What's your latest new old camera ? (Part 2)

[RLangham]

This lens is AI-S, with the rabbit ears. Not sure if it will work correctly with the meter or not. I'll let you know. My first Nikkormat only had a 50mm prime lens. I may test the shutter this weekend. It should be relatively easy with the mirror lock-up feature. I use audio recordings to check speeds. The slower speeds are easier to "time." If I can't estimate the faster speeds then an exposure test should suffice. That's how I verified my Bronica SQ lenses' shutters were pretty accurate.

The rabbit ears go back before AI, in fact. AFAIK, true AI ears have the cutouts in them to visually distinguish them. Generally there's a ton of backwards compatibility with these early-ish Nikon lenses, but I don't know anything positive or negative about zooms on Nikkormat. It shouldn't matter that much since it's TTL. As I said, I have no idea what the deal with early Nikon meters is that they want to know the exact max and min apertures... It dumbfounds me, but of course they don't work correctly if you don't do the Nikon dance, so I do it and I can do it quite fast now.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I don't actually understand why the FTn has to know what the actual maximum aperture is.

I'm not an FTn expert, but I suspect this is because the camera is metering at wide open (viewing aperture), and needs to know what that is to calculate the correct exposure for the set aperture from the light it sees wide open. In other words, to tell you correct shutter for f/8 based on the light it reads at f/1.7, it needs to know it's at f/1.7. Otherwise, it only knows the correct shutter speed for "whatever aperture you're at right now."

 

[RLangham]

I'm not an FTn expert, but I suspect this is because the camera is metering at wide open (viewing aperture), and needs to know what that is to calculate the correct exposure for the set aperture from the light it sees wide open. In other words, to tell you correct shutter for f/8 based on the light it reads at f/1.7, it needs to know it's at f/1.7. Otherwise, it only knows the correct shutter speed for "whatever aperture you're at right now."

Well, yeah, but because exposure stops are a mathematically constant unit, and because the camera is metering through the lens, the exact maximum aperture is not entirely necessary to know, and the minimum aperture is certainly not necessary to know.

The Minolta Sr-T system is a great example. I'm sure you've examined one, possibly even owned one, but if you haven't, it works like this: There's a sensor ring around the lens mount, and a tab on the aperture ring that presses a tab on the sensor ring. The position of this ring corresponds not to the absolute aperture the lens is set to, but the difference between whatever the maximum aperture is and the current setting, in terms of f/stops.

Because the camera is presumed to be metering wide-open and through the lens, it doesn't matter what the actual numbers are, as long as the difference between maximum aperture and current aperture, shutter speed and film speed are all factored in to the meter's calculation. In practice, the relative aperture value, the shutter speed and the film speed are computed together to give an exposure value, indicated by a "lollipop" needle, which is compared to a meter needle that just displays the light value coming through the wide-open lens, irrespective of film speed, current aperture or shutter speed. It's counter-intuitive, to me at least, but it works great in practice. Some OEM zoom lenses made especially for this system have special mechanisms that cause the aperture to close slightly when the lens is set to a short focal length, to keep the effective maximum aperture constant. It'd be nice if they were also up to par with the prime lenses, but that's entirely too much to ask from a 70's zoom lens.

Knowing that the Minolta system works, what is the benefit of the Nikon system, where the maximum and minimum apertures are entered into the camera? It's just going to meter through the lens at maximum aperture anyways, so it knows that stuff to the extent that it needs to.

 

[MattKing]

I'll point out first that I sold Nikons at one time, but have never photographed with them, so my knowledge of the fine details of difference between the various versions is imprecise.
The Nikon system doesn't need to know the actual maximum aperture.
What it needs to know is how many stops the aperture set on the lens is offset from the maximum aperture used for viewing and metering.
With the early models, when you mounted the lens you had to rotate the aperture from maximum to minimum (or vice versa) and back in order to tell the camera and meter that information.
Later versions of the mount dispensed with that back and forth "dance".

 

[RLangham]

I'll point out first that I sold Nikons at one time, but have never photographed with them, so my knowledge of the fine details of difference between the various versions is imprecise.
The Nikon system doesn't need to know the actual maximum aperture.
What it needs to know is how many stops the aperture set on the lens is offset from the maximum aperture used for viewing and metering.
With the early models, when you mounted the lens you had to rotate the aperture from maximum to minimum (or vice versa) and back in order to tell the camera and meter that information.
Later versions of the mount dispensed with that back and forth "dance".

Wait, why would it need you to do the "dance" in order to know that, since a much simpler solution was always feasible, as executed competently on Minolta, Pentax and even Canon?

I will say that the FTn does actually have a little gauge where it displays the maximum aperture of the lens you've mounted. It has a place on the shutter-speed adjustment ring that says something like 5.6--2.8--1.2, and a red dot appears next to the scale depending on the max aperture of the lens. Because of that, I would suspect that the designers found it important for the camera to know the actual aperture of the lens for some reason.

 

[MattKing]

Wait, why would it need you to do the "dance" in order to know that, since a much simpler solution was always feasible, as executed competently on Minolta, Pentax and even Canon?

Because the open aperture metering system was brought in by Nikon before all those other systems did that, and the solution Nikon arrived at preceded the solution that other systems eventually chose.
Later Nikons adopted what became the more modern approach - incorporating an additional lever or cam to communicate automatically the information communicated manually by the "dance" - but Nikon made a point of (mostly) incorporating backward compatibility into later lenses and cameras.
It is hard today to appreciate how revolutionary open aperture metering was when it became available. Just as it is hard to appreciate that stop down metering used to be the norm.
By the way, the more modern approach still doesn't communicate the maximum aperture to the camera. It still merely communicates the offset between the set aperture and the maximum aperture. It is only with the very most modern systems that communicate all information electronically (like the Canon EOS system) that the actual lens aperture is communicated to the camera.

 

[RLangham]

Because the open aperture metering system was brought in by Nikon before all those other systems did that, and the solution Nikon arrived at preceded the solution that other systems eventually chose.
Later Nikons adopted what became the more modern approach, but Nikon made a point of (mostly) incorporating backward compatibility into later lenses and cameras.
It is hard today to appreciate how revolutionary open aperture metering was when it became available. Just as it is hard to appreciate that stop down metering used to be the norm.

I get that the Nikon solution preceded the others. I just can't conceive why it was ever thought to be necessary.

 

[MattKing]

For clarity, once t

I get that the Nikon solution preceded the others. I just can't conceive why it was ever thought to be necessary.

See the changes I just added to my previous post.

 

[RLangham]

By the way, the more modern approach still doesn't communicate the maximum aperture to the camera. It still merely communicates the offset between the set aperture and the maximum aperture.

You didn't read my initial post where I said the same thing?

Anyways, I realized now a probable explanation for the Nikon's weird design--it's trying to do electronically what the Minolta did mechanically, so it's trying to do exponential math with linear electronic components.

 

[rubbernglue]

Just found myself a small speed graphic 6.5x9 for approx $40

 

[Donald Qualls]

Just found myself a small speed graphic 6.5x9 for approx $40

Unless that model works very differently from my 4x5 Pacemaker, you're missing the infinity stops -- but those aren't too hard to come by, and could even be improvised. If the focal plane shutter and the Compur both work, you've gotten yourself a monster deal even if the Kalart needs some fixing.

 

[4season]

Canon 7, fresh off my work bench. Performed CLA, fixed missing viewfinder frame lines, re-cemented illuminator window.

 

[CMoore]

Styling, not mechanics... I knew the Leica crowd would spit their grey poupon on the screen when they read that...

 

[Kino]

An Aries 35-V interchangeable lens rangefinder. Meter is not working, but otherwise fully functional with 3.5cm f3.2 Coral lens.

 

[awty]

Pity the eyeview is silver, but the rest is sexy black.

 

[rbguff]

Rollei 35, cool little camera w collapsible lens, love how quite shutter is, zone focus trial and error

 

[ColdEye]

This rolleiflex I got here at the forum.

 

[ColdEye]

Pity the eyeview is silver, but the rest is sexy black.
View attachment 243554

Still looks good. I am having the same issue and silver doesnt look too bad at all.

 

[eli griggs]

Nikon FG, so I have a manual Nikon with which to use the Hasselblad adapter and lenses I have, until I can find a nice, affordable F2 or F to use them with.

As it is, the FG makes for a very light camera to carry out with the 500 CM kit, just in case I do want to go 135 on occasion.

Be Safe, Be Healthy and Godspeed to all.

 

[eli griggs]

This rolleiflex I got here at the forum.

View attachment 243573

You camera looks like a good one, I hope it gives you your mind's eye view, each and every time you release the shutter.

 

[darkosaric]

La Sardina. I was looking for some wide lens lo-fi P&S, wide and slim Vivitar are super expensive (got some kind of cult status), so I got La Sardina for 10 euros. It has 22mm wide lens, bulb option, flash, planing to test it one of the next days.

 

[abruzzi]

a 2x3 baby Linhof Technika, with the Schneider 105mm ƒ2.8 lens, and a 65 and 180 on the way. I ran a test roll through it and decided that I'd rather shoot sheet film with it because the Super Rollex back makes using the viewfinder a challenge.

 

[abruzzi]

La Sardina. I was looking for some wide lens lo-fi P&S, wide and slim Vivitar are super expensive (got some kind of cult status), so I got La Sardina for 10 euros. It has 22mm wide lens, bulb option, flash, planing to test it one of the next days.

Is it called that because the body is the shape of a sardine can?

 

[darkosaric]

Is it called that because the body is the shape of a sardine can?

Yes, it is. And it is very small - I think it is 1:1 actual size of the sardine can, here is in comparison with XA and M body:

 

[rubbernglue]

Unless that model works very differently from my 4x5 Pacemaker, you're missing the infinity stops -- but those aren't too hard to come by, and could even be improvised. If the focal plane shutter and the Compur both work, you've gotten yourself a monster deal even if the Kalart needs some fixing.

Yep both shutters works fine, tested on a piece of paper - but the camera seems to be missing some parts here and there.