bob_miller4
-
Posts
435 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by bob_miller4
-
-
<p>I recently tried using a Komura Telemore95 II 2X made for for the Fujica-type M42 mount, just like the one pictured here. I was chagrined to find that plain vanilla M42 lenses I had (including Super Takumar 55mm/2 original version) would not screw in all the way and therefore did not give a proper infinity focus. So I inspected its threads carefully. Lo and behold! The threads had a split like that in the picture here but less pronounced. The moral is to beware of this 2X variant since Komura had problems machining it. I checked eBay for a true non-Fujica M42 version and saw one that looked like the Fujica type but it was not identified as such. Caveat Emptor.</p>
-
<p>Errors have been found from time to time in Canon Museum listings. <br>
For example, the listing below is flawed, because there was never a Canon TL SLR without the QL (Quick Loading) feature. I again dare anyone to find an actual example of the TL without QL---no image falsification, please!<br>
Note: "for export only" means for export from Japan.</p>
-
<p>These Mamiya/Sekor 50mm/2 lenses are super-sharp and very available used, and have an auto-manual switch for the aperture like that on a Super Takumar:<br>
The above website, by Roland Stauber, includes info, photos, and links for all the Mamiya/Sekor M42 cameras and lenses.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>I used my Canon FL 85mm/1.8 lens frequently with a Canon TX camera to photograph people and general indoor and outdoor scenes, mostly when our kids were young. Typical film used was consumer grade Kodachrome, Ektachrome, and Kodacolor, and processing was usually by Kodak. I saw no sign of low contrast and at most used a skylight or UV filter. Skin tones and general sharpness were excellent.</p>
-
<p>Vivitar XC-2 cameras with M42 mount, made by Cosina, have a lever to switch between averaging and spot metering through the lens. </p>
-
<p>This points to the need for foam on the outside of the camera.</p>
-
<p>Possibly, the lube oil lost viscosity over time.<br>
I've had some older Canon breechlock lenses where I could see lube oil on the flat annular surface (black) that faces the front of the camera's lens mount flange. So I wiped the oil off with a clean cloth. No leakage was ever noted on the aperture blades, etc. Focusing and general operation remained smooth.</p>
-
<p>I meant to write "camera straps" above.</p>
-
<p>I have a Canon TL QL camera I often use with a Canon FL Macro 50mm/3.5 lens (and others). One day, the old silk tie I was using as a strap snapped, and the camera w/3.5 hit the asphalt. Its performance stayed as good as ever despite dents to the camera and filter ring, but I began using sturdier material for lens straps: thick multistrand plastic clothesline---cheap, effective, and highly inelegant.</p>
-
<p>The screw-on or clip-on 55mm and 52mm lens hoods made for other lens makes (Minolta, etc.) often work for Canon lenses of comparable focal length and maximum aperture.</p>
-
<p>By 1976, the TLb had been replaced by the TX, which added a hot shoe.</p>
-
<p>I've had very good results using Vivitar branded zoom lenses made by Kobori (lens serial numbers start with 77). The two I own in FD mount are:<br>
70-210mm/4.5<br>
35-105mm/3.2-4<br>
Both are multicoated and allow close "macro" focusing at the highest focal length.<br>
Evidently these don't have enough of a following to have ridiculous offering prices on auction sites.<br>
Lens info and photo examples for these are common on the Web.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>The FP and FX from the 60's operate all-mechanically and have split screen focusing:<br>
I think the Canon AT-1 with split screen focusing is close enough to all-mechanical, if you can accept the electronics controlling the shutter. Is it so critical that the shutter will function without a battery?<br>
-
<p>Things about camera items offered for auction or sale that have bothered me as a buyer, due to seller nondisclosure or denial:<br /> 1. Frozen-in-place battery compartment lid.<br /> 2. Moldy odor<br /> 3. Fungus on or in lens<br /> 4. Non-functional aperture diaphragm (iris)<br /> 5. Super-stiff focus<br /> 6. Dirt and sand<br /> 7. Inoperative slow shutter speeds<br /> 8. Wrong camera mount named, or none named, and photos don't reveal the actual mount.<br /> I'm also amused/repelled by seller attempts to appear ignorant or illiterate. I guess that's either an excuse in advance for bad merchandise or a way to make buyers think they have an advantage (i.e., that the item is better than the seller knows). I'll grant that some sellers really are clueless.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>Why not go all the way and ban misrepresentation in general?</p>
-
<p>The Canon TX with Canon FD 50mm/1.8 lens (any version) is capable enough, solid, user-friendly, and inexpensive in very good to excellent used condition.<br>
<p> </p>
-
<p>I use heavy cardboard file boxes in an air conditioned room for camera and lens storage. The holes for the hand grips allow for some air circulation inside.</p>
<p>Older mechanical SLR's can hang up at shutter speeds 1/8 sec and slower if not exercised reasonably often.</p>
-
<p>I started in SLR photography in the late 1970's using a Canon TX, basically a FTb lacking a few features (such as QL loading, semi-spot metering, meter on-off switch, 1/1000 sec speed, self timer). It's been great all these years and as rock solid as its big brother. The TX's focusing screen with microprism center is brighter than the FTb's screen.<br>
There is also the slightly earlier TLb which is a TX with a cold, not hot shoe for flash.<br>
I find the slightly smaller Pentax Spotmatics a bit easier to handle, but breechlock (FL, FD) or pseudo-breechlock (New FD) mounted lenses on a Canon are easier to change out than M42 threaded lenses on a Pentax. I see many comments on the Web about the perversity of the breechlock design, but I've found it easy to work with.</p>
-
<p>Another fascinating Leitz-related story:<br>
-
<p>The Velbon VGB-3 tripod is solid and low cost in good used condition.</p>
-
<p>My Mamiya SX 105mm/2.8 lens, light and sharp and with a retractable lens hood, is very useful for portraits. See:</p>
<p>http://mamiya-nc-m42.mflenses.com/m42_mamiya_sx_105_2.8.htm</p>
<p>http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=34439&view=previous</p>
<p>It mounts onto most M42 camera bodies (tab on the aperture ring could cause an issue with some late M42 Fujicas and maybe others).</p>
-
<p>Some M42 versions of the 7-element Komura Telemore95 II teleconverter were made for Fujica M42 cameras and have some extra protrusions that cause mounting problems on some non-Fujica M42 camera flanges. These TC's are marked "F". I think the ones for plain vanilla M42 were marked "P".</p>
<p>By the way, any TC marked Telemore95 without the "II" has only four elements.</p>
-
<p>The late 1960's Mamiya Sekor 28mm/2.8 lens discussed in my comment above has the same iris characteristic. A lesser degree of this was found with a late 1960's 135mm/2.8 Hanimex lens (appears to be from same manufacturer). Both lens have taken good pictures under normal conditions. I don't like to generate bright out-of-focus highlights in the first place, so their shape is not critical for me. People may be passing up useful cheap lenses because of bokeh-mania. </p>
-
<p>I have a lens exactly like the one pictured, with the Mamiya Sekor name on the front lens ring. I've also seen an identical Soligor lens on eBay. The likely manufacturer was Tokyo Koki = Tokina.</p>
Canon Breech Lock Mount vs. Bayonet Mount
in Classic Manual Film Cameras
Posted
<p>The typical FDn lens is not beat up enough in use to reveal its weakness, if any, relative to its breech lock counterpart. Canon probably ran some early durability tests to rule out future lens failure publicity about the FDn series.</p>