After reading through the threads here, it's apparent to me that most PK-A's require the aperture lever to either be removed from the mount or cut off, depending on the lens, if you want to use them on a full-frame Canon. Does anyone out there have specific experience with the Voigtlander 180 f/4? Can the lever be removed or does it have to be cut?

If you've altered other PK-A's that required it to be cut off, what did you use? Did you remove the mount and then cut the lever or did you just have to cut the lever down to the mount?

Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

Thread title edited to make it easier to search.

I've always removed the mount and then removed the lever.

I don't remove the mount. I cover the rear element and all surfaces with masking tape (with a clean paper disk to cover the rear element), and cut off the lever & aperture shield with a big pair of wire cutters.

OTOH, it sounds like some of the newer K to EOS adapters have an angular offset that means you can use the K lens without a leverectomy, but the aperture index is no longer at 12 o'clock. I don't have personal experience with these new adapters.

Newer adapaters don't always cure it, leverectomy still needed in most cases, at least in my experience.

Thanks for sharing, guys. Much appreciated. I'll see if the adapter resolves the issue, but I have the feeling some type of surgery will still be necessary.

Most modern Pentax KAF mount lenses can have their aperture lever removed properly w/o sawing them off the ugly way. Usually this can be done by removing the piece of black colour plastic cover on the rear mount 1st. That piece of plastic is held by 3 or 4 tiny screws on Pentax lenses. Once with that off, you can see that the lever was held by 2 screws. This surgery is completely reversible. Some Pentax lenses, however, have the long lever goes all the way into the aperture blades mechanism. This happens most to some long teles and there is no easy way to remove them.

wlachan wrote:
Most modern Pentax KAF mount lenses can have their aperture lever removed properly w/o sawing them off the ugly way. Usually this can be done by removing the piece of black colour plastic cover on the rear mount 1st. That piece of plastic is held by 3 or 4 tiny screws on Pentax lenses. Once with that off, you can see that the lever was held by 2 screws. This surgery is completely reversible. Some Pentax lenses, however, have the long lever goes all the way into the aperture blades mechanism. This happens most to some long teles and there is no easy way to remove them.

I think you're right that the long lever is mostly a feature of older lenses, but it's not exclusive to telephotos. Both my SMCP 18/3.5 and SMCP 200/2.5 had the long lever. I didn't even bother to check with the SMCP-A 50/1.4, SMCP-A 50/1.7, and SMCP-M 135/3.5 that I still use, as it wasn't worth it (based on their low value - the f/1.4 has higher value, but it's a keeper). I just couldn't bring myself to the point where I did it to my SMCP 28/3.5 and 35/3.5 classics, as they really belong on a vintage Pentax film camera, plus they're a bit too dim for me on an EOS DSLR. If I ever get my hands on an SMCP-A* 85/1.4 or 135/1.8, then I'll proceed with more caution.

wlachan wrote:
Most modern Pentax KAF mount lenses can have their aperture lever removed properly w/o sawing them off the ugly way. Usually this can be done by removing the piece of black colour plastic cover on the rear mount 1st. That piece of plastic is held by 3 or 4 tiny screws on Pentax lenses. Once with that off, you can see that the lever was held by 2 screws. This surgery is completely reversible. Some Pentax lenses, however, have the long lever goes all the way into the aperture blades mechanism. This happens most to some long teles and there is no easy way to remove them.

Thank you. Reversable would be my prefered method of solving the problem if the adapter doesn't do it. so I really appreciate the details. I don't like ruining mounts, even on lenses I'm planning to keep long-term. I wouldn't have considered it if a) this copy wasn't substantially less expensive than any Nikon mount I've found, and b) new copies of the lens weren't readily available from multiple sources.

I removed the guard ring, just three screws, so I could grind down the hump that protects the aperture pin. Removing the guard makes the snip process easier as well.

I was sort of disappointed with the mount offset (no longer at 12 O'Clock) with the new Fotodiox adapter, but I am used to it now. I did some work with the SMC M 40/1.4 and am very happy with the IQ...

I have an offset adapter; my 20D didn't require a leverectomy on my 50/1.4, but my 1D did.

Excellent news. While the chipped adapter the generous seller sent with the lens was offset, the mirror on my DsIII still hit. However, I discovered the CV 180 PK-A leverectomy is completely reversable. Once you remove the mount, the ring and lever will lift right out with the mount. Then you've only got to free the spring connecting the lever ring to the mount by stripping it off the mount pin and replace the mount. That still left me with the problem of the protective shroud, but I found that part available from a local repair shop so I bought another one from them and clipped it. I thought about just going without, which is possible technically, but I wonder if it might help to cut down reflections on the sensor from the inside of the lens. Don't be intimidated if you aren't handy. It's four screws to remove the mount and three screws to remove the shroud if you decide to go that route. No big deal whatsoever.

Anyway, I'm very pleased with the lens, and even more pleased that I didn't have to destroy the mount to use it. I didn't get a chance to do more than shoot some tests with my test model today (and I'll post some crops in the APO thread) but it's sharp, tiny, and light. The only negatives I've found so far is the fact that there's no half stop between 4 and 5.6, which I knew going in. The rest of the range has half stops. And the hood is a little cumbersome, since it's metal and doesn't sit reversed on the lens. Still, at infinity, the lens and hood are shorter than my 135L without a hood, so I guess I shouldn't complain.

Here's one wide open at about five feet...