| Author |
Message |
    
Andrew Bingham
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 11:10 am: | 
|
I really want a Canonet G-III QL17 to compliment my growing Pentax SLR system. For instance, this weekend I'm going to an astronomy gathering in the southern end of the state an I wish I had something else to take with me rather then P30t + 50mm or MX + 50mm. Not to mention I've never owned a rangefinder, and I love the styling of the Canonets.
They fetch a prime price on eBay, at least when the seller can describe the operation, relibility, etc.
What I'm looking at in an 'as-is' specimin. There are good pictures of it, and the exterior seems fine other then a blemish on the finish where the QC sticker was (maybe someone used an odd cleaner on it?). Lens is protected by a UV filter, so someone cared for it at some point in time.
Light seal foam doesn't scare me, so no worries there.
However, I've never repaired a camera before. I took apart lots of stuff in my youth (most of which never got put back together) and I spent the summer working on buiding a prototype tidal energy generation device at school (lot bigger then a camera).
I guess my thought was if I get it and there is something wrong with it, to try and fix it myself. Obviously this is a very desireable camera, so if I wanted to I could probably even re-sell it for a significant portion of the initial cost (someone else bid on it 'as-is', of course).
Whats is the chance of something completely non-repairable being wrong with it? I've looked at the tool requirements and the testing equipment on this site, and having had experience with putting together robotics kits, all of the circuits seem quite buildable to me. I know where on campus I can borrow most of the tools if I need them, and I'd be willing to give it a patient shot. |
Jim Brokaw
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 06:16 pm: |
|
Canonet QL-17 GIII is a very nice camera, but as others will confirm, it is probably more difficult to work on than some other models. When working they are very good cameras, but buying a possibly broken one is risky unless you have considerable expertise in repairing cameras in general and some experience with this model in particular. There are some good guides on web pages that you can find with a Google search... but consider paying a bit more to buy one that works, or buy at a place where you can return it if it doesn't work. I've paid from $5 to $40 or so for QL-17 GIII's, and have gotten broken ones at both ends of the cost range... |
Winfried
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 13, 2004 - 04:09 am: |
|
I agree with Jim. The Canonets are feature-loaded and some parts of the mechanism are not easy to understand and of course not easy to repair.
If you want to start camera repair, I would recommend a Minolta Hi-Matic7SII which will give pics of same quality as the Canonet but is MUCH easier to repair. |
Jan Dvorak
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 13, 2004 - 10:47 am: |
|
Andrew,
I have fiddled with Minolta Hi-Matic cameras, Konica Auto S2 and many other rangefinders. I must agree with the above posts - the GIII QL is the most difficult one to work on.
The only thing that is straightforward on it is rangefinder cleaning and adjustment, even light seal material around the back dor is more work than other cameras.
Apart from the above, the GIII QL is a fantastic tool when in good order. I gave one to my wife to use during one of our trips to Europe, I used my regular Leica gear. Her shots were incredible - well exposed, sharp, I was amazed.
Jan |
Ken
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 13, 2004 - 02:53 pm: |
|
Andrew
I have bought several of the canon QL17 GIII's on ebay and most of the time they only need SEALS replaced and Shutter & Apeture cleaned...and a good overall cleaning....However, they may also have spots of fungus on lens....Most that I have bought hardly ever need internal repair....If you can buy with right to return or have seller assure you that lens is in clean & in good shape, then I would not hesitate to buy one for they still are great rangefinder cameras. |
Donald LeRoux
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 14, 2004 - 03:58 pm: |
|
Andrew The preceding posts are good advice. Keep in mind however, most of the neat old 35mm rangefinder cameras, like the G-III 17QL and Yashica Electro GSN are 30 years old and require some attention for serious use, even if they are functional when purchased. I recently purchased a functional G-III 17QL for $23 and an Electro GSN for $28. The Canon was sold AS IS - the Yashica as WORKING. Both needed lightseals, cleaning/lubrication. The Canon really needs a rangefinder cleaning. You may want to look for one someone has serviced recently. I have seen several auctioned on eBay in the $70 to $120 price range. Service on this type camera runs about $100. Have you looked at the classic camera material at www.cameraquest.com? These are nice old cameras with sharp lenses. Have fun. Don. |
charlie
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 10:12 am: |
|
I've owned both a Canonet G-III17QL and a Canonet 28. I think I am happier with the 28. It also has a great lens and I feel insecure with a camera which may be thinking I'm a dope for choosing the exposure that I did. The Canonet 28 does its thing without ctiticizing me. |
Dennis Mong
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 11, 2006 - 05:09 pm: |
|
Just purchased another canonet G-111 Ql 17 [for $5.00 at a thrift store]and it needs a light seal. Shot a roll and it's not leaking yet but, I see early signs of flaking. I own another QL17 and a Yashica gsn and love them both. I'm reading that replacing the light seal in the Canon is a bear...would I be ahead taking it to a camera repair shop?
Charlie, I understand your preference for the 28 but, the QL17 G111 can be operated on manual sans meter. I take a meter with me. Meter once in the morning and hope? |
Jon Goodman
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 11, 2006 - 07:49 pm: |
|
Hi, Dennis. Before you take that camera to a repair shop to have it re-sealed, please let me send you a pdf file (with lots of images) I've written on how to correctly re-seal it. It isn't the easiest camera to re-seal, however I've taken great pains to make the procedure as simple and logical as possible, and I can send you a kit with what you'll need as respects materials for $6. Contact me at Jon_Goodman@yahoo.com, and I'll gladly send you the file via e:mail...please put something in the subject line like "canonet re-sealing instructions" so I'll be sure to catch it.
Jon |
|
