mike_pearson

<p>ANDRES<br>

I am on a similar mission to you. After a lifetime of Canon Fd use, I have accumulated a raft of FD lenses , and Ftb, TX, T70, AE1, AE1P and EF bodies. I read somewhere that Canon lenses were deliberately matched for colour, and that some pro's bought into the system as this was an important aspect of a system's performance. My colour slides always looked consistent regardless of which FD lens I was using.<br>

I recently decided to get into Minolta film (manual focus) gear as a second film SLR system and have been very pleased I did.<br>

I have yet to blow up any of my B&W images but as negs they look on a par with my FD negs.<br>

At present in the UK, Minolta film gear is very cheap, so I have accumulated a tidy selection of stuff for little money - SRT101, XD5 and XE1 bodies, 28, 35, 50, 55, 135 and 200 primes, and 24-35, 35-70, 35-105, 35-135 and 75-200 zooms ( all Rokkor). The bigger aperture stuff is out of my price range. Most of the stuff I have acquired seems to have had only light usage.<br>

I am very impressed with the look and feel of the bodies relative to Canon FD. The SRT101 is akin to the FTb, and I actually prefer the XD5 to the AE1/A1 generation of Canons, which do not impress with their fiddly design. The XE1 is a tank, very like the Canon EF, which is my favourite Canon body ( I've never had an F1 though.....) <br>

I like the Rokkor lenses also, very smooth mechanically, and well put together. The 35-70 and 75-200 zooms are said to have been rebadged as Leicas for the R series, and I can believe that.<br>

The 35-105 shows amazing distortion, going from pronounced barrel to pincushion across the range which I don't remember seeing on any of my FD zooms.</p>

<p>With the development of mirrorless cameras, FD and Rokkor lenses may start to climb in price, so I would get in now with your search. I note that Minolta seems to have been a popular brand in Germany, and there is a lot of it on the auction site. Perhaps the Leica connection..... <br>

I have tried FD and Rokkor lenses on my Lumix G1 and they both give excellent results.<br>

Good luck with your search.</p>

<p>Rick<br>

I don't know what you are on, but you ought to bottle it and sell it.<br>

I had a Lydith in M42 mount which I used on my first SLR, a Petriflex V6. This would be around 1968, and was the widest lens I could afford as a student. I reckon it sold for around £30 ( £1 per mm?) in the UK, and everything else was twice the price. I never got impressive results from it and blamed the lens, so I was secretly pleased when it got stolen in a burglary. I used the insurance money to buy a Tamron 28mm<br>

I'm going to have to dig back in my neg file and see if I can improve on my prints from this lens given what you can do with it.<br>

Mike Pearson</p>

<p>I wish I could show you a picture of my original Ftb, but it, along with a sweet black AE1, the wife's TX and 28, 100 and 200 Canon FD lenses all got stolen from the boot of my car when we were on holiday in Arcachon France in 1985. Ironically I bought into Canon when the insurance company sent me a cheque when my original camera, a Petriflex V6, was stolen along with a rag bag of off-brand lenses, when my house in Nottingham was burgled in around 1978. I recall paying around 150GBP for the Ftb with 1.8 lens, which was around a month's salary for me, a graduate town planner.<br>

I have to admit that when I got the insurance cheque for the Ftb I was surprised to find |I could not get anything like the equivalent of the stuff stolen in Canon gear, so switched to brand new Lympus OM1s with 24, 100 and 200mm lenses. Whilst I loved the feel and lightness of the Olympus, we could never get on with them. Shutter speeds around the lens???? I never could get the right exposure with the TTL metering on the OM1 (I should have had the meters recalibrated I guess), but also i never felt that Olympus slides had the impact I had got with Canon.<br>

So after a couple of years when The Olmypuses languished, around 1990 we decided to offload and go back to Canon.I got good prices for the OM1 gear as it was mint, and armed with a wodge of cash descended on the several camera shops then trading in Nottingham. I found a mint EF witha 55mm f1.2 for 199 GBP which had to be an error - it's what you would have expected to pay for an EF with 1.8, or maybe a 1.4. I gradually put my Canon gear back in place and then went for the big one - a brand new 35mm Tilt Shift at around £600. It was essential for my work as a planner ( or that's what I told the wife) but was soon made obsolescent by the shift to EOS. I decided at that point that Canon could carry on it's own sweet way and I would stick with FD.<br>

I have amassed a tidy collection of FD glass and Canon bodies (Black Ftb, TX, AE1 and Programme, A1 ( x2) , T70 ( x 3)etc, all bought at knock down prices, and I have a Lumix G which I can fit them to for digital. I miss the wide angle of the Canon 17mm and 20mm on the Lumix, but maybe if they produce a FD to4/3 Speed Booster that issue may be resolved. <br>

I have bought several other systems over the years at knock down prices - Kiev, Contax G, Mamiya 220, Canon 7, but the Canon FD stuff is the system I keep returning to as it is just so versatile and rewarding.</p>

<p>Hi Les,<br>

the aspect that I find most difficult to deal with on my C220 is the lower viewpoint given by a tlr held at waist level, and the reversed movement. I just got the solution - the prismatic finder transforms the camera. It only adds marginally to the already considerable weight, hardly reduces the apparent light level on the screen, and means you view at eye level.<br>

But Mamiya tlrs are addictive. Since reluctantly buying mine from a friend, I have gone out and bought 55, 135 and 180 lenses, and paramender.<br>

The lenses are easy to get into (one of mine was fogged with condensation, simple fix) and if one of your lenses does go down, chances are it will be the shutter, so fitting a different lens means the camera carries on working.<br>

Why use it to shoot brick walls? It's a waste of time and film. Just use it to take pictures. It will never resolve as well as my Contax G but I still love those big square negs.</p>

<p>I had the previous model, the V6, which I bought new from the Coop in Leicester for £69 in 1967 having saved my pocket money for months. I used a separate exposure meter, a Viceroy Cds and thought I was the bees knees. I also thought TTL was for wimps. Then in 1974, having taken it through my University years in Birmingham, I moved to live and started work in Nottingham, where it was stolen in a burglary. As I was now earning I decided to go upmarket and got a new Canon FTb - yep, the dreaded TTL. And my photos improved immediately. The FTb was about £130, or about a month's salary in 1974. I cannot imagine spending a month's salary on a camera now.<br>

I still have a soft spot for the Petriflex, and every now and again am tempted to bid for one on e-bay. Adnittedly the Canon is better made, but the Petri was pretty sound. The only problem I had was that I knocked that cool front mounted shutter button and it sheared off, but in those days it eas no sweat to get things like that fixed.<br>

Nice camera Steve.</p>

<p>PS I recently got a mint Viceroy Cds meter on e-bay for £2 and was amazed how nice it is to use.I also seem to have learned how to get correct exposure with the hand held meter in the intervening 35 years.</p>

<p>Mark<br>

Take a look at Rick Drawbridge's shots with the Canon 35-70mm f4 in "This month's FD shots".That's the really cheap-feeling kit lens that Canon gave away with the T series cameras. It's the photographer, not the lens, that counts. Are you sure you need f2.8?<br>

Mike Pearson</p>

<p>I've had quite a few in my time. Thge notable ones are:-<br>

Fuji DL zoom- got to be the sexiest with its titanium body shell, but results only so-so.<br>

Prego 90 - the nearest to an SLR results-wise, bulky but worth it.28-90 zoom range is ideal for what I do. My copy has been snaffled by my wife, who is a Rollei fan<br>

Canon 120 Classic - not the most intuitive camera to use but gives great results, would prefer range to be wider at expense of shorter. My copy is pretty bashed about.<br>

Yashica T zoom - lovely camera, probably the smallest and best built of the lot, cracking Carl Zeiss lens gives Contax G- like slides, 28-70 zoom range. Viewfinder dioptre adjustment built in is a real bonus.<br>

Mike Pearson</p>

<p>I have both. A Zorki with 50mm Jupiter, and 2 Kievs with 35, 50, 85 and 135 Rusian lenses.I had to take the focus mounts of the 85 and 135 apart and relube them with lithium grease as the original oil was gummed up.<br>

The Kiev was my first real rangefinder, and largely destroyed my long held prejudice against Russian cameras. The results from mine are superb - in black and white, the negs are amongst the sharpest I have, and that includes Canon Fd and Contax G shots.Not surprising as they are all old Zeiss designs. The Kiev has a really quiet, smooth shutter, but it is mechanically complex.<br>

Both Russians tend to be a bit iffy on frame spacing, and the focus wheel on one of my Kievshas packed up, so I just focus on the lens.<br>

On the strength of the Kiev I bought a Canon 7, and added 50mm and 135 Canon lenses, plus the 35mm Color Skopar and 90mm Elmar. I honestly do not feel the Canon outperforms the Kiev for sharpness, although it will probably be going long after the Kiev are dead.<br>

I recently added the Zorki. Much better camera than I expected and has the advantage of taking the 39mm LTM screw lenses BUT..... the 135mm Canon does not marry up with the rangefinder on the Zorki. All the other LTM lenses are compatible, so you do need to be cautious.</p>

<p>Oh yes, the Zorki has a brilliant viewfinder dioptre adjustment built in, which if you are heading towards middle age or beyond could just be the clincher.</p>

<p>It was said that quality control was better on Russian cameras sold on the British market as the importer, TOI, did pre-delivery checks and corrected any faults . I suspect a lot of stuff has been imported post the advent of E-Bay so it is now caveat emptor.<br>

In my view if you don't pay over the odds its worth a punt on either.</p>

<p>Seeing your item has caused me to go digging in my darkroom, where I have a 105mm Meopta Belar enlarging lens. It has a very sophisticated iris mechanism with around 12 blades. Bizarre!<br>

I inherited it from my Dad's effects when he died 24 years ago, along with a Dallmeyer enlarger lens. I was surprised he had them as although he knew I was interested in photography, he never really discussed it with me. It was only recently I found out he had worked for Taylor, Taylor and Hobson in Leicester in the late 40's/early 50's in their drawing office. I wonder if it was a case of using them to see how the opposition compared.<br>

Subsequently I have realised that TTH were a highly regarded brand, and I have now got a couple of their lenses. I have tried the 108mm TTH and it compares well with my 80mm Computar and the Componon S 80mm f4.<br>

Whilst I had thought of using them for bellows work, I had never thought of mounting them direct to the camera. I reckon the TTH at small apertures mught give a really nice old time look on black and white.<br>

Mike</p>

<p>Rick<br>

As a newbie to the forum, forgive me if you have answered this before, but what is your technique for photographing your cameras. I assume you use a digital camera, but the results are fantastic, reminiscent of the best product photographs. Is it daylight/flash/light tent, and what lens do you use (perspectice control?)<br>

I would love to be able to get the "feel" that you get in your shots of cameras.<br>

Oh, and the Fujica is cool. I never owned one. It reminds me a bit of a Konica 35 I had for a few years ( f1.8, selenium meter, built like a tank). Fujica were always considered what I think you Americans call an "off brand" in the UK, back in the 60's. If my memory is correct I don't recall Fuji selling film at that time in the UK market so there was no brand awareness amongst amateurs. Now and again they came up as special offers in the big chains, which I suppose was Fuji disposing of excess stocks. It was only when the SLRs started to come out that we got to see them in any numbers, and by then they were struggling to get any market penetration against the established brands. I have a Fuji loupe which I bought from the USA and it is every bit as sharp as my Calumet/Rodenstock loupe.<br>

I also had the Fuji DL P&S cameras ( 28mm fixed and 28-70mm zoom)which were probably the sexiest cameras I ever owned, with their titanium shells and sliding lens covers. They were real tactile, but I sold them about a year ago for far more than I paid for them - oh dear I feel seller remorse creeping on.<br>

Mike Pearson</p>