possible 100 f3.5

[Erik L]

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-Canonflex...oryZ4687QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

whats going on in this item?

 

[Sonnar2]

It's the optical unit of a RF 100/3.5 lens - which can be unscrewed easily - in a focussing mount for Canonflex which Canon sold seperatly for a few lenses (at least the 85/1.9 as well).
It's quite amazing that they made this focussing mounts for a not expensive lens like the 100/3.5. The standard and wide angle RF lenses, of course, can't be adapted.
It don't look like the original RF mount is sold together with it.

 

[Erik L]

It's the optical unit of a RF 100/3.5 lens - which can be unscrewed easily - in a focussing mount for Canonflex which Canon sold seperatly for a few lenses (at least the 85/1.9 as well).
It's quite amazing that they made this focussing mounts for a not expensive lens like the 100/3.5. The standard and wide angle RF lenses, of course, can't be adapted.
It don't look like the original RF mount is sold together with it.

is canoflex FL compatible

 

[Sonnar2]

Canonflex-FL-FD are the same mount basically, but the lens can be used in stopped-down mode only (if it is usable at all with the fungus). There is one 100/3.5 FL lens in ebay at the moment too. Optically the same as the RF lens

 

[Erik L]

Canonflex-FL-FD are the same mount basically, but the lens can be used in stopped-down mode only (if it is usable at all with the fungus). There is one 100/3.5 FL lens in ebay at the moment too. Optically the same as the RF lens

im mostly interested in the adapter. my 100f3.5 chrome should work. it had fungus but is now perfect...
edit that FL looks great!

 

[Erik L]

i guess this is all detailed in Peter K's book isnt it?

 

[CanonRFinder]

HI,

SURE did. Have described its use in details, also what lenses between certain serial numbers where the lens head is removable. Just checked my 100mm f/3.5 database and it is interesting to note that this lens belongs to a batch of lenses that sold JUST with the R-B adapter and NOT as a full lens. At this time, the batch is between lenses #75862 and #77225. I own lens #77225 so will not be bidding. Unusual to appear in this configuration and have recorded only five lenses to date. This lens could lead to an interesting discussion about the time it was introduced. The T4 100mm f/3.5 lens was introduced between 11/1959-2/1960 and this lens is late in the production run just before Canon introduced the all (nearly) black barrel lens. At the time, Canon was introducing the Canonflex, which depended on the screw mount lenses to cover the longer focal lengths via R-B and R-A adapters that accepted the lens heads of some of the 85mm, 100mm, and 135mm lenses. Have done little in the way of research into the Flex series of cameras but many of the accessories could be used for either the M39 or Bayonet mount systems. Peter

 

[bennyng]

Interesting...

Since we are on the subject of adaptors as well, anyone know what this Canon 35mm f/2.0 is attached to? Looks like an Original Canon accessory as it as an original Canon rear cap.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=380060040385

Cheers,

 

[Erik L]

Interesting...

Since we are on the subject of adaptors as well, anyone know what this Canon 35mm f/2.0 is attached to? Looks like an Original Canon accessory as it as an original Canon rear cap.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=380060040385

Cheers,

a movie camera adapter? it looks the same size as the original mount. its the only thing that i can think of that would have about the right film-lens spacing.

 

[CanonRFinder]

HI,

Not sure of the thread size but it could be an adpator for a 16mm cine or TV camera . Doubt if it is a Canon product as it doesn't appear in any Canon I/Books or price lists. Peter

 

[Erik L]

the ebay seller sent me some pics

 

[Sonnar2]

Looks like the typical haze for the 100/3.5. It's rarely possible to remove without scratching the internal elements which have a soft coating.
BTW I have watched this item before it was discussed here, and I'm the actual bidder.
cheers,

 

[Erik L]

Looks like the typical haze for the 100/3.5. It's rarely possible to remove without scratching the internal elements which have a soft coating.
BTW I have watched this item before it was discussed here, and I'm the actual bidder.
cheers,

i was thinking that didnt look like the fungus mine had. i hope you have luck repairing it if you win.

 

[Erik L]

well i bought the FL one. sure went for cheap. i saw many of the 100 f2 and f2.8 but figured they would be pretty heavy. anyone know its closest focusing distance?

 

[Erik L]

well i have it sitting here and it has the oh so common haze. of course he didnt mentoin that. it doesnt want to unscrew, but it has a interesting helix. the front part of the lens does not rotate, but the focusing ring of the barrel, the lens retracts or extends on both sides.

i really tried to unscrew it like the RF version and theres nothing to grip, i dont want to force it by the aperature ring.


also there are only 6 aperature blades on this version, i dont like that

 

[Erik L]

this lens does not unscrew to dissasemble. its very diffrent construction than the m39 version.

high res pics

i need to remove and clean the inner element. can you see the haze too?

im linking for the people on slow internet.🙄
http://upshizzle.com/temp/IMG_1394.jpg
http://upshizzle.com/temp/IMG_1396.jpg
i guess its just a matter of unscrewing the rear one and then getting behind it? small hole to work with.

 

[Erik L]

there was a lot of black residue on the sides of theinner element. there was simply a spacer inbetween the elements. most of the haze came straight off! however id say 10% remains.

i tried taking pics of the element itself but the point and shoot would not coperate. worthless auto focus.

so heres a comparison of the M39 and FL mount versions. the m39 is so much lighter.

 

[Erik L]

now that im done i think i could have done better with a lens pen. i never was any good at cleaning lenses. there remains dust inside the lens becasue of my efforts. i simply do not have the technique of a repairperson like Don Goldberg.

 

[raid]

well i have it sitting here and it has the oh so common haze. of course he didnt mentoin that. it doesnt want to unscrew, but it has a interesting helix. the front part of the lens does not rotate, but the focusing ring of the barrel, the lens retracts or extends on both sides.

i really tried to unscrew it like the RF version and theres nothing to grip, i dont want to force it by the aperature ring.


also there are only 6 aperature blades on this version, i dont like that

My Canon 100/3.5 seems to have 12-15 blades.

 

[Erik L]

My Canon 100/3.5 seems to have 12-15 blades.

clearly a cost saving measure for the FL...

i think if i have to do this again i would get a ultrasonic cleaner

final result. im not sure if thats dirt or what. it looks pitted like a old cars windsheild. (but thats all that there is.) otherwise perfectly clear
i wish i had a loupe