Видео

I suppose it is a matter of terminology - yes you can set an infinite number - my reference, that should be better communicated then, is that is is denoted /indicated as full stops (more like half a stop from f3.5 to f4 also!), but is stepless or declicked (also not technically the correct term, but lens people would understand). The problem with setting the in-between aperture stops is, is that you cannot reliably set something more accurately than more or less half a stop, so even of you could do all the possible fractions, it is unlikely you will be able to know that you set it...., yet, shooting most films, with the latitude available, it would not matter. Thanks for your input, next time saying not clicked/denoted would be more accurate, so will make a note of that.

I enjoy mine, I think you will too

Thanks - yes, I agree with you. One has to work the film quite hard to get nice contrast, although the mid-tones are quite smooth. The Kentmere 100 is lovely, especially in 120, but instead of the 400, I would also lean to Delta 400 or even HP5 in future. I haven't tried Fomapan yet, but will soon. Thanks for checking in, much appreciated!

If it does work, you will have fun! Luckily even a rudimentary form of light seal replacement can be very effective.

Thanks so much! It is actually something I am not that comfortable with, weirdly enough.

@@danienelphoto dont worry, be happy

@@chriscard6544 lol, indeed.

No, but as far as I know the Takumar 55mm was the last to use Thorium glass.

100% man, I am really stoked. On the scans - medium res, not ultra high res, I can't even pick up aberrations. On a high res, I think you probably will, but even coma and all that, negligible or at least not visible in the current scan size. As long as your scenes are pretty wide, and in the infinity range, this camera delivers. Closer up, I presume you will have more issues.

Thank you very much for your comment, and checking out the video. Yes, you used to get it here too, in fact, I have an unopened box of 110 format Tudor XL still :). It was never considered great film, though.

I know, right? Apart from the composition, it was all camera. I was very surprised as well.

Thank you for your kind comment. It is so funny, 30 years ago when I was about to go to uni for my photography degree, these were just lenses! Lol, now its vintage. I suppose I am too! I didn't really care too.much about 35mm, as I was shooting Mamiya 645 almost exclusively for my pro work till 2006, so the 35mm stuff was aleays an afterthought, so I missed out on learning about Canon lenses a lot, those days. It was basically just "get a decent zoom for the odd event things I did, and bands too! That 50mm 1.4 SSC is legendary, even though I don't have yet.

Thank you and so much for checking out the video.

Great video Danie👍🏻 I would have taken a sizeable bet against those results😉😂

@@antonroland Thanks man, me too!

:)

Exactly! I am a K1000 fan no doubt, but I love the Ricoh, and is definitely an easier tool to use. I love the simplicity, but it is simple in a way that is efficient. I am about to start testing a Novoflex 400mm with PK mount, and I will be using the Ricoh, rather than the K1000.

Outside over the "gaps" works easier :). I have since replaced the seals. Easy to do.

Thank you, that is very kind!

Yes! (Disclaimer: it will always be an opinion as it is a subjective thing)..., but yes!

@@danienelphoto is it widely available? Can I find these easily? And what's about the fd 20mm f/2.8 ?? I'm interested in Portrait, landscape and real estate photography.

Yes, fairly avaialble. You will see in the description there are Ebay links. It depends where you are in the world, I suppose! I haven't used the 20mm F2.8 myself, but most of the FD lenses are great quality. A 20mm is great for real estate and landscapes, amd the 85mm is perfect for portraits. You can successfully use it for real estate and landscape compositions that is more cropped too.

@@danienelphoto oh! Thank you 😊 I am from Bangladesh. But I'll soon move to Romania for bachelor's study. There I wanna start professional photography beside my study. So, if it is possible, I'll buy these from there. I am currently using Samsung WB1100F for amateur birding, landscape, potrait shots 😊

Great stuff, man. I have been a pro photographer for 24 years and if I can dio it, anyone can! All the best with your move to Romania. Greetings from South Africa

Me thinks you will enjoy it!

Not the intention to mislead..., especially since I am not selling or promoting it. There are many online forums where this is suggested and thus I examined it, and you can see as well what my conclusion was. However, to correct your mistaken assumption, this is in fact a discussion that was had on FB groups where I participated in, and true to form to discussions like these, some claimed it was enthusiastically, and some held your view, enthusiastically. A quick intermet search would show this is in fact a topic of discussion, with this particular article claiming it is parfocal to 85mm. www.cined.com/ancient-optics-canon-fd-35-105mm-f-3-5-multi-format-zoom-introduced/ Or www.flickr.com/groups/canonfd/discuss/72157634551287530/ Or www.photo.net/forums/topic/395842-canon-fd-35-105mm-f35-lens-scales-interpretation/ And www.canonclassics.com/canon-nfd-35-105mm-f3.5/10-110/ There are scores more, but I think you should catch my drift. Absurd is a strong sentiment, and given the amount of discussion on it, probably ill-informed. You seem to also just be giving your opinion (an inalienable right, so please do!), but if indeed mine struck you as such, my apologies for causing you displeasure. I (sincerely) hope you were able to watch a video with more edifying results afters :). Thanks for checking out my review anyways and bothering to engage.

I have this lens and it’s parfocal on my Blackmagic 6k with Fd to L adapter so I don’t know.

The concensus I seem to be seeing is that it is parfocal to 85mm from 35mm... in my experience it was close, but not all the way - it could be a calibration issue on mine? I am not a camera technician, so cannot say for sure.

It is a good match, as it especially era specific.

Thank you for watching, Eddy, and I am glad you enjoyed that! I am more passionate about that than gear, actually.

Thank you for the encouragement! It is always needed :)

I do too! Such good value

Thank you very much for checking out the video. Yes, real "they don't make 'em like they used to" example!

I am keen to get an OM at some point, and that sounds like a great set you have. I think you will enjoy the Tokina, it really is a neat little lens.

@danienelphoto I did get very lucky. A cool large vintage camera case, with inside it: an OM-1 body with f1.8 50mm kit lens and an original Olympus leather casing, the Tokina lens from your video, a flasher, a 90s point-and-shoot camera and two film rolls. Booklets for everything included, everything in minty mint condition. It all feels semi-unused. Price: 75 euro. Not bad at all. Hope you'll have a similar score with your future OM!

That is a good haul for 75E!

That is a good price. I used mine again yesterday to test a Canon AL-1

@@danienelphoto - Brilliant! Will you be posting the results here or another platform by any chance?

Oh, very much! I just finished the roll - Kentmere Pan 400 - and I used that lens to shoot some still life shots in studio - also using its macro feature...

It sounds like you made a good buy! As you can see, I was very impressed by this little lens. Tokina made lenses for some really popular systems, so they must've known what they are doing!

Baie dankie, Anton! Haha... jy is reg. Ek kort so paar Takumars! Ek ogie op 35mm, 24mm... daar is wel n PK mount Novoflex video oppad!

@@danienelphotoek sien uit om DAAI te sien!👍🏻

Ek ook... kos n bietjie werk om hom te doen!

Totally. The Autographic is a neat kit. If there wasn't so many lenses I wanted instead...

Glad you like them!

...and manually focsing at f1.2 is tricky on the run sometimes!

@@danienelphoto absolutely!

Had an intersting chat to the camera repair guy here... the problem with super fast lenses is that in order to get it tack sharp, the lens develops chromatic aberrations, and to get rid of that, you sacrifice sharpness wide open.

@@danienelphoto yes, that’s interesting. I noticed that just a very minimal focusing change can change the appearance of longitudinal chromatic aberrations a lot. You might be right about sacrificing a bit of sharpness when needed. I will try to play with this aspect again.

It is hard to decide which I prefer to keep, sharpness or LCA!

Baie dankie. Ja, my versameling groei ook elke dag voel dit my! Karakter is die regte woord, ek stem. Baie dankie dat jy ingeloer het, en als wat mooi is daar in Oregon (dis mooi wêreld daai hoor ek).

Thank you for taking time to watch it! Enjoy the camera. God Bless you too.

It is 35mm film this camera uses. The 45mm is the lens's focal length. 45mm film is not a format I am aware off :) Kodak Gold is available in 135 (aka 35mm) and 120 format (for medium format cameras)

I did not know about the Nikon EM. White label manufacturing is the way most manufacturers stay afloat, in lots of industries.

Shot, bru!

I do believe it is quite reasonable to expect good images, if your camera is in good condition. If the bellows are good and the lens clear, then one must just take care that the front "standard" is parralell to the film plane, and it should be ok. Also, the iris and shutter can give issues.

Light leaks in folders are unfortunately a big issue, especially if the are almost a century old. I think you should get that 120 into the Autograph and de-Pentaxify a bit!

@@danienelphotoDe-Pentaxify? 😂 Dude…Gaan was jou mond uit!!🤪😂😂 But yes, f/stops with the Autograph amounted to great amounts of thumb-sucking and 3 or so highly unreliable shutter speeds made life interesting.

Yes, considering the margins allowed for error and what tech they had to their disposal, it is still impressive, and films of that era were not all that forgiving.

Thank you, Zax! I love them too. I spent some time with my family today in a park, and also had another FD on my R6. (85mm 1.8). But, yes, this lens I discuss here is great. Thank you for checking out my video.

I haven't used the 58, but as you could tell, I also really like the lens! Thanks for checking out the video.

Congrats! If you have wound on the film lever, then the shutter is cocked. You have to then pull the lever back about 30 deg, the lightmeter will switch on and the shutter should work, if the camera is in working condition.

Thank you :)

Any idea if the lens has a SC?

Indeed! It is truly never this camera's fault :)

Enjoy - it is a really fun camera.

Wow, that is a bargain. I checked Facebook Marketplace today, and saw a bunch of them for really very little money. Real value, indeed.

Let me know if it does! I have another, more complete video on the camera, and what bbatteries you should get etc is discussed. Thanks for watching.

Cheap Vintage Glass is the series's name, and it refers to the price relative to new modern lenses. It was indeed expensive then, but as I live in the present, I refer to its price now, but no disrespect to the quality or value of these. I couldn't afford it in the 90s either, so I get your point :).

Yes