Bought lenses don't fit. Unusable?

[Steven L]

I've purchased two lenses yesterday at a flea-market. Being both bayonette connection, just like on my Revueflex AC2, I thought they should fit. Back home I found out they don't. I haven't had the time to take pictures of the connections, going to do that later today.
If it doesn't fit, can I make them fit in any way or did I buy something useless?

#Edited# Both lenses have the DOF-button (button that shows you what apeture it's using) on the lens. The original lens has that button on the camera. If I could make the connection work, the camera wouldn't operate the apeture. When taking a picture, I would have to keep pressing (or find a way to lock this) the DOF-button until the shutter is released.

 

[Ian Grant]

Never seen a Revueflex let alone an AC2 but it's the same as my two Chinon CE-4 cameras so Pentax K mount bayonet, the problem is there are other very similar bayonets mounts, the Praktica bayonet is the same ount but differing connection.

If they don't fit now unless theey hapeent to be Tamron Adaptall's you've no chance at all. You need to identify what they are and pass them on.

Ian

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Thread moved and title updated. The "Feedback and Discussion" forum is for user feedback and questions about the APUG forum.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Steven ,

Now its time to look for a body to your new lenses. Dont forget to carry everything with you to prevent new failure.

Umut

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

What lenses are they?

 

[Steven L]

Thank you Ian Grant, for your information. The camera is a Chinon CE4 Memotron (aparantly a mailorder company named it Revueflex AC2) I'm going to look into the Adaptall option. Identification comes later today, when I'm back from work.
@Mustafa Umut Sarac: I had the bodies in my hands but one had a cracked mirror and the other didn't have a mirror.
To the moderator: I'm sorry I posted it in the wrong place.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

If you count variations, there are a couple dozen bayonet mounts.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Even if the mount should fit there is no guarantee that a particular lens will work correctly. It is even possible for such a lens to damage the camera.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

What lenses are they?

Let's try again: What lenses are they?

 

[Ian Grant]

Let's try again: What lenses are they?

Identification comes later today, when I'm back from work.

Give him a chance

Ian

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Give him a chance

Ian

Sorry. I thought photos of the mount come later thought he might remember the wording on the lenses...

 

[Steven L]

Finally, pictures. (made with a digital camera, otherwise some of us would loose their patience. )
I've got a Sigma:

and a tokina:

and the original Revueflex lens:

I've been google-ing for adaptors and I understand there are as many options as there are connections. What all of them (As far as I've found out) do is simply make the connection to the body. The DOF-button can not be operated.

 

[EASmithV]

The Tokina is a Minolta MD mount.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

The Sigma looks to be an Olympus OM mount.

For what you will spend on an adaptor, you are better off getting a lens made for whatever body you are using. Even professional grade used 35mm stuff is cheap today.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

I am agree with E.von Hoegh. Adaptors are not comes cheap generally and you can buy a Minolta and Olympus bodies , better investment for future. 28mm and 35-70mm will cover lots of your need. Looks like clean glass and mechanism. Good brands also. Good buy. www.keh.com , just have a look there , dont buy ugly class body . Postage can be a pain if you are from outside of US.

Umut

 

[Steven L]

Thanks for all the info. So my options are: sell the lenses and buy the ones that fit the Revueflex body. Or buy Minolta and Olympus bodies. The last option leaves me with 3 seperate camera's. To keep me from buying bodies that don't fit, what do I have to look for? Is there a way to see (without actually fitting the lens on the body) what kind of mount would fit? Is "just any" SLR Minolta and Olympus body enough to fit the bill or are there within those two options also different mounts?

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

You always need to know exactly what kind of mount a lens has.
That often isn't easy to do just by looking at it.

In some case, even lenses made by and for the same brand will have different mounts.
(Canon FD vs. EF, Nikon Pre-AI vs. AI, AIS, DX, G etc. Minolta MD vs. AF and so on).

Best thing is to choose the camera/brand you prefer (cue for everyone to recommend the camera they have) and then get lenses for it => which are clearly described as having the right mount.

At a more expert level, people sometimes choose particular lenses first and then get a camera body for it - but this usually applies to special or very high quality lenses.

 

[Steven L]

I want to come back to the adaptor option. Is it true it only makes the connection to the body and it brings the lens a few mm forward? Leaving the aperture un-connected to the body. (with a normal lens, the body operates the aperture while it takes a picture. If you want to see what the aperture does with the settings, you press the DOF-button. This shows in the rangefinder)
If what is stated above is true, I could do the next: I've got a body cover to protect the mirror and the inside of the body. This fits perfectly on the body. I could make a negative 3d copy with silicone. This mold can be used to make a positive out of resin. If I do the same with the lens, I could make the connection work.
With the two lenses I've got quite a few filters, both 55mm and 52mm. I don't want them to go to waste, like the lenses.

 

[BrianL]

Better idea, sell the lenses and camera and buy something more universal such as Pentax K-1000 or earlier or Yahica FX-3 series. Lenses for these are inexpensive, there is a large offering and in the case of the Yashica, it also allows for the Contax lenses to be mounted if money is no object. Or look for the earlier Pentax offerings such as the Spotmatic that uses the M42 thread mount as the lens offering in that mount is huge and they do adapt to many other mounts through adaptors easily. The SMC line of lenses in thread mount were amongst the best when in production and still some of the better lenses today.

I'm not sure of the filter size of the Yashica/Contax lenses or the M42 or Pentax flange mounts but if smaller, then a simple adaptor can be had for less than $10. Just stay away from the plastic ones as they are a pain to unscrew. Metal is better. I use 62mm filters from my Bronica on my Yashica; look a bit funny but I could care less as some of my filters cost more than $100 and I ain't gonna blow that type of cash again if possible. (for those wondering the $100 price is for a 62mm Nikon circular polarizer, also some of the softening and net filters)

 

[Steven L]

I guess I'm going to sell the lenses. I've got a Dutch e-bay like website I'm going to try and sell it. I was looking for a decent asking price but the lenses on that website are so versitile and prices are nothing to compare. What is a good price to ask? Or should I just let people bid from 0?

 

[elcabezagrande]

The Revueflex AC3 / Chinon CE3 Memotron is a quite highly-regarded M42-mount camera, so as far as "something universal", I think the OP has that covered as far as the camera body goes. He could get some Tomioka-made Reveunon lenses (or any of the thousands of great M42 lenses available) and shoot away happily into the sunset.

 

[elcabezagrande]

Oops, the AC3 is a rebadged CE4, so it is a K-mount body.