MarkP Posted February 24, 2014 Share #181 Posted February 24, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well one thing I'm confident about is that the lens should come back 100% guaranteed free of fungus. Anything else would surely be enormously unprofessional, especially considering it was the mere suggestion of such a thing that got me hell-banned from the Taylor workshop. You're assuming he's opened up the lens to clean it... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 24, 2014 Posted February 24, 2014 Hi MarkP, Take a look here After 3 years at Malcolm Taylor's, will my lens have fungus?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
plasticman Posted February 24, 2014 Author Share #182 Posted February 24, 2014 You're assuming he's opened up the lens to clean it... My assumption is that if he gave the lens even the most cursory inspection before sending it and saw the smallest sign of fungus, then he'd be extremely foolish to send it to me in that state without thoroughly cleaning it first. Naturally events may prove me wrong, but I would be even more surprised than I am now. I might then think about legal recourse as the lens was in perfect condition internally when dispatched, but anyway there's been far too much speculative discussion on the thread already - I'll wait and see instead. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted February 24, 2014 Share #183 Posted February 24, 2014 Looking on the bright side …. perhaps MT has unwittingly done you a favour since the 50/0.95 is worth a lot more now than it was when you bought it. I've seen them go for crazy money in the past few months. Pete. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted March 7, 2014 Author Share #184 Posted March 7, 2014 picked up the lens yesterday evening, and if nothing else I have to concede that mr Taylor definitely knows how to package: I opened one layer of hard wrapping to find a box, inside of which was bubble, inside of which was another box, then more bubble, then yet another box, then a combination of foam and bubble and finally a box that was a snugger fit for the lens, where foam had been cut to precisely hold the lens ’floating’ in place. I'm not sure he always wraps like this, but I imagine in this case he wasn't taking any risks. No sign of the Visoflex parts that Jaap donated several years ago, and which I specifically asked to be included, but under the circumstances I may just let it slip. I'd forgotten what a magnificent, heavy and audacious piece of optical technology it is. I very carefully examined it straight away - and not only was there no sign whatsoever of fungus, the lens was also much brighter and clearer than I expected after all these years. I think I've been conditioned by more recently seeing images of the 0.95 that make the glass appear yellow, but this example is really crystal clear and pretty much free of any dust. For a few seconds I thought maybe Mr Taylor had taken the lens apart to clean it, but then I saw that the tape which I'd originally secured the front and back caps was the still the same, so I can’t imagine he ever did much more than take a quick look through. I'd forgotten the lens also had an original UV filter on the front, and looking very carefully it seems to me that it's probably always had that protection. So all in all it feels pretty much unnecessary to have the lens checked by a professional, and now I'm just waiting for a newly CLA’ed Canon 7 to arrive from a dealer in Japan to try it out. What a strange adventure for the lens. 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted March 7, 2014 Share #185 Posted March 7, 2014 picked up the lens yesterday evening, and if nothing else I have to concede that mr Taylor definitely knows how to package: I opened one layer of hard wrapping to find a box, inside of which was bubble, inside of which was another box, then more bubble, then yet another box, then a combination of foam and bubble and finally a box that was a snugger fit for the lens, where foam had been cut to precisely hold the lens ’floating’ in place.... That's lovely. He's given you a layer of packaging to mark each year he's had your lens. If ever I find I have a spare decade, I won't hesitate to ship my cameras and lenses to the delightful Mr Taylor for a bit of well deserved maintenance. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 9, 2014 Share #186 Posted March 9, 2014 Enjoy the lens! I have had four of them over decades. Two were converted to M mount. One conversation was marvelously successful. I kept it. It is no Noctilux which I consider an over corrected lens. The Canon is just right, at least this one is. Sent from my Etcha-sketch. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted March 10, 2014 Share #187 Posted March 10, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Enjoy the lens! I have had four of them over decades. Two were converted to M mount. One conversation was marvelously successful. I kept it. It is no Noctilux which I consider an over corrected lens. The Canon is just right, at least this one is. Sent from my Etcha-sketch. hmmm….sounds good, i must check this lens out! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted April 1, 2014 Author Share #188 Posted April 1, 2014 Well if anyone's interested, the lens (and camera) are on sale in the classifieds now. It turned out that the camera I bought had a problem with the 1000/s shutter speed - everything else seems really nice - but to be honest it was the last straw of inconvenience for me and this lens, especially as I've sort of drifted away from the general style that this lens enables over the last five years. I'm trying to break even on the lens now - after all the extra expenses involved in the non-conversion. I'm putting it all down as experience. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted April 9, 2014 Author Share #189 Posted April 9, 2014 Well the lens finally sold on another forum (at a heavily discounted price). I think the hype about the prices of these lenses is often based on the super-inflated 'buy it now' figures that we see on ebay, but which have no relation whatsoever to reality. I'm not sure if I finally broke-even on the lens or not, right now it doesn't really feel like it matters. I was a bit conflicted as to whether selling it was the right decision when I looked through the test images - the lens signature is very unique* - but the lens does feel like it's been bad luck for me, so I think I'm glad to see it go. Now I have to keep my fingers crossed nothing happens to it on the way to its new owner... Some small (600px-wide) and rather compressed test examples here. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pebbles Posted June 27, 2017 Share #190 Posted June 27, 2017 Malcolm has carried out work for me on Leicas Ikoflex and Contarex lenses and he is totally reliable and conscientious. There must have been some other reason why your lens took so long. I would give him 10 out of 10 for his work and his business. I have known him for over thirty years. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted June 27, 2017 Share #191 Posted June 27, 2017 Ironic!! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 28, 2017 Share #192 Posted June 28, 2017 Malcolm has carried out work for me on Leicas Ikoflex and Contarex lenses and he is totally reliable and conscientious. There must have been some other reason why your lens took so long. I would give him 10 out of 10 for his work and his business. I have known him for over thirty years. The butt hurt in the OP was great, the passage of time may have soothed it, but I have also had great service from Malcolm. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted June 28, 2017 Share #193 Posted June 28, 2017 I have known him for over thirty years. The original poster was heading in the direction of knowing him for thirty years also. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted June 28, 2017 Share #194 Posted June 28, 2017 Why on earth has this thread, which never got to the bottom of the problems as we only heard one side of the story, been resurrected after 3 years???? Gerry Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2017 Share #195 Posted June 28, 2017 Why on earth has this thread, which never got to the bottom of the problems as we only heard one side of the story, been resurrected after 3 years???? Gerry Malcolm was either too busy or just forgot about the job. Personally I don't think we have heard even half the story. I find it hard to believe that anyone would commission a repair on mod without a serious realistic completion date. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted June 28, 2017 Author Share #196 Posted June 28, 2017 Why on earth has this thread, which never got to the bottom of the problems as we only heard one side of the story, been resurrected after 3 years???? Malcolm was either too busy or just forgot about the job. Personally I don't think we have heard even half the story. I find it hard to believe that anyone would commission a repair on mod without a serious realistic completion date. It doesn't feel like this thread needed to resurface after all this time, but now it has, I'd prefer if people went easy on the 'one side of the story' thing: I tried my hardest to be fair and even-handed in my posts, and the 'other side of the story' is still open for Malcolm Taylor to give, if he ever wants to. I understand that Mr Taylor has done a lot of great work for people over the years, and many of them are publicly vocal in their support for him. It's only fair to say that a few people got in touch with me during the lifetime of the thread, and privately shared their own negative experiences. If the thread served any purpose, it was to give other members a chance to weigh up both positive and negative experiences, if they needed to get work done themselves. For the (probably many) people seeing this thread for the first time, and not bothering to read through all the posts before throwing around accusations of dishonesty or half-truths, please take the time to look through what actually happened. In many ways I regret starting the thread - it was an impulsive post when I was panicking about fungus - but naturally the whole thing became much more complicated when Malcolm refused to subsequently work on the lens when he heard about this discussion. For the record, I'd ring and discuss the conversion with Mr Taylor every few months. He was always polite and very verbose: I would listen to his deliberations on how to tackle the conversion and (probably rather too gently) I would prod him tentatively towards giving me a date when the work could at least begin. Frankly, my own life with first one and then two small children meant that I wasn't particularly focused on this one task - so when the time we'd agreed for the work to be done came and went, I would often not even bother ringing to check, until maybe an extra 2 or 3 months had passed. And then the same polite conversation would play out, and a new date would be tentatively agreed upon. This is the way it went from months to years. As I said many times in the thread, I simply assume that the lens conversion - which Malcolm hadn't tackled before at this time - was a job he was reluctant to begin, when other more routine tasks continued to flow through his business. I don't see why there need to be any insinuations that there's somehow 'more' to the story than that? 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.