Jump to content

The Leica Forum uses cookies. Read the privacy statement for more info. To remove this message, please click the button to the right:    OK, understood.

Photo
- - - - -

After 3 years at Malcolm Taylor's, will my lens have fungus?


  • Please log in to reply
189 replies to this topic

#1 plasticman

plasticman

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 3,094 posts
  • City / Ort:Stockholm

Posted 03 February 2012 - 10:50

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)
I'm gearing-up for the annual round of nagging calls to Malcolm Taylor, as he's now had my Canon 0,95 for M-conversion for just about three years now.

The reason I bought this particular 0,95 was because it was in absolutely mint condition with no flaws either internally or externally, (and also incidentally came with its original caps and a few filters and shades in their original leather cases).

Now I'm concerned that when (if?) I get it back, that the chances that it's been infected with fungus during the long time that Malcolm has had it in his workshop will have increased. Does anyone here have any idea whether this is likely?
I'm sure that if I ask him this directly he'll deny it. But then he's promised to be done with the work many, many times before, so I'm not sure how much I can rely on his word.

I'd be reluctant to use the lens if there's even a hint of fungus, as none of my existing lenses have any trace of mould - and the thought of infecting the Noctilux or any of the Summiluxes is making me nervous about the whole procedure now.

Any advice gratefully received.

#2 Studio58

Studio58

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 1,168 posts
  • City / Ort:Hobart

Posted 03 February 2012 - 11:03

3 years sounds like a ridiculous amount of time. 1 year would be far too long.
I would not think fungus would be likely just from sitting around. Lack of airflow is one of the big causes (in a humid environment. So it is probably in a drawer or some similar storage system.... not stuffed away in a cupboard with blankets or in a moisture attracting leather bag. Will be interested to hear of your findings.
Good luck with that.
  • plasticman said thank you to this
Photography is art. The necessity of the imposition of a set of parameters in order to contain the image seems paradoxical to me.

#3 Ralf

Ralf

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Premium Member
  • 281 posts
  • City / Ort:Essen,Germany

Posted 03 February 2012 - 11:03

Since I dio't know his premises, I can't comment on this, but what I do know though, you are a very very patient person!
  • plasticman said thank you to this

#4 Studio58

Studio58

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 1,168 posts
  • City / Ort:Hobart

Posted 03 February 2012 - 11:09

I base my above comments on my 4 years working for Canon service in Melbourne BTW. Saw plenty of lenses with fungus and mostly it came from inappropriate storage. Having said that, any time in the tropics is asking for trouble.
Photography is art. The necessity of the imposition of a set of parameters in order to contain the image seems paradoxical to me.

#5 plasticman

plasticman

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 3,094 posts
  • City / Ort:Stockholm

Posted 03 February 2012 - 11:16

I base my above comments on my 4 years working for Canon service in Melbourne BTW. Saw plenty of lenses with fungus and mostly it came from inappropriate storage. Having said that, any time in the tropics is asking for trouble.


Luckily Malcolm is based somewhere in the middle of England. I suspect the conditions are definitely not tropical at the moment anyway.

Ralf - LOL at your comment btw! :D Actually patience is not my strongpoint. The key has been that I actually forget I bought the lens for long periods of time - only timely reminders on my iPhone periodically reignite the feeble flame of hope of ever seeing the lens again. :(

#6 wattsy

wattsy

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 6,537 posts
  • City / Ort:UK

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:04

I can't imagine why the lens is likely to come back infected with fungus - is the Canon lens particularly susceptible to it? - but three years is a poor service by any standards. I would ask for it back - if only to ascertain that he still has it and/or not damaged it.
Ian Watts
Tumblr // ianwatts.uk // flickr // Instagram

#7 delander †

delander †

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 2,490 posts

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:11

3 years? I'm glad I never sent anything to him .

Jeff
Gritty not Pretty

#8 asmith

asmith

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 434 posts
  • City / Ort:Arnside. Cumbria, UK

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:17

I'm surprised. Whenever I've sent anything to him it has been returned in a few weeks. I've had no complaints at all with his service or workmanship.
Alwyn

#9 plasticman

plasticman

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 3,094 posts
  • City / Ort:Stockholm

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:24

I can't imagine why the lens is likely to come back infected with fungus - is the Canon lens particularly susceptible to it? - but three years is a poor service by any standards. I would ask for it back - if only to ascertain that he still has it and/or not damaged it.


I was thinking that at home I store all of my lenses really carefully separated and in extremely dry conditions. I even store the Olympus Pen lenses that I recently bought in a totally separate area of my apartment from the Leica lenses, as I was worried about some tiny, almost imperceptible specks that I could see using a magnifier on the insides of the elements.

I imagine that Malcolm gets a lot of lenses in a variety of conditions, and that all or most of them are stored together in one workshop.

I've tried to research this whole lens fungus issue - but pretty much everything I've managed to find online is just personal opinions and internet myths. Some people seem to think that a lens with fungus will infect every glass surface in a mile-radius, others that communication of fungus is virtually impossible. So I have no clear idea whether to be worried or not.

In any case, I do hope to see the lens again someday. I'm extremely reluctant to simply get it back unconverted - then the three year wait will have been totally in vain. I'd rather wait four years and get back a lens I can actually use.

#10 plasticman

plasticman

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 3,094 posts
  • City / Ort:Stockholm

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:26

I'm surprised. Whenever I've sent anything to him it has been returned in a few weeks. I've had no complaints at all with his service or workmanship.
Alwyn


Alwyn - I'd say that jobs that he's done before and which can be turned around with some speed have gone before tasks that might take longer. Therefore the long wait. I don't for a moment imagine he's been twiddling his thumbs the last three years, wondering how to tackle my lens.

#11 MarkP

MarkP

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Premium Member
  • 5,080 posts
  • City / Ort:Sydney

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:29

I'm not sure what's more bizzarre: that he's had the lens for three years or that you've tolerated such a delay:rolleyes:

At this rate you'll be dead and buried (with fungus on your own two lenses) before the lens is:D
  • bill, plasticman, andybarton and 8 others said thank you

#12 Double Negative

Double Negative

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Validating
  • 1,717 posts
  • City / Ort:New York

Posted 03 February 2012 - 12:33

Three... YEARS? Holy sh*t! :eek:

#13 wattsy

wattsy

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 6,537 posts
  • City / Ort:UK

Posted 03 February 2012 - 13:35

I'm extremely reluctant to simply get it back unconverted - then the three year wait will have been totally in vain. I'd rather wait four years and get back a lens I can actually use.


That's understandable but asking for it back would, at a minimum, put the onus on Malcolm Taylor to actually do something with the lens (even if it is only to call Fedex). You will also know for sure then that he hasn't lost the lens or damaged it. Most likely he is waiting for parts from a niche (one man band) supplier who is even less reliable. A polite kick-up-the-arse seems in order.
  • jamesk8752 said thank you to this
Ian Watts
Tumblr // ianwatts.uk // flickr // Instagram

#14 Erik Gunst Lund

Erik Gunst Lund

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 902 posts
  • City / Ort:Copenhagen

Posted 03 February 2012 - 13:43

Three... YEARS? Holy sh*t! :eek:

+1

#15 250swb

250swb

    Sponsoring Member

  • Premium Member
  • 6,391 posts
  • LocationPeak District, United Kingdom
  • City / Ort:The Peak District, Derbyshire

Posted 03 February 2012 - 13:48

Things I have sent to him have come back in the time agreed, the last an M2 and 50mm Elmar just coming up to Christmas took about seven weeks for a full CLA. He does a lot of work in batches, as he has parts machined and even lenses ground to replace the commonly damaged parts in old Leica equipment. I really don't think he is spreading fungus around, the idea with sending something to him for repair is that it lasts another 50 years.

Steve
  • Archiver said thank you to this

#16 plasticman

plasticman

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 3,094 posts
  • City / Ort:Stockholm

Posted 03 February 2012 - 14:13

Most likely he is waiting for parts from a niche (one man band) supplier who is even less reliable.


No - he has all the parts he needs - kindly supplied for free by our very own Jaap, here.

I think, as I said, that he's simply procrastinating with a job which he hasn't tried before, and which may take somewhat longer than he maybe first thought. In the meantime, other customers push quickly through the system and generate income flow, as usual.

Note that I don't have an estimated cost though - so when he finally does get on with it, he can charge me whatever he likes. I guess now you're all impressed with both my patience and my acute business acumen...
  • Keith (M) said thank you to this

#17 TomB_tx

TomB_tx

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 1,194 posts
  • LocationCentral Texas

Posted 03 February 2012 - 14:27

Rare, unusual jobs take a lot of time to do, so the hours put in won't be paid until some future date when the job is finished. In the meantime other customers are pushing for their "simple" jobs to be done. I can see where a tech would tend to slip in the simpler jobs to keep the payments coming in.
I'm going on two years for my Zunow 50 f1.1 to be restored by Gus Lazzari. Yet I told him there was no rush - it had spent 20 years in my drawer already, and will need a full strip-down, repainting the edges of the elements, etc. I expect a job like this may get a bit of work between other jobs, so get bumped along slowly.
I'm still hoping to get it back sometime this year.
  • plasticman said thank you to this

#18 earleygallery

earleygallery

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 12,893 posts
  • City / Ort:Gtr London

Posted 03 February 2012 - 15:04

Did you opt for 'express service' - how much longer are you prepared to wait? Another 3 years, 10 years.........

Sorry, but waiting 3 years is just ridiculous. I know Malcolm Taylor is highly respected, and no doubt very busy, but 3 years............some people serve less time for murder.
  • plasticman said thank you to this
Regards,
James

croydonconfidential.blogspot.com

#19 pico

pico

    Sponsoring Member

  • Members
  • 10,110 posts
  • Location51°39'16.05" N 5°42'14.47" E

Posted 03 February 2012 - 18:08

That's understandable but asking for it back would, at a minimum, put the onus on Malcolm Taylor to actually do something with the lens (even if it is only to call Fedex). You will also know for sure then that he hasn't lost the lens or damaged it. Most likely he is waiting for parts from a niche (one man band) supplier who is even less reliable. A polite kick-up-the-arse seems in order.


The adapter is a hard brass unit available for about $35 USD available within a week of ordering from China. If the Canon lens is the TV version, then it gets a little more complicated because the 'real thing' has the rearmost element cut to clear the focusing mechanism. FWIW, I've gone through three of the Canon .95 lenses before finding one with acceptable performance on the Leica. They work well on the Canon 7, but I just had to use it on the M9.

However, a wait of three years is almost criminal.
  • Erik Gunst Lund said thank you to this

#20 thighslapper

thighslapper

    Grumpy Old Fart

  • Premium Member
  • 3,827 posts
  • LocationUK - Shakespeares County

Posted 03 February 2012 - 19:19

I wouldn't worry about fungus on the lens.....

More likely fungus on you....

Sounds like you may be deceased before you get it at this rate......:rolleyes:

I'm afraid some people are reluctant to turn work away and are incapable of saying 'no', even if they know the chances of them being able to do the job economically, if at all, are remote..... and then it becomes a game of 'he who shouts loudest' getting things done first....

Time to issue a ultimatum I'm afraid..... no matter how nice a chap he undoubtedly is....

Edited by thighslapper, 03 February 2012 - 19:21.





0 user(s) are reading this topic