUT i don't think it is garbage either- but what do I know ...
It looks like perhaps I'm in over my head- so of course I'm somewhat defensive and frustrated, also when you deal in the bottom level of gear- price and condition-wise you're bound to lose some deals-- I don't have many thousands to throw at this "hobby" - but in the long run sometimes it makes more sense to spend the cash up front rather than chase down the repair strategy.
Somewhere recently I read about the modern trend of buying questionable old gear (lenses and cameras, etc.) online (eBay, etc.) and hoping some repair person can bring it back to life for a song... I guess I'm part of this trend. It is fun to try out all the stuff that was formerly (pre-internet) hard to find but we should be realistic about our expectations. Not to mention that competent, trained repair personnel seems to become more rare as time goes by...
end of rant- no offense to any- plenty of blame for myself:angel:
I have always received good advice, products, and service form you over the years and I value your expertise. However, I don't really appreciate the implication that I may "mess it up". I don't approach these issues carelessly and I have not made anything worse. I won't force anything or use inappropriate tools. YES, I'm untrained... but not careless.
Bottom line- the lens is in exactly the same shape (not focusing accurately) as when I received it- the only change is the aperture ring is now not loose- I carefully tightened the grub screws that hold the ring in place. My attempts to open it up have NOT resulted in damage- nothing was forced- my attempts simply failed at which point I turned it back to where it was.
The decision to even attempt an exploratory try is my choice- obviously. Full disclosure- I paid $222 for this lens which was advertised as working-my mistake may have been forgetting that- if something is cheap- you get what you pay for... Front element has lots of marks/scratches - barrel has lots of wear. Seller was stubborn about a return- eventually I quit trying and decided that the price was low enough that it may be worth a repair and that the light scratches would not be a significant penalty on performance--- I like to use this old stuff not just collect.
As I'm sure most people bothering to read this know- the lens may bring $500-$800 in decent (vague, I know) condition. My copy is not really decent- BUT i don't think it is garbage either- but what do I know ...
It looks like perhaps I'm in over my head- so of course I'm somewhat defensive and frustrated, also when you deal in the bottom level of gear- price and condition-wise you're bound to lose some deals-- I don't have many thousands to throw at this "hobby" - but in the long run sometimes it makes more sense to spend the cash up front rather than chase down the repair strategy.
Somewhere recently I read about the modern trend of buying questionable old gear (lenses and cameras, etc.) online (eBay, etc.) and hoping some repair person can bring it back to life for a song... I guess I'm part of this trend. It is fun to try out all the stuff that was formerly (pre-internet) hard to find but we should be realistic about our expectations. Not to mention that competent, trained repair personnel seems to become more rare as time goes by...
end of rant- no offense to any- plenty of blame for myself:angel:
Stephen-
I have always received good advice, products, and service form you over the years and I value your expertise. However, I don't really appreciate the implication that I may "mess it up". I don't approach these issues carelessly and I have not made anything worse. I won't force anything or use inappropriate tools. YES, I'm untrained... but not careless.
Bottom line- the lens is in exactly the same shape (not focusing accurately) as when I received it- the only change is the aperture ring is now not loose- I carefully tightened the grub screws that hold the ring in place. My attempts to open it up have NOT resulted in damage- nothing was forced- my attempts simply failed at which point I turned it back to where it was.
The decision to even attempt an exploratory try is my choice- obviously. Full disclosure- I paid $222 for this lens which was advertised as working-my mistake may have been forgetting that- if something is cheap- you get what you pay for... Front element has lots of marks/scratches - barrel has lots of wear. Seller was stubborn about a return- eventually I quit trying and decided that the price was low enough that it may be worth a repair and that the light scratches would not be a significant penalty on performance--- I like to use this old stuff not just collect.
As I'm sure most people bothering to read this know- the lens may bring $500-$800 in decent (vague, I know) condition. My copy is not really decent- BUT i don't think it is garbage either- but what do I know ...
I looks like perhaps I'm in over my head- so of course I'm somewhat defensive and frustrated, also when you deal in the bottom level of gear- price and condition-wise you're bound to lose some deals-- I don't have many thousands to throw at this "hobby" - but in the long run sometimes it makes more sense to spend the cash up front rather than chase down the repair strategy.
Somewhere recently I read about the modern trend of buying questionable old gear (lenses and cameras, etc.) online (eBay, etc.) and hoping some repair person can bring it back to life for a song... I guess I'm part of this trend. It is fun to try out all the stuff that was formerly (pre-internet) hard to find but we should be realistic about our expectations. Not to mention that competent, trained repair personnel seems to become more rare as time goes by...
end of rant- no offense to any- plenty of blame for myself:angel:
The proof is in the pudding if you can pull this out.
Its your lens - your choice.
Unfortunately the bottom line is that "careless" and "untrained" often end up with the same results.
I've lost count of the attempted DIYS repair jobs we have done over the years that have turned into 2x or 3x the labor cost because newbies did not know what they were doing in lens or camera repair. Finally my classic camera tech got tired of them and refuses to take on more. The last and final one took up about 10x more of his time to get the repair right - not an exaggeration of time on his part.
Stephen
cassel
Well-known
We agree--- Your experience with your tech does not surprise me.
My only point was that I have not made this particular item worse--- someone took care of that before me. Two local (Seattle area) guys looked at it and one said "no thanks" the other was the one that said "at least $200, maybe not fixable" (he clearly was trying to say no without actually saying no)
For now it will gather dust on my shelf unless I get tired of looking at it and someone else can "mess it up"/ give it a try. Perhaps I could be persuaded to "pay it forward" and donate it to someone as parts- though some combo of skill, luck, and money may revive it....
Thanks anyway guys, on to the next topic...
My only point was that I have not made this particular item worse--- someone took care of that before me. Two local (Seattle area) guys looked at it and one said "no thanks" the other was the one that said "at least $200, maybe not fixable" (he clearly was trying to say no without actually saying no)
For now it will gather dust on my shelf unless I get tired of looking at it and someone else can "mess it up"/ give it a try. Perhaps I could be persuaded to "pay it forward" and donate it to someone as parts- though some combo of skill, luck, and money may revive it....
Thanks anyway guys, on to the next topic...
Fixcinater
Never enough smoky peat
So, I was the lucky one to try my hand at this particular lens next.
I've brought back quite a few lenses from the dead or nearly dead state, so I thought I'd gamble on this one and see what might happen. Worst case, I've got a TV version of the 85/1.9 Canon that needs a focusing helical so maybe something might work out that way.
Anyway, I got the lens and have sat on it a bit to do research and slowly assess the situation. No need to rush, right? Focus is smooth throughout travel, doesn't focus to infinity (as indicated earlier in the thread) but has a hard stop near infinity. Didn't see foreign matter that shouldn't be there inside the focusing helical (looking through the mount). I didn't see anything obviously wrong, so moved on:
Reading cassel's note on difficulties separating the optical block and focus mount, I carefully tested the notion and sure enough, the aperture ring and front lens surround want to turn with the rest of the optical block. Long story short, it came apart fine and the two parts were separated just like the photos already in the thread show with the aperture fully functioning and nothing had to be abused to get them split apart.
Having just opened up a Canon LTM 50/1.4 and re-assembling the aperture on that lens earlier this week and de-fogging my Canon 50/1.2 successfully in the past, the 85/1.8 is quite similar in a lot of ways, which helped my assessment and deconstruction at this point.
The infinity stop on the helical was bent on this 85mm, which was contacting the aperture ring/mechanism linkage on the optical block. In turn, causing the aperture ring interference that cassel noted. The bend was also causing the focusing mount to stop before it gets to infinity (as noted earlier as well). So, this been straightened out and the lens has been re-assembled but it still focuses well short of infinity. Shorter distances near MFD are accurate according to the camera's RF but it only goes out to ~40ft then hits the hard infinity stop.
The front element has enough wear that I may ship it off to Focal Point for a re-coating, depending on how the results look once I've figured out the infinity focus and run some film through.
I very much like the lens' construction and haptics. I'll either be keeping this lens or my Pentax 85/1.8 S-M-C Takumar for my portrait/short tele purposes.
Will post again when I know more.
I've brought back quite a few lenses from the dead or nearly dead state, so I thought I'd gamble on this one and see what might happen. Worst case, I've got a TV version of the 85/1.9 Canon that needs a focusing helical so maybe something might work out that way.
Anyway, I got the lens and have sat on it a bit to do research and slowly assess the situation. No need to rush, right? Focus is smooth throughout travel, doesn't focus to infinity (as indicated earlier in the thread) but has a hard stop near infinity. Didn't see foreign matter that shouldn't be there inside the focusing helical (looking through the mount). I didn't see anything obviously wrong, so moved on:
Reading cassel's note on difficulties separating the optical block and focus mount, I carefully tested the notion and sure enough, the aperture ring and front lens surround want to turn with the rest of the optical block. Long story short, it came apart fine and the two parts were separated just like the photos already in the thread show with the aperture fully functioning and nothing had to be abused to get them split apart.
Having just opened up a Canon LTM 50/1.4 and re-assembling the aperture on that lens earlier this week and de-fogging my Canon 50/1.2 successfully in the past, the 85/1.8 is quite similar in a lot of ways, which helped my assessment and deconstruction at this point.
The infinity stop on the helical was bent on this 85mm, which was contacting the aperture ring/mechanism linkage on the optical block. In turn, causing the aperture ring interference that cassel noted. The bend was also causing the focusing mount to stop before it gets to infinity (as noted earlier as well). So, this been straightened out and the lens has been re-assembled but it still focuses well short of infinity. Shorter distances near MFD are accurate according to the camera's RF but it only goes out to ~40ft then hits the hard infinity stop.
The front element has enough wear that I may ship it off to Focal Point for a re-coating, depending on how the results look once I've figured out the infinity focus and run some film through.
I very much like the lens' construction and haptics. I'll either be keeping this lens or my Pentax 85/1.8 S-M-C Takumar for my portrait/short tele purposes.
Will post again when I know more.
cassel
Well-known
Glad you have made more progress on bringing it back-- good luck.
raid
Dad Photographer
As I recommended from the start, mail the lens out to someone experienced. I suggest DAG, but others can do it too.
Fixcinater
Never enough smoky peat
Had a bit of time last night to pull this apart again:
Rotate off the focusing mount. Now it comes off smoothly with no issues due to the corrected internal aperture lever.
Simple retaining ring/name plate lets the front element out.
Rear element block comes off with simple friction tool or lens spanner if it's really tight.
Middle elements need further disassembly but what was giving the variable focus prior to my ownership was that the elements simply aren't secured down and so have 1/8" play obviously changing focus as they move.
Will post again once I learn more.
Rotate off the focusing mount. Now it comes off smoothly with no issues due to the corrected internal aperture lever.
Simple retaining ring/name plate lets the front element out.
Rear element block comes off with simple friction tool or lens spanner if it's really tight.
Middle elements need further disassembly but what was giving the variable focus prior to my ownership was that the elements simply aren't secured down and so have 1/8" play obviously changing focus as they move.
Will post again once I learn more.
kuuan
loves old lenses
sounds like you are having a real ball doing this, and that you are getting there too, have fun and congrats!
Fixcinater
Never enough smoky peat
It's fun when you have accumulated enough experience to know when to stop and not feel bad about doing so. Sometimes sleeping on a mechanical situation like a lens can do wonders in locating solutions.
The Canon LTM gear seems to hit a certain mark with simplicity of design (especially compared to their later efforts, as fine as their 80s SLR lineup was) and Quality that is very attractive, somewhat akin to Pentax's earlier M42 series cameras and all of their M42 lenses.
kuuan
loves old lenses
Trying to repair can be nerving, but usually very satisfying.
Haha, right! Takumars are my favorites and my collection of them is quite complete! Starting middle of the 50s Pentax imo was the leading force in developing SLR system and lenses for it and in Japanese manufacturers taking the lead. It's just that RF lenses make a better fit for mirrorless. Therefore, even though I find quite a few Takumars at least performing at par if not outperforming the Canon LTMs, imo they have quite noticeable superior coating than lenses of similar vintage even long before they started to market Super Multi Coating, I like the Canons for their feel, their solid and simple construction for which Takumars excel.