MX missed the ark

MrEspie · 01-09-2009, 07:24 PM

Hey everyone,

I have an MX (previously my mother's) that went through a flood roughly 10 years ago. I've spent a great deal of time testing all the mechanical functions of the camera, and they all seem to check out. It also appears remarkably clean inside and out with no odours that I can detect. So far it looks as though I may have a perfectly functional body. However, I've yet to try it with film. The original light seals are still in, and this concerns me as they (especially the front of the mirror buffer) look slightly uneven. When I test it with film, what exactly should I be looking for to indicate the integrity of the light seals? Or better yet, what sort of controlled shots should I take that would make slight imperfections more obvious?

Now, if it should turn out that the light seals are buggered, how much would a shop normally charge to replace them?

Thanks,
Al

k100d · 01-09-2009, 07:33 PM

from my basic knowledge, i think you should check that the foam is still bouncy and not sticky. if you press it, it should bounce back.

you'd probably should get it CLA'd. Erik is the best man for the job
Home

i'm not sure if there are any Erik equivalents in Ontario tho

Ratmagiclady · 01-09-2009, 10:14 PM

Yeah, I'd have that CLA'ed on general principle. It's a wonder it's still working at all if it was badly exposed to a flood.

Cameras that age aren't out of line asking for new foam under the best of conditions, anyway.

MrEspie · 01-10-2009, 06:23 PM

Well, it was very lucky to be in a thick gadget bag at the time. As for the light seals, they're toast, no rebound at all.

**Douglas_of_Sweden** · 01-10-2009, 07:07 PM

Originally posted by MrEspie

When I test it with film, what exactly should I be looking for to indicate the integrity of the light seals? Or better yet, what sort of controlled shots should I take that would make slight imperfections more obvious?

Cover the lens and the viewfinder so that no light is comming in that way. Then run a film (black and white I believe works best) through the camera, a cople of shots at the time, letting it rest in bright light in between. When this part of the film is developped you will see any leakage of light comming in from the sides of the film as black shades (black on the negatives, white on copies). If there are no leaks the developed film will be compeltely clear. If the leak is small you might not easilly see it on top of real exposures, but they might still make you loose contrast. If they are large you will see shades even on the normal shots.

Sort of reminds me of a young guy (10 years?) in the youth group of the camera club in which I grew up, who came to me (by then I had advanced to "youth-leader") with the camera opened complaining "I can't see any photos on the film, why is that, is something wrong?".

01-09-2009, 07:24 PM	#1
MrEspie Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: University of Waterloo, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 239	MX missed the ark Hey everyone, I have an MX (previously my mother's) that went through a flood roughly 10 years ago. I've spent a great deal of time testing all the mechanical functions of the camera, and they all seem to check out. It also appears remarkably clean inside and out with no odours that I can detect. So far it looks as though I may have a perfectly functional body. However, I've yet to try it with film. The original light seals are still in, and this concerns me as they (especially the front of the mirror buffer) look slightly uneven. When I test it with film, what exactly should I be looking for to indicate the integrity of the light seals? Or better yet, what sort of controlled shots should I take that would make slight imperfections more obvious? Now, if it should turn out that the light seals are buggered, how much would a shop normally charge to replace them? Thanks, Al

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Noah's Ark have been discovered	jgredline	General Talk	88	05-13-2010 07:46 PM
Nature Missed it almost	photolady95	Post Your Photos!	4	05-02-2010 04:25 PM
Look what I just missed out on.	Damn Brit	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	26	07-07-2009 11:05 AM
Have I missed something???	Photo Tramp	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	10-12-2008 06:14 PM
Missed out........	cupic	General Talk	6	05-29-2008 08:24 AM

01-09-2009, 07:33 PM	#2
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	from my basic knowledge, i think you should check that the foam is still bouncy and not sticky. if you press it, it should bounce back. you'd probably should get it CLA'd. Erik is the best man for the job Home i'm not sure if there are any Erik equivalents in Ontario tho

01-09-2009, 10:14 PM	#3
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Yeah, I'd have that CLA'ed on general principle. It's a wonder it's still working at all if it was badly exposed to a flood. Cameras that age aren't out of line asking for new foam under the best of conditions, anyway.

01-10-2009, 06:23 PM	#4
MrEspie Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: University of Waterloo, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 239 Original Poster	Well, it was very lucky to be in a thick gadget bag at the time. As for the light seals, they're toast, no rebound at all.

01-10-2009, 07:07 PM	#5
Douglas_of_Sweden Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,374	Originally posted by MrEspie When I test it with film, what exactly should I be looking for to indicate the integrity of the light seals? Or better yet, what sort of controlled shots should I take that would make slight imperfections more obvious? Cover the lens and the viewfinder so that no light is comming in that way. Then run a film (black and white I believe works best) through the camera, a cople of shots at the time, letting it rest in bright light in between. When this part of the film is developped you will see any leakage of light comming in from the sides of the film as black shades (black on the negatives, white on copies). If there are no leaks the developed film will be compeltely clear. If the leak is small you might not easilly see it on top of real exposures, but they might still make you loose contrast. If they are large you will see shades even on the normal shots. Sort of reminds me of a young guy (10 years?) in the youth group of the camera club in which I grew up, who came to me (by then I had advanced to "youth-leader") with the camera opened complaining "I can't see any photos on the film, why is that, is something wrong?".