User_502260

<p>I got a chrome Pentax Spotmatic F back from Eric Hendrickson today and it looks and works well now. Separately I got a 55/5 SMC Takumar in the mail from an eBay seller. The glass is fine, focusing is good and the aperture blades are clean. The lens has two issues. The first is that the distance scale moves when it wants to. The second is that when the lens is mounted on the Spotmatic F the A/M switch will not move back and forth. When I remove the lens and push in the small pin at the back, the switch moves both ways. If I mount the lens with the switch at M I can slide it over to A but it will not go back to M again. For using the lens it doesn't seem to be a problem because I can use the switch on the camera body to stop the lens down manually. I haven't searched for my other S-M-C-T or SMC Takumars to see if they behave the same way. Is this inability to move the A/M switch back and forth when the lenses mounted a normal condition? If I can remember most of the S-M-C-T lenses I have, it seems that only the 50/1.4, 55/1.8 and 55/2 have the SMC Takumar marking and the rubber covered focusing ring cosmetics. Is that right? I think the Spotmatic F was made from 1973 to 1976. By 1976 the KM, KX and K2 were already out and either the MX or ME was also out. Maybe AOC didn't want to bother updating the cosmetics on the non-standard lenses it knew were being discontinued. </p>

<p>I have used my RB ad RZ cameras for hand held shooting but I find them uncomfortable to use that way. If I know I want to shoot hand held with a 6X7 camera I prefer one of my Bronica GS-1s with a prism finder and a Speed Grip. This probably wouldn't work as well for someone who is left handed. A left handed person might not mind the left side bracket of an RB.</p>

<p>The GS-1 inserts are much larger. I have GS-1, SQ and ETR series cameras. Now I have the answer. The rear of the shell on a GS-1 back has the format marked. I found my GS-1 6X4.5 back (shell + insert). It's marked 6X4.5. Bronica calls its inserts film holders. It could be that there were 120 and 220 inserts for the same 6X6 shell and I only have the 120 insert. Now I can look for the missing piece. Finding the correct focusing screen with the 6X6 markings will be another search. </p>

<p>I tried a different 120 6X7 back on my GS-1 and the results were fine. The problem back can now be sent out for service. I am still not sure why the 120 6X6 GS-1 insert would not fit into the shell/back which the regular 120 6X6 insert fit into. Was the shell part of the GS-1 back different for the 6X6 120 insert? </p>

<p>One of my Bronica GS-1 cameras is not working properly. I don't know whether it's the camera or the back. With a regular 6X7 120 back the film winds improperly. The first frame doesn't start where it should and half of the last frame is cut off. On the advice of a repairman I cleaned the rollers in the insert but that didn't help. Today I decided to try a 6X6 120 insert but I couldn't get it to fit into the back properly. I know that the outsides of the backs changed a little cosmetically over the time they were made but I don't understand why the same back/shell shouldn't fit either a 6X7 120 insert or a 6X6 120 insert. The 6X6 insert looks new. Finally I removed the film from the 6X6 insert and found another 120 6X7 insert. If the film I shot has all ten frames and if the spacing is even I will know the problem was with the other 6X7 120 insert. If the problem isn't solved then I will suspect it's the camera. I have four other GS-1s which work with their backs perfectly but it bugs me that this one doesn't seem right. </p>

<p>I don't think all of the SLRs with the Vivitar name were made by Cosina. Some may have been made by Chinon. The models like the V4000 and V4000S are marked Made In Japan but later models with more plastic in them are marked Made In China. </p>

<p>I used one of my Minolta X-700 cameras this past weekend. The light was good and the longest lens I used was a 200/4.5 MC Rokkor-X. I thought about bringing one of my 300/4.5 Minolta lenses but didn't. The X-700 and all of the manual focus Minoltas with the exception of the XK have a top shutter speed of 1/1000. I am not interested in the XK because I already have Nikon and Canon SLRs with interchangeable finders and focusing screens. At one time there was an SLR which I think was made by Cosina and which had a Minolta manual focus mount. It may have been sold with the Vivitar name. Its even possible that I have one of these somewhere. Does anyone know whether one of these models with the Minolta mount also had a top shutter speed of 1/2000? I'd like to get one just to have a camera with that mount and with the higher shutter speed for times when I want to shoot with a lens longer than 200mm, hand held. I have a number of the Vivitar SLRs in Pentax K mount with a top shutter speed of 1/2000 and I have not had a problem getting them serviced. Yes, there is the Pentax LX to consider but I am happy using my KM, KX, K2, K1000 and MX models when I don't need 1/2000. </p>

<p>I was at the show briefly today but did not see Dan Fromm. What did I get? In a bunch of three lenses there is a 28-85/3.5-4.5 Minolta MD zoom, a 24-50/4-5.6 Sigma UC zoom in Minolta MD mount and a 35-70/3.5-4.8 Minolta MD zoom. The 28-85 must have sustained some impact damage to its front rim because there us a 55-58 step-up ring which seems to be permanently attached. Apart from that it seems fine. The 24-50 Sigma, like the 28-85 Minolta, also has an aperture lock for f/22. It's in nice shape. I just don't know how good it is. The 35-70 is a dead ringer for the Vivitars I have in Pentax K mount and the S Zuiko. It's undoubtedly the one made by Cosina. The one I got looks new. These lenses weigh almost nothing and are actually decent performers. You just need good enough light so you can focus them. At the long end I can focus it well on an X-700 with a grid or plain matte screen. <br> The next batch of three items has some oddballs. There is a pristine Canon Life Size Adapter for the 50/3.5 FD macro lens, a Nikon K3 extension ring and a strange adapter for connecting M42 lenses to Canon FL/FD mount cameras. This adapter is too long for correct infinity focus and has a short M42 auto extension tube attached to it (it can be removed). Finally, I got a ten pack of Fujicolor CN200 36 exp. rolls with an Exp. date of 04/2017. I believe this film is the one with the odd colors and was recently discontinued. The last time I was at Unique Photo in Fairfield, NJ they had none left. According to the rokkorfiles website the 28-85 is very good so I will want to test it soon. The 35-70 will make a light combination with an X-700 or X-9. At the next show I will be looking for some interesting photo books. </p>

<p>The Mamiya MSX and DSX cameras have full aperture metering when used with SX series lenses or other SX compatible lenses. </p>

<p>The Mamiya SX series lenses were made for your MSX500. They provide full aperture metering. In the common focal lengths (28-200) they are reasonably priced and are also decent performers. </p>

<p>The focusing range is why I don't really like the 35-105/3.5. Without engaging the close-up range the lens doesn't focus close enough at the 105 end for a close portrait. With the close-up range engaged it's too close. For that reason and for reasons of soze and weight I prefer the later 35-105/3.5-4.5. I would rather carry the 3.5-4.5 together with a 50 or 100 macro lens. My only complaint about the 3.5-4.5 is that it's difficult to use against the light. The other issue you have to deal with is your focusing method with the A7II. </p>

<p>If you want a field of view close to a 35mm but in the 645 format you would get (for the Mamiya) a 55/2.8. If the field of view is important but the speed not as important then you might look for a 35/2 AI or AIS or the first version (6 elements) of the 35/2.8 AI. </p>

<p>The M645 will take either a 120 insert or a 220 insert. Make sure you are not using 120 film with a 220 insert. The M645 cameras and inserts can still be serviced. I have two original M645s, a 1000S and a J. </p>

<p>You can probably get this from Greg Weber. You can reach him at 402-721-3873 or at gweber@webercamera.com </p>

<p>Changing an FT2 to an FT3 would not be worth trying. It would cost less to get an FT3 in good condition. My repairman likes the FT3 because it doesn't have the complex indexing mechanicals of the earlier Nikkormats. In 1977 when Nikon introduced the AI cameras and lenses it essentially went with the indexing system which Minolta had been using since the SRT 101 of 1966. My favorite Nikkormat is the FT2. It works equally well with pre-AI, AI/AIS lenses. If a lens has no prong then stop-down metering can be used. One of my FT2s was serviced twice for meter problems and is fine now. I have enough other Nikkormats for a long time of Nikkormat shooting. The FT2 has some advantages over the FTN. It takes the MS-76 battery, changing the film speed is much easier and it has a hot shoe. </p>

<p>This is a good argument for getting an AE-1 Program instead. The AE-1 Program has user interchangeable focusing screens. My AE-1 program now has a plain matte screen in it so it is easier to use for macro work and with slower lenses like zooms. </p>

<p>I recently shot a 120 roll of Agfa Ultra 50 color print film. I was told that it had been cold stored. The expiration date on the box is 12/99. The results were fine. </p>

<p>I history lesson is in order. Canon did not first come out with an SLR "about 1970." The original Canonflex is from 1959, the same year as the Nikon F. Nikon's decision to keep its meter in the prism finder rather than in the body allowed it to improve its meters over time. The FTN was the last and most advanced meter prism for the F. The Canonflex system was a capable one but not as flexible as the Nikon F system. The Canon F-1 of 1971 was an improvement for many reasons. One of these is that the meter was in the body. Even now a Canon F-1 or F-1n looks much nicer than any of the Nikon F or F2 models with meter prisms. Using an F2 with a meter prism requires the use to keep his/her eye centered in order to read the meter window at the bottom. The Canon F-1 is more tolerant of slightly off-center viewing. <br> The Canonflex system was not a commercial success and Canon was left for some years with no system camera (removable finder/interchangeable focusing screens). The Canon FT QL of 1966 was behind the times when it was intorduced. It still had stop down metering. That same year Minolta introduced the SRT 101 with full apertute metering. Even the Konica Auto Reflex of 1965 had full aperture metering but it did not have TTL metering. That would not come until 1968 with the Autoreflex T. Many of the Canonflex and Canon FL lenses were fine performers even if the cameras they were used with were not as convenient as those made by Nikon. From 1971 on the Canon and Nikon lenses were comparable in quality at most focal lengths. I still use Nikkors and Canon FD lenses from that time. Were Nikon cameras better than Canon cameras in the late 1970s and early 1980s? I would say that the mechanical models like the Nikkormats (after the FT) and FTbs were comparable in quality and function. The Nikon FE and FM series cameras were more sturdy than the Canon A series models. Both series were capable of good results. </p>

<p>I have one of these in my collection, without the separate rangefinder, but have never used it. Olympus had a meterless fixed lens RF camera with a 35/2 lens which was quite good. I used one which I found in a drawer in the science lab of my in High School. At that time I mostly used a Konica Autoreflex T2 and my 35 was an f/1.9 Vivitar. I have many 35mm Minolta wide angle lenses. They are all good. Some are excellent. </p>

<p>When I was in High School I used quite a bit of Verichrome Pan in my Yashica Mat 124G. I found it to be sharp and very fine grained. It just didn't like to be underexposed. It was Kodak's least expensive 120 b&w film. I understand that it was designed it be used in box cameras but it worked very well in better cameras too. </p>

<p>I ordered two 50 foot rolls of 46mm wide HP5+ so I can revive my 127 use. My plan is to cut down 120 backing paper to the right size and use it with 127 spools. If I remember its use correctly my Yashica 44 will stop at the right place each time I wind the film, after the first frame. One thing I don't understand about the program is the minimum number of items of each type which must be ordered. For the 46mm wide HP5+ the minimum is 23 rolls. Does this mean that any number 23 or higher will be made or does it mean that if I order the 24th or 25th rolls I won't get them until a full additional 23 rolls are made? </p>

<p>I have a 55/1.2 FL and two 57/1.2 Konica Hexanons. At or near wide open the Hexanons are better. At f/8 they would be about the same. If you can't get a 55/1.2 Aspherical or a 50/1.2L then you will be better off with either the 50/1.4 FD SSC or the 50/1.4 New FD. They are sharper wide open and better overall while being nearly as fast, lighter and less expensive. </p>

<p>According to the Canon Camera Museum website there were five different 55/1.2 Canon FD lenses. There was the original FD from 1971, the FD SSC from 1973 and three versions of the Aspherical.</p>

<p>Greg Weber can repair this for you. You can reach him at gweber@webercamera.com or by calling 402-721-3873.</p>

<p>I got a Vivitar TX adapter for Yashica/Contax from an eBay seller. It appears to be in working order but I noticed something odd about it. The silver color on the outermost ring seems to be flaking off and what's underneath it looks like brass. I have many Vivitar TX adapters. Some, like the ones for Mamiya SX, are black. Others, like the one I am looking at and the ones for Nikon F and Nikon AI are silver on the outside. The peeling material looks like a thin metal foil. Were these adapters plated or was some kind of silver foil tape used? </p>