 |
brainiac
Offline
[X]
|
 p.9 #1 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results | |
>you have two 5Ds, with firmware v1.0.3 and v1.0.5
Correct
>neither communicated with your N24-85 for more than 1 second.
Not exactly correct. When I first fitted the conurus mount, the camera initially showed an aperture of 00 and firing the shutter produced 'err 01' and failed to record a picture while leaving the shutter open until the release was pressed again after a second or two. Then within a minute or two of first trying it, the aperture began to show correctly on the camera, intermittently. While the aperture was showing, everything worked fine except AF. Focus confirmation, aperture contraction, auto exposure all worked, but no AF. I was able to take pictures for a few minutes. Later that day when I came to try it again, the prevailing state was the non-working state as described above, but there were a few seconds when it worked, and for a few seconds I noticed the AF working too. But it quickly reverted to the dysfunctional state and nothing I could do in terms of rebooting the camera, polishing the contacts both inside the lens and camera side, would get it working again. I tried mounting the EOS mount without any lens attached to it so that the lens electronics were not connected. As I understand it, this state should at least allow the camera to speak to the conurus circuit, but I still saw only '00' on the camera's aperture display. I tried all this on both my 5D bodies. When the replacement mount arrived I tried that too, but you had warned me that it was no different to the first one I had, as you had not had time to modify it yet. Sure enough it exhibited the same problem, and I have not been able to take a picture since those first few hours of intermittent function.
> you had your N24-85 tested on a Contax N body.
Yes, I refitted the N-mount and went to my favourite camera dealer who has an NX. The lens autofocussed and contracted aperture as it should. I could find no problem with it.
> the second one I sent to you had a modified circuitry which improved reliability.
That's not what you said at the time. You were very quick to send me a new mount (thanks), and you told me that it was not modified, so I might have to return the first two mounts and wait for a third mount which would be the modified version.
> Lotusm50 had a 5D with firmware 1.1.0 and has been using his N24-85 for a few weeks.
I know. I am very jealous :(
I would be shocked if the firmware version of 5D really mattered - but given the data so far is contradictory, I would have to stick with the original plan communicated to you earlier by email:I would make the latest version of the mount (not only with the modified circuit, but with the latest firmware and stiffened construction), and preinstall it on my N24-85. Then, I would beg/borrow/steal a 5D locally and make sure that works before I would ship the whole modified lens to you. It either works with your two 5D's or doesn't work.
Thank you for being so thorough. I really appreciate your commitment to this. My two mk1 adapters are about to be sent back to you by post. Shall I keep the spacer or send you all three pieces?
> if it doesn't, maybe the firmware version of 5D's really matter
I am going to update both cameras to firmware 1.1 now.
> and maybe different production runs of 5D's behave differently.
That's possible, although I bought my two about six months apart. Both bought here in UK.
Bo-ming, you have behaved like a gentleman throughout, and I would have no qualms about sending my camera body/lens to you, but hopefully that won't be necessary. I look forward to receiving the mk2 adapter.
|
| Sep 22, 2006 at 01:08 PM |
| |
|
 |
