Yeah, someone *should* care...but I don't expect anybody does.
You could always put the lens on eBay with full disclosure at, say,
65% of expected price for a mothless one, and see if anyone bites.
You'd be surprised.
Never used the Sigma 20mm. Did own the 24mm version for a while, which
I used for concert shooting. I sold it to Igor on this list, who I
believe used it for baby shooting :-)
Looking forward to your comparison pics. I think you should call your
e-mails on this subject "The Mothlens Prophecies".
Cheers,
—M.
\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com
http://EnticingTheLight.com
A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment
On 13 November 2012 04:58, Krisjanis Linkevics
<krisjanis.linkev...@exigenservices.com> wrote:
> So I opened the FA135 up last night. On the outside it looked like Pentax
> service had never even gone inside. On the inside - sure they had been there.
>
> I bought the lens new from the local dealer around 2002, it was the last one
> in stock here but it was still new and from the dealer.
>
> Somebody had tried to force the back element open with the wrong instrument,
> markings on the barrel would suggest they failed. Also the moth stuff inside.
> Removed the aperture thingies only to find one of the biggest screws in there
> was badly damaged by somebody with background in changing wheels, not
> servicing fine instruments. Jackass, Philips power drivers should never ever
> be used on JIS screws. Aperture spring being glued in place and not swapped
> out for a new one is a minor nitpick in comparison.
>
> Didn't want to take it apart completely - helicoids and all - so I tried to
> unscrew the rear element with a properly softened large area of contact tool
> (just dumb oversized pliers with rubber pads) and it worked. So I removed the
> empty pupal case (no sight of moth itself) and all the debris.
>
> Here's a picture for those of you who got this far:
> http://foto.ri-ki.lv/details.php?image_id=104
>
> Properly cleaning the lens would require total disassembly and even then I
> don't know if it would be any good. Those monsters weave their cocoons and
> strands of that weave are between elements even further inside the lens. Even
> if I could open it up that far I don't know if I could completely remove
> everything.
>
> So that's it probably for this lens. I will test it against my other sample
> but there is no real reason for me to use it anyway when I have the other
> one. I don't see a good way to clean it so well that there is no sign of the
> moth ever being there so it can't be sold either. I might go through the
> adventure of disassembling it completely, cleaning it and putting it all
> together but I don't see that happening before the kids grow up :)
>
> Pentax should probably know about the sad state of service in Europe but I
> don't see a way to get this information to anybody who cares. If service at
> Pentax authorized service centers takes half a year and is performed by
> idiots who only make things worse, somebody should care, no? Oh well, I feel
> better already.
>
> kris
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
> the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
