michael_linn

<p>Very good topic and posts.</p> <p>The accuracy of a shutter at it's top speeds is a design and manufacturing quality issue.</p> <p>This post brought back memories of servicing the original Contax RTS and it's associated Yashica FR counterparts. As it turned out, all shared the same rubberized cloth focal plane shutter, even the lowly Yashica FR II, a dumbed-down auto only model made to occupy the bottom of the line. The first couple of those I serviced surprisingly tested out on the digital shutter speed tester at a reliable and consistent 1/2000 second with the light meter pegged to the top. Pretty good for the bottom of the line.</p> <p>The higher end FR I did the same in auto mode. All of this was unadvertised, probably to avoid cannibalizing sales of the original RTS. Of course later models of the RTS had metal foil shutter curtains.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Ah, the memories!</p> <p>I owned a lot of Canon stuff in the 70's, starting with an EF, and Canon lenses from 20mm to 300mm.</p> <p>The most used lens, by far, was the 28mm 2.0.</p>

<p>I think that a Biotar might be the best classic fit if you have an older Exakta.</p> <p>A later model Pancolar (multicoated) will give better performance and an improvement over the swirly bokeh of the Biotar. But that Biotar was a milestone in lens performance circa 1950!</p> <p>Good Luck!</p>

<p>They all <em>started</em> with mirror cushions.</p>

<p>Number 1 would be a third party lens made in a wide variety of mounts, and without knowing the mount, or seeing a picture of it, it's impossible to answer the question. All we know at this point is that it is not in a Minolta mount.</p> <p>The Kalt auxiliary lenses are made to fit on the front of an existing lens via a series seven adapter. It's possible they were intended to fit a 50's or 60's fixed lens rangefinder camera. Not likely a good match for your Minolta SLR.</p> <p> </p>

<p>A good manual camera is one that is in good working order.</p> <p>All of the models you mention can be good cameras, but they are mostly thirty to forty years old, or more. If they have never been serviced, so is their lubrication, etc. Shutter speeds might be way off. Camera might lock up at 40 F. Light seals and mirror bumpers might be goo by this time. You won't know unless you check it all out. That's the bad news.</p> <p>The good news is that most of these cameras are generally well made and can be put into as-new working condition by a qualified repair facility. Then you likely have years of trouble free photography ahead of you. </p> <p>Good Luck!</p>

<p>Ricoh TLS-401, 1970.</p> <p>Had spot and averaging selectable by switch.</p>

<p>In working on a number of 137's many years ago, I recall one of the causes of focus problems.</p> <p>If you raise the mirror and look into the mirror box, you will see that the mirror rests on a small pin on the rewind side of the box.<br> The pin is actually covered by a plastic bushing, which sometimes goes missing, causing a noticeable mis-focus by allowing the mirror to rest at a lower position. There are other potential reasons for the pin to be out of position, but that is the one I recall.</p> <p>A short focal length lens, stopped well down, might compensate, but as I recall (just relying on distant recall!) the error is very noticeable.</p>

<p>My EF (bought new in the 70's) and still going strong is the only camera I have ever owned which would meter a 30 second exposure correctly.</p> <p>It needed new light seals of course along the way.</p> <p>The electronics are robust compared to other stuff. </p>

<p>Having serviced both models and their extended families, I would without hesitation recommend the Canon.<br> Professional photographers also knew this so if you are looking at an A-1 give it a good look and if there is evidence of extensive use, such as major brassing, just move on as many excellent examples are available for a song today. Just make sure that the shutter squeal and light seals are taken care of.</p>

<p>The advent of anti-reflective lens coating post WWII reduced the advantage of the tessar and sonnar designs , which featured fewer air to glass surfaces and therefore an advantage in contrast compared to the double gauss design. With the new lens coatings significantly improving contrast, the double gauss planar design came back in the form of the Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 58/2 of the late forties. It was a revolutionary lens at the time with a significant impact.<br> Most of the Japanese and German 5 to 5.8cm lenses of the 50's and 60's appear to be inspired if not directly copied from it.<br> Just my personal opinion. But then I have serviced all of the known Yashica "normal" f1.7/f2 lenses from the J series cameras up through the F* series, and also several varieties of 58mm Biotars.<br> I have also used several of them in M42 including Yashicas, Biotars, and Pancolars on Sony Alphas with pleasing results.<br> They are all contrasty (for whatever their time period) and sharp, but the bokeh is quite variable!</p> <p> </p>