Found mint SRT201 with 50mm lens!

[rob_murray]

Just a gloat, I got this one with owners manual, strap, case, 50mm F2

MD lens. Body is in really nice shape with a still working mercury

battery in it. I think mine is the last version (3rd?4th?) of this

camera as it has the split image viewfinder, black apeture ring and

no CLC on the prism..Got it for display and to use. Thinking about

getting a 50mm F1.7 MD lens instead as I hear they are sharper. Cost

me $20 at a flea market. Top of the case looks like hell bottom looks

better. Light seals are a little sticky so I ordered some to replace

them. This thing sure is heavy!

Rob

[douglas_green1]

Congrats on your good buy. But, IMHO, you won't actually be able to tell the difference in image quality between the 50mm f1.7 and the 50mm f2. I'd recommend getting a different focal length for yor next lens. Either a tele or a wide angle.

[jason hopper]

There is a question, and a little mystery, going around concerning these post-1980 SR-T's. Yours should have the different shaped shutterspeed barrel and rewind button with bent lever. And the serial number should be on the shoe's dress cover and be above the #1800000 starting point?

 

For these post-1980 Sr-T's Minolta left off the "CLC" engraving for a reason: sometime after 1980 they supposedly went to metering with a single CdS cell on supposedly some of these, while other post-1980 Sr-T's retained the dual CdS cells earlier ones used and kept CLC metering (even though a body may not be engraved as such, I've got one of these). At least this is what the technical literature seems to say, and from the outside there's no way to tell if a late post-1980 body would be really "non-CLC".

 

So the question and mystery has become: are there really any "non-CLC" late SR-T's out there? If you're brave and good enough at repairs, could you/would you take off top cover and count the cells? If there's one "non-CLC" late Sr-T out there, it help would solve a little mystery.

 

For anyone else wanting to help solve this little mystery, the post-1980 Sr-T's are limited to 201's with serial number above 18xxxxx, 101b's higher than 45xxxxx, 200's higher than 756xxxx, 100x's higher than 86xxxxx, MCII's higher than 907xxxx, and SCII's higher than 957xxxx. And all of these would have that neat different shutterspeed barrel and bent rewind lever and serial number on the shoe's cover (not on the back corner of the body). Don't volunteer if you're concerned about being able to take off and put the top cover back on correctly. TIA.

[rob_murray]

There is a question, and a little mystery, going around concerning these post-1980 SR-T's. Yours should have the different shaped shutterspeed barrel and rewind button with bent lever. And the serial number should be on the shoe's dress cover and be above the #1800000 starting point?

 

 

Ok Since I dont know what the old shutterspeed barrel looks like...

I have no clue how to post a pic here either. The barrel is heavily

indented with a little extra ridge on top. Not sure on the bent lever thing either. Serial number is 186xxxx engraved on hot shoe.

 

 

For these post-1980 Sr-T's Minolta left off the "CLC" engraving for a reason: sometime after 1980 they supposedly went to metering with a single CdS cell on supposedly some of these, while other post-1980 Sr-T's retained the dual CdS cells earlier ones used and kept CLC metering (even though a body may not be engraved as such, I've got one of these). At least this is what the technical literature seems to say, and from the outside there's no way to tell if a late post-1980 body would be really "non-CLC".

 

So the question and mystery has become: are there really any "non-CLC" late SR-T's out there? If you're brave and good enough at repairs, could you/would you take off top cover and count the cells? If there's one "non-CLC" late Sr-T out there, it help would solve a little mystery.

 

If I needed to take the top off I would but its too pristine for me to go messing up a screw head...can you post a pic of your latest 201

top area and I can compare to mine?

Rob

[rob_murray]

Oh I see now, the rewind lever is what you are refrerring to as being bent. Yes mine is bent.

[TomHildreth]

I bought my SRT-201 new back in...h'mm, well I don't remember. Had it CLA'd and modified for 625A battery last February. I've put a couple of rolls through it and she's working fine. Still part of my first-line arsenal. That 50mm f2 MD lens on yours was probably mated to the camera a few minutes before it was advertised. That's a lens from a later period.

 

Lots of concern about minutia in some of these responses. Don't worry about all this nonsense about the f1.7 MD being sharper. Don't spend your time gloating. Already the budding industrial archeologists are trying to get you to take the top off the camera. Pay them no mind! Go shoot with the thing, it is NOT a paperweight, no matter what they tell you!

 

Oh, you got it for "display". Think I'll pry my Gateway keyboard apart. I hear it's a late production model XIVb. I just have to verify this, it'll just take a few minutes......xnfidlkmlkjaoirejtoioksdserdeeeeeeeeeeee

[rob_murray]

Oh, you got it for "display".

 

Well, as I said to display and USE. I will just keep it on the shelf with my other cameras instead of in a camera bag when not using it.

Yeah mine should have come with an MC lens, but I am not complaining.

[TomHildreth]

Rob,

Apparently I was overcome with a humor remnant. I appreciate that you took it well. The camera should serve you nicely both as a shooter and a paperweight.

 

After looking around for a resonable way out of the mercury battery problem for about a year (and rejecting the wein air-cell), I talked to my repair guy and he said he had done many conversions so I had him go ahead with it. The mercury battery that was in it was still good, but I decided to be proactive and get it done sooner than later. Actually, my first "serious" roll of film since the conversion is at the developers now, so I should know soon how well the meter is working.

 

Enjoy the 201!

[jason hopper]

"...mine should have come with a MC lens, but I'm not complaining."

 

The post-1980 Sr-T201, at the serial number range of yours, came with your 50/2 MD as its original lens. The post-1980 Sr-T's 200, 100x, MCII and SCII usually came with the 45/2. The 1977-1980 2nd version Sr-T201/101b came with the 50/1.7 MD Rokkor-X/Rokkor. MC lenses were phased out starting in 1975 (most ended then, only the 35/1.8, 58/1.2 amd 100-500 zoom soldiered on to 1977), so you don't need a MC normal lens for your 3rd version post-1980 201 to be "correct".

 

In the end the 50/2 is just as good as the 50/1.7: both had a long development going way back starting from MC time. For 20 bucks for a near-new body with the lens it came with and case to boot, ya gotta great deal. Me asking you to take apart a perfectly good body was a bit much (and again was proposed only if you were comfortable with the idea), us industrial archeologists are just such an obsessive lot.

[rob_murray]

Thanks Jason, yeah I guess since mine was in the last batch of cameras

the MD lens would have come with it. Guess I will keep it and see how good it is. thanks

[TomHildreth]

Rob,

I stand corrected by Jason, who has shown me the facts are in the details. You likely have a matched camera/lens combination there, which is great.

[rob_murray]

UPDATE: I ordered a set of light seals from Jon Goodman (interslice on Ebay)for $6 I got enough seals to do 6 cameras! I resealed mine since the mirror damper was sticky. Easy job. I took it to a local camera show where they have a tech from one of the big camera repair places in town doing free cleaning and shutter checks. Said my shutter was still accurate and the meter he could only test at 125th with the small portable tester he had but it was just fine. Think I got a winner now.