On 8/10/05, Bob Blakely, discombobulated, unleashed: >I assume this is why I saw the lens modified (rather than an adapter). I >suspect that this requires that the lens barrel itself be shortened such >that all the elements are moved back with respect to the mount (projecting >the rear element about 1 mm into the camera body). This likely requires an >internal modification of the position of the focusing helix with respect to >the internal lens barrel and shaving of some internal metal. Such a >modification is likely to be delicate and one way - once you do it, there's >no turning back. > >I think...
You think correct :-) I've just looked at my test-bed K50mm 1.2 - getting 1mm off the flange mount area isn't a great big problem - as long as accuracy is maintained. I wouldn't have thought that the focus helix would need messing with - the milling could come from the flange mount area - as long as there was enough metalwork left over to support the lens with a mount attached. I need to take the lens apart to see, and then it may vary from lens to lens. Most (if not all) PK lenses have the aperture ring sitting right back with only the smallest of gaps left when they are mounted on a PK body. Take 1mm off the lens and it will become an 'interference fit' situation for said ring, so 1mm would have to come off the aperture ring as well. Entirely do-able, though - and as you say, no turning back! ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________
