sirius
Well-known
Hi,
I just bought a Canon P with 50mm/f1.8 lens and put my first roll of film through it. Wow, it was fun to shoot with. The camera is in really fine condition for almost 50 years old. The shutter jingles when I release it! and only when I release it. Does anyone know what that could be? For the most part the photos all turned out well. One photo that was taken out doors in bright sunlight (but not at the sun) had a red bar down the middle and to the right a little. I'll scan it when I have a chance.
The lens preformed pretty well though when I shot a couple with one of them backlight it looked like the lense flare really washed him out. The bokeh in one shot was a little harsh and distracting with the lens at f2. Has anyone else noticed similar qualities when using this lens? Mine seems to be in amazing condition with no haze or cleaning marks. There is a yellow orange cast to the glass. I assume this is some kind of coating. Compared to Hexar AF that I am testing out the images were a little on the cool side. The Hexar seemed to handle the lens flares much better when shooting a picture with the sun in the frame. That is to be expected though as it is a newer lens.
Hey, I hope that my post title doesn't sound too much like an email spam subject line!
I just bought a Canon P with 50mm/f1.8 lens and put my first roll of film through it. Wow, it was fun to shoot with. The camera is in really fine condition for almost 50 years old. The shutter jingles when I release it! and only when I release it. Does anyone know what that could be? For the most part the photos all turned out well. One photo that was taken out doors in bright sunlight (but not at the sun) had a red bar down the middle and to the right a little. I'll scan it when I have a chance.
The lens preformed pretty well though when I shot a couple with one of them backlight it looked like the lense flare really washed him out. The bokeh in one shot was a little harsh and distracting with the lens at f2. Has anyone else noticed similar qualities when using this lens? Mine seems to be in amazing condition with no haze or cleaning marks. There is a yellow orange cast to the glass. I assume this is some kind of coating. Compared to Hexar AF that I am testing out the images were a little on the cool side. The Hexar seemed to handle the lens flares much better when shooting a picture with the sun in the frame. That is to be expected though as it is a newer lens.
Hey, I hope that my post title doesn't sound too much like an email spam subject line!
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
jingles?
more info please.
joe
more info please.
joe
sirius
Well-known
Hi, I wind the shutter. When I release it there is the "clack" of the shutter going but there is also a metalic sound like a spring bouncing up and down about five times with dimishing strength. If I shake the camera I don't hear it. It only happens when the shutter goes.
back alley
IMAGES
both fast & slow speeds?
sirius
Well-known
More news, I have been shooting a lot at 1/30 seconds. I noticed that this jingle is not there at 1/1000 and when I go to 1 second there is a whirring sound like the self-timer and then the jingle when the shutter goes. Since it only happened there I thought it might just be what the camera does. Do yours only have the sound of the shutter?
back alley
IMAGES
mine could be considered a jingle at 1 second but nothing at any other speed.
joe
joe
W
wlewisiii
Guest
My 7 does something similar between 1/4 & 1/30. It doesn't seem to hurt the pics, so I after a bit I decided not to let it bother me. Worst case, she get's a vist to DAG... <shrug>
William
William
back alley
IMAGES
well, i'll be damned!
mine does it at 1/30 and 1/15 and at 1 sec.
i just ran through all the speeds.
i must have just gotten used to it.
i can't check the other body as i have film in it.
joe
mine does it at 1/30 and 1/15 and at 1 sec.
i just ran through all the speeds.
i must have just gotten used to it.
i can't check the other body as i have film in it.
joe
sirius
Well-known
Thank-you for your replies. I haven't learned to speak the RF language yet. Who is DAG? It doesn't really bother me though I don't feel very stealthly. Ha, I guess it's better that people hear me coming anyway. I live close to Edmonton, Joe. Is DAG where you send your cameras to be serviced?
Back to the lenses, which of the Canons perform the best for you? I have seen image comparisons on the forum and I find that the 50/1.5 has a beautiful warm tone to the images. I like low light photography so I'm looking for something fast. I like to shoot indoors or in close quarters so I am considering a 35mm for my Canon. Though, with my glasses on it is pretty hard to see the frame lines. Which do you like for the 35s, Joe? I see that you have a few. I can't buy into a leica system or Zeiss Ikon at this point; and I heard so many good things about the Canon P and the lenses that it looked like a good place to start (my rangfinder affair (don't tell the SLR)).
Back to the lenses, which of the Canons perform the best for you? I have seen image comparisons on the forum and I find that the 50/1.5 has a beautiful warm tone to the images. I like low light photography so I'm looking for something fast. I like to shoot indoors or in close quarters so I am considering a 35mm for my Canon. Though, with my glasses on it is pretty hard to see the frame lines. Which do you like for the 35s, Joe? I see that you have a few. I can't buy into a leica system or Zeiss Ikon at this point; and I heard so many good things about the Canon P and the lenses that it looked like a good place to start (my rangfinder affair (don't tell the SLR)).
Last edited:
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
sirius said:
I think the buzzing and bouncing sounds are normal. Remember that the Canon P has a shutter in which the speeds are timed by a clockwork mechanism -- not like the electronic controls in a Hexar AF. The mechanical timer makes different sounds at different speeds.
At 1 second, it is normal to hear a buzzing sound. This is the timer that holds back the second curtain from closing the shutter until 1 second has passed. This timer has a gear wheel and a little toothed "pallet" that rocks back and forth as the gear turns. The rocking is very fast, so it makes a buzzing noise. As long as the buzzing is smooth and steady, it is OK. If the buzzing starts and stops, or hesitates, it means the timing gears need to be cleaned.
At 1/8, 1/15 and 1/30 the shutter works a little differently. It still uses a pallet, but it doesn't rock back and forth. It gets pushed out of the way, then resets itself. It is on a spring, so when it resets it sometimes springs back a couple of times. This is the "bouncing" noise you can hear.
The "jingling" noise is different. Maybe I don't understand your description of it, but I have not heard a Canon shutter make a noise like this. Maybe it is the curtain brake...? This is a mechanism that slows down the shutter curtain at the end of its run, so it won't bounce back and re-expose the film. If it is not working properly, I think it could make a noise that sounds like a jingle, as the curtain bounces off it. This might cause a lighter stripe at one edge, because that edge would get extra exposure when the curtain bounces back.
If you continue to get pictures with streaks in them, you should have the camera checked to see that the shutter is working correctly. If you are observant, you can do a very basic check yourself: Take out the film, remove the lens, open the back, and hold the camera facing a brightly lit sheet of white paper. (Use daylight or an incandescent light, not fluorescent light -- fluorescent has a flicker that will change what you see.)
Now watch through the back of the camera as you release the shutter at different speeds. At slow speeds, below 1/60, you should see the whole rectangle of the film area open and close; at faster speeds, you will see a slit that moves across the rectangle. Either way, though, the open area should travel smoothly and look evenly lit. If it runs unevenly, or looks lighter or darker at some part of its travel, the shutter may have problems.
You might think the shutter would travel too fast for you to see this, but with a little practice you will be surprised at how easy it is to spot. This check doesn't tell you whether or not the shutter speeds are exactly correct, but at least it will give you a general idea of whether or not the curtains are running smoothly.
back alley
IMAGES
if you are shooting outdoors no one will hear anyways.
whereabouts close to edmonton?
not really a low light lens, i like the 35/2.8. it is very tiny and sharp and the contrast is about right for my liking.
for low light and less money than the 35/2 i would go for the 35/1.8.
it is sharp a good size and the contrast isn't harsh (too modern) for me.
the canon p is a great camera, solid and dependable.
dag is a leica repair person in the states, tho he works on other brands also i think.
i have used essex in new jersey. good work poor packing when they shipped my camera back.
the zeiss was a gift.
the leica i traded for, a p plus a lens and some cash.
joe
whereabouts close to edmonton?
not really a low light lens, i like the 35/2.8. it is very tiny and sharp and the contrast is about right for my liking.
for low light and less money than the 35/2 i would go for the 35/1.8.
it is sharp a good size and the contrast isn't harsh (too modern) for me.
the canon p is a great camera, solid and dependable.
dag is a leica repair person in the states, tho he works on other brands also i think.
i have used essex in new jersey. good work poor packing when they shipped my camera back.
the zeiss was a gift.
the leica i traded for, a p plus a lens and some cash.
joe
W
wlewisiii
Guest
DAG is Dan Goldman at http://www.dagcamera.com who is a camera repair guru (& who actually lives very near to me). Very highly thought of by me and I wouldn't even consider sending my good stuff to anyone else.
As for the lenses, I'll suggest that you look very carefully at staying with the 50/1.8. There have been a couple of lens tests on the RFF recently and it came out very well. The extra cost, wieght, etc of the faster lenses may not get you much in the way of hight optical quality. I do have a Jupiter 3 50/1.5 as well as the 50/1.8, but I consider the Jupiter to be something of a special case - it's certainly cheaper than the Canon 50/1.2, 1.4 or 1.5 lenses
Keep the 1.8 and try some of the faster emulsions instead.
Just my opinion and worth even less than you paid for it...
William
As for the lenses, I'll suggest that you look very carefully at staying with the 50/1.8. There have been a couple of lens tests on the RFF recently and it came out very well. The extra cost, wieght, etc of the faster lenses may not get you much in the way of hight optical quality. I do have a Jupiter 3 50/1.5 as well as the 50/1.8, but I consider the Jupiter to be something of a special case - it's certainly cheaper than the Canon 50/1.2, 1.4 or 1.5 lenses
Keep the 1.8 and try some of the faster emulsions instead. Just my opinion and worth even less than you paid for it...
William
R
ray_g
Guest
I think it is Don Goldberg, William.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
sirius said:
This is something you have to expect when using lenses from before the 1970s and 1980s. Back then, lenses only had single-layer coatings, which were not as efficient at reducing lens flare. Modern multi-coated lenses have less flare, but many of us also feel that pictures made with them are not as "atmospheric."
Here is an image from my gallery in which I believe the lens flare makes the picture better! (It was made with a Leitz Summarit 50mm f/1.5 lens, which is much flarier than your 50/1.8 Canon.)
Lenses made before about 1946 often are not coated at all, and these can have a LOT of flare under backlighting conditions. Using a lens hood with these early lenses is almost a requirement, unless you really WANT to create flare...
W
wlewisiii
Guest
ray_g said:
Oops. Yes, I believe you are correct, Ray. And I just was emailing with him tonight about the meter-ectomy on the CL... :bang: :bang: :bang:
William
W
wlewisiii
Guest
jlw said:
OTOH, used with care about flare, an uncoated lens can give a look all it's own. I dearly love the look of an uncoated Tessar design lens, for example (I have a large format Tessar from ~1905 that is sweet but flares like you wouldn't believe possible if I don't use a hood). You can find more than a few shots for samples in my gallery. Suffice to say, there are as many types of lenses and looks as there are photographers. The trick is to find what you enjoy and then shoot like there is no tomorrow with it
William
sirius
Well-known
Thank-you again for the excellent posts! jlw, that's an amazing and detailed response. I will explore different emulsions. There is this fridge full of "professional" film in the camera store that I have always been curious about...Since you are explaining all the mysteries to me tonight, what does GAS stand for? In context it sounds like someone spending too much for on their RF obssession.
I followed the arrival of your Ikon, Joe. Congratulations! It looks like it will be fun to use. A lot of people really appreciate what you do here. I already do.
I grew up in St. Albert and lived in Edmonton for 10 years. I live in Athabasca now. It's a 2 hour drive due North.
Is there a good 35mm Russian lens that works on the P? I read that the J 12 doesn't.
I followed the arrival of your Ikon, Joe. Congratulations! It looks like it will be fun to use. A lot of people really appreciate what you do here. I already do.
I grew up in St. Albert and lived in Edmonton for 10 years. I live in Athabasca now. It's a 2 hour drive due North.
Is there a good 35mm Russian lens that works on the P? I read that the J 12 doesn't.
back alley
IMAGES
athabasca eh? i've been there but so long ago i can barely remember.
a buddy of mine owned a travel agency there (maybe still does, we lost touch)
many of the russian lenses will fit nicely.
if brian sweeny has any 50/1.5 lenses left you would be lucky to grab one.
not too sure about the 35's. i think some of them have a too large rear element that sticks out a bit too far and hits the shutter curtains. but i also think it depends on the age of the lens. i don't follow the fsu lenses too closely.
btw - gas = gear acquisition syndrome.
if you hit edmonton, give me some advance warning and maybe we could meet up for a coffee. you could try out a 35 or 2.
joe
a buddy of mine owned a travel agency there (maybe still does, we lost touch)
many of the russian lenses will fit nicely.
if brian sweeny has any 50/1.5 lenses left you would be lucky to grab one.
not too sure about the 35's. i think some of them have a too large rear element that sticks out a bit too far and hits the shutter curtains. but i also think it depends on the age of the lens. i don't follow the fsu lenses too closely.
btw - gas = gear acquisition syndrome.
if you hit edmonton, give me some advance warning and maybe we could meet up for a coffee. you could try out a 35 or 2.
joe
W
wlewisiii
Guest
sirius said:
The Jupiter 12 can work with the Canons. The key is that you need a newer J12...
The recieved wisdom is that in all things photographic from the FSU (Former Soviet Union) older is better. Except that the oldest versions of the J-12 had a slightly larger rear element than the later ones. IIRC, and it can be found by searching this site, in 1957 the production of the J12 was moved to a different factory and they slightly changed the lens. As a result, the more recent lenses fit - it's a _very_ tight fit, but they fit - the more modern Canon bodies with light baffles. I have a 1975 J12 that fits just fine on my Canon 7.
If you get a J12, put your camera on T and open the shutter with the back open. Then you can watch and be sure that the sample you have does not run into anything. I did do this the first time I mounted my J12 on my 7. I found that avoiding bumping the RF cam with the glass element was a far bigger hassle for me.
Hope this helps.
William
sirius
Well-known
About the flare...I also really like what happened on that picture, jlw. I'll have to scan the picture that I took to show you what I mean. It was rather a strange flare. Rather than the light eating into the edge of his head there was a really sharp outline around him and his face was washed out. His head looks flat! Maybe I jut over-exposed the shot.
I take your point about learning the nature of the lenses. I'll use it more and I will learn how it will respond.
I take your point about learning the nature of the lenses. I'll use it more and I will learn how it will respond.