Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Lens full of beads
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
Apr 9, 2018 15:09:38   #
stage36
 
I got a Canon EF 35-70mm, f3.5/4.5 lens at a yard sale, cheap. Got it home and everything seemed to work as it should--focus and zoom-- but them I happened to shake it and it sounds like a bunch of beads (bearings?) rattling around. Am I correct in thinking it will fit my waste basket better than a camera? I don't have a Canon to try it on.

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 15:32:46   #
DirtFarmer (a regular here)
 
First off, why did you buy a Canon lens if you don't have a Canon to try it on? What did you plan to do with it? If all the bearings are bouncing around does it matter?

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 15:34:24   #
dennis2146 (a regular here)
 
DirtFarmer wrote:
First off, why did you buy a Canon lens if you don't have a Canon to try it on? What did you plan to do with it? If all the bearings are bouncing around does it matter?


That was incredibly helpful. I am sure the OP appreciates it.

Dennis

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 15:57:52   #
rkberta
 
I once had a lens that used loose ball bearings. I could hear them if I shook it but not an issue. It was an outstanding lens and the loose balls were part of its design...but for a camera system I sold. It was a Canon lens...as I recall a 85mm used on a A1 film body.

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 15:58:32   #
stage36
 
Well, you know, if you can buy a lens, Canon or otherwise, for $3----it's worth taking a chance that someone (with a Canon) might want to buy it!

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 16:00:36   #
mwsilvers (a regular here)
 
stage36 wrote:
I got a Canon EF 35-70mm, f3.5/4.5 lens at a yard sale, cheap. Got it home and everything seemed to work as it should--focus and zoom-- but them I happened to shake it and it sounds like a bunch of beads (bearings?) rattling around. Am I correct in thinking it will fit my waste basket better than a camera? I don't have a Canon to try it on.


Perhaps you know someone with Canon DSLR that you can try it out on. It would be pure guesswork on our part to suggest whether or not you should junk it. What were you planning to use it for?

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 16:04:18   #
steve DeMott (a regular here)
 
stage36 wrote:
I got a Canon EF 35-70mm, f3.5/4.5 lens at a yard sale, cheap. Got it home and everything seemed to work as it should--focus and zoom-- but them I happened to shake it and it sounds like a bunch of beads (bearings?) rattling around. Am I correct in thinking it will fit my waste basket better than a camera? I don't have a Canon to try it on.


I just bought a Nikon 105mm micro and it rattles when you shake it it's suppose to do that. Great lens BTW.

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 16:25:39   #
DirtFarmer (a regular here)
 
dennis2146 wrote:
That was incredibly helpful. I am sure the OP appreciates it.

Dennis


I admit it. I am not immune to making snarky comments occasionally. Mea culpa.

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 16:29:26   #
DirtFarmer (a regular here)
 
steve DeMott wrote:
I just bought a Nikon 105mm micro and it rattles when you shake it it's suppose to do that. Great lens BTW.


Nikon VR has an element that has to move around to compensate for lens motion. When powered up, the position of the lens is controlled. When no power is applied the element can move around, making a rattling noise.

I have never had a Canon, but I thought their motion compensation (Image Stabilization) was done in the camera instead of in the lens as Nikon is. Maybe someone could confirm or refute that statement.

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 16:55:16   #
dennis2146 (a regular here)
 
DirtFarmer wrote:
I admit it. I am not immune to making snarky comments occasionally. Mea culpa.


You too? I haven't owned a Canon for years but I would have purchased the lens for resale if cheap enough.

Dennis

| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 17:13:23   #
Longshadow (a regular here)
 
DirtFarmer wrote:
Nikon VR has an element that has to move around to compensate for lens motion. When powered up, the position of the lens is controlled. When no power is applied the element can move around, making a rattling noise.
........


| Reply
Apr 9, 2018 17:38:17   #
rmorrison1116 (a regular here)
 
If the lens works then it's worth a few bucks to someone. There are two of those EF 35-70 3.5/4.5 lenses. They are some of the oldest EF lenses made. One version has a suffix of A, one does not. The non A version was introduced in early 1987 at a cost of around $325. The A version was introduced about a year and a half later for around $260. Neither lens has been made in years.

| Reply
Apr 10, 2018 05:25:47   #
jerryc41 (a regular here)
 
stage36 wrote:
I got a Canon EF 35-70mm, f3.5/4.5 lens at a yard sale, cheap. Got it home and everything seemed to work as it should--focus and zoom-- but them I happened to shake it and it sounds like a bunch of beads (bearings?) rattling around. Am I correct in thinking it will fit my waste basket better than a camera? I don't have a Canon to try it on.


Try it and see how it works. If it work okay, you're in luck. Otherwise, you can sell it on ebay "For Parts."

| Reply
Apr 10, 2018 06:00:25   #
BillyP
 
Where you at, close enough and you can try it out on my Canon... I'm sure others would be willing to help you out if we knew where you lived.
$3... was worth a shot!

stage36 wrote:
I got a Canon EF 35-70mm, f3.5/4.5 lens at a yard sale, cheap. Got it home and everything seemed to work as it should--focus and zoom-- but them I happened to shake it and it sounds like a bunch of beads (bearings?) rattling around. Am I correct in thinking it will fit my waste basket better than a camera? I don't have a Canon to try it on.

| Reply
Apr 10, 2018 06:00:29   #
Peterff
 
DirtFarmer wrote:
Nikon VR has an element that has to move around to compensate for lens motion. When powered up, the position of the lens is controlled. When no power is applied the element can move around, making a rattling noise.

I have never had a Canon, but I thought their motion compensation (Image Stabilization) was done in the camera instead of in the lens as Nikon is. Maybe someone could confirm or refute that statement.


Canon DSLR lenses have IS in the lenses if they have IS, not in the camera.

Canon's mirrorless cameras have IS in the body, and can utilize both stabilization types.

| Reply
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.