Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,763   Posts: 1,484,037   Online: 1276
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    279
    dan, he's not entirely SoL with an M42 lens, Canon made a nice FD-M42 adaptor, The Canon Lens Mount Converter P, which I've got lying around somewhere (Came on the back of an Auto Rikenon 90-190 f5.8 zoom I bought for $10 a couple weeks ago).

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington
    I thought I was pretty sane, Dan, and my invisible friend agrees with me! Seriously, though: I have 3 T-mount devices, two cheapo telephoto lenses and a slide copier. The copier I bought new about 15 years ago, the cheapo lens are probably anything up to 30 years old. I also have a new unused T-mount. These are all the same, as I described in my earlier posting. At the rear is a male fitting to match up with a certain type of camera mount (Nikon F, Pentax K, M42). The T-mounts themselves have no particular register, they simply bring a lens into the required register of the camera model in question.

    On the sides of all 4 mounts are 3 set screws. When loosened, these allow the keeper ring in the center of the mount to be removed - in no case have I experienced the need to use this ring to mount lenses. The rear of the T-mountable lenses has a tapered flange which fits inside the T-mount (the inside of which has plain parallel sides with no thread whatsoever), the 3 set screws are then almost fully tightened, the mount is checked for orientation, and the screws are then fully tightened. This as far as I am aware is a T2 mount - it's certainly what I've got whenever I asked for a T2 mount in a British camera store! Are you talking about adapters to fit M42 lenses on various bodies?

    Regards,

    David
    Hmm, I think you might have an Adaptall rather than T mount. Adaptall uses that sort of setup IIRC.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,203
    Quote Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington
    I thought I was pretty sane, Dan, and my invisible friend agrees with me! Seriously, though: I have 3 T-mount devices, two cheapo telephoto lenses and a slide copier. The copier I bought new about 15 years ago, the cheapo lens are probably anything up to 30 years old. I also have a new unused T-mount. These are all the same, as I described in my earlier posting. At the rear is a male fitting to match up with a certain type of camera mount (Nikon F, Pentax K, M42). The T-mounts themselves have no particular register, they simply bring a lens into the required register of the camera model in question.

    On the sides of all 4 mounts are 3 set screws. When loosened, these allow the keeper ring in the center of the mount to be removed - in no case have I experienced the need to use this ring to mount lenses. The rear of the T-mountable lenses has a tapered flange which fits inside the T-mount (the inside of which has plain parallel sides with no thread whatsoever), the 3 set screws are then almost fully tightened, the mount is checked for orientation, and the screws are then fully tightened. This as far as I am aware is a T2 mount - it's certainly what I've got whenever I asked for a T2 mount in a British camera store! Are you talking about adapters to fit M42 lenses on various bodies?

    Regards,

    David
    David, I've always thought you were pretty sane too. My sanity is always in doubt, my invisible friend often tells me I've lost it, but this time I have a little faith in it. My sanity, that is, not my invisible friend. He/she/it speaks with my voice and is wrong a lot.

    See http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetc...id=00D03Z&tag=

    Also visit http://medfmt.8k.com/third/cult.html#tamron , search for 0.75

    I have a small pile of "t-mount" adapters including a couple of Vivitar Ser. I adapters, still with their boxes, that I bought new. The Vivitars' boxes are marked "T-mount Adapter" and the adapters are solid, with no set screws and no way of adjusting the camera's orientation on the lens. My other adapters have the three radial setscrews we both have mentioned and their fronts are threaded female M42x0.75.

    Every T-mount adapter I've ever seen, with or without setscrews, has been threaded M42x0.75 at the front.

    I also have a Vivitar 2x Matched Multiplier for their Ser. I 450/4.5. The SI 450/4.5 is a T-mount lens and its teleconverter is threaded M42x0.75 at both ends, female at the front, male at the rear.

    The tapered flanges you've described must have a circumferential groove for the setscrews to engage. Those flanges are the inner parts of T-2 mounts that some barbarian has glued to your lenses' rear mounts. Did you buy your t-mount lenses new?

    Best,

    Dan

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    965
    Images
    58
    Dan,

    Thanks for posting those links. That seems to explain what's going on here. The lens seems to be an M42 (42 x 1) while the t-2 adapter I've bought is 42 x 0.75.

    Well, now to the next phase: Does anyone have an m42 to fd adapter they would be willing to sell? (I'll post this in the classified as well).

    Thank you all once again,

    André

  5. #15
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm

    The tapered flanges you've described must have a circumferential groove for the setscrews to engage. Those flanges are the inner parts of T-2 mounts that some barbarian has glued to your lenses' rear mounts. Did you buy your t-mount lenses new?

    Best,

    Dan
    Dan, one of the great things about photography (and APUG) is that you never stop learning! Having owned 3 T2 devices which all had a preformed flange equivalent to the inner part of the mount, I assumed that all devices were like this (T2 mounts have not featured very prominently in my life anyhow, as of course they have very limited application in normal photography due to the fact that they do not provide any aperture linkage).

    I now know that there are other devices (apparently, principally telescopes) in which the inner part of the mount comes into play. Even so, I would not be surprised if Andre finds he can take off the outer part of the M42 mount currently attached to his lens and replace it with the outer part of the extra mount he has bought. I have an f6.3 400 mm Soligor lens which could well be exactly the same as Andre's under a different name to which this principle applies - I also recall owning some Russian mirror lenses which were sold as M42 but in fact had T2 mounts which could be interchanged if necessary.

    Best regards,

    David

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,203
    David you could well be right about Andre's lens. I have a $20 marvel of a 400/6.3 Tele-Astragon that seems to a Nikon T-2 adapter glued to it. I'd like to use my T-mount teleconverter on it, can't get the inner part of the adapter off the lens. Arrgh!

    Cheers,

    Dan

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    965
    Images
    58
    David,

    You were right about my lens. Half of the adapter is glued on the lens, it attached right into half of the t2 adapter I bought. And infinity focus is right on. thanks, man.

    Bottom line: we're all insane, just like my invisible friend's friend told him.

  8. #18
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    Good to hear that, Andre. I think this thread has been a classic case of arriving at the truth gradually through a Platonic dialog! Of course, here at APUG, we're always right (except when we're wrong!).

    Best regards,

    David

  9. #19
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    Woops, read the first page and replied before I got to the second.

    I see Andre's got his lens working, and now we have only the great mystery: why would anyone, sane or otherwise, glue a T-ring to a lens? I'm guessing that it's not glued, it's galled -- the aluminum of the lens barrel and mount have "swapped spit" so to speak, and changed from smoothly sliding to interfering rough surfaces, locking in place. It happens with aluminum when it's overtightened, or from friction; it's one of the main reasons it's a bad idea to directly thread aluminum for any load-bearing application.

    It's remotely possible penetrating oil (like WD-40 without the spray propellant) would loosen the collar enough to unscrew it, but now that you know what's up, it's not that big a deal, since all T-2 rings are made to the same dimensions (cheaper that way, because the female threaded pieces are then all identical). It's not the way T mounts were intended to be used -- but it'll work as long as you don't need to mount any other T-mount accessories behind the lens.
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  10. #20
    cdholden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    720

    some people's kids...

    Quote Originally Posted by Donald Qualls
    why would anyone, sane or otherwise, glue a T-ring to a lens?
    Here's one better. As part of a LF kit I bought a while back, the seller offered to throw in a "Heliar lens as-is". The lens turned out to be a Technika badged Voigtlander Heliar 210/4.5 in a Compur shutter. The lens was amazing... BUT... some genius decided to superglue a Cokin filter holder to the front of the lens, giving it a cosmetic wart as well as blocking the ability to use normal threaded filters (due to the superglue being in the threads). The Cokin holder had broken off and someone attempted a second superglue job. It looked horrible, but the lens performed like a champ.
    I haven't seen the lens since moving. If it wasn't lost in the move, it's in a box that has yet to be opened since moving here in November. I'll take a shot at cleaning it up if I can ever find it!
    Chris

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin