Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Mamiya CS & E lenses on digital full frame?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 12:14 pm    Post subject: Mamiya CS & E lenses on digital full frame? Reply with quote

I have a few Mamiya CS & E lenses sitting on the shelf - are they worth buying an ZE=>Sony E adapter and using them on 24MP Full Frame (Sony A7II)?

* Sekor E 3.5/28mm
* Sekor CS 1.4/50mm
* Sekor E & CS 2.8/135mm
* Sekor CS 3.5/200mm
* Sekor CS 4/300mm
* Sekor CS 3.5/45-90mm
* Sekor E 3.8/80-200mm

The lenses are much smaller than contemporary lenses, and quite lightweigt (the Sekor CS 4/300mm is about 780g).

Does anyone have experience with these lenses, either on APS-C or on Full Frame? Thanks for all comments / suggestions Wink

Stephan


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Neither can be adapted, sadly. The E lenses are fully electronic so no possibility. The CS lenses have an aperture lever but would need to be converted as there are no adapters available.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is Mamiya ZE to NEX adapter.
http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Pro-Adapter-E-Mount-Mirrorless/dp/B00AUKDUF2/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1436534109&sr=1-2&keywords=Mamiya+ZE


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PLEASE don't post if u don't know Wink

Of course there are Mamiya ZE => Sony E adapters, and of course the ZE-lenses can be stopped down using these adapters (the e-mount is not at all "fully electronic", it has an mechanical aperture lever which is controlled by the camera, similar to the Minolta AF-System).

http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Pro-Adapter-Panasonic-Mirrorless/dp/B00AUKDU5W

Probably also the Mamiya CS-lenses may be used with the above adapter, since the CS lenses can be used on the ZE series of cameras as well.

Stephan


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CS lenses have a similar mount but the aperture operate differently. You need an adapter similar to this if you don't modify the lens http://www.shapeways.com/product/6Z8VPG28J/mamiya-cs-to-canon-eos-adapter?li=shop-results&optionId=40867244 .


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 3:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh but I do know, I own quite a few Mamiya E lenses, I've even taken a couple of them apart to see how simple a conversion would be.

The answer is very complicated as there is no physical connection between the aperture and the aperture ring on the lens, therefore a part must be fabricated to make this connection. it's an involved and complex process.

Anyways, there is already a thread here on this subject that goes into quite some detail:

http://forum.mflenses.com/mamiya-sekor-ef-50-1-4-t47942.html


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Fotodiox ZE adapter works fine with E and E-S lenses. A CS lens does fit the adapter but it won't locked in place. Also the pin has to be push down with a small spring which is quite a hassle.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Oh but I do know, I own quite a few Mamiya E lenses, I've even taken a couple of them apart to see how simple a conversion would be.

I'm NOT talking about a conversion, but about an adapter (be it Sekor E => Sony E or Sekor CS => Sony E)

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

The answer is very complicated as there is no physical connection between the aperture and the aperture ring on the lens, therefore a part must be fabricated to make this connection. it's an involved and complex process.

Certainly not more complicated than the (readily available) Minolta AF => Sony E adapters. The Minolta AF lenses don't have ANY aperture ring, yet the adapters work. The Canon FD => Sony E mechanically is at least as complicated, by the way.


iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

Anyways, there is already a thread here on this subject that goes into quite some detail:

http://forum.mflenses.com/mamiya-sekor-ef-50-1-4-t47942.html

Yes, I've seen that thread, but it's completely outdated. I was looking for some first-hand experiences regarding Mamiya CS/E glass on modern Full Frame cameras (mainly the Sony A7-System), since no modification on the lenses is needed when one uses the A7-series.

@ tao: THANKS for your meaningful answer. Obviously you use the Sekors on a Sony E-mount camera. Which lenses do you use, which camera, and hwo do the sekors compare to other lenses? Thanks Wink

Stephan


PostPosted: Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was googling this recently. The two most interesting and relatively recent results were:

1. https://nickspur.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/fotodiox-adapter-to-mount-mamiya-e-lenses-on-sony-e-cameras/
The writer clearly has used the Fotodiox ZE adapter with CS lenses (see last paragraph). Unlike tao's suggestion of trying a spring, he says: "what you need is a strip of heavy sticky tape about 6 mm by 12 mm. The strongest Duct Tape works OK." But he apparently selects the aperture on the lens first, locks it in with the tape, mounts the adapter and then attaches the camera. You seemingly cannot change the aperture with this set-up. At least, that's my understanding.

2. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Mamiya-NC1000-CS-50mm-1-4-bayonetLens-m4-3-NEX-A7-A7r-A7s-FE-DSLM-Sony-Nikon-8-/191588627096
A somewhat bizarre ad, and I've no idea how he came up with the following, but "You Will NEED an adapter for any type of Digital camera which I am NOT selling , Adapter for CS Mamiya bayonet mount/Nex, soon to be made by fellow ebayer seller friend......"
And again later: "Ready to pro shoot DSLR or DSLM camera's with an adapter ( Soon to be released) !"
Is it mad enough to be true?

However, as he says: "Beware many sellers on ebay, they have very low standards of TRUTH or knowledge!"


PostPosted: Tue Dec 08, 2015 6:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As regards minolta af adapters they are part of sony's acquisitions so not a valid comparison. You could say sonys nex and a mount evolved from minolta af technology, which if I am not mistaken was purchased from leica.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 08, 2015 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jamaeolus wrote:
As regards minolta af adapters they are part of sony's acquisitions so not a valid comparison.


Maybe the comparison from Minolta AF to Leica M (by Novoflex) maybe a better one.
This Adapter is very useful for my Ricoh GXR-M. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some of my Mamyia CS lenses:

Sekor CS 4/300mm
Sekor CS 3.5/200mm
Sekor CS 2.8/135mm
Sekor CS 3.5/50mm Macro
Sekor CS 2.8/28mm
Sekor CS 1.7/50mm
Sekor CS 1.4/50mm (mounted on the NC1000 SLR)
Sekor CS 3.5/45-90mm
Sekor CS 3.8/80-200mm



Sadly, the CS 2.8/35mm, the 2.8/21mm and the 3.5/14mm Fisheye are still missing ... Wink

Stephan


PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
Some of my Mamyia CS lenses:

Sekor CS 4/300mm
Sekor CS 3.5/200mm
Sekor CS 2.8/135mm
Sekor CS 3.5/50mm Macro
Sekor CS 2.8/28mm
Sekor CS 1.7/50mm
Sekor CS 1.4/50mm (mounted on the NC1000 SLR)
Sekor CS 3.5/45-90mm
Sekor CS 3.8/80-200mm



Sadly, the CS 2.8/35mm, the 2.8/21mm and the 3.5/14mm Fisheye are still missing ... Wink

Stephan


I picked up a CS 2.8/35mm with a Minolta camera and lens bundle on eBay (no idea how it was packaged together). Came across this thread trying to figure out how to mount it on my MFT cameras. Seems in decent shape other than the missing caps and mount I can’t seem to adapt. Interested? If so I can send pics and do a more thorough exam.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zedism wrote:
stevemark wrote:
S

Sadly, the CS 2.8/35mm, the 2.8/21mm and the 3.5/14mm Fisheye are still missing ... Wink

Stephan


I picked up a CS 2.8/35mm with a Minolta camera and lens bundle on eBay (no idea how it was packaged together). Came across this thread trying to figure out how to mount it on my MFT cameras. Seems in decent shape other than the missing caps and mount I can’t seem to adapt. Interested? If so I can send pics and do a more thorough exam.


The 35mm 2.8 is actually the best one of the M-S CS bunch IMHO, if not one of the best SLR 35mm lenses in general. Both in practice and as reported in some older magazine tests. I am using it converted to EF mount on an MC-11 / A7RII combination. My favorite lens.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 6:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ernst Dinkla wrote:
Zedism wrote:
stevemark wrote:
S

Sadly, the CS 2.8/35mm, the 2.8/21mm and the 3.5/14mm Fisheye are still missing ... Wink

Stephan


I picked up a CS 2.8/35mm with a Minolta camera and lens bundle on eBay (no idea how it was packaged together). Came across this thread trying to figure out how to mount it on my MFT cameras. Seems in decent shape other than the missing caps and mount I can’t seem to adapt. Interested? If so I can send pics and do a more thorough exam.


The 35mm 2.8 is actually the best one of the M-S CS bunch IMHO, if not one of the best SLR 35mm lenses in general. Both in practice and as reported in some older magazine tests. I am using it converted to EF mount on an MC-11 / A7RII combination. My favorite lens.


Perhaps the 1,7/50 is better than the SX 55 F/1,8.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

papasito wrote:
Ernst Dinkla wrote:
Zedism wrote:
stevemark wrote:
S

Sadly, the CS 2.8/35mm, the 2.8/21mm and the 3.5/14mm Fisheye are still missing ... Wink

Stephan


I picked up a CS 2.8/35mm with a Minolta camera and lens bundle on eBay (no idea how it was packaged together). Came across this thread trying to figure out how to mount it on my MFT cameras. Seems in decent shape other than the missing caps and mount I can’t seem to adapt. Interested? If so I can send pics and do a more thorough exam.


The 35mm 2.8 is actually the best one of the M-S CS bunch IMHO, if not one of the best SLR 35mm lenses in general. Both in practice and as reported in some older magazine tests. I am using it converted to EF mount on an MC-11 / A7RII combination. My favorite lens.


Perhaps the 1,7/50 is better than the SX 55 F/1,8.


On bokeh and bloom that might be true, no experience. If it is as sharp in the center it would be a hell of a lens. Excellent Olympus OM 50mm 1.4 already in use here though.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For quite a few years, the Fotodiox "Mamiya Sekor E/CS => NEX" was out of stock. Recently i saw that it is available again, and so i did order one Wink ... As soon as it arrives i will post some meaningful test results from the Mamyia Sekos CS and E lenses.

Stephan


PostPosted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
For quite a few years, the Fotodiox "Mamiya Sekor E/CS => NEX" was out of stock. Recently i saw that it is available again, and so i did order one Wink ... As soon as it arrives i will post some meaningful test results from the Mamyia Sekos CS and E lenses.

Stephan


Well here you will have an interested reader of that report. BTW there is a PM for you on the subject.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ernst Dinkla wrote:
papasito wrote:
Ernst Dinkla wrote:
Zedism wrote:
stevemark wrote:
S

Sadly, the CS 2.8/35mm, the 2.8/21mm and the 3.5/14mm Fisheye are still missing ... Wink

Stephan


I picked up a CS 2.8/35mm with a Minolta camera and lens bundle on eBay (no idea how it was packaged together). Came across this thread trying to figure out how to mount it on my MFT cameras. Seems in decent shape other than the missing caps and mount I can’t seem to adapt. Interested? If so I can send pics and do a more thorough exam.


The 35mm 2.8 is actually the best one of the M-S CS bunch IMHO, if not one of the best SLR 35mm lenses in general. Both in practice and as reported in some older magazine tests. I am using it converted to EF mount on an MC-11 / A7RII combination. My favorite lens.


Perhaps the 1,7/50 is better than the SX 55 F/1,8.


On bokeh and bloom that might be true, no experience. If it is as sharp in the center it would be a hell of a lens. Excellent Olympus OM 50mm 1.4 already in use here though.


The center of the sx 55/1,8 is the best of all the 50/55 that I have used .


PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2019 1:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
For quite a few years, the Fotodiox "Mamiya Sekor E/CS => NEX" was out of stock. Recently i saw that it is available again, and so i did order one Wink ... As soon as it arrives i will post some meaningful test results from the Mamyia Sekos CS and E lenses.

Stephan


The adapter has arrived today. It is well made (obviously better than the average chinese "fotga" or whatsoever), and i expect to publish results of the tests of Mamiya Sekor E lenses towards the end of the week.

Stephan


PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2019 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been going through my Mamiya Sekor E primes, using my new Fotodiox Pro "ZE => Sony E" adapter. The adapter itself is much better made than the average Chinese "no name" or even "Fotga" adapter. The bayonet fits precisely, infinity fits equally well, and the aperture ring on the adapter has click-stops and moves without any play and really smoothly.

Back to the Sekor E lenses! Most of them seem to be as good as their contemporary CanNikon counterparts, the Sekor E 3.5 and 2.8/28mm lenses probably being an exception. Today, I've been checking the Sekor E 4/200mm and the Sekor E 3.8/80-200mm lenses a bit more carefully using the 24MP FF Sony A7II.

The Sekor E 4/200mm certainly is as sharp as the Nikkor Ai 4/200mm (and only slightly less so than the first generation Minolta MC/MD 4/200mm).

The Sekor E 3.8/80-200mm, wide open at f=200mm, has better corners than the Canon nFD 80-200mm L and less lateral CAs than the Nikkor AiS 4/80-200mm. Both the Minolta AF 4.5-5.6/75-300mm and the Zeiss CY 4/80-200mm have slightly more corner detail and slightly less lateral CAs.
Stopped down to f11, the Canon L shines, however: it has a no CAs at all. Combined with the (now at f11) good corner resolutiond its use results in very clear and clean looking images. Otherwise the remaining zooms look rather similar (the Nikkor having a bit more CAs, and the Minolta 75-300mm having a bit less CAs than the rest).

Stephan





Last edited by stevemark on Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:07 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="stevemark"]I've been going through my Mamiya Sekor E primes, using my new Fotodiox Pro "ZE => Sony E" adapter. The adapter itself is much better made than the average Chinese "no name" or even "Fotga" adapter. The bayonet fits precisely, infinity fits equally well, and the aperture ring on the adapter has click-stops and moves without any play and really smoothly.

Back to the Sekor E lenses! Most of them seem to be as good as their contemporary CanNikon counterparts, the Sekor E 3.5 and 2.8/28mm lenses probably being an exception. Today, I've been checking the Sekor E 4/200mm and the Sekor E 3.8/80-200mm lenses a bit more carefully using the 24MP FF Sony A7II.

The Sekor E 4/200mm certainly is as sharp as the Nikkor Ai 4/200mm (and only slightly less so than the first generation Minolta MC/MD 4/200mm).

The Sekor E 3.8/80-200mm, wide open at f=200mm, has better corners than the Canon nFD 80-200mm L and less lateral CAs than the Nikkor AiS 4/80-200mm. Both the Minolta AF 4.5-5.6/75-300mm and the Zeiss CY 4/80-200mm have slightly more corner detail and slightly less lateral CAs.
Stopped down to f11, the Canon L shines, however: it has a no CAs at all. Combined with the (now at f11) good corner resolutiond its use results in very clear and clean looking images. Otherwise the remaining zooms look rather similar (the Nikkor having a bit more CAs, and the Minolta 75-300mm having a bit less CAs than the rest).

Stephan

The M-S E and CS have a good report in allphotolenses too. I am most curious about the two samples of the 135mm 2.8 you have. BTW the header of the second row of images is a bit confusing.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ernst Dinkla wrote:

The M-S E and CS have a good report in allphotolenses too. I am most curious about the two samples of the 135mm 2.8 you have.

I have at least two CS 2.8/135mm and one E 2.8/135mm, maybe a few more up in the storage room. I'll compare them tomorrow with the classical nFD 2.8/135mm, MD2.8/135mm [4/4], and the Zeiss CY 2.8/135mm.

Ernst Dinkla wrote:

BTW the header of the second row of images is a bit confusing.

Yes, in fact Wink ... i have changed it ... thanks for the hint!!

Stephan


PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2019 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ernst Dinkla wrote:

I am most curious about the two samples of the 135mm 2.8 you have.


I've been playing around with a few nice 2.8/135mm (and a few equally nice zooms), comparing them in the infinity range at f2.8, f4, f5.6 and f11 using my 24MP FF A7II.

Canon nFD 2.8/135mm
Konica Hexanon AR 3.2/135mm
Mamyia Sekor SX 2.8/135mm
Mamiya Sekor E 2.8/135mm
Minolta Rokkor MC 2.8/135mm [4/4]
Topcon Topcor RE 3.5/135mm
Zeiss Sonnar CY 2.8/135mm

The Canon is among the best - very sharp, but slightly more lateral CAs than the Zeiss.
The Konica, wide open, is a bit disappointing and not as sharp as most other lenses, but at f5.6 it looks very good
The Mamiya Sekor SX, surprisingly, at f2.8 is nearly as good as the Zeiss.
The Mamiya Sekor E has also very good corner resolution, but stronger lateral CAs than any other lens mentioned above. Easy to correct in PP, then the images are nearly perfect even at f2.8
In the corners, the Rokkor is slighty less sharp than the Zeiss or the Mamiya lenses, but at f2.8 it has less CAs than the Mamiya E lens. Looks a bit like a de-centered sample, bu i've tested two copies; they both have the same look.
The Topcor can't impress me - the center is good, of course, but there's quite some field curvature, at f3.5 leading to completely unsharp corners and even in the field.
The Zeiss, over all, has the best image quality of these primes. Very good corners, good contrast, and relatively little CAs.

After that, i did a few zooms at f=135mm:

Minolta MD-III 4/70-210mm
Canon nFD 4/80-200mm L
Nikkor AiS AF 2.8/80-200mm
Minolta / Sony AF 2.8/70-200mm APO G SSM

Surprisingly, the MD 4/70-210mm wide open is as good or even better than the Zeiss at f2.8. If we stop down the Zeiss to f4, the Zeiss may be slightly better.
The Canon 80-200 L has no CAs at all, but at f4 corner details clearly are missing. Needs to be stopped down to f8 - f11 if you want to get the same detail resolution as with the MD 4/70-210.
The Nikkor is slightly disappointing (decentered), but it has less CAs than any of the primes tested above.
Finally the Minolta/Sony 2.8/70-200 APO G (the latest contruction tested here) comes with best image quality of all the lenses tested here: No CAs at all (as with the Canon 80-200L), but much better resolution than the Canon 80-200 L.

Images will follow.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 10:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
Ernst Dinkla wrote:

I am most curious about the two samples of the 135mm 2.8 you have.


I've been playing around with a few nice 2.8/135mm (and a few equally nice zooms), comparing them in the infinity range at f2.8, f4, f5.6 and f11 using my 24MP FF A7II.

Canon nFD 2.8/135mm
Konica Hexanon AR 3.2/135mm
Mamyia Sekor SX 2.8/135mm
Mamiya Sekor E 2.8/135mm
Minolta Rokkor MC 2.8/135mm [4/4]
Topcon Topcor RE 3.5/135mm
Zeiss Sonnar CY 2.8/135mm

The Canon is among the best - very sharp, but slightly more lateral CAs than the Zeiss.
The Konica, wide open, is a bit disappointing and not as sharp as most other lenses, but at f5.6 it looks very good
The Mamiya Sekor SX, surprisingly, at f2.8 is nearly as good as the Zeiss.
The Mamiya Sekor E has also very good corner resolution, but stronger lateral CAs than any other lens mentioned above. Easy to correct in PP, then the images are nearly perfect even at f2.8
In the corners, the Rokkor is slighty less sharp than the Zeiss or the Mamiya lenses, but at f2.8 it has less CAs than the Mamiya E lens. Looks a bit like a de-centered sample, bu i've tested two copies; they both have the same look.
The Topcor can't impress me - the center is good, of course, but there's quite some field curvature, at f3.5 leading to completely unsharp corners and even in the field.
The Zeiss, over all, has the best image quality of these primes. Very good corners, good contrast, and relatively little CAs.



I compared the Mamiya Sekor CS 135mm 2.8 with the Canon FD 135mm 2.5 and the Minolta MD III 135mm 3.5.
All three on an A7RII, all converted to EF mounts and used on a MC-11 adapter. The last two I like but the M-S shows more CA and the worst defect, which makes it unusable for me, is the purple fringing. Editing that out in capture one with different tools does not make the image better. I was thinking of decentered elements too but given your test I think the CS 135mm is just not up to the competition. Pity as it is about the lightest 135mm 2.8 available.

Best regards, Ernst