| Author |
Message |
    
Steve Holt
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 03:33 am: | 
|
Hello all,
Hope someone can help with this. I have been collecting old cameras for a while and now want to start learning about camera repair. I am fairly confident that I can be self taught but need a few pointers! My first test case for the learning process is an Ilford Sportsman Rangefinder (Type 4), because it's cheap to replace (in fact I already have for 99p!) and not much of an upset if it goes wrong. Does anyone know of any freely available schematics / repair docs that I can use for guidance?
Thanks in advance guys
Steve |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 06:13 am: |
|
Whilst I have every confidence that you will succeed on the Sportsman, I do not think you will find many documents etc.
My advice would be to look at the repair articles available in the Favorite Classics section or search for good descriptive repair sites - a number have been mentioned on this Forum and I am sure that somebody will give the addresses without you having to search. Then purchase the type of camera that is described there-in.
This means that you will have the complete 'words and music' and will have a workable camera at the end of the process. You can solve most repair problems via the question and answer approach of this Forum, but for the beginner I think a nicely illustrated article/manual/book is the way to go. For example the Zorki 1 is a very good camera to learn the art of focal plane shutter re-curtaining and general refurbishment. They are dirt cheap in nonworking condition (eBay) but there is good repair documentation available. You end up with a very nice workable camera that you can carry all the time.
Good luck, what ever route you take. |
Henry
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 09:49 am: |
|
I'd like to add one thing to Glenn's excellent advice...tools!
The biggest mistake I made when first starting to tinker was trying to make do with standard tools. Oh I got the camera open, fixed and reassembled...but I left footprints, you could tell it had been opened. But these special tools are not purchasable. Well, a few are, like flexiclamps. They are very expensive.
What I'm saying is...make tools! Get yourself a rotary tool and lots of bits. Tinkering becomes both easier and more fulfilling.
Henry |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 10:35 am: |
|
Quite correct Henry and when all said and done, tools are the most important aspect of the job.Remiss of me not to mention that aspect because nothing looks worse than jaw marks of pliers on chrome screw heads etc.
My first adjustable pin/lens ring wrench was made from a pair of steel vernier calipers. Even after acquiring a very posh set, I still reach for this tool when things are perceived not to be overly tight. The answer to to continued use of this makeshift wrench is easily given - you can adjust it with one hand. No juggling with lock screws or crossbars etc. |
Steve Holt
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 07:03 am: |
|
Thanks for the sound advice guys. Will definitely go the route Glenn suggested & expect I'll soon be purchasing some of Tomosy's books soon too.
One question while I'm here, regarding a Vest Pocket Autographic. Have just received it (lovely little camera), bellows are in a mess, but I'll make some more when I'm more confident, but the thing that concerns me most is that there doesn't seem to be any glass in front of the aperture/shutter mechanism. Some photos I've seen on the net don't have any (these have similar front plates ie. shutter setting at top 25-B-T-50 & aperture at bottom 1-2-3-4), others I've seen on the net do have glass in front, but also have different front plates like aperture near-far etc & fancier front plates. When aperture & shutter are open I can see glass behind mechanisms, but not in front. Is this right or am I missing some glass? |
Henry
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 07:12 am: |
|
Before shelling out money for camera repair books, read through the book review section on this site.
All newbies (myself included) think all can be learned from books. Sorry to burst your bubble, tinkering is a real hands-on experience. The reason I was able to write all those reviews is that I too went through that phase. This is not to say that books aren't helpful, they are. They are just not a panacea. A combination of reference books, advice from those that have been there and lots of careful note taking.
And if you have a camera you really want to fix, don't let it be your first project. Usually ones first adventure in the wonderland of camera tinkering ends up in a baggie. I still have the baggies to prove it. Notice I changed to plural in my case.
Henry |
Henry
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 07:22 am: |
|
Oh, one other pitfall I forgot to mention. Not all old cameras are broken. Sometimes the well meaning tinkerer just doesn't know how it is supposed to operate. He opens it up and says, "Aw, that is how it works."
This is one of the reasons we started this website: to collect, scan and distribute instruction manuals so no innocent camera will be damaged by unneeded disassembly.
So always get and study an instruction manual before grabbing tools. If no manual is available, definitely ask advice!
Henry |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 12:06 pm: |
|
Steve,
No you are not missing any glass in this case, I am sure of that. This type of construction was quite common and I have cameras with similar attributes. You soon get to know the signs of missing elements - a lot of retaining rings doing nothing, large areas of threads showing or gaps in between replaced retaining rings. Also remember it is very rare for light baffling to be turned up in a proper female thread form. It is far more likely that a series of concentric grooves will be turned on the inside surface of the outer mount. If a proper female thread is present then a bit of research is called for, remember also that convertible lenses have been around for years.
Quite funny you should mention missing front elements. About two weeks ago I purchased a Canon 200/2.8 from a well known US eBay dealer. The lens was sold with a noted problem, which I was 99% certain was fixable. As price was cheap and cosmetics good I was prepared to gamble on the 1% failure.
Lens arrived and problem was as I thought, easily put right - tighten 3 screws. However it was quite obvious that the front element retaining ring was retaining nothing but air!. I got a full refund, as this small fault had been missed - hidden by a filter. So, as far as I am concerned there is no problem. Shame really as the lens is in nice cosmetic shape and the chances of finding a good front element are pretty remote. The large front glass is the only important bit that gets damaged on this lens.
Glenn |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 04:35 pm: |
|
Steve,
I forgot to mention that somewhere in the archive is a link to a very informative article/instructions on how to make bellows. If you cannot find it contact me because I made a copy to use on the bench, thus I have authors details etc. |
Adrian
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 04:53 am: |
|
Steve,
I presume as you say your Vest pocket camera is Autographic that it must be a Kodak.
I have a number of ancient Kodak Box Brownies and in every single one the single lens is behind the shutter. It seems to have been a standard design, and some of their cheap folding cameras such as the Hawkette appear to use the same shutter and presumably (as it is a simple meniscus design) lens. So your lens is just well-hidden. I wonder whether this was deliberate to protect it, though it does make cleaning them a bit fiddly!
I've never taken a VPK apart so I cannot vouch for its construction, but you may find it surprisingly archaic. The No2 Box Brownies continued to have a lump of wood at their heart until 1933, and if you compare them with (say) an All-Distance Ensign, you begin to realise how Kodak kept them selling - they must have been a LOT cheaper!
Hope that helps,
Adrian |
seanmckinney
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 09:38 am: |
|
One other thing about tools notably screwdrivers, get good ones.
Your got-the-cheapo-set from xyx's are probably not up to tight screws. My cheapo set from xyx left the tip of the screwdriver in a screw head and ummm made a mess of the head. I had to drill the head off and a hand brace rather than a power tool did an excellent job of that, I was able to stop the drill dead without drilling into the metal, aluminium, behind the screw head. However I am now waiting for some "sample" 1.6mm screws from the local nut and bolt stockist, thank goodness the damaged screw was a standard metric thread.
Also work inside a tray, it saves being on your hands and knees for a couple of hours looking for that miniscule ball bearing, washer or screw that you last saw making a break for orbit or the deepest recesses of the carpet. |
murray
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, February 03, 2006 - 03:38 am: |
|
as noted above, VPA has an achromatic meniscus lens, mounted the original way, concave side facing the aperture.
I was just cleaning one & knocked something inside the shutter while cleaning the glass. It was the last thing to do & I apparently disconnected the self-cocking mechanism (!?!) |
|
