Step 5: The Iris

If the iris is working then fine. In the case discussed here , the iris was in place and it is operational but it was obviously handled by a ring close to the camera which was missing. Although there was a way to do something similar I selected to immobilize the iris in the open position, by placing a plastic tube through an opening in the focusing lens compartment.
just reassembled a lens of that type from a camcorder,want to make a shift tilt lens for slr,so far no focus on near or far,any dismantling the handycam was fun,i like your diagram
Sorry that you did not manage it yet. Let it aside for a while and think again. These things need patience!<br>
Vary Impressive As A action Photographer I enjoyed This article
I am glad you did. As you see this lens results on soft photos compared to the crystal clear result of the new lenses intended for DSLR. However I enjoyed remaking this lens and at the end you have a nice feeling that you know this equipment inside out!
Good Instructable... <br>your comment on the softness of your old Zoom lens is quite logical: in those old days a Zoom was very difficult to design and manufacture. <br> <br>But NOT ALL old SLR lenses were soft; the best lenses of those years were even more detailed and precise than recent designs, no joke. You would be surprised to see better older lenses compared side to side to latest ones, unless, that is, you are comparing the VERY best of today lenses (like SOME but not all of the Canon &quot;L&quot; series) to old &quot;L&quot; series SLR lenses of around 1980's vintage. <br> <br>Even when today Canon &quot;L&quot; lenses have Autofocus and some of them motion compensation, OPTICAL quality is NOT much improved, and in some cases, today some &quot;L&quot; series lenses are not up to the resolution and correction of older ones. <br> Now, compare the price of the better modern ones... you can purchase a new car for that kind of money! Another consideration is about the SPEED of today lenses: Young people think the 50 mm F 1:1.8 normal lens is very &quot;fast&quot; and good lens, (at least much better than the piece of junk of the &quot;kit lens&quot; sold with the Canon cameras, the cheaply made 18-55). <br> <br>But older people like me know for shure the 50mm F1.8 was the cheap one in the 80's, because the 50mm F 1.4 was better built and better overall... and the <br>expensive 50mm F 1.2 L was a really extraordinary one, competing and slightly surpassing even the best German Leica 1.2 Noctilux, no less! <br> <br>Now the surprise: Professionals have found the OLDER lens is not only much better built, more precise and has better materials than the actual 1.2 L; which has dissapointed some owners with Autofocus issues. <br> <br>The plain truth is that both Nikon and Canon (and others) are now producing LESS than the best lenses possible, maybe because they want to have some &quot;room for improvement&quot;, but they are concentrating their efforts more towards the electronics and sofware, than on the Optical quality of their lenses. <br> <br>Soon, the sensors will continue getting better and better, and then the industry will be forced again to concentrate on Optical quality, but I seriously doubt they will return to the precise and durable construction of the 80's. <br> <br>
Thank you for the fruitful comment. I have also understood that contemporary lenses although they have more functionalities are not as clear as some older lenses. I have an example. I had CANON 1000F SLR with a 35-80/4-5.6 lens. Sometimes I substituted this with a LEICA 58/2 which was far superior. Speaking about this specific zoom 200of the instructable, I think its worse feature is the sooming part. It has two lenses that move independently on different paths and when you change the zooming , it slightly defocuses.
Good instructable, and something to think about. I spent over $4k in 1980 dollars buying Nikon lenses and now they are useless with dSLRs. I was so angry with Nikon that I bought a Canon.
I say the Same... but for Canon!!! <br> <br> My old Canon &quot;New FD&quot; lenses of the 80's, were made UNUSABLE in 90's Canon cameras, BY DESIGN! (INTENTIONALLY). They say it was made for technical reasons and blah blah blah, but the truth is other. <br> <br>It is called &quot;Planned Obsolescence&quot; and is responsible for much of the waste and pollution damage caused to the planet, not to say the damage to our purse! <br> <br>One thing is clear: Managers and engineers were not only good, but somewhat perverse: by redesigning the mount, they made the older lens unusable in newer cameras, just to keep people buying and throwing away perfectly good lenses, just to keep &quot;updated with the latest model&quot;. It is the business model... I wonder how long that situation will be sustainable. But thanks to clever people at INSTRUCTABLES, we can have old things working again instead of making the trash mountain bigger!
I also have an SLR Canon and I have mounted several odd lenses on it through an M42 adaptor. I one case I had to remove the final ring of the lens (unscrewing) to gain some distance. If you have a nikon lense that is worth to be mounted on your Canon it may be possible through a T-ring adaptor because Canon has a smaller camera - lens distance. If I were you I would first google &quot; nikon lenses to canon&quot;. <br>
I like your little organiser. I often use ice cube trays for the same purpose, I number them so that I can create a simple index if I need to when dismantling complex things.
This small tray has the advantage that you can cover it with a tape and store it , something I did often during the repair. However it should be made a little larger and with more compartments.
Good use of older lenses and without breaking the bank account

About This Instructable




Bio: I am a physicist working in research, Making things and sharing the experience with others, helps me in many ways.
More by tholopotami:Tabletop bench and Moxon vice How to digitize slides and film negatives with  a DSLR 12 improvements for a cheap telescope 
Add instructable to: