mark_rossano

Also, make sure that the cam is not for a Tech IV. If it's for a V/Master, it will have the lens serial number and focal length engraved. If it's for a IV, it will also have a second serial number (the body number) on the reverse side of the cam, but will otherwise be identical in appearance to a cam for the later bodies. If you have a Tech IV cam, it probably won't focus accurately on a V or Master (or, for that matter, on any Tech IV body other than the one the cam was made for).

The F-1 meter cell is most certainly *NOT* in the prism. It's in the body, directly behind the focusing screen! All F-1 focusing screens have a beamsplitter to direct light back to the cell.

Anthony,

 

You have failed completely to understand what Erwin Puts has said in his article. I suggest that you read and reread the discussion until it all sinks-in, by gradual osmosis if necessary.

 

As an aside, and I apologize if I seem unkind in saying this, even my twelve year old was able to grasp this concept more quickly and completely than you have.

I've owned eight F-1 bodies (have three now) of the first two (mechanical) versions. I also have about every piece of technical literature that applies to these bodies. I can assure you that there is no plastic cover over the film speed window on these bodies, so don't worry that you have a missing part there. If you could see the exploded view of the shutter speed dial assembly in the service manual, you would see that there is no path there for the intrusion of dust or dirt into the guts of the body.

 

As for the missing Servo-EE port cover, your dealer is wrong in saying that this part is commonly missing. I've seen a few that have lost this cover, but most of these bodies do have the part intact. As a matter of function, the missing cover will allow the intrusion of dust and dirt over time, so a piece of tape would be helpful as a temporary fix. If the camera were mine, I'd contact whomever was going to do your CLA and check whether they have a replacement part. Parts for F-1 and F-1n bodies are becoming increasingly difficult to find, as Canon seems to have liquidated nearly all of their inventory in the past three or four years.

Miles,

 

Do you use any of the Canon extenders with your lens? If so, which one of the 2X works best, the A or the B? How is the performance when the 1.4X or 2X extender is used?

I was fortunate enough to recently acquire one of the quite uncommon

200mm f/1.8 L lenses in FD mount. Unfortunately, there seems to be

little, if any information on the Net about this lens. I've tried

at least twenty different Google searches with little in the way of

results. Canon USA was completely useless as a source of

information.

 

My understanding is that this lens is optically similar to the EF

version, however, there seems to be a difference in the filter

holder. My lens came with a gel holder with no glass. It seems

close in configuration to the 48mm holder that works with the

300/2.8 and 500/4.5, but the internal clearance is much less. I was

unable to seat the filter mount that fits the other lenses for this

reason.

 

My concern comes from the fact that the other Canon teles that take

an internal filter have instructions that stress that you must have

a filter inserted or the optical performance will be degraded. My

past experience confirms this with several of the other Canon

lenses. Since my filter holder has no glass at all, never had any,

nor does the lens have the internal clearance to even allow the

typical Canon internal filters to fit (unlike the standard Canon gel

holder, which has a backing glass), I was wondering if this lens was

modified so that no internal glass filter is required or desired.

 

Any help based on real experience or available documentation for

this lens (not the EF version, which I can get on my own), rather

than conjecture or speculation, would be appreciated.

I've owned several of these motors over the past few years, and still have one in use. They are a very reliable unit. The battery pack takes 10 AA cells. The only problem that I've found is that many of the units on the second-hand market today have had battery leakage. Reject any unit that shows any evidence of leakage whatsoever. Even if the motor works now, it is quite difficult to remove all the residue from such an incident, making the motor highly susceptible to failure in the future.

 

On the plus-side, I've felt very comfortable having this heavy, sturdy motor attached to my equally heavy, sturdy F-1 body when walking around Washington, DC. Any riff-raff that would try to interact with me in an unsatisfactory manner would find themself rendered unconcious with a nasty crease in their skull with one swift stroke.

I second the endorsement of Ken-Mar camera. I've done business with them regularly since 1979 and have been very satisfied. For LF equipment, ask for Mike.

The tripod collar for the FD 300 f/4 L lens is the same as the one on the 200 macro. Canon USA still stocks these new, but they are over $200. I also need one, so if you find a lower cost source, please let me know!

I've been looking in vain for the dual cable release made for the

Prontor Professional Shutters. You know, the one with the control

unit. If anyone knows of one in nice condition or new, I'd

appreciate a lead.

I have two of these cameras. I recently overhauled one using the parts from the second. Be careful. Although a very clever and modern design for its day, these cameras are rather fragile. That's why the USAF cancelled the contract after one year and returned to the Graphic camers. I don't have the time to write a whole set of operating instructions, but I'd be happy to answer specific questions, as I've stripped these things down pretty thoroughly, and am therefore one of the few people who actually knows how they work, inside and out.

First, if I recall correctly, all of the Canon 300/4 lenses were internal focus designs. That being the case, there is no "helical." The focus is driven by a cam slot (or slots) in the focusing ring mechanism that brass bushings attached to the rear (moving) group ride within. The lens body has straight, axial slots that the bushings pass through to engage the focusing ring cam slots. You may be able to correct the sticky focusing without major disassembly, but you have to at least get to the point where you can inspect the various moving parts to see why it's stiff. I've had in past times several Canon lenses with this type of focusing system and stickiness is usually an indication of physical damage or derangement, not lubrication problems. There just aren't the kind of large bearing areas or close tolerances that a standard helical has. In fact, most of these IF lenses have clearances that are quite large; almost sloppy in my opinion!

 

Having said all that, don't go removing the lens mount mechanism. That's not necessary for focusing mount service in most cases, and on these longer lenses in particular, it can be a royal PITA to put it back together, particularly on the New FD (bayonet-style) mounts.

 

As for front group reassembly, I would dispute the previous poster's assertion. Unless you actually disassemble the front cell for cleaning (not recommended, and never required, in my experience) rather than simply removing it as a unit, it *IS* simply a matter of screwing it back in the way it came out. There is no provision for adjusting the position of these components in relation to the rest of the lens body or the element in front of the focusing group.

The height of the maximum aperture setting pin (the pin is cylindrical and about 3mm diameter) on that lens should be between 1.96mm and 1.98mm. Measure it with a depth micrometer. If it's within that range, your lens is OK in that respect. Correcting a slight error in the infinity stop and focus scale alignment on this lens is relatively easy and does not require major disassembly. I've done it several times and it's about a fifteen minute job, assuming that you can get the rubber cover on the focusing ring loose without tearing it or scarring the finish on the metal.

You have to learn eBay-speak

 

eBay-speak: Mint!

English equivalent: KEH Bargain Grade

 

eBay-speak: Mintish/Minty

English equivalent: Looks like my dog has played fetch with it

 

eBay-speak: As-is

English equivalent: Photos in listing may or may not be of the item for sale, or for that matter, of any physical object that actually exists in the known universe (the miracle of PhotoShop at work!)

 

eBay-speak: Like-New

English equivalent: Seller filled-in all the scratches in the finish with a black magic marker

 

eBay-speak: Like-New for its age

English equivalent: Seller didn't even bother with the magic marker

 

eBay-speak: Rare

English equivalent: Not seen on eBay within the last eight hours

Alternate: Cooked to no more than 140 degrees in the glove box of my car on a hot summer day in Maryland

 

eBay-speak: Slight marks on glass that won't affect the image

English equivalent: Need a soft-focus portrait lens?

Alternate: Even John Van Stelten can't fix this one. Need an interesting paperweight for your studio?

 

eBay-speak: Shutter not tested, but all speeds sound correct

English equivalent: [No translation. This is what we call pure gibberish. After all, what exactly does 1/1000 sec sound like, as opposed to 1/250, or even 1/628, for that matter]

Notable examples of commonly-found lens types that have significant focus shift include Angulon, Dagor and (some) Tele-Xenar. There are probably a few others that you'll run into.

Your responses have been very helpful. Thanks!

Thanks for the recommendation. I must add that my question was probably not focused sufficiently. I did, in fact do a Google search prior to my post, using that exact search string. Some useful information came up amidst the dozens of eBay search results.

 

Having said all that, I'll rephrase myself (more verbosely) with the questions that Sinar's product literature online and a few discussion group threads didn't answer.

 

Is there any difference between the rear standard on the F and the F2 other than minor cosmetics and the F2's use of separate locks for swing and shift?

 

Are there any particular problems in terms of reliability or durability for any of these models, or specific components used?

 

I already have a Sinar Norma that I like for travel/outdoors because of its light weight and generally sturdy design. There are times, however, that the larger range of some of the movements and yaw-free design of a newer model would be advantageous. Since most of the parts for the F-series are compatible with what I already have, I was considering buying only the front and rear standards (I already have a modern Sinar 4x5 back) and using my existing bellows and rails. I've seen F standards on eBay pretty regularly, but being new to the system, I'm not confident that I can shop intelligently without some advice.

 

There it is in a coconut shell.

"Time for Leitz to reopen a plant in Canada."

 

Maybe all they need to do in that regard is subcontract with the one they already built (and spun-off). Last I checked, ELCAN was still in business as a division of Raytheon, doing quite well and willing to take on OEM subcontracts. Leica could then shut-down some of their own capacity to save overhead costs. It's not as if ELCAN doesn't know how to build Leica lenses.

I'm hoping that one of you would be kind enough to describe the

functional and cosmetic differences between the Sinar F, F1 and F2

models. I've never used Sinar brand view cameras and I haven't

found a concise summary of this sort after some amount of searching

for the information.

 

Thanks for your help.

"V12? Wait until you see Cadillac's V16."

 

Cadillac made a V-16 engine many decades-ago. There's no particular advantage to it nowadays.

I had an M4 for more than ten years; used it daily. And that included numerous photos shot at less than 100 feet from the muzzles of the 16" guns on the battleship USS Iowa (BB-61) while she was firing broadsides. Nothing ever got out of adjustment. A great camera. I'm gonna have to get me another one, come to think of it!

On Liberty, Malaga Spain, 1982.<div></div>

Best pizza I ever had was in a little place on Neptune Ave in Coney Island. I'm not sure that it even had a name, just a small sign that said pizza. My dad used to take the subway there from South Brooklyn (now a neighborhood with the more gentrified name of Carrol Gardens) when he was a youngster in the 1930's. Until he passed-away some eight years ago we still made the trip there on occasion. Homemade sauce, superb New York style crust. Man, do I miss it!

You stick the screwdriver *up* through the bottom and through the hole.

The prism is also mounted backwards.