Hand Polishing Aluminum Bicycle Parts to Mirror Finish

Go from the part above, to the part pictured below it, in about 30 minutes, no power tools necessary. I looked all over the web for more information about hand polishing aluminum parts, in this case, for a bicycle. I actually had a surprisingly hard time trying to find a good step by step. It probably has something to do with this instant gratification society. I want to know (in this order), What Will The End Result Look Like?, What Will I Need?, How Long Will This Take?, and then if I decide it's worth it, The Steps....with LOTS OF PICTURES! So for those with this impatient affliction, see above image. Worth it? Read on.

What You Will Need

- Varying Grits of Sandpaper (Depending on the condition of your original part, how much initial sanding is required.) I started with 400, 600, 2000, and 3000. 

- Mother's Mag & Aluminum Polish.

- Terry Cloth or Terry Application Pads

- Some paper towels and some water. I used a small bucket to sand over (wet sanding so there will be drips).

You can get all of these items at most automotive places like Pep Boys, or Autozone. I don't think the home improvement stores really carry sandpaper over 1000 grit or so (but they might?).

How Long Will This Take?

This is completely dependent on the size of the part you intend on polishing. A bicycle seat post took me about 30 minutes. You do not need any power tools, just the items listed above.

The Steps

So this all started when I picked up a Campagnolo seat post for a great price relative to what they typically sell for. The part was, however, in pretty rough shape. If only it could be revived...

*For those saying to themselves, "That before picture looks terrible, like one of those get in shape quick info-mercials, of course the after looks so much better..." In my defense, I forgot to take a before, and had already begun sanding the post. SO, I used the eBay seller's picture. This is why they look very different.

The condition of your part will determine the grit of sandpaper at which you should begin. Obviously you need to assess whether the part can afford to lose some material (through sanding) relative to the kinds of issues affecting it's finish. Deep scratches would require you to sand the whole part to the depth of the scratch to make it disappear entirely. Since many tolerances on bike parts are fractions of a millimeter, you likely can't afford to sand out really deep scratches but scratches add character right?

STEP 1. 

I started with 400 grit. You will be wet sanding (soaking the sandpaper in some water and sanding with the paper wet). I did this over a small bucket. You'll need to put some elbow grease into it. You want to sand as many of the scratches out of the metal as you can whilst being cognizant not too take too much material off. Beginning with 400 grit, you shouldn't worry, but starting with a more coarse, dry sandpaper, you can really get into the material quickly.

The sandpaper will leave a grey residue. You can use this to your advantage to see the scratches you want to sand through. See in the image above, the seat post was improperly, or rather violently removed from the bike leaving scathing lacerations in the lower part. These were too deep to sand through in my opinion.

STEP 2.  Once happy with the results of the first sanding, step to a finer grade sandpaper and thoroughly sand the part again. Some sites recommend sanding in a single direction and then sanding in the opposite direction with the next grade of sandpaper. I did some of this, but I didn't find it to be imperative to the success of the polishing. Just be sure to sand through what you had done with the previous grade of sandpaper.

Using 600 grit.

I stepped from 400, to 600, to 2000 (I skipped 1000 because I ran out and forgot to pick some up), and then finally, 3000 grit. 

STEP 3. At this point, the part should take on a smooth, semi-gloss sheen. Now you're ready to apply the Mother's. This stuff is magic!

Above you can see how my part looked as I progressed through the sandings. In the third image, the top part of the post is sanded to 3000 grit. The bottom has the mothers applied. Amazing! As per the directions, I just dabbed a very little bit on the Terry pad, and began scrubbing intently, until the material literally dried up and began to appear glossy and brilliant!

The seat post now has a beautiful mirror shine. As you can see, I did not sand down far enough to take the deepest scratches in the post out, because that might have caused issues with the seat post fitting securely in the seat tube of the bike.

Finished!

And mounted on the bike. Much nicer than before!

UPDATE

I picked up two stems at the LBS and applied the above polishing technique to just one of them. Initially, they both appeared identical, save for their size. Because these looked rougher than the seat post did, I started with 220 grit sandpaper. A more thorough sanding job would have yielded a nicer result but I was in the middle of conversing with the neighbor and an early afternoon beer!

Installed on the ol Bianchi (The previous stem was a bit too long). P.S., this bike still rides like a dream!

Resources

---

Another good visual tutorial...in Russian. Thanks Google Translate!! http://kickstarter.org/index.php?ind=reviews&op=entry_view&iden=27

Century Precision Optics Tele-Athenar 1000mm f/5.6 - Part I

---

The Century Precision Optics Tele-Athenar 1000mm f/5.6

---

You may recall I found this lens a few weeks back via an ambiguous, local Craigslist ad. This lens is huge. Measuring 38" from the tip of the hood to the camera mount, the lens weighs over 15 lbs. (Some of that weight can be attributed to the heavy metal brackets on which this lens was originally mounted.). Although I didn't initially know anything about the lens and had no idea if I could do anything with it, as Rick from Pawn Stars often enthusiastically declares, "I wanted it!" A couple text messages and less than an hour after discovering the ad, I was driving home with this thing in my backseat! I took the gamble and now I needed to know 3 main things:

1. Some History - Where did this lens come from? What was it used for?
2. Optical Capabilities - How can I adapt this for use with my DSLR? Is it possible?
3. How to Mount - If use with a DSLR is optically possible, I need a means to mount this lens on a tripod.

The Search for Info on Century Tele-Athenar Lenses

---

I contacted Schneider Optics, the company who purchased Century Precision Optics and asked them for some information on this lens. Schneider was surprisingly prompt in responding (A stark contrast to my attempts at getting info from the Tokina corporation) however, they had very little info to give. Even what the rep did have to tell me seemed more like speculation than fact. I also asked around on the Manual Focus Lenses Forum and one user, cooltouch (Michael), seemed to have more info and be much more confident than the rep from Schneider.

The rep basically said:

The Century Tele-Athenar 1000/5.6 was most likely contracted by the military and probably about 10-15 years old putting it around 1995-2000. Originally it probably sold for more than $4k and was a special order lens.

That's it. Despite my numerous questions, that's all I got.

Michael on the other hand had quite a bit more to help me out. He says:

"If the lens is white, it was military-contracted. If it's black, it probably wasn't. But it probably was used in the movie industry. CPO sold most of their optics to the movie industry and the military. Back in the 60s, photographers got wind of their optics and began requesting a line for 35mm still photography. CPO came out with the Tele-Athenar II line for still photographers. The main difference is the TA II's barrel does not rotate when the focusing ring is turned. The lens should also say it's a TA II if it is indeed one.

As far as its age, 10- 15 years ago is probably too young. I got the impression from talking to Bill Turner that, even though they still showed the TA lines in their catalog, they rarely sold one anymore, and this was the early 90s. So it's possible, but not all that likely that your lens is that young.

...
Anyway, according to my records, the 1000mm f/5.6 is a Tele Athenar and not a Tele Athenar II. It was made for movie work primarily and not specifically for 35mm photography. However, I don't see why it wouldn't work. I imagine it will take killer photos of the moon, for one thing."

Thanks Michael! Essentially this is good news! This lens can be used on modern DSLRs since they were used for cinema, a similar application. I have heard stories about some of these old large lenses being discovered but turning out to be very special purpose lenses. One user from MFL, nemesis101, was telling me of a lens he found long ago that turned out to be for aerial spotting duties with a minimum focusing distance of 3 miles!

As always, I will keep this section updated as more information surfaces.

Adapting The Lens For Use With A DSLR

---

Optically it's possible to use the lens. Now I need to figure out what parts are necessary for that adaptation. The lens was handed off to me with a rear mount that looked like this:


A seemingly arbitrary sized thread and an empty filter slot. In contacting Schneider, I found out this thread is a proprietary mount that was utilized by CPO on their Tele-Athenar lenses. Fortunately, the mount is still used today on some of their newer products! So the company had the parts for me to order. To use this lens on a DSLR, you need the following part:

0TM-00TC-00 (those are zeros) - Century Interchangeable to T-mount Adapter

Then you just need the correct T-mount for the camera with which you want to use this lens. They even had the 2"x 2" filter tray.

Issue #2 down. At this point I was leaning the lens on a deck post, while awkwardly attempting to support the back end and focus at the same time with an extremely narrow field of view. I think I'm going to need a tripod mount...

Mounting the Century 1000/5.6

---

The lens originally had two large metal brackets attached this to whatever rig it had been designed for. Structurally, it seems to me, it makes the most sense to start from these for a sturdy tripod mount. I began by gluing several 8" x 12" PVC boards together.

Next, I trimmed the boards to an even block.

Then the shaping began.

The process was pretty much just a lot of cutting, drilling, and sanding. Eventually I hope to really smooth everything out and paint it black. For now though, I was too anxious to use it. There's no sense in taking it to the final product if it doesn't work so I had to test it!

Objective 3 complete. Finally time for testing!

Specifications

---

Focal length: 1000mm
Angle of view: 2.1º
Max. aperture: f/5.6
Min. aperture: f/45
Elements/Groups: unknown
Dimensions: 38" L
Aperture blades: 20

Performance

---

Click here for the performance review of this lens: Century Tele-Athenar Part II!

A Second 1000/5.6 Found! John Maycock shares his experience with this behemoth.

First Taste of "Noctilust" - Canon FL 55mm f/1.2 - A Canon FD to Nikon F Conversion

I find it incredible how I often wander into "new" territory completely unexpectedly. Though some may argue my activities automatically disqualify any notion of "chance". Essentially, my constant perusing of eBay and the local shops and flea markets hardly allows me any room to claim mere good fortune as a factor. I suppose I put myself in the position to "come across" things...This is all beside the point.

I hadn't heard the term "Noctilust" until just the other day but I have certainly become quite familiar with it now. I have always read about fast lenses and even used a couple here and there. But I don't know that I have ever really desired one just because I think I have been more after what I need and can use everyday. Sometimes, though, decisions get made for you.

While exploring the local flea market this past weekend, I came across an old Canon FT. Despite having no real need for film camera, I tend to always check them out because I am still a hardware nut above all. What first caught my eye, and what my attention was now transfixed upon in a closer inspection was the 55mm f/1.2 lens sitting on the front. In all practicality, as a Nikon user, the Canon FL and FD mount lenses are quite useless to me. Because save for a complete re-engineering of the lens mount, I cannot do much in adapting the lens. I figured it was a cool piece but I would pass it up since it would prove some work to use. Then the gentleman told me the price. Sold! That was quick...

Canon FL and FD to Nikon F

If you are looking to adapt either of these archaic Canon mounts to the new Nikon F for use on the digital bodies consider this:

- Canon FL and FD focal flange distance is 42mm while Nikon's is 46.5mm. This means you need to figure out how to reduce the Canon lens' mount by 4.5mm.

- Adapters that contain no optics but merely mate an FD or FL lens to a Nikon body cannot possibly retain focus at infinity. So with this means, you will turn every lens into something of a macro lens.

- Adapters do exist with optics to compensate for the differing focal flange distance however, these typically have a multiplication factor associated with them as well as an inherent reduction of light. So your lens will be slightly more telephoto (often 1.6x or so) and your lens speed will be reduced by the added optics. Not only that, the optics currently in use with these adapters, by most accounts, is inferior and degrades image quality.

My thoughts: No sense in using a straight optic-less adapter since I do not need another macro lens. This lens was made for portraits! Adapters that use optics are also out since what's the use of an f/1.2 lens if it just gets knocked back down to a slower stop. Also, it makes no sense to use all sorts of round-a-bouts like adapters only to wind up with a mediocre image in relation to what that lens may be truly capable of. I just would rather not be limited by some cheap adapter.

A DIY Project - Photographic Blasphemy!

OK, an admittedly exaggerated title considering I know many photographers who shoot Canon and use Nikon glass on their Canon bodies. But it was funny when The Girl asked in a whisper-like voice, "Is that a Canon lens?...on your Nikon?" I have taught her well. Actually I'm quite non-partisan though I do like to continue to egg on the whole Canon/Nikon battle in jest.


I decided the only way to really make this lens worth my while was to convert it to an F-mount. So I first removed the FD mount from the lens via three simple screws located just inside the Breech/Lock mechanism. This exposed some threading, as well as the A/M ring which switches the lens from Auto to Manual stop-down mode. Since this lenses aperture ring is up front by the filter ring, it would prove tough to easily make this lens index with a Nikon so I will most likely be using this in stop-down mode. Considering I bought this lens for its f/1.2 aperture, I don't believe I will need to worry about auto-indexing. As I said before, for this lens to focus to infinity the rear element would actually need to recess back inside the Nikon mount of the camera. Since at this point I'm not prepared to physically alter the lens in any permanent manor that would prohibit it from being returned to its original FD mount, I have chosen to drill a spare F-mount I have to fit the original 3 screw holes used for the FD mount.


So I ended up with that. The rear element protrudes ever so slightly beyond the Nikon F mount but not nearly enough for infinity focus. The most common concern with converting these older f/1.2 lenses is that, typically you run into some tight if not simply unmanageable tolerances between the rear element and the mirror of present-day DSLRs. After some measuring and working out the numbers, this lens, in theory, could achieve infinity focus through a full mount conversion (milling down the rear portion of the lens to the correct length, and then attaching the Nikon F mount). But the numbers of where the rear element must be inside the camera in conjunction with where the mirror swings are nearly dead on. In reality, it's probably too close for safe operation. I actually even found one of these FL 55mm f/1.2 lenses on eBay converted for Nikon. I messaged the seller with some questions but still have not received a response. My guess is infinity focus is not achievable.

Despite that somewhat discouraging information, I managed to get an F mount on the rear of the lens and give it a whirl! I have about 4 feet to work with. Honestly, I am thinking a few more feet may be all I need. This lens, for me, will be a beautiful portrait lens. I am interested in the soft ethereal qualities of the shallow DoF. I most likely would never even need more than 10 feet or so. For now, I will tinker with my 4 ft.

Performance

Nikon D700 with Canon FL 55mm f/1.2
ISO 200 1/320 @ f/1.2

Just off-center Crop

I have to say, judging from my first few test shots, I love this! Noctilust here I come. I didn't think a fast normal lens was up my alley but it truly is a thing of beauty. No one shoots an f/1.2 lens that I know of for sharpness and it is clear why. This lens is not sharp wide open. But then again, I don't believe perfect sharpness was necessarily what the designers were striving for. This optic possess a unique ability to render subjects softly and in a way that is almost boastful. I find myself completely unconcerned with sharpness which is entirely uncharacteristic of me.

The Girl defeated by her Pizza
ISO 1600 1/80 @ f/1.2

Contrast with this lens is great and I don't see a whole lot of CA actually. I do notice this lens is prone to flare. This originally had a uniquely designed hood that I just may pick up since I believe I will be using this lens a lot more in the future.

I can't say a whole lot more on performance at this time save for continue posting more images as I use it. I plan on eventually milling down the back some more and getting as much as I can out of this lens. And I'm sure in the future I will end up with another fast lens to compare it to!

Links/Resources

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fllenses/index.htm

The Insect/Arachnid Relocation Program (IARP)

Being as this is far from the first instance this has happened, I have decided to create a "program". I simply love human's reaction to particular instances when even one of the innumerable other residents of our "spaces" make his or herself known. Instances such as a deer eating "our" gardens, a tiny jumping spider crawling up our kitchen walls, ladybugs dive-bombing our screen doors, and so forth. I proudly adhere to the old maxim, "They were here first!" So rather than squish them, shoo them, or in most cases hastily ward them off, I like to observe what they are doing. Are they building something? Going somewhere in particular (towards warmth, light, food, etc)? Or, are they just simply hangin' out!? As a photographer, I take it a step further and tend to want to document the little guys, if for nothing more than just to see them through the lens, with more detail.

This morning, I did just that. Today is my day off. Being out of school and now working a full time job which I do not personally have to "take home with me" I have found increasing contentment mentally. Last night, a visitor was discovered, or perhaps even a resident. Either way, he was deemed unwelcome by my parents. My dad put him in a jar and gave him to me. (Allow me to assume, since I have a limited knowledge of arachnids, this is a male spider)

The program works quite simply. The individual is selected for relocation. He/She is photographically documented. The individual is then carefully introduced into a new, larger, more "natural" environment (A.K.A. the yard).


Above is the inaugural candidate for the program. Being as specific spider identification is hard to find based on the sheer number of species discovered (not to mention UNdiscovered). From other images I have found, I believe it is a type of crab-spider Thomisidae family of the Araneae order (wikipedia's crab spider). I will update as I discover more information.


All images were made using the Vivitar Series 1 90mm f/2.5.

Since this blog is all about information I realized a quick image of how I made this shot might be a fine conclusion to this post. I got home tonight from being out and about and my dad asked me what I was doing with the leaves downstairs. I am not sure what you may have thought when first looking at these images or even if you considered it at all. I always find myself asking the question of how the shot was made when I see an image. Consequently, I thought I would include it. This was not made outside, as hopefully it appears it was, but in my "mini-studio". I recently moved out of my apartment and in with the rents in hopes that should I take a job outside the city I currently reside in, I can easily move without having been locked into an apartment contract. Well, I have been searching for several months now and continue to do so but have to get a job for the time being. That said, my ability to set up shoots is limited and thus I try to make everything as low maintenance and manageable as I can. Enter the mini-studio haha.

Ok, so it's a light tent...big woop. It is a few square frames made from PVC, some with white shower curtain stretched over them, and all with velcro wraps at the corners so that I can just stick 'em together as I see fit. With the addition of some foamcore and plexi, I have all I need. Strobist: White Lightning 1200 monolight (was given to me by a very gracious photographer looking for a good home for his equipment), Nikon SB-600 and SB-800 (which I picked up for a steal at $100 on craigslist!). The SB-600 was the most expensive thing!

Is it odd that I have the majority of my money invested in my glass and a skeleton crew when it comes to studio gear? I think not! We all have our priorities. Yesterday I was in a local camera store browsing when I asked to see a Kiron 80-200mm zoom (asking $30). It was in very nice condition and it honestly just peaked my interest. The associate asked what I would be using it on and I said a D700. He furrowed his brow at me, hesitantly mocking, "You're going to use that on a D700?" To which I replied, "Sure, why not!" This may however all simply be a result of the poor, condescending service I often encounter when I shop the local camera shops. That is an entirely different post all its own. For now, I will stick to the positives!

I hope to put up some DIY photo gear projects soon since that's another one of my personal favorites!