| Author |
Message |
    
WernerJB
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 01, 2006 - 06:26 am: | 
|
Hi everybody, I wish you a Happy New Year!
I recently came across a Taron Auto EE, DOA, the usual routine, cleaning the shutter, relubing the helicoil (I did it my way, NO disassembly !). Inside I found a sticker from a long gone professional repair service and then saw the traces they had left: they had taken out the resistor(s) adjusting the galvanometer and had put in a variable resistor instead. The question now is whether this method of repair which actually changes the authentic set-up of a camera's innards is justifiable from a photohistoric point of view. In the case stated above (original parts gone) there is no choice, but in other cases of erraneous meters due to defective resistors I have decided to leave them in their places and compensate the error by changing the film speed dial if possible.
I would like to know what others think about what counts more, restoring or repairing ? |
Henry
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 01, 2006 - 07:39 am: |
|
It would seem that for a user camera repairing would be more important. But for a collectible camera restoring would be. On collectibles often doing nothing is the proper route. Any sign of non-standard anything would bring the value down.
From my own personal point of view (I am NOT a collector) anything I can do to make the little cogs whirl again I do. Collectibles rarely cross my desk...I'm too cheap to pay for them!
To me a pristine, museum condition camera doesn't raise my blood pressure. It's the banged up ones with history that I live for... The Nikon FE that belongs to a Peace Corp volunteer that has been to nearly as many countries as I have US states. The Zeiss 512 that sat in a steamer trunk for nearly 50 years that still had a film plate in it, whose current owner was the granddaughter of the lady who passed away overseas and the trunk put in storage. The Voigtlander folder a friend found in a cave. The Signet 35 another friend bought in Singapore when he was a young navy seaman in the early 50's. The list gets longer every year...
These are the ones I live for...
Henry |
Peter Wallage
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 01, 2006 - 07:41 am: |
|
Hello Werner, and a Happy New Year to you also.
I don't completely agree with your view on restoring vs repairing and can't see any harm in replacing a failed fixed resistor with a small potentiometer. Where there is room I have done this both where a resistor has changed its value or wasn't a particularly close tolerance resistor to begin with. I have also done this where I have changed a broken meter galvanometer with a working one from a junk camera, and where I have replaced a dead rectangular selenium cell with a modern cell intended for something like a solar powered calculator.
I would not do anything to change the outward appearance of a camera with historic importance, say from the 19th or early 20th centuries. If I have had to replace a missing part like a piece of brass or mahogany I have tried to make the new part as close as possible to the the missing part. Nor would I change something in a classic camera that is working well just to make it more convenient to use, such as changing the lens flange to be able to use a range of more modern lenses.
There is also the question of replacing something that cannot be repaired, like damaged bellows or torn covering. In many cases the original type of leatherette used is no longer made, so I will happily use a modern vinyl material with as close a grain pattern to the original as I can get.
Largely, I suppose it depends on the camera. I wouldn't regard a Taron as particularly rare and, as the replacement potentiometer doesn't show and makes the camera usable without altering its character, I can't see any objection.
Peter |
rick
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 01, 2006 - 08:32 am: |
|
both repairers and restorers have their place... personally, i am a repairer only. i will use a variable resistor to replace a fixed one, i will make a new part where i can to replace a broken one, or AI a Nikkor lens by milling the aperture ring... i'll even reassemble a Leica from parts with non-matching serial numbers (please don't tell anyone, lightning might strike me). i'm more than happy to use original factory parts when i can get them (from a donor camera or otherwise), but in most cases my task has been to get a camera working again, not to restore it to its original factory state. |
WernerJB
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 02, 2006 - 12:37 pm: |
|
Thank you for your views and opinions. Taking everything into consideration, and if I read your ideas accurately, a compromise between restoring and repairing is best, and, if possible, one should try preserving a state as true to the original as possible. |
Rob
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, January 21, 2006 - 03:56 pm: |
|
Werner, I too suffer from being a cheap bastard. My prize camera still is a Signet 35 that I picked up at a yard sale 30+ years ago for four dollars (I should have asked for a discount seeing it was a neighbour). Although they were sold between 1951 and 58, the lens number puts it at 1950. I've collected a variety of clunkers since then that I've gone and showed off at work, but the Signet means the most. I was a teenager when I got it, and the shutter jammed up on me every so often. I also didn't know about the rangefinder function until four years ago (it was so far out of whack that it didn't dawn on me what it was for). A few years ago, some friends at work got me interested in cameras, and after Googling the Signet 35, I found out it was a fairly full featured little camera that looks like a toy compared to others. Since then, I've learned how to strip and clean the shutter on my own (many thanks to Dan Mitchell), and I've converted the M synch to an X synch that works well. I picked up a leather case for it from a fellow in San Jose that had an address label from Fort Lauderdale. I live in Toronto. Go figure. The camera has taken a large number of my best shots. I hope my kid will respect it when I hand it down. |
WernerJB
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 12:43 pm: |
|
Average people use ordinary cameras, those cheap ones that can be had for close to nothing. Among these the banged-up ones (in Henry's words) have character and each one tells a story, so to speak, that is what makes them so charismatic, I fully agree ! |
Brad Tissi
Tinkerer
Username: Spaceman
Post Number: 1
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 08, 2006 - 07:50 pm: |
|
Hello, I've just come across a Signet 35 as well and actually I found Dan's site first and then these forums. The problem is though, that I can't seem to get the front lens assembly off to clean anything.
The camera itself seems in great condition, but there's dust in-between the lenses and the shutter sticks every once in a while (although normal, I'm not giving up until I try myself :D )
Thank you |
|
