Which lenses deserve re-conditioning, and which do not?

[FlyingO]

Aloha everyone! I own several hundred (yes.. "hundreds") of 35mm cameras and at least two or three lenses for each body. I have all makes and models, many of a few models (eg, I have probably 20+ Pentax K1000 bodies, 6 or 8 Nikon F models, at least a dozen Canon AE-1s and A1s, etc.) and I have always tried to get "fairly decent" glass - whatever I could afford - many times lenses came with purchases made on evilBay - which has left me with a boat-load of lenses, most of which would not be candidates for re-conditioning since they were "cheap lenses" when they came out, and cheaper still by the time I bought them. My question is this: Besides my Nikkor glass, and my Helios, Vivitar series 1, etc. lenses. How can I decide if a lens is worth spending $100 or more to have it cleaned, lubricated and so on?

I have a friend in Kansas City who is a wizard at fixing and re-conditioning lenses. Her late husband was the wizard at camera repairs. I have told her I would send her a list of what lenses I'd like her opinion about. Maybe that is the only real way to get a good answer to my question - put a list of what I have here in this forum and let the brains here tell me to "trash that one", or "spend whatever you need to for this one!"...

Thoughts? (I thank you for your time!) - Mike Owens - ~~O~~

[Lloydy]

I've found that lenses are fairly resilient at giving good results when not in the best condition. It might not be 100% of the quality that they delivered new, but I think that many lens problems don't detract from the image quality, not even very slight fungus or haze seem to ruin the image past saving with some basic processing. And a worn body makes no difference at all, neither does a stiff focus or aperture ring. It's a pain in the butt to have a stiff lens, but it can be overcome and by doing so you get to see the image the glass delivers .
Using the lenses will tell you what you need to know, make notes as you test them. I go to the churchyard behind our house and shoot hundreds of pictures with different lenses, I can create all the different styles of picture taking there, and because it's the place I always do it, I know what I expect to see, or hope to see, when I check the pictures.

[StillSanj]

I think rather than researching each lens or anything of the likes, you should compile a list of the lenses in question and post it on here. Users could then go over the list and point out the keeper restoration lenses as well as absolute throwaways. I would at least be willing to contribute- I think it would be fun and interesting to see what you've aquired! And i'm sure there is a lot of overlap on the lenses, such as the pentax-m 50/2 and canon FD 50/18 just from what you've mentioned on the cameras you have, so it wouldn't be as overwhelming as it seems.
I look forward to seeing how it works out for you.

[StillSanj]

[iangreenhalgh1]

The lens I shot this with has a lot of cleaning marks, a few scratches, pretty poor condition really.

Still performs very nicely though.



100% crop:

[FlyingO]

Wow. I didn't think I would get ANY responses for a few days at least! You guys are great! I am fascinated by the suggestions and yes, a list is absolutely necessary - for here and for my lens master in KC! That's the hard part.. there's so many.. I guess the old question "How do you eat an entire elephant? One bite at a time." applies here. I just need to make that list. Although, I would wager that there is a general consensus about certain brands of lenses and which should be cherished and which should be given up on - when they stop doing what they're supposed to do, with or without sticking focus rings, or rough aperture rings, etc., because I believe what has been said (and shown!) about poor condition lenses is true - you just have to futz with 'em until you're ready for the shot. I'm talking about "kit" lenses, or those that were exclusive to Ritz, like Quantaray or others like that brand.

I must confess, I have lots of friends, just none who are into photography like I am, so I'm asking these questions of you all because you are "in the know", and I want to be.

As an example, here's the kind of stuff that I've run into lately: A "Beck" brand 135mm f/2.8 for Pentax. It's barrel - between the aperture ring and the focus ring above it - this barrel (that has the aperture setting numbers and lines stamped on it) is not supposed to turn, I believe, but it does, which screws up setting an aperture, and/or focusing (image stays blurry throughout the range) so all the futzing in the day won't get it ready to take a shot. Another lens, this time a Tamron 28-80mm f/3.5 again for Pentax, literally just about 40 minutes ago, froze at around 60mm. It was working fine all week and then out of nowhere it decides to stop zooming - no impact, no rough handling, the zoom ring.. it just stopped turning. These two lenses are examples of what I'm curious about what to do with. Not just these two, but several considering the number of lenses I have..

I don't know about the Beck (it is VERY smooth, and seems well built, except for not working..), but I'm sure no one would want to throw a bunch of bucks to straighten out a Tamron.. I could probably get another one, on-line attached to a camera no one wants, so it would cost very little. Those kinds of issues are part of why I want to know more about lenses in general..

I suppose if I just concentrate on which of my lenses I feel need attention, rather than a generalized "which brands are consistently good or bad?" should make this list of mine a little easier to prepare... but it would be very prudent for me to know what to avoid and what to strive for when finding lenses on-line or at flea markets.. That's that generalized info that cannot be learned overnight...

Here's the rub: I'm too much like my late father, who taught me to shoot and edit 8mm & 16mm films when I was seven years old, in that I can't stand the thought of just throwing away somewhat complex machinery - like camera lenses - or other things that had value.. I know, that's a different forum on a different site.. ("How to deal with father issues.") Just kidding. Thanks again to all of you. I need to go start making a list..!

Any thoughts on cheap brands to not waste time or money on.. I'd be interested in your thoughts, knowing of course that there may be a diamond in the rough here and there within the cheap lens lines.

Mahalo and Aloha, ~~O~~

[Pontus]

I would not spend 100 USD on any lenses of the following brands:
- Petri
- Marexar
- Sun
- Universar
- Hanimex
- Albinar
- Accura
- Prinz Galaxy
- Kenlock

Lenses almost always worth fixing:
- Leica
- Contax
- Fast glass f1.2 or faster
- Tilt & shift
- 1:1 macro (all metal)
- APO
- Tele lenses >300mm and f2.8 or faster
- Fish-eye

Lenses generally worth fixing (from well known brands)
- wider than and including 24mm
- macro lenses
- 85mm
- >100mm f2.5 or faster

Fix lenses that you intend to use only, unless the lens is one that brings top dollar on the used market. There are many lenses from the Fujinon Ebc, Yashica ML line or the Konica line that will outperform most anything but will not bring a decent return on investment if fixed. But once fixed the lenses could become your best friends.

[scsambrook]

[tb_a]

As a general rule I would support what Pontus stated before.

However, it makes a lot of a difference whether you intend to keep or make money out of your lenses.
If any commercial interest is your driving factor then I would recommend to check the selling prices on *bay and alike and solve your problem alone. At least I wouldn't really care then whether your business was good or bad in the end. Maybe others here have a different opinion on that. I don't.

Else you can ask here of course for any lens whether it may be considered as a rather good or bad lens from the experience of the members community and considered to be a keeper. In that case I would also help you further, if I have experience with the lens in question. However, even in that case you should rather use the search function first as most of the lenses are already discussed in detail and many sample pictures are already available too in this forum.

So in essence you have to do your homework in any case first.

Thanks for understanding.

[kuuan]

Pontus list is very good, and I'd say that also any of the fastest lenses of each focal lengths from any of the first tier makers Leica, Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Zeiss, Konica, Mamiya, Yashica ( I must forget one or the other..) should be worth while fixing. If you spend around 100.- I'd think that money wise fixing only makes sense for lenses that sell for at least 200.-, you having so many maybe over 300.-, check completed listings on the bay and find your own threshold.

Personally I'd try to repair most of them myself! It's great hobby and you have so many that you could start with some of very little value to practice, to get experience and confidence

[cooltouch]

It seems to me that trying to put together a list of candidates for CLA out of a list of several hundred is gonna require more than some sort of analysis. This is inherently a subjective decision you'll be making. If I were faced with this "problem," I'd go through the lenses and make two lists, essentially: those lenses that I use most frequently and all the rest. Then out of the list of lenses I use most frequently, I'd prioritize based on the specific condition of the individual lenses or those that I use the most. For example, let's say I have a favorite zoom who's aperture ring has started becoming sluggish and I have another lens that I've just used very heavily and as a result the focusing collar turns with little if any resistance and there's more dust inside than I'd prefer. So, which one do I choose? The one with sluggish aperture blades, or the one that is beginning to suffer from wear? Me, I'd choose the lens that needs a CLA to prevent wear over one that's beginning to exhibit a slower operating aperture iris, but that's just me. Again, subjective. But anyway this final winnowing should probably get you down to a couple dozen optics, maybe even fewer. And at that point, things become a whole lot more manageable. And hopefully decisions will be easier to make.

You might also want to see if your repair lady gives quantity discounts.

Oh, by the way, regarding your Tamron -- I don't know what it is about adaptall-2 Tamrons, but I've had three or four begin to suddenly act up, and it was because something came apart inside. Typically one of the element groups gets unscrewed from where it belongs and falls free, jamming things up as a result. Most recently it was an Sp 80-200mm f/2.8 LD where an inner group unscrewed itself and just dropped loose. I was able to reach it easily and reattach it, and now everything is back to normal. The symptom you describe may or may not be related to this, but I can see how something falling loose could restrict zoom travel.

[Basilisk]

If shooting on Nikon DSLR, manual lenses can still be used with auto aperture. It is essential in that case that there is no lag at all in the aperture. In most other cases, lenses adapted to digital bodies are used in stop down mode, and a bit of lag can be lived with.

[newst]

[guardian]

I think repair order is important, too.

For example, if I had the money and many needy lenses, I would CLA first my needy Angénieux and Noritar lenses. This provided I was confident up front regarding the ability of my technician.

I don't own many lenses, though, for which a $100 CLA could be justified. For that kind of money today you can buy, for example, a decent Tamron 19AH or 01A. Even the Hexanon 35mm f2 lenses are down in price . . . though such a lens still might be worth a $100 CLA. A Hexanon 57mm f1.2 surely would be.

On the classic side, e.g. presets, many fine opportunities exist out there if you have $100 to spend.

If I had a great many candidates for CLA, before sending any given lens I would go to eBay, research completed sales for that lens, and be guided by that data.

Finally, for lenses in poor shape where $100 expense cannot be justified, there is always the option of doing the CLA work yourself. If inexperienced or fearful, you would start with your very lowest end candidates, using them to learn the ropes of lens repair.

[Lloydy]

Sometimes lenses just fail and they aren't worth the effort to repair, sometimes they are impossible to repair. Such as a Tamron SP 28-135 that I bought a while back, in immaculate condition, that suddenly jammed solid. I've repaired a few lenses before so I set about this one - and couldn't even get it apart. So in the end I got brutal and forced it apart and discovered an internal roller had come off and the roller, screw and washers had fallen into the focus mechanism, it was never going to come apart, so destroying the lens just served to prove that to me. I paid about £10 for it, I could buy another for the same price. Sometimes it's just easier, and more economical, to accept that a lens is faulty or damaged and get a better copy - if it's a common and fairly cheap lens.

Good, and scarce lenses, are worth the effort and expense, but a cheap lens will always be a cheap lens.

[tb_a]

[FlyingO]

Thank you all for your viewpoints! I will most surely take all of your wisdom into consideration when deciding what lenses to spend money on for repairs or just re-conditioning. Honestly, I have yet to read everyone's replies, but I wanted to toss out my "story"...

To "scsambrook" - Here's is the "why" regarding my collection/obsession:

10 or so years ago, while living in Hawaii, I wanted to buy my girlfriend a Canon AE-1 film camera for her birthday, so I checked on eBay (I've been selling and buying on eBay since 1997), where I found 11 or 12 auctions for that model of camera, or the AE-1 Program. I bid less than $10 on most of the auctions, hoping to win one of them. When all was done, I had won 10 of them! I gave my girlfriend hers and said "I guess I'm a camera collector now!". I became more familiar with the various camera makers and the incredible numbers of various models available. I got hooked on buying for cheap and I never spent more than $15 for a camera (most often accompanied by two or more lenses), until I looked into, and bought some Nikon gear for my own use. I was living right on the beach on Hawaii's famous North Shore, (pic or 3 attached, hopefully) so my test shots after fixing these cameras were usually gorgeous.. I actually sent a few of the sellers pictures, saying "Here's what you old camera is doing now!", but then I figured that's not too cool - kind of like rubbing it in that they sold something fr $6.50 that takes amazing photos.

Back then, people were excited about digital cameras and they thought their old film cameras didn't work so they put them on eBay for next to nothing. I can't tell you how many cameras I bought for $7 or $8. I would get them, replace the battery, fix little things like mirrors locked up or replace light seals, fix shutter issues, etc. (I'm an engineer by trade, I just work on something until I figure it out.) and am now selling those cameras (all working fine) for anywhere from $35 to $85 each..! I am very glad I made the investment all those years ago. So, I've got a HUGE inventory to sell. I pay close attention to the "camera gear buying trends" of the eBay buyers. Sometimes, I hold off on selling things ( like right now - things are selling, but not for as good of prices they were a few months ago. I'm pretty sure that if I wait a little while longer - like as we approach Christmas - the prices will creep back up. Oddly, mainstream models like the K1000 and the AE-1 are declining, but the prices for the more obscure models - like an AL, AV, AT-1 or a Canon FTb or TX, Pentax KX, Yashica Electro, Konica Auto S, or other rangefinders, are on the incline.. I can't quite figure that one out.

Of course, it always helps when a famous photographer or filmmaker speaks out in support of film vs digital. That always makes for a spike in interest and sales of analog 35mm gear. Now to finish reading this sage advice from you folks, who I am positive know more about the lens world than I...! Mahalo nui loa for your thoughts and for your time! - Mike

ps, sorry about the giant photos.. the upload screen said to re-size to 1600x1280, but then I figured it out that any size smaller than that will be fine.

[FlyingO]

Oh, and to member "kuuan" - I hope to do just that - repair my own lenses - with the help, tools and tips from Jean West (my lens lady in Kansas City). She's not too interested in staying in the business, so I'm going to see if I can buy some of her tools and pick her brain for the kind of info you can only get by working on them for 40+ years... She tells me that, in her opinion, the fast lenses - the 1.4s or 1.8s are not as good as those with slower minimum apertures. She feels the f4 and above are generally made better and are more serviceable than the fast ones. She even said that about the Nikkors I brought up! I'll be inquiring deeper into why she feels that way, for sure!

And to everyone else - you have made very valid points and I do intend on researching eBay price trends and making my 2 lists, etc. I especially appreciate the down & dirty list of good and not-so-good lens manufacturers. That's the info that will help me in making my lists! I am a member of various camera and photo related forums on different sites, and I must say, you folks have been amazing! Your group is, from my experiences in the last few days, better than most all of the other forum groups I have encountered! All the more reason to pay close attention to the posts form you all. I only wish I had more time to spend and really take a good look around this manual focus lens site!

Like most people, I had always been of the impression that if a seller has the words "slight fungus" anywhere at all in their listing, to run away as fast as possible. But it makes perfect sense, which some of you have pointed out, that a little haze or fungus isn't going to completely ruin a photo. Once I get the hang of taking lenses apart and successfully putting them back together, I'll be able to clean lens elements and lubricate mechanisms. My deepest thanks to everyone!

[scsambrook]

Thanks for the background info. Now I understand - and good luck with the re-selling and fixing

[FlyingO]

Thank you Stephen. I am envious of those of you, and anyone for that matter, who owns and uses a Leica - old model or new. I have always wanted to use one. I can remember my grandmother's voice saying the words "with my Leica", so I just know that there is an old Leica somewhere in my basement! I did find a very old Canon rangefinder camera in a box of her belongings years ago, but I sold it soon after, thinking I would find that Leica! She and my grandfather traveled to all 50 states and she took Kodachrome slides of everything. For some of those slides to be 75 years old or older, the colors are just as vivid as if I were to step outside this morning... Kodachrome was amazing stuff! - end of rambling. Thanks again to everyone! Aloha!

[Lightshow]

Generally, start at the fastest lenses(f1.4 or faster), even the lesser names, then the widest(24mm or wider), even the lesser names, Any 85's, any you think are interesting for what ever reason, any 40-45mm lenses, the rest I wouldn't worry about too much, unless it's a good name, A search @ flickr for the lens to see if it can produce good images.

[Eugen Mezei]

[aoleg]

In my view, if you are about to pay for servicing a lens, it'd better be a lens that deserves servicing. And there are very few lenses that actually deserve it. For example, pretty much all off-brand 135mm f/3.5 and f/2.8 lenses can be had for next to nothing; however, if you have a nice Nikkor or Zuiko 135/2.8, they'd be good candidates for a CLA.

Zoom lenses - with *very* few exceptions - are better left alone. Exceptions include select Zeiss (Contax) zooms, Olympus 35-70/2.8 and such.

If your intention is selling the stuff, a before-sale paid service will almost never be profitable. It won't be worh of your time, effort and money.

In other words... just pay for servicing a few good, reasonably expensive lenses you're planning to keep long term. Sell the rest "as is".

[Olivier]

I would add Angenieux lenses as worth being serviced.

[paulhofseth]

Add to that all Kinoptics, Oude Delft and Spectros, even the longer ones.

p.