[LRflex] Re: Woe is me.....
- From: David Simms <simmszee@xxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 10:22:59 -0700 (PDT)
Sorry to hear this, Aram. That was a beautiful lens. however, you'll probably
be surprised how well someone can repair it.
i would guess that, due to the very critical movements necessary to maintain
quality over the zoom range, zoom lenses probably don't like being dropped.
Good luck with it.
dave
--- On Sun, 8/21/11, Aram Langhans <leica_r8@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Aram Langhans <leica_r8@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [LRflex] Woe is me.....
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Received: Sunday, August 21, 2011, 10:46 PM
After leaving David's house in Logan lake, I was wandering down 99 towards
Vancouver taking photos of waterfalls, and at Nairn falls my 35-70/4 R lens
fell from it's bag on my waist to the ground and went thump. I picked it up
and it looked fine, except for a small ding in the paint on the barrel. It
landed fairly square on the side. Well, the next time I went to use it at
the next falls, I noticed I could not focus to infinity. Hmm. I looked at
it and saw that the front element groups can be pulled in and out a few
millimeters by hand w/o turning the focus ring. Not a good sign. Something
broke inside. I cried a bit on the inside. I thought these things were
indestructible. Ha.
So, here are a few questions.
Any suggestions as to who I should have look at it for repairs?
Is it easy to partially dismantle it myself to see if something just came
unclipped or something? I see no screws up front unless they are under the
rubber grip for the focus ring.
At any rate, I doubt I can get it fixed in three weeks, which is when we are
going on our next trip, a long one from coast to coast. So, I may just need
to break down and get a Nikon mount lens.
Any suggestions? While I was in Canada and also passing through Seattle I
visited a few stores. Two lenses were recommended as replacements.
The 24-70/2.8 Nikon and the 24-120/4 Nikon. I actually got to play with
them for a bit. Each has pros and cons. The 24-70 is probably a better
lens, but it weighs over two times what the Leica 35-70 weighs. And it has
more distortion, yet seems pretty sharp.
The 24-120 took some pretty nice shots in the store, and I was told it is
almost as good as the 24-70. It has a bit more distortion, but then again
it is a 5x zoom compared to a 3x zoom. the Leica is a 2x zoom and the
distortions are very small in my experience. the 24-120 does have IS, and
weighs about the same as the Leica. Also, since I have lived with f-4 all
these years, maybe it would not be so bad.
I knew one of these days I would replace the 35-70 as my eyes age more and
it gets harder to focus, but I was not counting on it for quite some time.
I was hoping Nikon would have added IS to the 24-70 by that time.
So, any answers to the above questions about repairs, or about lens choices
would be appreciated. I'll go off to my corner and stare at my broken lens
and cry a bit. I do plan on having it repaired, but the timing is bad right
now.
Aram, sad in Yakima.....
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
