Best mirrorless camera to use old manual lenses

CuriousOne · Joined: 31 Dec 2013 Posts: 669 Location: Home

I'd go with A7s, and if on budget, with Pentax Q. The latest allows to use superfast F0.75-0.95 X-Ray machine lenses, which are unusable even on A7.

kds315* · Expire: 2021-03-09

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

Technologically, it is more or less indisputable that the Sony A7(r)II is superior. Full frame sensor, 5-axis IBIS, ... so very likely, at least if you have the funds, a Sony would be the best choice.

There are a few relatively minor considerations which might speak in favor of a Fuji camera instead:

The film simulation modes (in-camera color/rendering for JPEGs) are widely praised, and go well with film-camera lenses. However, I haven't personally looked at Sony cameras' output, so all I can reliably say is that I personally like the Fujis' a lot, and the consensus opinion on the internet also seems to be that Fuji does it much better. If you mostly want to shoot RAW and post-process, or even prefer the Sony's output, then this won't be an issue. (I personally find post-processing tedious in the extreme and never do it, so the good in-camera processing of the Fuji is very important to me.)
The controls and styling of Fuji cameras are also much more "retro", which again go well with lenses which are actually from the bygone era which the modern Fuji cameras are trying to emulate. I also personally like these controls much better than PASM in general (though I haven't tried an A7 in particular).
There are some lenses which were designed for smaller formats, and which therefore work better on APS-C than full frame (either the image circle doesn't even cover the sensor, or image quality gets much worse toward the edges). It should be noted that there are much fewer of these than of full-frame lenses. Most notable among them are the Olympus Pen-F lenses, but there are a few scattered others. The 40/1.4 Zuiko, for example, happens to be my favorite lens. Of course, you can still use these with a full-frame camera and just crop the images, at some potential cost in resolution (depending on which camera you have).
For similar reasons, telephoto lenses are more "efficient" on a crop sensor. If I want the reach a 135mm lens gives me on a Fuji, on an A7 I'd have to use a 200mm lens, which is much bigger. Likewise, for the reach of a 200mm, I'd need a much bigger 300mm lens. Again though, you can just crop the image from a full-frame camera to get the same effect as if it were APS-C, at a resolution cost. I'll expand on this below. And this is of course counterbalanced by the fact that wide-angle lenses are much more efficient on a full-frame sensor: a 28mm lens on an A7 has a wider angle of view than a 20mm on a Fuji! (That said, you can also get a Speed Booster for the Fuji to recover very nearly the same angle of view as a full-frame sensor, but it's expensive, and might have a negative impact on image quality.)

A full frame sensor is 36 x 24mm = 864mm^2. A Fuji APS-C sensor is 23.6mm x 15.6mm = 368.16mm^2. This means a Fuji sensor has 42.61% of the area of a Sony sensor. A Fuji sensor is 16.3MP. If you crop a Sony sensor to APS-C, here is how much resolution you are left with:

A7s (12.2MP) -> 5.2MP
A7, A7II (24.3MP) -> 10.35MP
A7r (36.4MP) -> 15.5MP
A7rII (42.4MP) -> 18.1MP

So if you buy an A7r or A7rII, even after cropping you'll have almost as much or even more resolution than a Fuji, making the last two points completely moot.

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Having read some of the disadvantages here again about the A7 regarding wide angles and loud shutter I just wanted to mention my most favorite mirrorless camera for old MF lenses, especially RF ones: Ricoh GXR-M.
It's purely designed for the use with MF RF lenses but can take almost every SLR lens as well.
There is no issue whatsoever with wide angles and the shutter is alternatively also switchable to 100% noiseless (electronic mode) and also the mechanic shutter is nearly noiseless.
The only "disadvantage" compared to the A7 is the APS-C sensor but that is not as important for me as I have a FF DSLR additionally anyway. For tele use it may also be seen as advantage. Depends as always on the personal preferences.
However, as I have a full set of RF lenses from 12 to 135mm I am also rather fine on the ultra wide part of the game as I consider the FOV of 18mm of the excellent CV12mm lens as good enough.
A major advantage of the use of this combination (GXR-M and RF lenses) is the rather small size compared to any other combination with SLR lenses and especially the ultra wide angle RF lenses are causing the biggest problems on the A7.
Additionally the GXR-M has some features which you barely will find in any other camera like e.g. the possibility to register all lenses manually for the direct display in the EXIF information. Also the way how the focus aid is designed is at least for my personal taste the best. Also the lack of the low-pass or blur filter for better details is something to mention as only the A7R/36MP does have this feature too.
Just to complete the overall picture.

shaolin95 · Joined: 24 Apr 2014 Posts: 75

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

wolan · Joined: 30 Jun 2015 Posts: 576 Location: Zurich

Hi,
thank you to everybody for your useful tips.

I'll consider Sony A7 but to be honest I'd prefer to go for the Fuji, if not else for price reasons.

However I have some additional questions here:
- which Fuji camera would you recommend?
- which adapters would not be available for the X (Fuji) mount, which are available for the Sony cameras?
- would all my Nikkor Ai(s) lens work fine on the X mount?
- if you are a Fuji shooter, please share what are the cons in your view

Thanks again.

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

I think the main points are that the X-E1 is the cheapest, the X-E2 has faster operation, a faster EVF refresh rate especially in low light, newer firmware, and the split-screen focusing aid (using the sensor's phase detect pixels), and in addition to those, the X-T1 also has a considerably larger viewfinder (with the ability to view both the full image and a magnified part of it at the same time, which I imagine could be very useful).

I myself have an X-E1. The biggest day-to-day complaint I have is that, after taking a shot, it takes an excruciatingly long time for the button that turns on EVF magnification to start working again - I haven't measured it, but probably a full second or two. (I usually futilely press the button 3 to 5 times in this interval before it finally registers.) This is really, really annoying if I want to take a quick shot and then adjust focus for the next shot. I assume this is fixed in the later models. I've also found the focus peaking to be completely useless (way too imprecise to be of any help) and have turned it off; I don't know if other cameras do it better. For what it's worth (maybe because I've never tried a good implementation), I don't really miss it.

I don't have concrete information, but I would be surprised if there are any adapters for one mount which aren't available for the other (given that both are mirrorless cameras with very similar register distances).

I'm pretty sure all manual Nikon SLR lenses should work perfectly well on either.

Atlasman · Joined: 30 Oct 2013 Posts: 28 Location: Canada

caribou · Joined: 22 May 2011 Posts: 44 Location: France

I had an X-E1, didn't like it. The body construction give a "cheap" feeling and the viewfinder not very good (I think it is better with X-E2 and X-T1). When I got it I had only the Olympus E-P5, the Fuji X-E1 was not much better (regarding to what E-P5 offers, stabilisation, nice viewfinder, good construction, etc...) and I sold it. I guess X-E2 and X-T1 are better.
But the JPG of the Fuji are excellent, for those who don't use RAW it could be a good choice.

JJB · Joined: 02 Oct 2014 Posts: 424 Location: USA

I have an XE-1, primarily because that is what I could afford. I like the ergonomics, the manual controls, and the overall feel of using it. Adapters for most major lens mounts are readily and cheaply available. For the price point, I think it's a good choice. If you've got more money to spend, then you will have more options. Good luck with your eventual purchase.

marcusBMG · Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1304 Location: Conwy N Wales

Sony A7's were out of my price range. So I acquired a Samsung NX20 body, 20MPx, apsc, in LNIB condition s/h off the usual auction site. Cost after selling the software CD was under �100!! Bang for buck I have been very pleased with this. It's a bit noisier than my pentax K5, but resolution with sharp lenses is impressive. RAW images for some reason need more contrast boosting than those from the pentax also.
But for use with MF its great, no need to juggle with settings just straight on the camera (with adapter), Av mode. Quick single button press to get magnified view in evf or on lcd (but no focus peaking).

uhoh7 · Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA

At the moment the best rig for legacy glass is the Basic A7 with Kolari sensor mod.

Since a used A7 is about 700 and the mod is 400, you are looking at about 1100 for a very good to the edges FF which can take any legacy lens.

As noted the shutter is not great, but the images are excellent, and it's better with film glass than any version of the A7 to date, though the new backlit A7r2 might work as well: we don't know yet Smile

For example, I found the nFD 24/2 unusable on the stock A7. Here it is on the A7.mod:

Bridge in to Blue by unoh7, on Flickr

In fact the grisly truth is until just recently the best wide angle performance on the A7 series was the 16-35 zoom. It beat all legacy glass, and still does, because it's tuned for the thick sensor stack and the internal processor know the lens. But the new CV 15 v3 is better yet and so appears to be both the coming Batis 25/2 and current FE 28/2.

Just because we can mount any lens, it does not follow we will see them perform as designed. The 50 Summilux, for example, is awful on the A7. The 50 cron is pretty good, but the 50/1.8 FE kills all other 50s on an un-modifed A7x.

No question the A7 series has been a huge step in the right direction, but does not do full justice to film glass yet.

However lots of shots don't need "full justice" and it's about the best we have right now......except:

For M and LTM and Contax/Nikon RF glass, the M9 does get very very close to "full justice"; as does the A7.mod with most SLR lenses, and some RF lenses.

The Fuji crop is a killer.

memetph · Joined: 01 Dec 2013 Posts: 942 Location: Poland

I don't think that the A7s has a real advantage on the A7 regarding the use of WAs . Unless you need the very high iso , I see no reason to pay that much and the A7 will do the job.

Problems with RF WA and UWA are well known but when I said previously that those lenses should be selected carefuly , I was thinking about SLR WA.
After 2 years using legacy lenses with an FF digital camera ( A7), I can say that it is not difficult to find a good standard lens and a good short or mid telelens.
I was sometimes disappointed by SLR WAs. I don't think this is a camera problem but a lens one. WA design and build are probably more demanding.

newst · Joined: 21 Oct 2014 Posts: 617 Location: Troy, MI USA

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

Yes - that was in the back of my mind. There are APS-C mirrorless cameras from multiple manufacturers (Sony, Fuji, Samsung, Canon off the top of my head). But the post was long enough already ;)

newst · Joined: 21 Oct 2014 Posts: 617 Location: Troy, MI USA

dnas · Joined: 14 Nov 2008 Posts: 488 Location: Japan

dnas · Joined: 14 Nov 2008 Posts: 488 Location: Japan

I have an A7 (amongst a lot of other mirrorless cameras, as I buy, repair and resell broken cameras & lenses in Japan, in my spare time!!)

I know that some wide angle lenses don't perform well on the A7, so I always try them first. I take shots where I buy them, and look at the images centre and corner before deciding.

What works(that I own) on the A7:
- Minolta MD 16mm F 2.3 fisheye
- Canon FD 20mm F2.8
- Minolta (AF) 24mm F2.8
- Pentax SMC 24mm F2.8 (K-mount)
- Minolta (AF) 24-50mm (although this is not a great lens)
- Minolta (AF) 24-85mm Xi
Most other longer lenses.

To try:
- Tokina 20-35mm. Looks ok, but I need to do a better test.

What doesn't work:
Samyang 8mm fisheye. This was not sharp anywhere in the frame, but I think it was a bad example. I have the same lens at home that I can try out.....

Minolta MD 16mm F 2.3 fisheye:

caribou · Joined: 22 May 2011 Posts: 44 Location: France

Lightshow · Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary

Shutter vibration on the A7r has been blown out of proportion, yes it exists, but under certain conditions, I might see it in 5-10% of my shots, my steadiness has far more impact on sharpness.
The shutter loudness is complained about many times too, in reality it sounds the same as my NEX-7 with it's EFCS is turned off, and I don't recall everyone calling it loud.

The A7rII should be a great Manual lens platform.... If you can afford it, I'm waiting till next year to decide if I will get it, by then there will be lots of feedback as to how it handles difficult lenses and situations, plus feedback on EFCS, will it be able to be used at all shutter speeds? or will IQ be degraded at speeds faster than 1/4000, same for the silent shutter.
The EVF will hopefully be much better, though I don't mind it now, any improvement is welcome since I use it 90% of the time.
IBIS will be useful, mainly for long lenses, my least covered FL's.
It will be interesting to see how the new sensor handles night shots with bright lights and high contrast situations like the sun in frame.

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

In essence it's much more complicated nowadays than in the old film times to decide for the best camera that suits the personal needs. There are simply more criterias and also possibilities in the whole process which may influence e.g. the quality until the final picture is produced and even then it plays a not unimportant role whether the final picture should be just displayed electronically or a billboard like poster should be the final target.
So from my point of view there is no "one size fits all" solution available and I don't think that it will ever be.
Additionally the personal tastes, preferences and priorities will ever exist.
That's one of the reasons why I prefer to have different cameras for different purposes and gave up the idea to have one camera for everything already some years ago.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07