[Argenticien]

It's at this point an off-topic story of mine is now nearly on-topic! My first real camera, a Canon AE-1 (with 1.8/50), was in the trunk (boot) of my first car, a 1980 Toyota Tercel (weight barely 2000 lbs or ~900 kg) when I was rammed from behind by a full-size Ford pickup truck (weight probably twice that). The car was knocked off the road and spun around maybe 200 degrees. I was preoccupied with getting myself out of the car in one piece, so forgot about the camera. Upon cleaning up the wreck, the firemen found the AE-1 a few car-lengths away in the woods where it had been thrown by the force of the impact/spin. The car was a total loss, but there was no damage to the lens, and on the camera body only a crack in the VF window (which one focused right past when holding it up to one's eye) and a slight bend to the rewind crank, which did not impair function. Without any repairs, the kit served bravely for 10 more years and eventually sold for $40 (at age 20 or thereabouts) even with full disclosure of the damage and the cause thereof. Lesson: all cameras should be (over)built with lots and lots of metal. I'm not sure how my K20d would hold up to similar (mis)treatment. --Dave

[pentaxman]

update: i took the lens with me on a trip and just returned and uploaded the shots and they look perfectly clean - i see no issues in the images nor did i experience any difficult focus or noise or grinding while shooting, etc..
ok, i am feeling better about the accident...
...and did i mention i only paid $100 for the 16-45????

Does it detect the largest aperture as F3.5 or F4? I thought that the contacts on the mount were how the camera knows the maximum aperture, since you used a mount off of a F3.5 lens, does the 16-45 get detected as F3.5 now?

Tom

[mikeSF]

Does it detect the largest aperture as F3.5 or F4? I thought that the contacts on the mount were how the camera knows the maximum aperture, since you used a mount off of a F3.5 lens, does the 16-45 get detected as F3.5 now?

Tom

Good question. I just checked and it still correctly sees the largest aperture as F4 across the zoom range. The contacts were exactly the same between the two lens mount rings, so I do not imagine there is any functional difference associated with the swap.

[mikeSF]

here is the bent mount ring, now installed on the DA 18-55. Note, the severity of the single bent tab prevents the lens from mounting to the camera.

---

Last edited by mikeSF; 06-08-2011 at 11:25 AM.

[mikeSF]

Here is a close up crop of a tiny flower, showing the bokeh of the 16-45 at f/4.0. Pretty decent, IMO.


User Photo Gallery - Macro

[mikeSF]

yup, the lens is definitely working fine. Here is a pic i took today at f/5.6 16mm FL.


User Photo Gallery - Miscellaneous

[mikeSF]

Here's another, also at 16mm FL (f/8)


User Photo Gallery - Miscellaneous

[paulbw]

Hi mikeSF, glad you fixed the lens.
I will dropped my 16-45 (for the second time) got a bent K-mount too.
I am tempted to try with an FA 28-80, good to know that a DA 18-55 works.
I will let you all know how I get on.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Man, maybe photography and me aren't meant to happen. Last night, i was removing my beloved SMC-M 50mm 1.7 from the camera and it slipped out of my fingers and smacked on the hard stone tile floor.

Is it just me? should i get carpeting?

I don't know if it'll make you feel better, but I just gave you a pity "rep".

[mikeSF]

I don't know if it'll make you feel better, but I just gave you a pity "rep".

lol, thanks, but i posted this thread over 2.5 years ago and the happy ending was that the 16-45 recovered beautifully AND i sold it for $300...I only paid $100 for it used. Trust me, I am over it, haha.