andredossantos
Well-known
Hey All!
Just snapped up a 50mm f/2 HC in leica thread mount and I have a possibly dumb question
BTW, this is my first foray into Nikkor optics and I love the feel of this lens!
Anyway, I mounted it to my M5 with a leitz LTM to M adapter. When I'm focusing down to around 3.5 feet, I have to give it a little push to keep going but then I lose RF coupling. Now, I know the min. distance on my M5 is .7 meters however I seem to be losing it earlier than that (just under 3.5 feet) The lens goes down to 1 foot but I imagine that has to be estimated. That's no problem, but I may return the lens if I can't go below 3 and a half feet!
Anyone have an idea what's going on here?
Just snapped up a 50mm f/2 HC in leica thread mount and I have a possibly dumb question
BTW, this is my first foray into Nikkor optics and I love the feel of this lens! Anyway, I mounted it to my M5 with a leitz LTM to M adapter. When I'm focusing down to around 3.5 feet, I have to give it a little push to keep going but then I lose RF coupling. Now, I know the min. distance on my M5 is .7 meters however I seem to be losing it earlier than that (just under 3.5 feet) The lens goes down to 1 foot but I imagine that has to be estimated. That's no problem, but I may return the lens if I can't go below 3 and a half feet!
Anyone have an idea what's going on here?
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
The Nikkor 50/2 and 50/1.4 lenses can focus all the day down to 1.5ft, however they lose RF coupling at 3.5 ft. There's a little ball bearing in the focus that causes the 'bump' to let you know that you've now lost RF coupling.
You can cut away a small portion of the helical to allow the lens to focus closer. Roland (Ferider) was nice enough to help me with this. Its also a simple task for anyone who can CLA a lens.
You can cut away a small portion of the helical to allow the lens to focus closer. Roland (Ferider) was nice enough to help me with this. Its also a simple task for anyone who can CLA a lens.
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
Found a pic from Dag who recently worked on my 50/1.4, while it was there I asked if he could mill the helical to allow for 0.7m focus.
He sent me this picture of what the end result looked liked. With the right tools it looked like a 5 minute job.
He sent me this picture of what the end result looked liked. With the right tools it looked like a 5 minute job.
VinceC
Veteran
Without the modification described above. all Nikkors have a minimum focus of approx 3 feet.
andredossantos
Well-known
Darren and Vince: Thanks so much. I was hoping the "bump" was not a technical malfunction. Glad to hear that.
However, I'm just now getting to fully inspect the lens and noticing there is oil on the blades. Arghhhh. It's either a partial refund or I return it. Too bad.
How worrisome is the oil? Looks like quite a bit to me.
However, I'm just now getting to fully inspect the lens and noticing there is oil on the blades. Arghhhh. It's either a partial refund or I return it. Too bad.
How worrisome is the oil? Looks like quite a bit to me.
Last edited:
Highway 61
Revisited
Oil on the aperture blades is the result of the grease used to damp the internal aperture driving collar at the factory to have separated over time into its two basic components (oil and soap). Many times, the focusing helical damping grease has separated too, and as a result there is a lot of oil on the blades, because the oil coming from the separated focusing helical grease finds its way inside the lens assembly until it lands on the aperture blades eventually.
So, sending back an otherwise nice (no scratches, no fungus, no chips or seriously bad things) vintage lens because it has oil on the blades doesn't make sense - best of luck for you would be to find as nice as an other lens, which would very probably have... oil on the aperture blades.
A lens having oil on the blades must be cleaned, because oil makes the blades stick, and the force you must use to change the aperture may very well cause some aperture blades pins to break. And lenses having oil on the blades often show a begnin haze (which is vaporized oil) on their inner optical elements close to the aperture mechanism. So those lenses now have some hard to move apertures and exhibit some sensible flare around the brightlights on the pictures.
That's what cameras and lenses repairers have been created for : fixing old cameras, and cleaning the inwards of old lenses, then relubricating with modern lithium grease which won't separate quickly.
So, sending back an otherwise nice (no scratches, no fungus, no chips or seriously bad things) vintage lens because it has oil on the blades doesn't make sense - best of luck for you would be to find as nice as an other lens, which would very probably have... oil on the aperture blades.
A lens having oil on the blades must be cleaned, because oil makes the blades stick, and the force you must use to change the aperture may very well cause some aperture blades pins to break. And lenses having oil on the blades often show a begnin haze (which is vaporized oil) on their inner optical elements close to the aperture mechanism. So those lenses now have some hard to move apertures and exhibit some sensible flare around the brightlights on the pictures.
That's what cameras and lenses repairers have been created for : fixing old cameras, and cleaning the inwards of old lenses, then relubricating with modern lithium grease which won't separate quickly.
Green_Blue
Established
What would be a reasonable price for this lens? Also are these lenses rare because they seem to be hard to find.
kermaier
Well-known
Looks like Don made a very neat job of it -- I'm planning to send him my NKT 5005xxxx lens for CLA soon as well. However, for some reason my gut is resisting the idea of irreversibly modifying a rare collectible like that. On the other hand, my head is telling me that my copy isn't in collectible condition to start with and, since I actually use the lens, anything that makes it more usable is a good thing.
What do you folks think, should I go with my head or my gut?
::Ari
astro8
Well-known
Looks like Don made a very neat job of it -- I'm planning to send him my NKT 5005xxxx lens for CLA soon as well. However, for some reason my gut is resisting the idea of irreversibly modifying a rare collectible like that. On the other hand, my head is telling me that my copy isn't in collectible condition to start with and, since I actually use the lens, anything that makes it more usable is a good thing.
What do you folks think, should I go with my head or my gut?
::Ari
I was pondering the same as I have a nice copy of this lens.
Last week my wife and I went for dinner. I decided to take the r-d1 along with the nikkor...try it wide open in b&w, soft light, sonnar and all that, it would make a nice change from the LX3.
Nearly tipping over backwards out of a chair in a restaurant trying to get a shot of my wife across a table as she was protesting in a far too loud voice "I am leaning back!"...I'm thinking of making the modification.
alexnotalex
Well-known
Go with the guts guys, better to regret something you did do, than something you didn't...
I need to do the same thing. Now where did I put the file and the pliers....
I need to do the same thing. Now where did I put the file and the pliers....
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
Looks like Don made a very neat job of it -- I'm planning to send him my NKT 5005xxxx lens for CLA soon as well. However, for some reason my gut is resisting the idea of irreversibly modifying a rare collectible like that. On the other hand, my head is telling me that my copy isn't in collectible condition to start with and, since I actually use the lens, anything that makes it more usable is a good thing.
What do you folks think, should I go with my head or my gut?
::Ari
Easy, get a Nikkor "Tokyo" 50/1.4 and modify that for .7m