steven_endo

<p>LOL<br /> @ JDM, your last sentence in your last post ("Never force it") brought back a painful memory. When I was in high school, I took a photography class and I had my FT with me. A friend of mine asked to 'check out' my camera. Next thing I see is him trying to twist off the lens. "WTH!!??!??" He had an older Konica with the screw mount lens and he just assumed ALL SLRs had screw mount lens and he was trying to unscrew my lens. Since then, the locating screw that fits in the notch at the top of the FD mount has been cocked about 1/8". Never had any problems with taking photos though, a testament to the toughness and design of the FL/FD breechlock mount, I think...</p>

<p>Canon, for some reason, discourages using FD lenses in stop down mode. I've used them that way and it seems to work fine though. The only other way to use the EF in manual mode, after taking the lens off "A" or "o", is to read the recommended f-stop from the vertical scale with the lens wide open and then manually changing the lens to that recommended f-stop. Of course, you have to stop looking into the viewfinder and look at the lens because there is no f-stop window in the EF as in the New F-1. IIRC, the latter method is the way the owner's manual recommends operating the EF in manual mode with an FD lens.</p> <p>FL lenses, OTOH, must be used with stopped down metering.</p>

<p>I will "call" on your Servo EE and Booster T finders and "raise" you the Speed Finder. I think this was Canon's most innovative finder for the F-1 and New F-1. No other company made anything like it (IIRC) although Nikon's HP (High Eyepoint) finders were close. But, although Nikon's HP finders allowed you to view the full viewing screen from a couple inches away, it did not rotate to give you a right-side-up waist level finder which in itself was innovative since most (all?) waist level finders are upside-down and reversed. The only thing that could have made the original Speed Finder better was to combine it with the Servo EE finder's auto exposure function, which Canon did with the New F-1/Speed Finder FN.</p>

<p>I wish I had known (and should have guessed) earlier that it used alkaline AA batteries. The case looked like it might have used a proprietary NiCad battery no longer available. I would have bought one of the mint condition Servo EE sets that used to come up for sale occasionally, just for the coolness factor...<br> I mean, to be honest, I don't really like auto-exposure. I have an EF that I bought in 1980 to take on a family trip to Japan. After spending a month using it there, I bought an F-1 as soon as I came home because I didn't like/trust the bottom center weighted auto exposure. I was too accustomed to the 12% rectangle in my FT.</p>

<p>I agree; the F-1 with Power Winder F is the best, most comfortable setup.<br /> Regarding your question about the naming convention, I think it was in the Canon Cameras book by Carl Shipley or in a Popular Photography magazine equipment review that explained why Canon called the second generation F-1, "just" New F-1. Unlike Nikon (F, F2, F3, F4...) who used the number part of their F-series camera to count off each subsequent generation, the F-1 had a specific meaning from the beginning at Canon: Flex #1. As in, the #1 reFlex camera in the world. So, any other name would be a step down or away from #1. I don't know how true that is or if he had some internal sources that told him so but that is what he wrote...</p>

<p>The first drive I ever bought was a Power Winder F for my then-new F-1n. I couldn't afford the full blown Motor Drive MF so there was always a twinge of jealously whenever I saw one. However, I found that the Power Winder did exactly what I needed: advance ONE frame (on the "S" setting) after taking a shot. So I "justified" to myself that I really didn't need 3.5fps since I didn't even need 2fps. But the MF looked so cool...<br> <br /> Fast forward 25 years or so when I bought my New F-1. I saw that used Motor Drive FN were relatively inexpensive so I bought one as well as the Power Winder FN. Man, that combo is HEAVY with its 12 batteries! So, in retrospect, I was glad I never could afford a Motor Drive MF because I suspect that combo is even worse (weight-wise) and it would have just sat in the storage box, just like my Motor Drive FN mostly does...<br> <br /> One last point: I wish Canon had stuck with keeping the Power Winder FN an amateur level accessory. The Power Winder F uses the low torque of the winder motor to stop the winder when the film reaches the end of the roll. The Winder FN uses the reverse frame counter countdown like the motor drives and I find it to be a PITA and time consuming since the winder FN has to be "set up" when a new roll is inserted in the camera.</p>

<p>If the BT-72 hood is substantially cheaper, perhaps buy one of those and cut it down?</p>

<p>If I recall correctly, turning the BL ring into the locked position, whether attached to something or not, allows the aperture ring to actuate the blades. You need to push in the little pad inside the top of the BL to turn the ring from the fully open position if you are trying to turn the BL ring while the lens is not mounted to anything.</p>

<p>If the goal is to learn photography, I would avoid all of Canon's auto-exposure capable cameras with the exception of the New F-1. They are all (except the New F-1) kind of clunky when used in full manual exposure mode. I would start with (cheapest to most expensive) an AT-1, FT, FTb, FTbn, TL, TLb, TX, F-1, F-1n, or New F-1. These all use FD lenses.<br /> Of these, my pick would be an FTb or FTBn. Very rugged, simple, and uses the same 12% spot metering system as the F-1s.</p>

<p>If you look at the picture of an FL 135mm f2.5 lens on the MIR website, that looks like just the front half of a dis-assembled 135mm f2.5 lens.</p>

<p>Yeah, I see your conundrum. At this point you might want to sacrifice some film and take shots based on just the camera meter with different lenses and then a whole other set of shots with exposure determined by the meter and compare them all...<br> The other option is to use the handheld meter and bracket your exposures +/- 1 stop each time you take a picture...<br> One last question, when you compared the TTL meter measurement between the 24mm, 50mm and 500mm, did you move the camera each time so that the same area was being metered? IIRC, the A-1 has a center-bottom weighted averaging metering pattern and that might make a difference as well...</p>

<p>The camera's meter is probably behaving correctly and the exposures should come out fine.<br /> F-stops on a lens are determined mathematically: focal length divided by aperture diameter and has nothing to do with light transmission. Thus, for any given lens, reciprocity will hold true throughout the range of f-stops. However, two lenses with or at the same f-stop could transmit a different amount of light. Thus, that 500mm f8 lens is probably transmitting less light than the other lenses at f8. A practical example to consider is the use of neutral density filters; same lens, same light but due to the filter, light transmission is cut and therefore shutter speeds need to be lengthened.</p>

<p>One last thought, you said,</p> <p>"...I saw that the problem had not disappeared, which I guess I expected because I had not made any changes from its original condition...."</p> <p>Maybe try inserting the screen in its holder upside down (if possible) just to see if it "fixes" your issue before sending the camera out for repair?</p>

<p>More ponderings:<br /> If the mirror, pentaprism or eyepiece were out of alignment then I would think the image would never be in focus.</p> <p>Since it is possible to get a sharp image, I think the problem is the focusing screen. Perhaps it is installed upside down?</p> <p>If not, then the lens mount is not aligned longitudinally correctly which will show up when you test the focus at the film plane...</p>

<p>The glass in the 34mm drop-in filters are not threaded filters; however, the 48mm drop-in in filters are special, thin 48mm filters threaded in. I am not sure how the 34mm filters are mounted but Canon did make a gel filter holder for the 34mm drop in filter (not sure about the 48mm drop-in filters). When I bought my 400mm f4.5 from KEH, it came with the gel filter holder (without a gel filter) installed instead of a filter so I had to buy a 1X filter.</p> <p>Although the 48mm drop in filters are screwed in, they are not standard thickness filters although they are standard filter threads. I found this out with a little experimentation: I found a set of Canon 48mm filters on ebay for cheap just to see. They threaded in just fine but the holder would not fit the slot with the standard filter.</p>

<p>Sounds like the film is at the end of the spool.</p> <p>If so, push in the rewind button and rewind the film. With the film out of the camera, you can complete cocking the shutter and firing it.</p>

<p>Just a wild shot in the dark, and I don't know if it is possible to mis-install a screen, but is the focusing screen installed correctly? If it is installed upside down or turned 180 degrees around, no light will hit the meter. </p>

<p>My idea (for sometime in the future) is to cut out the face of an extra lens cap I purchased on ebay and then screw in/tack weld on a filter ring (without glass) on to the remaining ring of the cap. Then I will have a slip on filter holder...</p>

<p>I tried to find references when I posted my first reply but couldn't at that time. However, I did finally find this:<br /> From Canon's <strong>Lens Wonderland, Canon FD Lens Guide Book, </strong>booklet, © 1982, <strong>Accessories Guide II</strong>, <strong>Extender FD2x-A/FD2x-B/FD1.4x-A</strong>, page 42:</p> <p>"... For lenses (including zooms) which have a maximum focal length of less than 300mm, the FD2x-B gives you a 2X increase in focal length. It is also recommended for use with the FD 300mm f/2.8L...."</p> <p>In your link, you need to go to the bottom of the page and read the note in the light pink box, next to the picture of the 2X-A converter.</p>

<p>I believe you are supposed to get the 2X-B for the 300mm f2.8. Canon says the 2X-A is for focal lengths 300mm and up but that means 300mm lenses other than the f2.8. The original BL 300mm f2.8 was designed to pair up with a 2X converter which was included with the 300mm f2.8. According to Canon the nFD 300mm f2.8 was designed similarly with the 2X-B but you had to buy the converter separately.</p>

<p>Just a thought, but since it is a non-Canon 2x, and you say that, "you hear the mirror not complete", could the rear of the converter be protruding too far into the mirror box and jamming the mirror? Have you tired firing the camera with just the converter installed? Are their any contact marks on the back of the converter?</p>

<p>I had a chance to look at the back of my nFD 28mm f2.8 and I was wondering, when you say the lever "can be moved Up about half way" is it more like 2/3 or 3/4 of the way up? The tab for the lever on my 28mm does not go all the way up the slot as shown in the picture. The lever is made such that the tab is in the middle of the lever and so cannot go all the way up.</p>

<p>I <em>may</em> have your answer; but I am no expert and I cannot attest to the accuracy of the MIR website:</p> <p>http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/300mm.htm</p> <p>But if you compare the two lens designs (300mm F4 vs F4L) you will see that the L type has a flat glass front "element" while the non-L type does not. As a 300mm F4L owner I <em>can</em> attest that the front element is "just" flat glass (which I know is not "just" flat glass but optically flat). I have never seen a non-L 300mm F4 to know if they do or do not have the front flat glass element.</p>

<p>Huh, interesting.</p> <p>My guess: maybe it's an early, demo lens intended for taking around to photo shows like Photokina? Having 'Canon' shown prominently would be something companies do to their products to highlight them. And it would explain the white "L" since it could be an early prototype?</p>

<p>But does the T90 have swing needle metering (OP's request/requirement) like the New F-1?</p> <p>It is not my intent to hijack this thread into an New F-1 vs. T90 debate and I am sure if you compare the T90 to the F-1, it has many more features. But two features the T90 does not have are interchangeable finders, of which I especially like the Speed Finder and the ability to use without batteries (admittedly in a limited range of shutter speeds). I know the it has been argued that it is very unlikely to be out in the field without batteries but it still is comforting to know that one can, if necessary...</p>