Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site wdl1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!decwrl!greipa!twg!pesnta!hplabs!hpda!fortune!wdl1!wunder
From: wunder@wdl1.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: Re: Canon Ft-b winder problem
Message-ID: <399@wdl1.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 3-May-85 15:22:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: wdl1.399
Posted: Fri May  3 15:22:12 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 12-May-85 00:50:41 EDT
Sender: notes@wdl1.UUCP
Organization: Ford Aerospace, Western Development Laboratories
Lines: 16
Nf-ID: #R:acf4:-272002300:wdl1:7300003:000:798
Nf-From: wdl1!wunder    May  3 11:13:00 1985

I would take the FTb to a repair shop.  If the rewind crank shaft
was not well lubricated, then the crank would be stiff, but the
sprocket would still operate correctly, yes?  The problem is down
inside somewhere.  One of my FTb's got sloppy framing and rough
winding like this.  Eventually, it didn't work at all.  It sure
did feel nice after I got it back from the shop, though.

Lest everyone here think that FTb's fall apart, mine was used for
college sports photography, about 10K exposures in 9 months.  With
the bionic thumb (couldn't afford F1's and motors), the camera took
a real beating.  Amateur cameras just wear out under professional use.
This is a design decision, not a design flaw.  If everything lasted as
long as a Canon F1, everything would cost as much as a Canon F1.

wunder