Jump to content

When you had your camera CLA'd ...


Recommended Posts

I had my M4 serviced because the RF patch didn't align properly vertically (one of the images was a tiny bit below the other). The service fixed this. The camera was already incredibly smooth before I sent it in, but cleaning and lubricating it (which I didn't ask for) made it, incredibly, even smoother. The metal ring around the eyepiece was also stuck; the service unstuck it for me. Lastly, the top plate, but also other parts of the body, had several dings which the service point flattened without my asking for it. I actually couldn't believe how much better the camera looked in this respect when it returned.

 

But I wouldn't habitually just "CLA" a camera. I send in for service when there's a need. I have no idea when my 1931 Leica II (D) was last serviced but in the years I have had it, it has ticked along as intended and I have never felt the need to have it serviced.

 

I realise I haven't yet answered your question :o but, since I will only service when there is a need, the answer is yes, I do notice a difference.

 

Everyone's different, but this read is, if nothing else, funny (both in the peculiar and humorous sense of the word).

 

Dante Stella - That Leica CLA culture

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My 1957 M3 and 1952 IIIf both got a CLA because they needed it. Shutter speeds suck and and the finders were dim.

 

My M6 went in for upgrade to the MP finder optics and as it was there it got a CLA as well

 

All three went to DAG in Wisconsin and all three were very much better to use when they came back. The M6 would have done fine without the CLA, but as it was there for the finder upgrade anyway it made sense. I wouldn't send a body in unless it needed the work done.

 

Carl

Link to post
Share on other sites

My M4, M6, and LeicaflexSL all benefited from CLA, but they were all bought when new models, and were just serviced in the last few years. On the Ms the shutter brakes were not working right and speeds were off, sometimes light leaks at the closed shutter position. The SL shutter speeds got much too fast as the lubes dried out, and the meter cell deteriorated. The rangefinders were fine through all the years, so the shutters benefited the most, and the feel of the film advance was also improved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had my M2 and 50mm Elmar serviced by Malcolm Taylor and they came back working as smooth as butter. I also have a Malcolm Taylor serviced IIIF and that is just as good. The M2 was a world or difference between before and after, although if it hadn't been for a sticking shutter that led to the CLA I would have thought it was already a smooth working camera.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, especially the older M2 and M4 bodies, which had probably not had a CLA since they left the factory.

 

It was less noticeable with my M6ttl and M7, but still, you could tell.

 

It was even more noticeable with lenses. I had my Summicron DR and collapsible serviced by Leica, NJ. The difference was astonishing.

 

Unless something is noticeably wrong I think every 10 years is a good interval.

 

I shoot my M2 almost every day. Last year I sent the M2 to Gerry at Kindermann to get the strap lugs replaced. Although the camera felt quite smooth, Gerry said that it was filled with dirt and grime, just from being used so much and he recommended a CLA. ONe of the shutter curtains was also starting to develop a hole.

 

So, maybe every 5 years with heavy use and 10 for normal? The lubricants deteriorating is probably the key factor here. Harry Fleenor recommended every 10 years, simply because after that the lubricants start to break down.

Edited by thrid
Link to post
Share on other sites

YES!

 

I recently had my 111f RD CLA'd at Luton, and it turned it from a 'nice but not terribly practical' camera to my favourite. A new beam splitter was fitted which made the rangefinder fantastic to use: much more contrast.

 

I had my M2 overhauled fifteen years ago by Leica at Milton Keynes, but find the tinting of the viewfinder image (to give contrast between the two images) rather too much.

 

Susie

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also had my IIIf CLA'd last year by DAG, and indeed there is a big difference. Before the shutter had a "clank" sound much louder than my M cameras. After CLA it is at least as quiet as my M cameras. I've had the IIIf for at least 30 years, and this was the first service I know of. I agree - CLA when needed, not just on a schedule.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer to your question is Yes

 

Both my IIIf Red Dial & IIIg including lenses went to Malcolm Taylor and my M6 because it had developed a problem went to Solms for investigation during which it was CLA'd. Ok whilst that all took a long time to sort out the cause of the problem when it did come back it is noticeably smoother. In fairness to Leica both in Mayfair and Solms I couldn't have been given better treatment. Came back with a 12 month warranty

 

Regards

 

Mike :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

1/ M3DS + DR Summicron serviced by Melbourne dealer just before purchase: Superb. 2/ Canon Vt by same dealer came back worse than it was when it went in, so didn't take it out of the shop. It came back by mail and advance only worked some times. Fixed it myself. 3/ Leica I serviced by Collingwood agent; expensive, but superb work. Now feels great. 4/ Leica M1 ditto agent, ditto result. 5/ Nikon S2 + 1.4/50 Nikkor ditto agent, ditto result. 6/ Leica M2 (very worn - a camera I was expecting to be told was worth parts money only) sent to Perth, now works perfectly and is a pleasure to use (and at a very reasonable price). Sorry about including other makes, but I thought they helped to complete the picture of my experiences.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought my M4-P brand new in 1988, and I sent it in for a CLA to Solms in March 2008. I also had the viewfinder upgraded to the newer MP version.

I clearly remember that I felt I huge difference, once my camera returned; both from a mechanical and (more obviously) optical point of view. Total "damage": 1100 Euro.

Three months ago It went back to Solms because a heavy bunch of keys cracked by accident the front glass of the viewfinder: They replaced it and checked everything else. When I received the camera back, besides the viewfinder being now spotless and supposedly sealed against occasional dust, I noticed no operational differences. The bill was 320 Euro.

In both cases the service was extremely good and fast. Plus I was treated with extreme courtesy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...