View Full Version : Canonet 28
I recently picked up a "minty" Canonet 28 from a pawn shop, cheap, cleaned up the viewfinder, loaded it up with a zinc air 1.4V battery with an aluminum spacer, adjusted the images at infinity, shot some pics, but am a little disappointed. The center of the pictures appear to be in focus, but the outter edges are really blurred. This happens on all the pictures. Could the rangefinder be off and needs to be aligned? Here are a couple of pictures of my results [I hope]. Now that I look at my pictures however, they appear to be out of focus period.
This looks like a film flatness issue to me
"minty", huh? :)
check the film plane. it might not be flat.
also check the focus: tape a piece of tracing paper, waxed paper, etc over the film plane. Make sure it is as flat as possible. Focus the camera using the rangefinder. tehn look at the image on the paper to see if it is really in focus. use a loupe.
was the entire roll like this?
Is this on the negatives, or out of the scanner. If it's not this way in the negatives, I think maybe the negative holder isn't holding the negative strip flat. If the negatives are like this, then maybe pressure plate problems?
Keep us advised...
Hi. Possible someone has had the lens apart and replaced a lens element back to front. Just a thought!
Thanks for all the responses. I'll attempt to address each question. I just checked the film pressure plate and everything looks OK there. I was using a Canon rectangular lens hood made for a Canon ML, also with a 40MM lens. I also thought that could be the problem, and took off the hood for a couple of shots, same results. As you are probably aware, the 28 doesn't have a "B" setting to keep the shutter blades open. I would check the lens out using another camera with a backlight, but without the B setting it can't be done. It doesn't look as though the lens has been tinkered with; no minute marks or scratches showing the lenses being taken out or back in.
Is it possible that when I realigned the two images in the viewfinder with the camera on infinity, that this could have messed up the focusing. One thing I haven't done is to take some shots on anything closer than infinity, which would be less than 20 feet. I'm wondering if I set it up on a tripod with the top removed, and set an object at a measured distance, say 5 feet, and adjusted the rangefinder image to be on at that distance, if that would help?
If you have an more suggestions I'm certainly open to them. There aren't any dings, dents or abrasions, so I don't thing the camera was ever dropped. It truly is close to mint. HELP!!!
Now might be a good time to be thankful that you got the camera "cheap"!
It looks like a flipped rear element to me too, with the sharp area in the center and the blur getting progressively worse toward the edges. Someone may have opened up the lens for cleaning and made a mistake putting it back together. If they were careful they could've done it without any visible scratches on the lens ring.
Unscrewing the rear lens ring to check is not usually that difficult. Especially if it has been previously removed.
Yes, the lens hood and the filter are a one piece combination. I don't think the filter would cause this problem, but you never know. I'll attempt to take out the rear lens element and see what direction it's facing. Which direction should it be facing? Should the concave part be facing the film plane?
Can the rear element really be reversed without any and reasembled without interference? Cause I think those picture are pretty cool! I think I'll get a cheap QL28 and do a "flip" mod, and have a nifty portrait camera! Cool!
I give you special deal on Canonet 28 my fine American friend. :D
I give you special deal on Canonet 28 my fine American friend. :D
I'll give you two chickens and these magic beans....
Am I the only one that ( after the initial shock of course) would be super pysched on having a camera that did this without having to do anything extra?
Today I tried a couple of other tricks from my bag of tricks and will fire off a couple of rounds to see what the effect is! Ready on the right, ready on the left, commence firing!!! Stayed tuned.
Well, I'm almost back to suare one - almost I say, because the pics I took yesterday were a tad better then previously. I readjusted the rangefinder to a measured 5 feet, and while the pics are a little better, they're still out of focus around the edges and fairly sharp in the center. On this test, I focused on something within 10 feet of the camera to see what the objects looked like in the distance. Center fine, edges blurred.
Several have suggested that a lens element may have been placed in backwards. My question is, should I try and remove the front element or back element and reverse it. How can I tell which side of the lens should be facing the film plane?
Just wondered...did you inspect the negatives to check for the sharpness problems, or did they appear upon printing/scanning? I asked about this in a prior post, but didn't know if I'd asked something REALLY stupid, that didn't need answering, or was overlooked. Hope it works out for you.
Happy New Year!
Don, yes, the negs are focused in the center but blurred around the edges. I had already shot a few pics on the same roll from a different camera and they came out just fine, so I know it wasn't in the processing. BTW, that's not a stupid question. I generally shoot test shots of a couple of cameras on a 12 exposure roll, and then compare the shots. Being the cheapskate that am, I purchased a whole bunch of 35MM 24 and 36 exposure roll at Big Lots for around .35 a roll, including some Fuji, Kodak and house brands. So, I cut off around 18" of a 24 ex roll, recut the leader and get 12/13 shots per roll. I fiddle with a lot of cameras, including several Russian built machines and test shoot them to see if I need to fine tune them some more, before putting them on Ebay. Quite frankly, I'm a little stumped and frustrated with my cute little Canonet 28. I'm not sure where to go next with it, except to remove the lens elements to check to see if one of them could be reversed as several folks have suggested. I suppose it's worth a try, although there aren't any marks to indicate the lens has been tampered with.
One other thought I have, is to take a couple of pictures into a camera repair shop here in Orlando, and have the repair guy take a look and see what he thinks. That may be my last resort. Happy New Year to you.
Ain't it a pain in the A** when a "neat" camera goes bad? I've got a Konica Auto S2 that's been working fine, but now, the aperture ring won't respond. It's stuck at f16 or so, and I can't free it up, don't have tools or knowledge to open it up, and it's frustrating. Not worth taking to the professionals, as it cost me $12.00 and a re-glue of the rangefinder mirror. Guess it's gonna be relegated to the "paperweight" status until I get tools and nerve to try to fix it! So it goes...
Happy New Year!
btw...I've got family in Davenport, and expect to be down in February. Grab a beer/coffee someplace?
Don, have you tried placing a drop of two of lighter fluid around the aperature ring? I've managed to free up a couple of nonworking cameras by using that method. Just a couple of drops to loosen things up, but don't force it. Just sort of let it set for a while and then gently try to work the aperature ring. In a sense you don't have much to lose, as the S2 is a great camera and worth trying to salvage. Good luck!
The aperture ring moves, but the leaves of the aperture don't. Dunno if something became disconnected, or what. I've tried letting it get cold...sitting overnight on a cold (enclosed) porch. Haven't baked it yet, but maybe down the road....
I'll keep the forum posted...
Yesterday, I took my Canonet 28, along with my distored pictures to a camera repairman to get his diagnosis of the camera's problem. I actually didn't get a chance to talk with him personally, but I explained the problem to the "counter girl," and she relayed it to the camera tech. I shared with her some of the input I received, i.e., pressure plate, lens hood, etc. After looking at the pics, the technician said he thought it could the shutter! Therefore, I'm not sure in which direction I should go, but here's a thought I had. Looking through the back of the camera, the shutter looks OK, and I've been shooting with a zinc air 1.4V battery. I don't know if or how that would affect the shutter, but today I switched to a regular 1.5V battery and ISO 400 film. So, back to the firing line to see what results, if any, there will be. So, keep tuned, same time, same station [as they used to say decades ago]!
Well, here's a couple of my last shots taken on my Canonet 28, with a 1.5V battery and ISO 400 film. The first picture is still a little fuzzy around the edges, but I think the second one came out just fine. I'm still not sure if I can say that it's fixed, so I may shoot a few more shots with ISO 200 and compare the prints.
maybe you should sell it to somebody (here) who loves the effect. I find it quite lovely.
I agree with both of the last 2 posts. Since I presently have around 10 rangefinders, I really don't need the 28. The first $15 plus $5.00 shipping gets it!!!!! Continental US that is! Let me know!
Hey, I like (no, love) canonets. Even 28's. I've had 4 or 5 28, not to mention a bunch of GIII's. They are what Steve Gandy says they are, in my book.
I have never gotten pictures like that, but I hope it's your search for knowledge that has you so involved with the camera, and not the value of the camera. It may be worth dollars to know what's causing this problem, but right now there are an even dozen Canonet 28's on eBay, and looking at the completed listings, almost twice that many sold in the last 60 days. The highest sold for $32 and most sold for $10-15.
A sharp image across the frame is the first thing I would expect from either a 1.7 or 2.8 canonet lens.
I don't have anything to offer on the problem. It is not a rangefinder problem. If the center is in focus, the rangefinder is on the mark. It is either curvature of the film inside the camera, or a lens problem.
BUT, barring that, don't blow any more film on this one. It's a bad camera. The good news is that most of them are not. They are one of the best built camera products of the era they came from.... I think Steve Gandy says that Canon built 10,000,000 of the GIII, and I don't think that includes many thousands more canonets in various models.
The price is a function of the glut of surviving camera's on the market.
Sorry, but I don't want you to be deluded about what this camera is worth in terms of real dollars.
we're certainly not going to run out of these for a while. They just keep surfacing out of closets, like replicators.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.