[Cuthbert]

Well, I had no sooner said I had no Canon or Nikon Rangefinders, when my neighbour said I could have these old cameras which had been stored in his shed. They have obviously been neglected, but the shutters seem to work. The Canon is a &quot;P&quot; with attachable lightmeter. Some of the inner glass has haze, so I need to figure if I can get in to clean it, given I don't know what I am doing mostly.<br />
The Ricoh was a surprise, (still has film in it) as I didn't know they had a TLR. I now need to start cleaning these up. I may post an 'after' shot if justified.<br />

<br />
<br />
It appears that these old Canon lenses tend to lose their coating that precipitates on the last element, the one immediately after the iris. My 1.2 is hazed too...at the rangefinderforum they told me it's easy. to clean and they sent me a page on how to do it.<br />
..later I'll post the link.<font color="Silver"><br />
<br />
<font size="1">---------- Post added 10-25-14 at 01:28 AM ----------</font><br />
<br />
</font>

Super Ikonta III?<br />
The Novar lenses can be great. I had a Nettax 513/16 with a 75/4.5 Novar and it was superb. My friend has a Super Ikonta IV with a Tessar and it's nearly his favorite and most used camera.<br />
Here's a set of photos from my Nettax, <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/daiku_san/sets/72157648885391726/" target="_blank">https://www.flickr.com/photos/daiku_san/sets/72157648885391726/</a>

<br />
<br />
Thanks guys, hopefully the camera will work well, they say the only problem is that the slower speeds are a little too slow, I wanted an an Iskra but I won this one for 75 quid.

Edit: How to clean a canon lens:

http://www.johanniels.com/index.php/camera-gear-articles/39-cleaning-a-canon-50mm-1-2-rangefinder-lens

I'm a little reluctant to do the operation by myself, though.

---

Last edited by Cuthbert; 10-25-2014 at 02:20 AM.

[arnold]

How to clean a canon lens:

Thank you for that, I have bookmarked it. It looks simpler than an Auto type lens, so may give it a go sometime.

[LesDMess]

Took a chance on an "As-is, sold as parts, no refund & no return" Olympus OM-3. I was hoping that given the price that it would be at least be in reasonable cosmetic condition and mechanically functional or at least be workable enough for restoration. Since it is only battery dependent for metering, I figure I can still use it even if the circuit board is toast. As I was pleasantly surprised when it came. It has very good cosmetics, viewfinder is clean and clear, all seems to function as intended and meter is accurate as my Sekonic spot meter. The battery check beeper also stops after 30 seconds which indicates it has the upgraded circuit board that doesn't drain the battery!




That completes the set . . .

[TomB_tx]

Thank you for that, I have bookmarked it. It looks simpler than an Auto type lens, so may give it a go sometime.

I've worked on a few of the Canon RF lenses, and they are not hard to understand.
The Canon P is a nice camera, with a much better VF than the older models - esp. for us with glasses. I prefer the build quality of the older IV models, but the pinhole VF is a pain with glasses.
I've used both the 50 1.4 & 1.8 of that vintage on Leica M9 digital and Sony A7, and they give very good results.
If perchance you want to use a Canon reloadable film cassette in the P, it takes the later "V" style cassette and not the one for the model IV and earlier. (The earlier models had removable baseplates so the release button on the cassette had to be revised to work with the swing-open back.)

[arnold]

That completes the set .

Nice! This is one manufacturer I don't have, but I sure remember in the late seventies comparing my MX with the OM 10. Sadly the Olympus lenses are not as versatile (usable) as the Pentax K or M42.

---------- Post added 26-10-14 at 10:13 ----------

What a great neighbor! And definitely post shots taken with them too!

The Diacord cleaned up well, and is fully functional, but what a brick. You could stun a Moose with it. I am not surprised these TLRs fell out of favour, because their use is fiddly and cumbersome, setting one up for failure. Beautifully made, this "Diamond" version, but my 9X6 Franka Folder is so much more user friendly.

[arnold]

I'm a little reluctant to do the operation by myself, though.

OK, I just pulled this one apart enough to clean the required surfaces. Well, not quite, because one rear element consists of two lenses cemented opposite each other in a short tube. I saw no way of getting between them, but the overall improvement is worthwhile anyway. As I thought, this is a simple lens since it has no auto stop-down mechanism to deal with.

[maltfalc]

[45 Mike]

Beautifully made, this "Diamond" version, but my 9X6 Franka Folder is so much more user friendly.

I like my Yashica-D TLR, I find it very ergonomic and a joy to use. The controls are well placed and the fully manual operation gives me complete creative control. The 6x6 film format is somewhat awkward for me at times, but I get used to it and the choice of vertical or horizontal is no longer done at shutter time, but rather during post.

I really prefer the 6x9, and my Franka RolfixII works great for my b/w shots. I have shot color through it and it does fine with color as well, however for color, I use my Agfa Billy Record II, another 6x9 folder. The Franka is shedding some verdigris and occasionally that gets on the film. For b/w the resulting crud spots give the whole thing a somewhat nostalgic old time mood. It just happens and there it is.
On my color shots however i prefer the clean crisp non crudded results.

Have you ever wished for a 6x9 folder with a TTL focus and meter?? I think that would be wonderful. I think the Graflex model comes close, but it's not really a folder, and no meter that i know of.
Somewhere i saw mention of a 6x9 TLR, but the review was that it was a horrible monster of a camera. Oh well.
Hope you get good pics with the Diacord, post em when you do!

[LesDMess]

Nice! This is one manufacturer I don't have, but I sure remember in the late seventies comparing my MX with the OM 10.
Sadly the Olympus lenses are not as versatile (usable) as the Pentax K or M42.

Yoshihisa Maitani (Olympus creator) was clearly an innovator and had always provided the smallest configuration without sacrificing robust quality.




The MX was the Pentax response to the OM-1 and delivered a dimensionally smaller full info viewfinder SLR.




The Zuiko OM lenses are adaptable to Canon EOS with focus verification.



---------- Post added 10-26-14 at 11:21 AM ----------

Another Olympus innovation was the off the film (OTF) metering introduced in the OM-2. The OM-2 used two sets of light measuring cels - CDS cels in the viewfinder and silicon cels in the mirror box after the mirror flips up. The LX advanced this by using only cels in the mirror box with a transmissive mirror allowing light to go through even when the mirror is down. The OM-4 used this configuration and added spot metering. All three will meter the scene in realtime, adjusting exposure time depending on the scene lighting. However, only the LX will meter for as long as it takes as the Olympus models have a time limit. And of course the LX has interchangeable viewfinders, MLU, range of shutter speeds even when batteries die and a few other features.

[arnold]

Yoshihisa Maitani (Olympus creator) was clearly an innovator and had always provided the smallest configuration without sacrificing robust quality.

That is an informative set of picture comparisons you have here. Didn't know the Zuiko lenses could adapt to EOS Canon. (I don't think anything adapts to Nikon F)

[nparsons13]

I've been enjoying using Zuiko and Nikkor lenses on my K-01 with the Adaptist PK+MM multi-mount. The Zuikos need no adaptation other than a piece of tape to hold down the stop-down button. You can get into the lens and disable the auto-aperture mechanism, but I prefer the tape so I can use the lenses on my OM-1 as well.



Nikkors require a little more work. The Nikkor-P 105mm f/2.5 below has 0.8mm-thick shims under the mount to make the mount flush with the rim of the aperture ring and also increase flange focal distance closer to that of Nikons.

[IHS]

Here's one of the ZX crew...Hopefully I'll be able to replace the 7 w/a 60 before too long.

[Swift1]

Here's one of the ZX crew...Hopefully I'll be able to replace the 7 w/a 60 before too long.

Why would you want to replace the 7 with a 60?

[IHS]

I think the L will do most anything the 7 will and I'd like to start playing around with mirror lock-up. See how I like it.

[JuanEstrada]

Yoshihisa Maitani (Olympus creator) was clearly an innovator and had always provided the smallest configuration without sacrificing robust quality.




The MX was the Pentax response to the OM-1 and delivered a dimensionally smaller full info viewfinder SLR.




The Zuiko OM lenses are adaptable to Canon EOS with focus verification.



---------- Post added 10-26-14 at 11:21 AM ----------

Another Olympus innovation was the off the film (OTF) metering introduced in the OM-2. The OM-2 used two sets of light measuring cels - CDS cels in the viewfinder and silicon cels in the mirror box after the mirror flips up. The LX advanced this by using only cels in the mirror box with a transmissive mirror allowing light to go through even when the mirror is down. The OM-4 used this configuration and added spot metering. All three will meter the scene in realtime, adjusting exposure time depending on the scene lighting. However, only the LX will meter for as long as it takes as the Olympus models have a time limit. And of course the LX has interchangeable viewfinders, MLU, range of shutter speeds even when batteries die and a few other features.

I would pay to take a look at your collection...

can I ask you, how much did you pay for the om3?