Leciaflex SL purchased off eBay, questions

[kaleb duke]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I purchased a Leciaflex sl camera off ebay. It was advertised as fully functional and ready to take photos. When I got it, with the lens stopped down, it took two presses of the shutter release to complete a cycle: (1) to bring the mirror up (2) to (2) open/close the shutter and release the mirror. I stopped the lens up, and it only took one press of the shutter button to complete the cycle.  However, after working through the action a few more times, I mirror gets locked in the up position. When I watch the mirror come up, it does so very sluggishly. 

Also, I know a lot of these cameras do not have operable light meters. I put a new 675 battery in it (I waited 5 minutes for it to air out, not sure if I need to wait longer).  The manual says when pressing the test button, the indicator should go all the way to or below the index on the lower left. I get close, but I’m not there (see photo). I don’t know if that means the light meter isn’t functional. Or a caveat of using a 675 battery, 

I think there’s a reasonable expectation that any old mechanical SLR will need some sort of service. But I’m not sure how big a risk I am taking given the status of this camera. 

Also, I don’t know about investing in the service given how much dust/fungus is in the lens. See the attached photo, the description just said the lens has cosmetic imperfections. The lens is a  50mm f/2.0 Leitz-Wetzlar Lens

Sorry, I know this a lot, but any insight is helpful I paid $350 total. I think the non-disclosure of the dust/fungus in the lens and the fact that the camera is non-functional warrants me to bring a case up with eBay if need be. However, the seller is very communicative, and I’d start there. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[TomB_tx]

The lens certainly looks at least dirty, but chances are a good CLA could restore it. Clean it is a very good performing lens.

I bought my Leicaflex SL in 1969 and after some years the meter could be adjusted to work well in bright light - but would be off in dimmer light. The SL meter cell is known to degrade with humidity and age, and the only real cure is to replace the cell - but it's a special design, and I don't think replacements are still available. (Mine was replaced about 20 years ago by DAG, and while he still had some replacements he would only provide them if he did the CLA service, He first adjusted the meter as best he could, but was off in low indoor light, so I had him replace the cell.)  I've seen the sluggish mirror syndrome on later Leica R models, but not on the SL.

Its still one of my favorite cameras, and if you are in the USA I'd suggest contacting DAG (Don Goldberg) Camera Repair by phone or email to see what he would suggest. The price you paid with lens is OK, if a CLA service will restore it.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Pyrogallol]

I would return the camera and lens. There are plenty of early Leicaflex cameras available on E Bay, I have three. The bodies are cheap, around £100 though the 50mm lenses are £200-300, I just bought an early 1963 lens. I had an early Leicaflex that developed a fault that caused the mirror to stay up instead of dropping back down after taking a picture, I sold it on as faulty and bought an other. I haven’t tried the meters, I use a handheld meter.

Edited February 18 by Pyrogallol

[Al Brown]

Just got a fully functional Leicaflex SL from eBay for 60 euros. If I were you I would return.

[jaapv]

Cosmetic imperfections is a bit of an understatement. That lens has fungus and is basically worthless.

[lukeadair]

Yes, as Jaap said, this lens is just obliterated by fungus. Chances are, it has etched into the coating and the glass itself. There is no cleaning this out.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As for the metering question. The Leicaflex SL has been designed for a Mercury battery which has been obsolete for many years. If you try and use a present-day battery  the voltage is wrong. An expert technician can adjust the circuit during a service, which the camera will need anyway. If the lens is in such a state and the mirror is slow/nion-functional it will be in dire need of a full CLA and a new lens. It looks like somebody managed to offload a lemon through eBay with a false descrition.. 

[hepcat]

Send it back "Not as described."  As mentioned above, that lens is beyond economically salvaging.   The body needs an overhaul at the very least, about $250 depending on who does it.   I recently had an SL2 overhauled by Don Goldberg.  It wasn't inexpensive, but it was worth every penny for that particular body because of its provenance.  I wouldn't do it for most bodies.  There are enough inexpensive, working bodies and clean lenses out there, it's not worth buying a klunker.

[earleygallery]

You paid for a 'fully functional' camera with a lens that only had 'cosmetic' marks.

You have got a faulty camera and a lens that's full of fungus which will certainly affect the optical quality.

Demand a refund. If the seller gets difficult open a dispute with ebay. Make sure you only send messages to the seller via ebay because they can then see the exchanges between you if it comes down to a dispute. Hopefully the seller is honest and just didn't know what he was selling.

[spydrxx]

I concur with previous posters, return the camera for a full refund, or ask the seller to pay for a CLA to correct the deficiencies....that should get him/her to refund what you paid + postage. And, make sure you do it thru Ebay, not outside of their system. Often a bargain in some of these older cameras & lenses is too good to be true...not saying you can't use them, just that they often don't perform up to spec.