Actually, I've never seen a manual focus Pentax 200/4 that *didn't* unscrew this way. The top half always seems to just unscrew from the bottom half of the lens. I've seen this both on screwmount and M-series 200/4's. It's possible that all the ones I've seen (5-10 samples) were poorly repaired, but I doubt it. I think it's just a design thing.
chris On Sat, 3 Jan 2004, Robert Chiasson wrote: > I think your lens was disassembled and just thrown back together. A lot of > camera repair shops do this when a customer asks for quote and then refuses > to pay the examination fee - or it was concluded the lens was worn out. > > My New Year's resolution was to get my Taks diaphragms cleaned, and a 200/4 > is among the lot, but at this time I have no idea how to do it (haven't even > started to research the problem). > > ------ > Robert > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Greg Lovern" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 3:51 PM > Subject: How to Tighten Super-Takumar 200mm/f4 > > > > I picked up a very worn Super-Takumar 200mm f4 (for pocket change) on > > which the glass looks good but the barrel seems to need tightening > > somewhere inside. The barrel moves up and down a millimeter or so relative > > to the mount, and also moves in and out a millimeter or so, again relative > > to the mount. > > > > > > BTW, the depth-of-field ring is loose, and spins all the way around the > > lens freely. I suppose if I got the focusing ring off, then slid the > > depth-of-field ring off, I'd see what needs to be done to secure it in > > place? > > > > > > Also: > > Maybe I should ask this in another thread, but -- why does the front > > section screw off? Were there interchangable front sections or something? > > > > >
