Thanks for the welcome back. The place certainly gets a lot more threads than before. I'll try to answer technical DIY repair questions. If I do not respond, it's because I've missed the question rather than totally clueless. I've never let the latter prevent me from just making stuff up.
mike goldberg
The Peaceful Pacific
Hi... Although this showed up in Canon...
I want to acknowledge Brian here, having met him over at flickr.
I'm going to try a J8M 50/2 on my Leica M2. If the lens is
back-focusing, I have instructions for back-turning the variable
standoff ring, one half turn.
Another point can be made here: It is perfectly normal to try
several different kind of 50's in our favorite RF cameras, until one is
delighted. Having spent some $500- on photo gear recently
...
the $45- or so with shipping, spent on a J8 50/2 M-mount,
is all I can afford. Thanks for listening.
Ciao, mike
I want to acknowledge Brian here, having met him over at flickr.
I'm going to try a J8M 50/2 on my Leica M2. If the lens is
back-focusing, I have instructions for back-turning the variable
standoff ring, one half turn.
Another point can be made here: It is perfectly normal to try
several different kind of 50's in our favorite RF cameras, until one is
delighted. Having spent some $500- on photo gear recently
...the $45- or so with shipping, spent on a J8 50/2 M-mount,
is all I can afford. Thanks for listening.
Ciao, mike
ferider
Mentor
Finally get to see pictures of the beast, Brian
Great work !
Roland.
Great work !
Roland.
harry01562
Registered semi-lurker
Hope this is just the beginning of many more posts, Brian. As you can see from the posts, you are appreciated here by many of us.
BTW, I'm currently taking a roll with a Nikon LTM lens, a 135/3.5 black with tripod screw. I had taken a couple with it some time back, and they were all OOF. I'm wondering if the problem was my carelessness, or the lens. Knowing your fondness for things Nikon, I would assume you know the lens. Ever run across a similar problem with them???
Harry
BTW, I'm currently taking a roll with a Nikon LTM lens, a 135/3.5 black with tripod screw. I had taken a couple with it some time back, and they were all OOF. I'm wondering if the problem was my carelessness, or the lens. Knowing your fondness for things Nikon, I would assume you know the lens. Ever run across a similar problem with them???
Harry
Harry,
I had an identical problem with a Nikkor 13.5cm F3.5 chrome lens. The RF coupling "tongue" was worn, and was off by about 1ft at 15ft. The Actual focus and the distance scale on the lens agreed, the RF coupling did not. I "hacked" a solution by putting one layer of copper tape on the tongue.
Measure the distance to an object, use the lens on your camera to see if the RF agrees with the distance scale. If it does, the problem is the shim. If the distance does not agree with that measured, it could be the RF coupling.
I had an identical problem with a Nikkor 13.5cm F3.5 chrome lens. The RF coupling "tongue" was worn, and was off by about 1ft at 15ft. The Actual focus and the distance scale on the lens agreed, the RF coupling did not. I "hacked" a solution by putting one layer of copper tape on the tongue.
Measure the distance to an object, use the lens on your camera to see if the RF agrees with the distance scale. If it does, the problem is the shim. If the distance does not agree with that measured, it could be the RF coupling.
They called me mad, MAD I TELL YOU!
No one else had tried to graft a Jupiter-3 Butt Into a Canon Sonnar Before.
But no one else thought of wrapping it with electrical tape during a lightning storm.
BEHOLD! The images that they said could never be formed!
Fence Post at F1.5 (marked), Fence post at F4, infinity at F2.
No one else had tried to graft a Jupiter-3 Butt Into a Canon Sonnar Before.
But no one else thought of wrapping it with electrical tape during a lightning storm.
BEHOLD! The images that they said could never be formed!
Fence Post at F1.5 (marked), Fence post at F4, infinity at F2.
Attachments
ferider
Mentor
Amazing, Brian. You're the man !!!
raid
Dad Photographer
Wow! What will you do next [for us] ?
Raid
Raid
I won't rest until I have an S-Mount Summircon.
For all those Nikon RF users that see Nikkor lenses on Leica's.
I say, let's get even.
For all those Nikon RF users that see Nikkor lenses on Leica's.
I say, let's get even.
VinceC
Mentor
To quote from the 1931 version of Frankenstein: "Quite a good scene, isn't it?! One man crazy! A forum full of very sane spectators."
VinceC
Mentor
"Look! It's moving. It's alive. It's alive....IT'S ALIVE. IT'S MOVING. IT'S ALIVE. IT'S ALIVE. IT'S ALIVE. IT'S ALIVE!!!"
In this case, it was
"Look! It's Coupling! It's collimated. It's collimated....IT'S COLLIMATED. IT'S Coupling. IT'S Coupling. IT'S COLLIMATED. IT'S in Focus. IT'S IN FOCUS!!!"
The Modulation Transfer Function is a little whacky...
"Look! It's Coupling! It's collimated. It's collimated....IT'S COLLIMATED. IT'S Coupling. IT'S Coupling. IT'S COLLIMATED. IT'S in Focus. IT'S IN FOCUS!!!"
The Modulation Transfer Function is a little whacky...
mattmills
madman (w/ camera)
brian- you don't happen to have just a rear element left over from the 50 1.2, do you? I was fixing mine while in brazil, using an imporvised (read: ill-advised) tool, and got it apart, re-screwed the screws inside that were loose and causing considerable wobble, and while tightnening the last retainer ring on the back of the lens, my tool slipped and took a chip out of the rear element. It still shoots, but I'd love to replace the rear element and have a whole lens again. thanks, Matt
No spares on Canon 50/1.2's. I'm lucky to have gotten the one out with the dremel.
Good Canon rears are in demand.
Good Canon rears are in demand.
Maybe it's getting more like "Dr. Moraue's Isle of Lenses".
I got this lens in a Photo grab-bag for $50. The main prize was a Leica IIIf with an coated Elmar. But this Zeiss-Jena Tessar was also in it. It is an F2.8 Pre-set, and used to be in M42 mount. With an SLR, the view with an F2.8 lens is a bit dark, so I never used it much.
I had the Industar mount left over from putting the lens module in a J-8 Kiev mount and setting it for Nikon RF's.
And besides, Raid does not have one...
I got this lens in a Photo grab-bag for $50. The main prize was a Leica IIIf with an coated Elmar. But this Zeiss-Jena Tessar was also in it. It is an F2.8 Pre-set, and used to be in M42 mount. With an SLR, the view with an F2.8 lens is a bit dark, so I never used it much.
I had the Industar mount left over from putting the lens module in a J-8 Kiev mount and setting it for Nikon RF's.
And besides, Raid does not have one...
Attachments
Last edited:
harry01562
Registered semi-lurker
Brian Sweeney said:
I had a momentary thought of adding a comment here, bet recovered in time. Canon rear (elements) are in demand, is probably a true statement, and any levity is out of place. Especially in the presence of a Master of Lens Art. Possibly the only MLA recipient on the forum.....
Harry
I should add that I've cleaned three of Harry's Canon Rear Ends. They cleaned up nicely.
John Shriver
Well-known
Collapsible Summicron lens tube should be a slam dunk mechanical adapter to put it into a Nikon RF, since they are both based on the same nominal focal length. I'd presume that the narrow throat of the Nikon could hold the lens tube from a collapsible Summicron, but not any later one.
According to Gandy, the nominal length for the Nikon is 51.6 mm. Leica would put a 7 on the back of the focusing tab of such a Summicron. (See the table in Irwin's book.) 15 would be 51.5mm, and 17 would be 51.7mm. Those would be the best ones to pick. All other focal length groups will show more tracking errors on the Nikon.
According to Gandy, the nominal length for the Nikon is 51.6 mm. Leica would put a 7 on the back of the focusing tab of such a Summicron. (See the table in Irwin's book.) 15 would be 51.5mm, and 17 would be 51.7mm. Those would be the best ones to pick. All other focal length groups will show more tracking errors on the Nikon.
harry01562
Registered semi-lurker
Brian Sweeney said:
Yes, although I seldom display them, I have some very clean rear ends, thanks to Brian. Actually I was amazed at what he was able to do with a 50/3.5 from the late 40's that looked "yuuccchhh" when I sent it to him.
We are indeed fortunate to have some industrious souls who enjoy playing or tinkering or whatever, and help keep our semi-priceless toys functioning.
Harry
Who probably has too many Canon 50's....