Clean, lubricate, adjust: A promise that costs a lot if kept

[Andreas Thaler]

These are exactly the two problems, and a third problem are internet forum threads like this that promulgate an extreme opinion of what that term "really" means - as if there is some ground truth definition available - and what one should expect to get if asking for it.

What else should a CLA be if not this basic work?

Where is something „extreme“?

Because a CLA in the true sense of the word would mean

• dismantling a camera,
• checking it,
• cleaning it outside and inside thorougly,
• replacing worn parts,
• removing old lubrication and adding new,
• reassembling everything and completely adjusting the camera.

Anything else doesn't make much sense. And we can easily argue this on a technical level.

What should all other be sold as?

A CLA light or a mini CLA?

And if there is no definition for a CLA, then we can try to create one.

The motivation for this thread came from my own experiences.

EUR X for „a service“, whatever was sold to me.

I didn't know any better at the time and paid, believing that my camera had now received everything it needed.

Today I know that that is impossible for that price.

 

[BrianShaw]

That's exactly why I ASK when taking/sending a camera for anything other than a repair of a malfunction.

Don't take it personally, but unless you have the authority to establish a standard definitoion and a way to impose a standard definintion on the repair community then this is just internet chatter. Might be better if everone stopped assuming and consistently asked, then more repair people might be addresss expectations.

Terms I more easily understand: Inspection; Full overhaul; Repair (of specific broken part/function). Possibly one more for superficial/external cleaning of parts like viewfinders and lenses.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

I agree and much prefer the term "overhaul", but even that can be shamed into confusion by internet folks promulgating the myth that disassembly to the lowest level of component pieces is a reasonable basline expectation or that a tech should have to prove their service with photographic evidence.

I believe you yet thought it a more recent term... perhaps because I'm not in the Leica circles.

There's not much that can be done without dismantling an SLR camera. Unless you give the camera a good shot of WD-40 from the outside

In order to clean and lubricate/oil the mirror box mechanism, it has to be removed.

This is a lot of work with all SLR cameras, as parts have to be dismantled first.

Then the question arises as to whether the mechanism can be cleaned while assembled or whether further dismantling is required.

With SLR cameras with a horizontal focal plane shutter, the transfer gears on the bottom of the camera also raise the same questions.

There is often dust behind the eyepiece or above the focusing screen, which means further dismantling.

Then all the settings have to be checked, the lists in the service manuals are long, see also my attempts as a beginner to adjust the shutter on a Minolta XG-M.

For this alone, parts have to be removed and the top cover removed.

All together, and that doesn't even take into account troubleshooting and replacing/repairing defective parts, this work takes several hours of work. If you are practiced, it goes faster.

These are the electro-mechanical cameras like the Minolta X.

A mechanical camera with more moving parts requires significantly more effort.

This means that a CLA for little money cannot mean much more than superficial work.

 

[BrianShaw]

This means that a CLA for little money cannot mean much more than superficial work.

Very true. This would be a much easier/reasonable discussion if there weren't so many expectations placed on a vague term. Bargain basement camera service is as risky as buying bargain basement cameras. If one choses to take the risk the it may pay off, or it may not. I'm sure that you would agree that asking to clarify what one is buying rather than assuming, and being willing to pay the price for the level of service requested/contracted is the correct approach.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

Don't take it personally, but unless you have the authority to establish a standard definitoion and a way to impose a standard definintion on the repair community then this is just internet chatter. Might be better if everone stopped assuming and consistently asked, then more repair people might be addresss expectations.

In our field, there are no authorities or committees that approve anything. That disappeared with the switch to digital.

There used to be technical schools and training to become a camera mechanic, but that is a thing of the past.

People have died, are doing other things in retirement or are no longer interested in old cameras. So anyone who wants their old camera to live on has to seek help or do it themselves.

That is the reality.

And so everyone is free to question things, improve them or mess them up.

What we need as DIY repairers is enthusiasm, interest, willingness to try new things, use of the latest technology and self-confidence. Otherwise we won't get our cameras to work again.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

Very true. This would be a much easier/reasonable discussion if there weren't so many expectations placed on a vague term. Bargain basement camera service is as risky as buying bargain basement cameras. If one choses to take the risk the it may pay off, or it may not. I'm sure that you would agree that asking to clarify what one is buying rather than assuming, and being willing to pay the price for the level of service requested/contracted is the correct approach.

You should tell people the truth about what they get for their money, in a way that even laypeople can understand. Then it doesn't matter what name it goes under.

And people should ask questions - that is one of the purposes of this thread.

 

[BrianShaw]

Cameras, like refrigerators and televisions and many consumer good, have become a disposable commodity. Use it and when it breaks, replacement is most likely the solution. That is the reality.

Repairing 20+ year old electronics ... those are legacy systems and are, generally, not economically advantageous for professional repair. Plus they come from the earlier days of the disposable commodity era. That is the reality.

I fully support continued usage of legacy cameras and DIY, but don't confuse them with 'modern" or "current". I don't know where the current camera techs who work on current electronic/digital cameras gets their training, but thought it was from factory courses as well as factory service manuals. Aren't there still brand authorized service folks? They certainly can't just be figuring it out as they go, although it seems form some complaints that they aren't all completely trained/competent. Do you know?

 

[Twotone]

This is an interesting thread to read, Andreas - I agree with your sentiment, it's important to ask what you are getting for your money.

In my opinion, one of the many things have murkied the water so to speak, is the definition of something receiving a CLA/service in the context of a camera reseller.
Going back a few years I was in the market for an F2 and saw several that stated their F2's had been serviced/had a CLA and tested by the seller so naturally I enquired as to what had been done and I received the same sort of reply each time:

'I've changed the light seals and put a roll of film through it'

I am currently working exclusively on F3 and FM2s, and regardless of how clean they are when they come to me, they are all being stripped, fronts out and given everything they need (including internal foams which are inaccessible without disassembly). They are cleaned (including dismantling the shutter on the FM2s), lubricated, and adjusted (including meter, manual shutter speeds and auto mode, with the latter being on F3s). The viewfinders and screens are also dismantled and cleaned - this allows me to be confident that they will be good for many years (assuming a component doesn't break) and happy in the knowledge that I've done right by the camera and it's new owner + I offer a warranty which I have to be confident in.

The reality is, even some of the last film cameras ever made now need deeper maintenance than they would have had some years back, and the work needs to reflect that.

Ultimately, I think technicians should be clear about what you are getting for the cost of a service (thankfully a lot of them are). Broadly speaking I don't believe there is an issue with dishonesty etc within the technician community, I just think it's partly down to it not being clear what is expected/what is being offered, and the terms CLA or service being used incorrectly.

Thanks

 

[BrianShaw]

You should tell people the truth about what they get for their money, in a way that even laypeople can understand. Then it doesn't matter what name it goes under.

And people should ask questions - that is one of the purposes of this thread.

Vehemently agree, but expecting truth frm others (or even hope of truth in some rare cases, it seems) is an impossible task, especially of the expectations of the service to be provided don't have a solid foundation. The term "CLA" is not a solid foundation for much other than something is cleaned and something is lubricated, and something is adjusted.

The title of the thread is indisputable. The subsequent statements of expectations of what a CLA is or isn't is where the thread gets confusing.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

Vehemently agree, but imposing expectations of honesty on others (or even hope of honesty in some cases, it seems) is an impossible task, especially of the expectations don't have a solid foundation. The term "CLA" is not a solid foundation for much other than something is cleaned and something is lubricated, and something is adjusted.

The title of the thread is indisputable. The subsequent statements of expectations of what a CLA is or isn't is where the thread gets confusing.

I'm not interested in how this is regulated for current cameras, I'm concerned about the cameras for which there is no longer any support.

My heart beats for these and I take care of them without any reservations or fears.

Because there is no one else who will do it. Or at a cost that I can afford.

If I hadn't set out on my own journey, some of my cameras would be nothing but worthless junk. And I want to save as many of them from that as best I can

I assume that the manufacturers will educate and train their own people to service and repair current cameras.

But they won't be repairmen in the sense of what we're discussing here, but rather specialists for exchanging modules.

There's no other way these days.

 

[BrianShaw]

I'm not interested in how this is regulated for current cameras, I'm concerned about the cameras for which there is no longer any support.

My heart beats for these and I take care of them without any reservations or fears.

Because there is no one else who will do it. Or at a cost that I can afford.

If I hadn't set out on my own journey, some of my cameras would be nothing but worthless junk. And I want to save as many of them from that as best I can

I assume that the manufacturers will educate and train their own people to service and repair current cameras.

But they won't be repairmen in the sense of what we're discussing here, but rather specialists for exchanging modules.

There's no other way these days.

[Please note that I updated the post you quoted because I didn't think it was clearly expressed, but the intent remained.]

OK, that's your perspective. It is a personal one and I seem to have a slightly different perspective and expectations. All good.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

The title of the thread is indisputable. The subsequent statements of expectations of what a CLA is or isn't is where the thread gets confusing.

That's why we're here, to discuss it. Everyone is invited to give their opinion.

I can't express my understanding of a CLA any differently, because I know some of the technical background from my own work and experience.

It is derived from what a camera needs to function. I neither thought this up nor invented it

 

[Andreas Thaler]

OK, that's your perspective. It is a personal one and I seem to have a slightly different perspective and expectations. All good.

Sure, that’s right

 

[Angarian]

You often read in forums that a second-hand or older camera needs a CLA (clean, lubricate, adjust) to make it as good as new and work perfectly.

There is nothing wrong with that; any device in which parts move and settings can change will be happy with such a treatment as the owner is.


But what does it mean in concrete terms

when you take a camera to a repair shop for a CLA, what is done there and for how much?


View attachment 375952

„A CLA please!“ But what do I actually get for my money?


In my experience - other camera owners certainly have better experiences - repair shops generally do not provide any information on this or are vague in their answers. (Although of course I have also experienced positive and very positive exceptions.)

It was cleaned, checked, lubricated, adjusted and that was it.

Does a service like this make sense if you don't have any detailed information about it?

What am I actually paying for and what does my camera get out of it?


View attachment 375953

A thorough CLA means a lot of work, even for an experienced repairman, which of course has to be paid for.


All questions that made me critical over the years when I was still a regular customer of repair shops. And dissatisfied.


Because a CLA in the true sense of the word would mean

• dismantling a camera,
• checking it,
• cleaning it outside and inside thorougly,
• replacing worn parts,
• removing old lubrication and adding new,
• reassembling everything and completely adjusting the camera.

That's a lot of work, which of course also comes at a price. I'm unlikely to get this specialized work done for USD/EUR 100.


But what am I paying for then?

I gained a good impression of the effort involved in a CLA in these two projects:

Have you just purchased a Minolta X-700? Do a Check & Clean first!

Since I'm currently working on a few Minolta X cameras and focusing on the Minolta X-700, I thought a "Check & Clean" tutorial might be useful for you 🙂 Today I was busy with this X-700. I had no idea if it worked. Anyway it was obvious that it was dirty. But otherwise? So let's take a...

www.photrio.com

Minolta X-700: A renovation project

As announced, the first project in the new year will be the renovation of an X-700 with obvious moisture damage. Today the cheaply purchased and well used X-700 arrived and I did an initial inspection. The goal is not to get the camera back to full function at all costs, but to see what damage...

www.photrio.com

Admittedly, one of the Minolta X-700s was very dirty, but for a thorough cleaning it has to be removed from its covers anyway.

And I didn't take both cameras apart down to the shutter, check them completely and adjust them.


View attachment 375954

Which settings on my camera will be checked and adjusted? Is professional testing equipment available like on this picture?


Therefore, before you commission a repair shop to do a CLA, you should ask what exactly is being done.

An experienced and serious repairman will explain his approach and why he does/does not do this or that.

I think this is the only service we want for our cameras and for our money.

Thanks Andreas.
Very well thought, I think you are spot on.

And a general big "thank you" for all your very good insights in camera repairs!

 

[Andreas Thaler]

I am currently working exclusively on F3 and FM2s, and regardless of how clean they are when they come to me, they are all being stripped, fronts out and given everything they need (including internal foams which are inaccessible without disassembly). They are cleaned (including dismantling the shutter on the FM2s), lubricated, and adjusted (including meter, manual shutter speeds and auto mode, with the latter being on F3s). The viewfinders and screens are also dismantled and cleaned - this allows me to be confident that they will be good for many years (assuming a component doesn't break) and happy in the knowledge that I've done right by the camera and it's new owner + I offer a warranty which I have to be confident in.

It would be great if you could show us some of your work here!

Otherwise, I agree with what you say.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

To echo previous sentiment:

• Don't fix it if it ain't broke.
• Fix anything long enough and you will really break it.

In the old days a CLA at a New York camera store was a check that the camera works along with an external wipe down with a Ronsonol soaked paper towel. Which does align with Hippocrates' dictums: "Do the least harm."

A CLA should be a check of the camera - shutter speeds, metering, focusing, light seals ... If one of these is off then the owner should be contacted and given an estimate for the cost of repair. If all went OK then the camera is wiped down with Ronsonol and returned to the customer in a nice plastic bag - appearances count. Everyone knows a car runs better after it has been waxed.

Calibrating a bit of electronic test equipment is a performance test - does it meet specifications? If yes, the job is done. If needed, a simple adjustment is made. If a repair is indicated then the customer is contacted for instructions. If all was OK the covers aren't even removed from the oscilloscope or voltmeter and a 'Calibrated' sticker is affixed to the case. Industry standards require instrumentation to have this yearly 'calibration.'

I worked at a firm that had its own internal calibration laboratory. There was a terrific uproar as it was the policy of this lab to twiddle every adjustment in the instrument. All instruments returned from the lab now had something wrong with them even if they were working perfectly when they went in.

 

[runswithsizzers]

...
In my opinion, one of the many things have murkied the water so to speak, is the definition of something receiving a CLA/service in the context of a camera reseller.
Going back a few years I was in the market for an F2 and saw several that stated their F2's had been serviced/had a CLA and tested by the seller so naturally I enquired as to what had been done and I received the same sort of reply each time:

'I've changed the light seals and put a roll of film through it'
....

Even "put a roll of film through it" may not mean what you think. One reseller of used cameras told me his camera was "film tested." After asking more questions, I discovered he ran a previously exposed roll of film through the camera without actually exposing and developing any film. In other words, the ability of the camera to make a correct exposure was still untested. He claimed nobody would actually expose film and develop it to test a camera because of the time and cost involved. And this guy ran a processing lab...

Unfortunately, my questions seemed to irritate the seller to the point where he would no longer answer my emails. I would like to think I am a polite person who is able to communicate without triggering defensive feelings, but maybe not?

My point is, a certain percentage of repair persons may feel like our questions are challenging their honesty / competence -- whatever, so tread softly.

 

[Chan Tran]

I figure if a properly CLA is done the cost must be several times the camera. I don't think one can make a living doing the job without charging at least $500 per camera if not more.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

A reason to spend $300 repairing a $250 camera is that the replacement camera will more than likely need the same $300 level of repair.

This applies, of course, only to cameras that will be kept and used. If it doesn't get regular use sell it on ebay. Or so I tell myself - my sell to buy ratio is probably in the 1:100 range. OTOH, I would only consider DIY service for many of my cheap(er) non-critical cameras.

 

[BrianShaw]

My point is, a certain percentage of repair persons may feel like our questions are challenging their honesty / competence -- whatever, so tread softly.

This is certainly true. I find that more the case with mechanical watch repair shops than with cameras. I like and wear (when I can) a mechanical watch. Keeping them running is just as difficult as keeping an old camera running... and for the very same resaons. My local watch repairman was willling to discuss a watch he "repaired and timed" yet ran several minutes a day fast only once. In response to my questions, he showed me the timing machine, how it operates, and discussed all of the reasons I cause the watch to run fast.... and then showed me the door. Just as well. Knowing his limitations was worth the price of admission. He's a very nice man and one of the few watch repaimen around so I would not hesitate to have him replace a strap of change a battery in an electronic watch, though.

 

[indy_kid]

Some years back I had my M2 worked on by Sherry Krauter. She initially quoted me a price, and that was the exact price I paid + a few $ for screws. .

I sent a Leica CL to Sherry. Heard nothing from her for 5 months. She finally returned the camera to me, claiming that it couldn't be repaired. I sent it off to DAG, and they returned it to me fully repaired in just 5 days.

SK will not get any business from me.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

Thanks Andreas.
Very well thought, I think you are spot on.

And a general big "thank you" for all your very good insights in camera repairs!

Thanks for your feedback!

 

[4season]

Nikon F2’s were never as “Leica smooth” out of the box as they are when you get it from him. They were actually a little gritty and would improve some with usage.

Brand-new Leicas aren't "Leica smooth" either And this may be a good thing if it indicates use of heavier-duty steel gears,in the case of newer models designed for use with a motor.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Well, I did work for a very skilled and experienced camera repair tech (I was doing admin, customer service, etc. not repairs). I saw him check over many cameras of the type under discussion here- dominantly mechanical 35mm SLRs. He checked shutter speeds on a tester, meter on a tester. Ran a dummy roll of film through to check winding, shutter cocking, etc. Gave the camera some shakes. Looked at wear, dust. Checked seals. From this, he developed what was needed. I am not certain but I seem to remember that 'CLA' was a generic intake term if there weren't obvious failures. But that estimates did not use CLA. Work to be performed was called out specifically. And based on his experience with cameras, he had a pretty good idea what was a real issue, what could be fixed, etc. And bills also called out specifics, with maybe 'CLA' added as the last step, a generic wipe down.

I think CLA has different meanings in different contexts. I bet it came out of professional photographers and repair techs when cameras were used constantly and people's living depended on the camera. Like a watch or a car, going in to get general cleaning, lubrication, and adjustment is good preventative maintenance. So you send the assistant off to the repair tech with orders to tell Joe or whoever, 'give it a CLA.' Like working on a car, you don't need to disassemble everything to see most problems before they arise and to do maintenance that can reduce the chance of future failures.

Cameras usually need some disassembly to do most adjustments. A good time to check over other systems, clean, maybe apply lubrication in places you know can use it. So for example, most 35mm rangefinders probably have the bottom plate removed for minor shutter adjustments? Might be a good time to wipe down the escapement if there, etc.

All in all I don't know what CLA means beyond a generic, seems like time to get this thing looked at. I clean, I overhaul (shutter is cleaned if front is opened and minimal disassembly and speeds reset; overhaul is full stripdown). I check, I adjust. I don't do a CLA. If somene wants a CLA, fine by me, call it what you will.

 

[BrianShaw]

Back in the 1980's I was that assistant who took the cameras to the camera repair shop. One man operation; no intake clerk, I remember saying, "We need this camera looked at; let us know what it needs". He saw us often, 4-6 times per year, and knew the evironments we were working in - photographing underground mining worksites. He'd call after his inspection with a price. When picking up the most I recall him saying was something like, "Nothing is wrong; I dusted it off" if just the inspection or "Here it is; works good now" is he did an overhaul. In our situation I don't recall him ever doing any service that was in between the two options. We needed reliability and he needed confidence regarding warrantee. He never failed us; It was a sad day when he closed shop.