awahlster

<p>Taking the top off an AE-1 without knowing exactly what you are doing can ruin the meter settings and in the worst case break the tungstin cable that runs from the meter pot to the dial. AIt has to be preset to a certain speed and ASA before you start disassembly or your totally screwed.</p>

<p>The AE-1 AE-1P AT-1 AV-1 and A1 all use the same data back (the one that burns the date onto the negitive. SO they all have to use the same back.</p>

<p>How about the Canon Demi S EE17? 1/2 frame auto exposure zone focusing. very compact little cameras with ecellent lenses. The S and EE17 had a 30mm f1.7 lens. 6 elements in 4 groups the S was circa 64 the EE-17 was circa 1966.</p>

 

<p>Louis sometimes I look at your images and I think to myself. "That Louis is a showoff" LOL</p>

<p>As always your keen eye and skill shows the rest of us what is possible</p>

<p>Keep in mind when talking about image quality two of the most important things are Sensor size and Lens quality.</p>

<p>Now I am sure the sensor behind that tiny 4mm (across) lens is perfectly suited to capture snap shots. But I have printed a lot of cell phone photos over the years and even with my Samsung Stratosphere and LG touch 4MP cameras a quality 4x6 print is a real challenge.<br>

On the othe hand my wife has a Canon SD1300IS 12.1MP with image stabilization. And she has shot pictures of humming birds with the thing racked all the way out to 17X and while the photo is not National Geographic quality it holds up to cropping and printing at 4X6.</p>

<p>And her grand childern photos are stunning even a 8.5 x 11"<br>

Its about .5 times as thick as my Stratosphere and over all smaller.<br>

Not saying its the camera you should get but you need to understand no amount of marketing will make up for simple math. And a tiny lens and tiny sensor will only ever make tiny photos.</p>

<p>I don't think Canon Made a bad 35mm lens going all the way back to the 35mm f2.0 in the rangefinder series. I have a 35mm f1.8 Black and Chrome that is very very good. And it's nearly 60 years old.</p>

<p>I like the 35mm f2.0 nFD the best of the ones I have had. My first was a 35mm f3.5 S.C. not sure which Mk.</p>

<p>Patrick I have no idea of what you speak. I've had T-90s for almost 15 years now and until I stopped using them regularly I never once had the stuck magnet problem. As to them coming with the problem new I seriously doubt that as it never would have avoided being a topic of discussion in the forums. And I have been on camera forums since 1999 and this is the first mention I have ever heard that T-90s had stuck magnets when new or even for the first 15 years of their life span.</p>

<p>I have one T-90 that if it sits for more then a week it needs a good solid smack to get it working.<br>

I guess I should pony up the money and get it cleaned.</p>

<p>James try the acetone on the name plate first. or under the hood.</p>

<p>I managed to remove a Black spray paint job from a 600mm f4.5 nFD a while back. I want to say I used Acetone and a cotton terry cloth rag for most of it. The White coating on the lenses is not a paint but either a baked on or epoxy type coating. I would suggest you try a drop or two of Acetone on a Q tip (cotton bud) and see how it works on your paint.</p>

<p>Have it properly clean lubed and adjusted by a trained service person.</p>

<p>John is correct you have a Canon FD adapter but not a Canon FD mount lens. They will not work together no matter how you glue them together. Nor will this lens work on a Micro 4/3 mount if you attempt to use a Canon FD mount adapter.</p>

<p>You need to find out what mount your lens is in and get adapters to suit that mount.</p>

<p>You will need an aftermarket eye cup none of the later canon eye cups will fit if I remember correctly. I would go with the Sunpak flash as the 199A is a dedicated flash and the FT's Flash system is all manual.</p>

<p>You should try photographing Saturn and its moons with a 500mm f4.5L S.S.C. + a 2X-A on a F-1n. I did well enough to clearly see 5 of the moons.</p>

<p>Photos came out almost as good as those taken with my Meade ETX-90 UHTC telescope and Canon G3 and it has a computer controlled tracking base.</p>

<p>It boils down to 2 choices</p>

<p>1. Your hobby is photography and the creation of photographs<br>

2. Your hobby is Cameras and the technical aspects of the tool normally used to create a photograph but also collected as a toy to fondle.</p>

<p>Sure I been waiting for the right combination specifications to hit the market before I buy into a Micro 4/3 Mirrorless camera. But that is because I along with other considerations have to accomidate 30) legacy lenses. And I had to wait until the right combo showed up. I needed the short lens resigtration, IBIS, and a built in Viewfinder that could be used for manual focus. With 400 and 500mm lenses I had to have the IBIS, And it would be near impossible to focus manually a lens like a 500 at arms lenght trying to use a screen.<br>

So now I am waiting until the New Olympus hits the street and the prices mellow out. Before I sell off the bulk of my manual focus bodies and accessories and move to the Digital Capture. With my old lenses.</p>

<p>Canon also had it's Rapid Winder as far back as the early 50's this was a replacement bottom plate that had an handle extending down and a trigger type wind that could easily manage 2 fps in quick hands. I have one on my 1951 Model III rangefinder. Works extremely well.</p>

<p>Yep neat lens sold mine off this last summer to help fund another hobby want. A while back a number of us did some research and can up with the idea that possibly only 2500 of them were made based on the 3-4 dozen various serial numbers we could track down over about a 4 month period.</p>

<p>try holding a 200mm lens out at arms lenght to focus. How about a longer lens. HOW about a manual focus lens?</p>

<p>WOW will miss you Louis. I have always valued your contrabutions to our little corner of Photo.net.</p>

<p>Please remember those camera bodies will not like being left in the dark at least get them out and even if no film run the shutters a few dozen times a month to keep things working. Just in case.<br>

Take care and stop by anytime. We'll have a cup of coffee waiting to hear about your latest exploits.<br>

Mark W.</p>

<p>Jeff wouldn't that add to his lens registration problems?</p>

<p>Yes you will need to either get a Diaphram adapter a small 1/4" X 3/4" plastic pc. that fits over the aperture lever and holds it in the same positon as if the lens was mounted. or wedge something in the lever slot to hold the lever in place.</p>

<p>theres a photo of one part way down on this page</p>

<p><a href="../nature-photography-forum/00BLfV">http://www.photo.net/nature-photography-forum/00BLfV</a></p>

 

<p>The T-90 had a case but it sure couldn't be called an ever ready case. It weas a zippered soft thing that I've only seen a few of. I think once the new styling arrived (with the T-90) along with the Polycarbonate body shells. The days of the ERC were over. So to put a date on it 1986.</p>

<p>I have the one my dad punished us with every christmas. Its a Keystone and I'm sure was bought after 1957. I do have one magazine and pretty much everything the other guys have said is true.</p>

<p>Mine is going on a small tripod and sitting on top of an antique book cabinet in the living room right next to Dads Braun Super II (also known as a Paxette Super II) Last used when I was in high school.</p>

<p>Getting really realy close to turning this into an ad for sale.</p>

<p>I've owned the Tokina 28-85mm f3.5/4.5 ATX and found it to have a very flat contrast I didn't like so much. I picked up a Canon 28-85mm f4.0 nFD (the sister to the 35-105mm f3.5 nFD) and I liked that lens so much that on our once in a lifetme trip to Europe it was my walk around lens on my T-90.<br>

I can't comment on the older S.S.C. 28-50mm as I don't remember ever owning one.</p>