Discussion Forum for various Lenses of different major labels in a shared environment at Photography In Malaysia

1. From : rick oleson (rick_oleson@yahoo.com)
Url : http://rick_oleson.tripod.com
Date : 05:13 AM Wednesday 28 August, 2002

Ron, I have encountered lenses hwose mounts were attached by a few screws in slotted holes around the sides; these can easily work loose and let the lens wobble (not a good thing, optically or mechanically), especially when it's a heavy zoom lens that puts a lot of stress on the mount. It shouldn't cost too much to have this fixed, but the consequences of leaving it as it is could be expensive. I'd have it looked at as soon as possible.
rick :)

2. From : Bill Barry (bbarry1@tampabay.rr.com)
Url : http://web.tampabay.rr.com/bushman/
Date : 09:16 AM Tuesday 27 August, 2002

If anyone has used the Voigtlander 40mm Ultron SL, please eMail me with your impressions. Thanks, Bill.

3. From : Ron L (rleachman@wwnet.net)
Url : http://
Date : 09:12 AM Sunday 25 August, 2002

Has anyone had a problem with a loose lens? I have a Consine 70 - 300mm zoom which will move around when mounted to my T90. Other lenses do not have this condition on the camera. I assume it is in the lens rather than the camera. Any ideas??? Thanks, R Leachman

4. From : John (jcdiel@sbcglobal.net)
Url : http://
Date : 04:10 AM Saturday 24 August, 2002

Information about an old Canon Lens: I am looking for info about a very old Canon 400mm f4.5 lens that I have aquired. It's a very nice lens and still have the leather case, screw in type filters (for B&W photography I assume) and lens cover. The mount appears to be a locking ring that would have an adapter or something similar mount into it, lock, and then mount to a camera? There also appears to be a small screw type adapter in this locking mechanism that looks like it's home made. The lens also have a rifle style sighting system (post and peep). The tripod mount is built into the lens barrel and will screw onto any standard tripod that I can see. However, the mount itself is oddly shaped and appears that it also may "lock" into something. I need to find out more information about this lens. I would like to be able to adapt it to work with my Canon A2. Manual focusing and stop down aperture is not a problem. I almost belive this to be one of the R-Mount lens, but without definitve proof, it's hard to tell. If this is one of the R-Mounts, what else would be needed to make this endeavor work? Thanks! John

5. From : Mark W. (awahlster@aol.com)
Url : http://
Date : 01:32 AM Saturday 24 August, 2002

Duane, both styles of Canon FD mounts will fit your FTb and both will ift any Canon camera up to the T90 or T60 (the last two FD mount Canons) The reason that Canon changed the mount style was to be more comptitive with the other manufactures that were advertising one hand lens changes. The newer mount is refered to as nFD the older as FD or breech lock. Both have their advantages, the older style is rock solid and has almost no wear possible (but these lenses are heavier then the newer models) The Bayonet nFD mount lens use smaller filters and are generally quite a bit lighter some being very light, The button style lock allows you to change the lens with only one hand. ONLY Canon has ever made a button lock lens for the FD mount camera all third party lenses are a breech lock style or an adaptation of the breeck locking ring (like Sigmas button lock ring) Feel free to use both with wild abandone as both were made to fit your camera. Hope this answers your questions, Mark W.

6. From : doug nelson (douglasfoto@hotmail.com)
Url : http://dougnelsonphoto.com
Date : 09:18 PM Friday 23 August, 2002

This is a great site and I thank Leofoo for providing it for us. There are interesting gaps in the lens information. For example, Canon put out two versions of a 28 f3.5 FD lens, one a chrome front ring pre-S.C. and a later ('73) 28 f3.5 S.C. If these were improvements on, or even just as good as, the excellent and very sharp FL 28 f3.5, they were excellent lenses, indeed. Speed isn't everything. Distortion-free edges on my architectual shots are very important, indeed. Also, Canon put out a legendary 35 f2, chrome ring, with a concave front element. It used a flourite element and the sharpness was phenomenal, even though it gave a greenish tinge to colors. I cannot find one to buy. This site is excellent, but it could be more complete. Thanks Doug

7. From : Dr Martin Emanuel (martinemanuel@mac.com)
Url : http://
Date : 10:43 AM Friday 23 August, 2002

Hi everyone, I am trying to purchase a Nikon 8mm fisheye lens for my sLR can any help martin emnauel Belfast Northern ireland 44 2890 382 882

8. From : Duane (duane_inlow@chiron.com)
Url : http://
Date : 05:04 AM Friday 23 August, 2002

I have a historical Canon question. My old (circa 1974) FTb has FD lenses with a silver ring that screws/twists onto the camera to mount the lens via bayonet-like mount. I have seen pictures of other Canon (FD?) lenses that have a button on the lens and I assume a black ring that mounts the lens on newer (old) cameras. What are these 2 types of lenses called? Will both types mount on the old FTb camera? And, will the old FD lenses mount on newer (FD) Camera bodies? Why did Canon do this? Thanks Duane

9. From : bullazar (bullazar@excite.com)
Url : http://
Date : 05:24 AM Thursday 22 August, 2002

I just obtained a AE1-p with 70-210/4 and was wondering what kind of polarizer filter to use, a circular or linear type or does it matter?.Thanks

10. From : Niels (nheidoe@hotmail.com)
Url : http://
Date : 04:40 AM Thursday 22 August, 2002

Just bought a Sigma 75-210mm/3.5~4.5 for my Canon A-1 ("Sigma Zoom K-III", if anyone's interested). But...it seems that I cannot stop-down the aperture?!? Thus, taking photos in the stopdown mode is not an option?? I also have a Vivitar 28mm/2.8 which works perfectly when stopping-down the aperture. As does my original Canon 50mm/1.4. I suspect that the mechanics of the lens might be malfunctioning, since I cannot stopdown. And I'm starting to wonder if the lens is working along with the body at all? Or it just takes pix with aperture wide open(?). For instance, how can it be that the LED shows aperture 3.5 when the focal length is set to 210mm? I thought that 4.5 was the largest aperture possible for 210mm??? Can anyone explain this, plz? PS, I have not developed any film yet using the lens, since I will turn the lens back asap, if not in 100% working condition.

PAGE | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | 150 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162 | 163 | 164 | 165 | 166 | 167 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 | 180 | 181 | 182 | 183 | 184 | 185 | 186 | 187 | 188 | 189 | 190 | 191 | 192 | 193 | 194 | 195 | 196 | 197 | 198 | 199 | 200 | 201 | 202 | 203 | 204 | 205 | 206 | 207 | 208 | 209 | 210 | 211 | 212 | 213 | 214 | 215 | 216