craig_depolo

<p>The zoom mechanisms on the Canon FD 28-50mm f3.5 SSC and the classic FD 35-70mm f2.8-3.5 SSC tend to get sloppy to outright loose with time. This is because the collars that are guided through the grooves in the inner housing deteriorate. The original collars are made of rubber surrounding a brass center with a hole, which is in turn attached with a screw through the middle. As I understand it, the grease used deteriorates the rubber, and it wears down. Steve Swerigen from Camera Clinic bought Canon's last batch of collars. He had rehabilitated my FD 35-70mm lens with original collars, but ran out of these shortly thereafter. I have a 28-50mm that had a very sloppy zoom and I really wanted this lens in better shape (the sloppiness leads to zoom creep and just doesn't feel like the high performance lenses these are). So Steve took some teflon collars used in modern EOS lenses, hand sized them, and installed them in my lens as an experiment. Success! Both the zoom and the focus rings turn smoothly and without any play. Focusing is a little stiffer when the zoom is at 35mm, but it seems to loosen up with a few back-and-forths, and is not really a problem. Steve says this is the difference between the more flexible rubber and the teflon material that has less give. The zoom mechanism turns a little less smoothly than the ring on my 35-70mm lens, but if I wasn't comparing it I don't think I would have noticedt. So far so good. I'll see how it holds up to the test of time, but given they are used in modern lenses, I am thinking this is effectively a semi-permanent solution. I just wanted to share this idea in case you need to rehabilitate your zoom.<br>

Cheers,<br>

Craig</p>

<p>Does anyone know if the automatic exposure control of the EF camera is electronic or mechanical? How does it work?<br>

Thanks, Craig</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

You all have covered L (Luxury) lens quite well. I'll just note that I adore L lenses and the great non-L lenses and the pictures they produce, and I'll tell an FD story. <br>

In 1975, when the 300mm f2.8 SSC Fluorite lens set was released, its reputation greatly preceded its availability (this was an "L lens" even though the first lens labeled "L" was in 1978 - the 300mm f4L). I always call this the Christmas lens because of the red "SSC" and the green "Fluorite" on the lens hood. Some photographers and lens reviewers had to wait up to a year before they could finally get their hands on one of these. Everyone seemed to love this lens and its results when they could finally get to shoot with it; it always lived up to its reputation as being true to color rendition. I always wondered why there was never an FD 600mm "L" lens. I've concluded that it was because the 300mm f2.8 SSC Flourite lens set included a 2x teleconverter and was intended to be used as both a high quality 300mm and a 600mm lens. The 300mm was upgraded to a white barreled L lens in 1981 because of its popularity. The 800mm f5.6L (1979) preceded the 400mm f2.8L (1981) so there wasn't a parallel here with the 2x teleconverter.<br>

Cheers, Craig </p>

<p>I would have assumed the same as Mark, but I just tried it and the 50-300mm collar is a larger diameter than the 400mm collar. The only caveat is that it is an original FD mount 400mm, not the new mount, but I don't think that will make a difference. The diameter and collar width are the critical parameters and there might be an EF or one of those other camera companies that make one that would fit. In bright conditions I have had good success hand holding the 50-300mm. Yea it gets heavy, but gosh is it fun and it takes great pictures.</p>

<p>Good Luck</p>

<p>1000 Thanks Gordon!</p>

<p>Hi Guys,<br>

I'll take the opportunity to say I have the highest regard for both of you and always enjoy and learn from your comments. A note is that the Canon AE-1 and Speedlite 155A were released in 1976, I believe. That the Macro Speedlight 120A was a CAT System flash really blows me away. I guess the flash unit sits a little forward of the lens decoupled??? from the focusing ring that operated as the CAT ring; otherwise it would rotate. Gordon is there any chance you could scan and post that small section of the 1972 Photokina? I apologize for not knowing if that is ok or not. It is really a rare piece of Canon FD history though and I think many would be interested in it.<br>

The CAT System is a very mechanical approach to automatic flash control. I wonder what the relationship was between the mechanical design crews (F-1, FTb, EF) and those electronic geeky guys (AE-1, A-1). Canon was behind the other companies with the CAT system, which actually must have been a major drawback in the initial appeal of the F-1 System, given that flash systems are so integral to general photography. The geeks plopped in a photocell into the flash unit and added a little communication with the camera and Wa La - dedication - what was the big deal? But electronic actions are invisible for the most part. Mechanical systems were honed in, reliable, and tangeable; its partly why we like the FD system so much. The mechanical and electronic groups must have interesting views of each other, although they seem to have collaborated on the EF and New F-1 cameras.<br>

Cheers, Craig</p>

<p>I was looking at the 1972 version of "An Introduction to the Canon F-1" and it shows an interesting macro flash unit called the Macro Speedlite 120A. Was this ever produced? It looks kind of like a Macrolite ML-1 only the small flash units are pointed towards the front of the lens rather than parallel to it like the ML-1. This probably created too much light in the center of the picture, but it sure looks cool. This would have been the time when Bell and Howell wanted Canon photographers to use their flash units, so the early flash units weren't pushed big in the U.S. (note the rarity of the Speedlite 500A). Any ideas out there?<br>

Cheers, Craig </p>

<p>Detlef,<br>

This is Canon Viewfinder Unit CR4-DF for the Canon F-N camera. It allowed direct viewing out the back of the Canon CR4-45NM versus the Fixation Target Box that was viewed on the small monitor.</p>

<p>Cheers,<br>

Craig</p>

<p>I also recommend Steve at Camera Clinic for working on T90s. He has a lot of experience in these and I believe he can fix them up to minimize the recurrence of the oil on the blades. He also really likes working on T90s and there is probably something to be said about that. I have been very satisfied with all the work he has done for me on my FD equipment. His number is 775.829.2244. If nothing else you might like to talk to him about your camera and fixing it. He knows what people have been successful with and what usually takes a technician, and he is an honest fellow, so he won't try to mislead you.<br>

Cheers, Craig</p>

<p>I did document some of the disassembly, cleaning, and reassembly, but I used a T90, 300TL, and FD 50mm f3.5 MACRO lens, FD equipment, of course. It is really exciting to see how well engineered and machined this FD lens was. The only word I can think of is "solid construction". Steve had to take apart the compensator group of elements (third batch of elements back). These definitely are critical to reassemble exactly correctly, the tolerances must be about 1/100th of a millimeter. But watching Steve reassemble them, one element or group would screw in and snug up exactly where it should be - I kept being impressed with the way this lens was designed. Watching it zoom without the shell was poetry. I worked with the lens a bit today, great definition (no question it is an L-series lens) and the contrast is back! Steve can be reached at 775.824.2244 or <a href="mailto:steven40@aol.com">steven40@aol.com</a>. In my mind he is top in his field, and a true specialist in FD equipment (although he does work on that other stuff I understand). I'm going to the field for a bit, but when I get back I'll get my film processed and try to post some pictures of the experience.<br>

Cheers, Craig</p>

<p>I recently picked up a FD 50-300mm f4.5 for a great price, but learned upon reception of the lens that there was

quite a bit of mold and fungus on at least six elements, so not as good a deal as I thought. But this is

Canon's first super zoom and people usually have harsh words for this lens which strangely intrigued me, an admited

FD freak. Steve Swerigen of Camera Clinic rather quickly cleaned up the mold on the outside of the rear

element, so I decided to keep the lens and have a go at rescuing it. I assumed that the mold would clean

up , but the spider legs fungus on a single element face would remain. I was correct. Now I may

not know what I am talking about in distinquishing mold and fungus, so keep this in mind. The fuzzy hazy

stuff that cleans up I call mold, and in this case the two spider leg spots I call fungus (or fungus damage).<br>

Well today Steve took apart the lens and man what an experience. Steve had never worked on this

specific lens and there are no repair instructions, but he has great experience in lenses, particular Canon FD

lenses. This was a very well desinged lens with some features that made it robust, and it was

fun watching Steve discover these and point these out. The zoom mechanism was amazing - what a

piece of art. One thing about watching an experienced technician that I began to appreciate was the analysis

he would go through on every move, and the tricks he would use to make things come apart correctly. You

don't just unscrew a screw. You think about what happens when it comes out, does it need to be softed,

think about whether there is a reference mark that is need, and so on. I'll admit, there was a moment that I

looked down on his desk where little groups of screws, rings, tubes, groups of lenses, and the shell were all

systematically laid out, and I had lost track of what was what that I was hoping (praying?) that this will all go back

together and work right. I kept thinking of that time my friend and I rebuilt my volkswagon bus transmission

and installed the spider gear backwards; I had three speed backwards and one speed forwards. But Steve

was has no such reservations and really seemed to be having fun taking it apart and cleaning the elements.

What was left was minor - mostly that element with the two spider legs spots.<br>

Now here is the good news and an important FDer message. Steve says, lets see if that element is still

available, because CANON DOESN"T THROW AWAY ITS PARTS. It may run out, but it keep its stuff until it

runs out. Canon still appears to have the element for $29 and we ordered it. Now it still may not be a

done deal Steve says, accounting mistakes can happen, but he is optimistic that we will be receiving a replacement

element soon, and this part of the lens is particularly easy to get back into (I'd better pinch myself). Keep this

in mind if you have an issue with an element, you might be still able to replace it. Long live FD! Long

live Canon too!<br>

The lens is back together and really the only issue now is the element with the two spider spots, but these

probably would not seriously affect quality even if it does not get replaced. It was great watching the lens

doctor work and the skills and techniques and it was particularly exciting to see the quality and craftsmanship of

Canon FD lenses- man are they made well. Next step - shooting away when I get the chance.<br>

Cheers, Craig</p>

<p>Thanks for the response Lindy. I just looked at it and all the elements are definitely crystal clear (well except the rear element - but that has a long history of abuse - we got it back 95% though - mystery spots, fungus(?) on the edge - got most of that cleaned up). Some day I'll find a broken one with a good rear element and swap it out, and then I will have a perfect lens, but thats being a bit of a perfectionist. I am at least the third owner. The other thing I will say about the lens is it has great action focusing it.<br>

Cheers, Craig </p>

<p>Lindy - Do you recall which element was cloudy; if not specifically, whether it was in the middle or back (I assume it wasn't one of the front elements). This must be a problem with the EF version as well as the elements are exactly the same with exception of glass protective rear cover on the EF version (strange why they put this on the EF version and not the FD). <br>

I guess for the record I really like my 200mm f1.8, I use it for indoor sports and candids. Yea it is a little heavy, but I can carry it, I don't need a horse, but it is such a sweet lens, it is really not a problem (it is a manly lens!). I wouldn't pack it on a hike I guess, I have other lenses for that. Mocking is ok, it is good to have fun. But this is too fine a lens to diss in my opinion. It is one of my favorites.</p>

I use my spot meter on the T90 quite a bit and just point at my subject, or a neutral gray equivalent, or compensate the exposure as need be, but this is not new information. I just wanted to remind people that there are two light sensors in the T90, adjusted with small potentiometers I understand. There is also a linearity adjustment. If you are having problems with you spot metering (I was getting overexposure in bright situations) it may need to be tuned. Like any camera, they can have their own personality, and to be consistently successful, you have to master that personality.

Well I don't know if this meaningfully adds to the discussion, but it was packaged in a gold box with reflective metallic gold letters. It was sold with an AE finder and a certificate of authenticity (as if it wasn't unique enough). Ask the dealer for the serial number - that might give a clue as to the number of them made if it is a unique code. I have seen two for sale on Ebay in the last year or so - never paid attention to the price (I like my spouse).

Thank you all for the suggestions. I found the recommended book in a box of photography books my Dad gave me! I look forward to having some close-up fun.

Best Wishes - Craig

I was dutifully reading the instructions for my 50mmf3.5 SSC MACRO lens when I realized I wasn't reversing my

lens for most of my macro work (not too much in magnification). I assumed (I think wrongly) that because the lens

has such awesome resolution and is designed for close up work, it would hold up better than other lenses at macro

distance ratios without being reversed. The instruction sheet indicates otherwise (although doesn't exactly state it

seemed), that it should be reversed for macro work. My photos seem ok (not awesome though - a little sterile at

times) and I know I need to improve my part of it vastly, but maybe reversing this lens (and all FD lenses?) for macro

work is much more important than I have considered.

 

I was wondering if any of you macro FD folks had some experience in this you could share? I have to admit I

haven't shot with a reversed lens much - and the snap of the close-up photo is critical. THANX

I had a T90 that shot a couple frames then went EEEE. Steve at Camera Clinic USA said it was probably close to needing an overhaul and finally went over the edge. He showed me how to temporarily clear it up (by opening the camera up) but assured me the EEEE would return soon. I think part of the problem is that oil goes out onto a magnet associated with the shutter. This has to be cleaned up and Steve puts in a small barrier in to slow this down from reoccurring. I need to have my T90 cameras tuned to the best one and eliminate the exposure variability between them, but I never get around to it.

With the exception of having fun with the Flash Auto Ring, I would not use the Speedlite 133D flash because it has a deadly trigger voltage. The trigger voltage of the one I measured was 257 V (measured with a professional digital multimeter). Also higher capacity batteries can roast these units; they appear to have some close tolerances.

I use both and love both lenses. The 80-200mm f4L is incredible and is one of my outdoor standard lenses I carry; awesome resolution. I really like the 200mm f2.8 for indoor sports (although a f1.8 has had front stage lately).

Hang loose and have fun. I plop a FDn 200mm f1.8 on the front of my XTi. It is really kinda fun (I don't use tape - I use a Canon converter). I have some fancy EF lenses for work (they are modern and the best). But, my heart is with the huge capabilities I have with my FD system. I guess I have three aspects to my photography. Work - which is, well work (digital and film). Mechanical facination - all FD. And that creative art thing - mostly film - but really now, there aren't suppose to be boundaries are there.

 

Canon could have done the transition better. After all, they had previously offered extreme backwards compatability. But they had to change the mount. They did offer (sort of) the converters. As usual with their macro systems they transcended camera systems. And they made the 200mm f1.8 in an FD mount after the EF system was launched.

 

I really love FD lenses and will use them as I want and as excites me. I like the light gathering capacity. If film becomes hard, some will follow me to digital.

 

Cheers, Craig

Hi Douglas!

More excited about my FD equipment than ever. My work is tied to earthquakes, and we have been having a lot lately in Nevada. I was working 24/7 from about 2/21 to 5/30, so I regretfully, I couldn't even read the forum. Then I had to catch back up with life, go on a family vacation, and so forth. All the while I have been burning up slide film and color family pictures (there is cost, but it is worth it). I have to admit I have a token Canon digital camera that I have had to upgrade lenses to L quality for because of the earthquakes. But there are distinctly different purposes to the FD and the digital. On my recent vacation to Yellowstone National Park, it was all FD. My children are going to learn film first (their world will be different and digital - but they need to understand the basics). I do enjoy the forum immensely, and have thought of responding to several comments lately, but either didn't feel like I knew enough - or something. Thanks for asking.

Craig

When I use my connecting cords I am in fun mode - so I haven't recorded what I have done, but I have used and abused these cords with a TTL distibutor, multiple 300TLs and multiple T90s and have had some great luck or the A-TTL did its thing pretty darn well. I like to shoot double shot portraits sometimes with a T90 and 85mm f1.2 straight on and a T90 about 40 degrees off with a 135mm f2 lens. Lighting is what is needed or sets the mood, but is usually strong frontal light or side with fill or flare or whatever. I tend to get wrapped up in the subject and usually use the complications with the camera as a fun distraction. I love seeming to accidentally have a IR remote with a mind of its own that is randomly firing off pictures to my dissatisfaction, but in reality I am capturing laughs + from my subject that is laughing at me struggling. About 1 in 4 or 5 pairs is remarkable because it is two views of the same great expression. After a couple camera specific adjustments (my T90s have personalitiies) I just let the automatic metering go, and the cameras and the main cameras pre-flash and the cables and 300TLs all do their thing quite well. The above comment gave you the real answer; I'm just endorsing it and saying you can really push these setups (even the 9 m max length??? - what can I say).

Cheers, and Long Live FD!!!

 

Craig

I would like to give a belated thanx for all the comments. I will be using these as I try to pick this project up again. I've been busy with an earthquake event that has ruled my life for the last month (I'll try to post some pictures from that).

Take Care,

Craig

I am an earthquake geologist and have been trying to document a magnitude 6

earthquake that recently occurred (Wells, Nevada). I thought you might be

interested in what I took to take pictures with. I had about 20 minutes pack

camera gear and no time to go to the store for film or anything.

 

My primary camera was a T90. I was a little nervious because for these types

of one time shots that have to come out, period, I have always used an A-1. I

would have liked to have taken a second T90, but I was suppose to board a

small plane and take off in a storm, so weight was a concern. I also took my

XTi digital camera because pictures needed to be distributed quickly (I was

stumbly with this but it was good; pictures at nbmg@unr,edu). My initial

primary lens was an original FD mount 35-70mm lens, but I evolved to my

Aspherical 55mm because I wasn't entirely satisfied with the focusing at 70mm

and I was beginning to take more and more close up pictures. I had an FD 20-

35mm for my wide angle shots and a new mount 85mm 1.2L medium telephoto (by

now your thinking - and he is travelin' light?). I also took a original mount

reflex 500mm with a 2X teleconver (that was a weight savings) for details I

could not get close to. I also had a Speedlite 300TL with a piece of white

notecard permanently taped on as a reflector (I usually use it pointed

straight up in full program mode - I don't have much time to take any one

shot, usually - about 30-40 seconds; a minute an a half setup is a luxury).

We are inspecting, popping our heads into and photographing damaged buildings

and effects - so it has to be fast. I took about 8 rolls of Kodachrome 64, a

couple of Kodachrome 200, 4 Provia 100F, and there were a couple Velvia 100F.

How did I do? Who knows; I haven't had a chance to turn in the film and I

usually include a little note for the processor. The equipment functioned

well, I think. In these kind of situations, you just try to do you best.

When I says a 4th of a second and your 2 miles from your flash, you hold it as

steady as you possibly can and take the shot. There is so much going on that

there are screw-ups, like being in aperture priority and taking pictures

inside and outside of buildings and not noticing the damn 4000th a second has

been blinking like crazy; this happens where I am more busy trying to describe

or understand the situation and am treating the T90 more as a point and

shoot. Everything was duplicated with the XTi (I gave it 10 or 20 secs. for a

shot). I'll try to post some shots. I was most frustrated with everything

being bright white or very poorly illuminated (inside buildings and deep dark

overcast skys at times - and then intense bright sunshine). How well I kept

up with all the compensations, we'll see. I mostly kept the T90 in partial

spot mode and sought out an 18% grayish part of the picture. Well I could

completely flop or something global could have happened to the T90, but I

suspect there will be some shots worthy of posting on this forum (I'm a little

nervious about this because the quality of pictures posted in this forum are

outstanding). I am still working the earthquake and won't be reading this for

a week or so, and I look forward to reading the questions I posted a little

over a week ago. I just thought you would like to know that I consider the FD

system a solid performer in professional, perishable data situations; this is

my FD equipment's sixth earthquake (1983, 1986, 1989, 1992, 1994, 1998, 2008)

and every other time I've had great success with it. I just glanced in my bag

and will note the last time I went out I took an Macrolite ML-2 and replaced

the 35-70mm with a 35-105mm f3.5, and that all my lens have lens hoods.

Because my camera is being tossed around a bunch, I am using a screw in lens

cap for my Aspherical 55mm - even though it takes a second longer to unscrew

it, I love that lens and need to protect it. I use a large canvas tool bag

with a towel on the bottom for a camera bag.

 

Cheers,

Craig