Parts for Nikon lens mount

[NLsafari]

I want to convert the lens mount of one of my legacy Canon lenses to a Nikon and I would like to know if Nikon still makes the parts for their mount including the linkage for the diaphragm.

[NLsafari]

I want to convert the lens mount of one of my legacy Canon lenses to a Nikon and I would like to know if Nikon still makes the parts for their mount including the linkage for the diaphragm.

[mike_halliwell]

Don't bother. The Canon lens's flange distance is too short to work on a Nikon F mount body without an added optical element.

 

You can fit a Nikon lens onto most other maker's bodies because they have one of the longest flange distances around and using a simple short tube to make up the space is quite simple.

 

However, if you're wanting to mount it so it will work on a Nikon Z mount camera, you may find an adapter, but it's not a DIY job unless you have a precision machine shop.

 

Out if interest, what actual Canon lens do you want to mount on which Nikon body?

[rodeo_joe1]

Nikon still make F mount spares, but AFAIK there's no complete mount+operating levers available for any of their lenses. The mount design isn't modular, but consists of a series of separate parts - bayonet flange, spring-plate, aperture-lever, etc. The nearest 'off the shelf' thing around today is a Tamron Adaptall mount.

 

Even starting with a ready-made module like an Adaptall mount, it's not a trivial engineering task, and it would be easier to transplant the Canon optics into a scrap Nikon lens body IMO.

 

My advice would be to forget it, or buy a mirrorless body and suitable adapter. Or just get a Canon body.

[mike_halliwell]

and it would be easier to transplant the Canon optics into a scrap Nikon lens body IMO.

....and you'd always have to remember which way to turn it to mount/dismount the lens......:p

[NLsafari]

Don't bother. The Canon lens's flange distance is too short to work on a Nikon F mount body without an added optical element.

 

You can fit a Nikon lens onto most other maker's bodies because they have one of the longest flange distances around and using a simple short tube to make up the space is quite simple.

 

However, if you're wanting to mount it so it will work on a Nikon Z mount camera, you may find an adapter, but it's not a DIY job unless you have a precision machine shop.

 

Out if interest, what actual Canon lens do you want to mount on which Nikon body?

 

 

Thanks for the tech advise. The lens I have is a Canon FD 300 F/2.8 Fluorite S.S.C. with the GREEN ring .The glass is perfect. I even had S.K. Grimes out of R.I. make an adapter so that it is possible to put a generic UV filter on it. The problem with the lens is that the diaphragm mechanism sticks for some F-stops. A very capable repair person tried to fix it and says that without parts it can't be fixed.. I want to use this lens on a legacy body so I can shoot film. But I want to use it in the automatic lens setting so I don't have to stop it down. Unless i find another 300-Fluorite for parts that has a good mount I have to change the mount of the lens. I thought of Nikon because they did not change their mount when they converted to digital the way Canon did and so parts might be available.. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Raphael

[conrad_hoffman]

Probably not worth the effort. I recently bought a Nikon 300mm f/4.5 ED that's decent and they don't cost all that much. Yes, the f/2.8 is way more, but with the ISO capabilities of a modern camera, plus image stabilization, the f/4.5 works well. FWIW, I never got decent results with long lenses and film unless using a tripod. IMO, handheld is a waste of time with a slow lens and not many keepers even with a fast lens. I know some could do well with them, but I was never one of them. IBIS changes the entire game.

[mike_halliwell]

AFAIK, the only way to get that lens to focus on a Nikon film body would be to somehow shorten the lens.... or recess the body's mount.

 

Canon FD flange is 42mm. Nikon F is 46.5mm.

 

Maybe machine 4.5mm off the lens mount....:cool:

[NLsafari]

Probably not worth the effort. I recently bought a Nikon 300mm f/4.5 ED that's decent and they don't cost all that much. Yes, the f/2.8 is way more, but with the ISO capabilities of a modern camera, plus image stabilization, the f/4.5 works well. FWIW, I never got decent results with long lenses and film unless using a tripod. IMO, handheld is a waste of time with a slow lens and not many keepers even with a fast lens. I know some could do well with them, but I was never one of them. IBIS changes the entire game.

 

With Portra 400 film by Kodak and bright sun you can hand hold the lens and get reasonable results . Look at the pics from Africa in my file they are hand held.

[Sandy Vongries]

With Portra 400 film by Kodak and bright sun you can hand hold the lens and get reasonable results . Look at the pics from Africa in my file they are hand held.

Faint hope, but you might check with John White at AI Conversions.

[rodeo_joe1]

AFAIK, the only way to get that lens to focus on a Nikon film body would be to somehow shorten the lens.... or recess the body's mount.

It's a 300mm lens Mike, and most teles have a heap of space between the rear element and the mount.

 

FWIW, and I posted about this somewhere else recently, I picked up a 300mm f/2.8 Tamron Adaptall for 20 quid. The image quality is darned good, even wide open - more than good enough for film.

 

Although the Tamron doesn't use fluorite it does use Extra Low Dispersion glass. Added to which, fluorite is sensitive to moisture and can deteriorate over time.

 

Long and short of it. I don't expect another bargain like mine to fall into the OP's lap, but I would expect a 300mm f/2.8 Tamron to cost less than any attempt to repair or re-engineer that old Canon lens.

 

There's this nice looking one on ebay right now.

Edited October 2, 2021 by rodeo_joe|1

[NLsafari]

Nikon still make F mount spares, but AFAIK there's no complete mount+operating levers available for any of their lenses. The mount design isn't modular, but consists of a series of separate parts - bayonet flange, spring-plate, aperture-lever, etc. The nearest 'off the shelf' thing around today is a Tamron Adaptall mount.

 

Even starting with a ready-made module like an Adaptall mount, it's not a trivial engineering task, and it would be easier to transplant the Canon optics into a scrap Nikon lens body IMO.

 

My advice would be to forget it, or buy a mirrorless body and suitable adapter. Or just get a Canon body.

 

So you think a Tamron Adaptall mount could be retro fitted into the Canon 300 Fluorite? What do you think it would cost to pull this off? Do you think this is easier than

to transplant the Canon optics into a scrap Nikon lens body?

 

Raphael

[NLsafari]

It's a 300mm lens Mike, and most teles have a heap of space between the rear element and the mount.

 

FWIW, and I posted about this somewhere else recently, I picked up a 300mm f/2.8 Tamron Adaptall for 20 quid. The image quality is darned good, even wide open - more than good enough for film.

 

Although the Tamron doesn't use fluorite it does use Extra Low Dispersion glass. Added to which, fluorite is sensitive to moisture and can deteriorate over time.

 

Long and short of it. I don't expect another bargain like mine to fall into the OP's lap, but I would expect a 300mm f/2.8 Tamron to cost less than any attempt to repair or re-engineer that old Canon lens.

 

There's this nice looking one on ebay right now.

 

Thanks for the info . I will take a look at the ebay unit.

 

Raphael

[mike_halliwell]

Can you give more detail on where the fault actually lies, ie where the sticking occurs? And why changing the mount would fix it?

 

Buying a Tamron 300mm 2.8 won't solve anything that I can see that will get your Canon S.S.C. working.

 

It's a 300mm lens Mike, and most teles have a heap of space between the rear element and the mount.

Indeed, just a simple lathe and epoxy job then.....:p

 

I guess the aperture levers work the same way?

 

I wondered about re-fitting my af-broken 600mm f4 AFS to take 1.1/4 telescope eyepieces and a rack focuser.

[conrad_hoffman]

With Portra 400 film by Kodak and bright sun you can hand hold the lens and get reasonable results . Look at the pics from Africa in my file they are hand held.

No question, bright sun is a wonderful thing when it comes to long lenses!

[Sandy Vongries]

Can you give more detail on where the fault actually lies, ie where the sticking occurs? And why changing the mount would fix it?

 

Buying a Tamron 300mm 2.8 won't solve anything that I can see that will get your Canon S.S.C. working.

 

 

Indeed, just a simple lathe and epoxy job then.....:p

 

I guess the aperture levers work the same way?

 

I wondered about re-fitting my af-broken 600mm f4 AFS to take 1.1/4 telescope eyepieces and a rack focuser.

Vaguely remembered something LINK Nikon Lens Scope Converter

[mike_halliwell]

Vaguely remembered something

Yup, I've seen that one. It doesn't use the full aperture by any means, although I guess the 600mm f4 would be OK.

 

It adds an erecting element and a generic 10mm eyepiece. IQ was OK apparently.

[conrad_hoffman]

Yeah, description here- Nikon Lens Scope Converter I had forgotten about that. Thought it would be pretty rare but there's a bunch on eBay for a couple hundred bucks.

 

My 300mm Nikkor was also only a couple hundred bucks. Just learning about foreshortening and depth of field, which is way less than I would have thought. It's very sharp, though you can't see that in this downsized image. I think I was at f/8 or even f/11 and the end signs are getting soft.

 

[Sandy Vongries]

There is also a Kenco for around $160 - at B&H I think.

[NLsafari]

Vaguely remembered something LINK Nikon Lens Scope Converter

 

Normally when lens is in automatic setting when the shutter release button is pressed the diaphragm closes to the preset F/stop and then returns to the resting position and is fully open. What happens to my lens is that the diaphragm does NOT close fully to the preset F/stop and then it stays partially open. It is like there is a drag on the diaphragm system that impedes the action and makes it stick. I was told it was probably a problem in the diaphragm linkage mechanism or even the race that holds the ball bearings in the aluminum ring that is used to tighten the lens to the camera. Either way it seems to me ( I am not a technician ) you either get parts for the lens , which don't exist , get another Canon lens mount from another Canon 300-Fluorite, which I think is also near to impossible , or change the lens mount to something else. I was thinking Nikon because there are many legacy bodies available for reasonable $$$ and since they retained the same mount when they went digital parts would/might be readily available. The last option would be to see if S.K. Grimes can take the Canon mount apart and fabricate the necessary parts.

[NLsafari]

Another option is to see if Kanto Camera in Japan can change the mount of this lens.

[conrad_hoffman]

It's usually very difficult to fabricate new parts for the actuating mechanism of a lens. It's also rarely necessary as almost everything that can go wrong can be repaired in some way. About the only thing that would be difficult is if the aperture blades are bent or damaged. Everything else can be re-bent back to shape, built up, filed down or otherwise made serviceable. It's just a matter of time and cost. If somebody can change the mount, so much the better.

[mike_halliwell]

Humm, why do you think changing the mount will free up the sticky aperture linkage/mechanism? Sure, the aperture lever passes through the mount, but I'd have thought you could feel the resistance if you move said lever with your finger. Does it feel free and, err, springy or gritty/sluggish?

 

Could it just be a tired/gooey aperture spring? When you mount the lens, the spring is tensioned to the wide open aperture position. As you hit the shutter button, the aperture lever pushes against the spring power as far as the aperture stop, shutter opens and closes and the spring returns the lever to battery. Anything involving the spring would be iffy.

 

Maybe!;)

[NLsafari]

Humm, why do you think changing the mount will free up the sticky aperture linkage/mechanism? Sure, the aperture lever passes through the mount, but I'd have thought you could feel the resistance if you move said lever with your finger. Does it feel free and, err, springy or gritty/sluggish?

 

Could it just be a tired/gooey aperture spring? When you mount the lens, the spring is tensioned to the wide open aperture position. As you hit the shutter button, the aperture lever pushes against the spring power as far as the aperture stop, shutter opens and closes and the spring returns the lever to battery. Anything involving the spring would be iffy.

 

Maybe!;)

 

Another observation that I didn't mention is that on my other Canon FD lenses the metal tightening ring on the lens moves slightly when the lens mount engages the camera . This lets me know that the alignment is correct between the lens and the camera body and I can safely tighten things up without causing damage. On this lens the ring has zero movement and it is a little bit stiff. I was thinking maybe instead of switching to a Nikon mount switch to a NEW FD Canon mount. This would eliminate problems with focal-plane distance etc. The problem is I have to find someone that can make this conversion. Has anyone seen a lens mount conversion Canon OLD FD to NEW FD ? Is it very expensive?

[mike_halliwell]

On this lens the ring has zero movement and it is a little bit stiff.

Interesting because it almost sounds as if the bayonet and breechlock ring are unhappy. I wonder if the aperture levers in the body and the lens are somehow binding so not engaging consistently?

 

Do the levers look the same as other lenses you have? Are there any odd wear marks on it?