Chris Crawford wrote:
> Moose,
>
> That fits my samples too. My dad's lens with the slow aperture is an even
> older one than yours: 3,234,xxx
>
> The two good mij's that I have are in the 5,8xx,xxx range. They must have
> improved them along the way!
>
Ah! More data points!. My suspicion is that the problem was a lubricant
for the focusing helicoid that broke down with, time, heat and use.
No particular reason why they would happen to change lubricants just at
the other changeover. Maybe they later became aware of the problem as
early MC lenses starting acting up, or maybe just good luck with a
change made for another reason. My more limited experience with MC
marked versions was of a couple or three with issues and one nicely
snappy.There could also have been differences in different batches of lube.
Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|