Copal shutter repair (at home)
Robert
fires at both speeds but the dial won't turn to the lower speeds. I have my
tiny screwdrivers ready to go. Is there a site that shows a picture of what
I can expect to find and some hints?
Richard Knoppow
I don't know of any site with detailed instructions for repairing
any shutter. I think there are reprinted repair manuals for Copal
shutters available. Try John S. Craig at http://www.craigcamera.com
and Petra Keller at htttp://www.camerabooks.com
Copal shutters are similar to Compur but enough different to require
specific instructions. I would not try getting into the thing without
having drawings showing how it goes together.
If no parts are broken repair is quite practical.
This is a somewhat unusual problem, it sounds like something is
jamming the speed cam, but only inspection will show what.
Although cleaning shutters is quite practical I think this goes
beyond that. I would advise sending this one to Steve Grimes unless
you consider it a junker and just want to learn about shutters.
http://www.skgrimes.com There are many on this group who will vouch
for him.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, Ca.
dick...@ix.netcom.com
kirkfry
Outlook Express. What are the other choices for readers that folks like?
Google is marginally usable if you just search on
rec.photo.equipment.large-format in the advanced search. But you can't
respond, or at least I didn't figure out how.
Steve does a great job on shutters by the way.
Kirk
Richard Knoppow <dick...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3a887d5a....@news.mindspring.com...
GW De Lacey
>The death of dejanews, zikes, I had to learn how to set up a news reader in
>Outlook Express. What are the other choices for readers that folks like?
Forte Agent
http://www.forteinc.com
Easier and less fussy than OE. The full version is worth the money...
HTH
--
GW De Lacey
Richard Knoppow
>The death of dejanews, zikes, I had to learn how to set up a news reader in
>Outlook Express. What are the other choices for readers that folks like?
>Google is marginally usable if you just search on
>rec.photo.equipment.large-format in the advanced search. But you can't
>respond, or at least I didn't figure out how.
>
>Steve does a great job on shutters by the way.
>
>Kirk
>
>
Free Agent works well although it doesn't have some refinements like
filtering. The commercial version, Agent does have filtering and a
mail client.
Google's actions re Deja.com are beyond understanding. They seem to
have been mostly interested in buying the database but destroying the
service. Their explanation is ludicrous. Google is an excellent search
engine but they don't seem to have a clue about Deja. Perhaps massive
amounts of e-mail would help. They've certainly gotten a lot of people
mad at them. Business types are just plain beyond me. -
Jess4203
I have never had a Copal apart, but I suspect that you could take off the
faceplate and that will let you lift off the speed control ring, if that is the
right nomenclature. It might be that somehow one of the levers that is
supposed to run in a cam-type groove on this ring has somehow gotten out of
place. If you look at how it operates after you get the faceplate off and
before you lift off the speed control ring, you may see what is blocking it
from rotating. If you remove the ring and push the correct lever up into
position and then replace the ring, maybe it will work right. Or maybe you
will be able to peer in and see what is wrong. I would not go further than
this and take the shutter housing apart unless I had some confidence I could
get it back together again, even though it shouldn't fly apart just because you
remove the top of it. Repair people have been known to penalize people for
sending in shutters that they have destroyed by DIY . . . . . . however, I
don't think our St. Steven would do such a thing.
HTH,
Roy
Robert
"Robert" <robe...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:sB_h6.2276$Vp.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Ron Todd
Richard Knoppow wrote:
...
> mad at them. Business types are just plain beyond me. -
...
IMHO: Its not so much the "business types" but more the untalented,
incompetent, unteachable, and just plain dull people who by hook or
crook get into a position for which they are unsuited. The history of
the dot com mess will one day conclude that it was a fiasco of the
magnitude of the tulip craze and the south sea bubble. Just like those
sad points in history, a lot of people are going to get jerked around.
Richard Knoppow
Known in some circles as the "Peter Principle" stated as: People
rise to their level of incompetance.
Although this is intended as humor it is more than a little true,
especially in middle management jobs where someone who may be very
good at what they do gets promoted into an administrative or
management job where they are just awful.
An old friend, now dead (too many of them are), who had been a top
researcher with Bell Labs, told me that the labs would reward those
who had done exceptional work by promoting them into management, it
was the only way they could pay them more money. The problem was that
they got a double whammy, 1, they lost these people as talented
researchers, 2, they got poor managers since management is a talent in
its own right, and people who do scientific research usually like what
they are doing and hate administrative duties.
I think the "dot.com" problem is something else though, with just
plain greed combined with a large dose of wishful thinking playing a
major role.
Going public can make the principles rich even when a company
totally fails, so some of the recent business failures may have been
the result of old fashioned con games applied to a new technology.
In the case of well established companies the top management is
often trying to steer a very large and unweily ship in very uncertain
waters. Some do better than others. I suspect it is actually easier to
create a new company, dedicated to new technology or product ideas
than to keep an old company alive.
George Eastman is probably the ultimate example of the successful
entrapeneur. Although many of this stratigies would be illegal now,
they were considered completely acceptable when he used them. He was
not greedy, but rather had a vision. Those who he bought out, and
didn't fight him too much, got rich from it and were allowed to
continue running the enterprizes they created. Eastman makes a good
study for those interested in how businesses work.