Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

What digital camera for manual focus lenses?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital SLR Cameras
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:07 am    Post subject: What digital camera for manual focus lenses? Reply with quote
Please introduce your digital camera from manual focusing point of view.

Nikon D50

Advantages:
---------------
+focus confirmation works with MF lenses
+cheap
+brilliant colors
+ergonomic body
+black LCD usefull to check image sharpness
+1.5 crop factor that is good in this category (amator DSLR)
+usable bright viewfinder

Disadvantages:
------------------
-register distance one of the longest from 35mm cameras
this means less adoptable DSLR
-metering disabled with MF lenses.
-ISO started from 200


Olympus E-1

Advantages:
--------------
+Most adoptable DSLR film register distance is short
+professional body
+metering works with MF lenses
+sensor cleaning
+usable bright viewfinder
+user replaceable focusing screen

Disadvantages:
------------------
-no focus confirmation
-no color boosting like Nikon has
-black LCD small unusable to check sharpness
-2X crop factor can't use wide-angle lenses normally

Last edited by Attila on Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:45 am; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Canon EOS 400D

Advantages:
---------------
+fantastic CMOS colors, with neutral balance and subtle shades rendering
+exposure with manual lenses wide open is perfect even with contrasted scenes
+larger perceived (at least by me) dynamic rance tolerance than its predecessors
+big and bright LCD with perfect colors (LCD colors match output colors)
+interface fast, compact and easy to read
+small. With a small 50mm lens, it can be used as unobtrusive street photography camera of unbeatable quality
+ the sensor cleaner makes a fantastic job
+ higher pixel density than its predecessors, without significant negative side effects
+ the 10,1 Mp density really brings the best out of the high resolution manual lenses, and allows for high quality large print sizes
+ the 1.6 crop factor coupled with the 10,1 Mp lets you use small lightweight medium tele lenses to obtain results that with full frame would be obtaineable only with heavy bulky long tele lenses
+ large array of compatible processing software and custom color profiles available
+ compatibility with most manual lenses possible due to short register distance
+ availability of a full array of focus-assist adapters helps you overcome the difficulties of manual focusing
+ availability of third party focusing screens allows you to customize your camera for manual focus work
+ the built-in flash works great even when used in manual mode with manual lenses
+ batteries are small and really last very long; replacement batteries not branded (i.e. not Canon) work well just the same and are available at a fraction of the price
+ large user base means lots of information available online and lots of accessories (adapters, focusing screens etc.) readily available
+ unbeatable low price, both in absolute terms and especially when weighted with all the plusses

Disadvantages:
------------------
- exposure with manual lenses needs adjustment when stopping down (approximate average 1/3rd stop exposure adjustment each 2 lens stops - varies with lenses)
- some slightly increased noise at 1600 ISO setting compared with its predecessors (easily removeable with Noise Ninja)
- the small size may be uncomfortable for people with very large hands
- the 1.6 crop factor makes it impossible to obtain superwide focal lenghts with traditional manual lenses (which usually arrive down to 17-18mm, equivalent to 28mm in full frame)
- owning both the 400D and the 5D will make you notice limitations in the 5D design that 5D owners who don't know the 400D will never realize
- you will be hated by your friends when you will show them the pictures and prints that you could take with what is today a 600 EUR camera (real street price)
- when the time will come that you'll have to sell it, this will make you very, very sorry.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
What Orio says about the 400D also is valid for the 350D.
That's why I will never sell mine! Wink

Carsten


PostPosted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I love my 400D too Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pentax ? Minolta ? Sony ?


PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
Pentax ? Minolta ? Sony ?


I'm too keen on the color lusciousness of the CMOS sensor, it is ideal to make the German/Russian manual lenses shine, outside of it I would only consider a Foveon sensor because of the absence of AA filtering - and in any case not as an alternative, but as additional - and only when the prices will align with those of the CMOS sensors.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
pentax! all the way. compatable with any lens ever produced that will fit a pentax. somewher around 25.000,000


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
robar wrote:
pentax! all the way. compatable with any lens ever produced that will fit a pentax. somewher around 25.000,000


Can you give us more detailed description like above we described ?


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
robar wrote:
pentax! all the way. compatable with any lens ever produced that will fit a pentax. somewher around 25.000,000


Well it is a fact that all will love the camera they have and ignore any faults and point out its features. Bit like car owners!

With good PP there isn't a lot of difference in the image quality from prosumer DSLRs, perhaps IMO the new 10 million (Sony Chip) offerings do have problems and it is pretty well agreed that the Sony A100 is a bad camera.

But if we are asking what is the best for manual focus lenses I think we first have to look what you can see on the screen. It is pointless having great MF lenses if your viewfinder is a waste of time.
It is interesting to see all the number who buy the focus confirmation adaptor and others who ask how you can focus a f5.6 lens, or can't focus a Zenitar 16mm!

After image quality the most important thing is having a camera you can see through and compose an image with. A usable camera that lets you get on with taking pictures.

I also think you should rule out the idea of a Nikon D50, D70, D80 or D200 as even being cameras to consider for manual lenses. What you going to fit to them except a few old Nikor lenses? Even then it still won't meter. Usable? Yes if your just going to do table top Macro!

If anybody isn't sure what I am on about look through a Pentax viewfinder or even a Minolta/Sony. OK Nikon D80, D200 has a good view as well.
IMO it is a con that a maker of good digital DSLR doesn't think it's worth designing a new viewfinder and just throws on the same one they used on their cheapest ?99 SLR

I have changed from Canon (It was the first reasonaly priced DSLR) To Minolta and now Pentax. I will change again with no problem if they don't give me what I need.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
For me Pentax!

I have the Ist Ds large viewfinder, focus aid works under all conditions, maximum comfort for eache type of lens.

With a K10D you even have antishake with every lens.

Guido


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
How effective the anti-shake system ?


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rob Leslie wrote:

After image quality the most important thing is having a camera you can see through and compose an image with. A usable camera that lets you get on with taking pictures.
If anybody isn't sure what I am on about look through a Pentax viewfinder or even a Minolta/Sony.


I don't agree with the rating. For a manual lens user, much more important than the viewfinder is the range of compatible lenses. What good is to me a super viewfinder if I can not mount and use my Zeiss and Leica lenses on that camera?

There are workarounds for small viewfinders (the magnifying eyepiece for Nikon reflex can be mounted on 400D viewfinder and it works), and there are focus aids such as alternative focusing screens and focus assist adapters.

But nothing will make my Zeiss and Leica lenses useable on a camera that can not mount them.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio I could not agree with you more. If you want a camera to take Leica and Zeiss lenses and no other will do the job then it is the best for you even if you do have to make so many compromises and do all those ‘Workarounds’ Although I have used plenty of Zeiss lenses on both Pentax and Minolta/Sony
I feel the same about Pentax and its ability to use Tamron Adaptalls as I have always used them, with auto aperture and even auto exposure programme modes if I want to use them without having to trouble with workarounds.
I'm sure not everybody wants to mount Tamron Adaptalls on there camera as I'm sure not everybody wants Leica or Zeiss lenses so badly so its down to using all MF lenses and which camera can function better with them.

Yes SR does work. It gives at least an extra two stops, more with a non tele lens On the Pentax it works with ANY lens. The effect is clearly visible on the camera LCD screen if you take a with and without shot. When a MF lens is mounted on the camera the camera asks you to input the FL so that SR can work effectively. Sony/Minolta SR doesn’t do this so does not work so well with MF lenses. Being a bit of a sceptic when it comes to new camera features I have given it extensive tests. Results its marvellous the technology is beyond me but it works. How often I could mange without is a different thing. It isn’t essential but it is good to have.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rob Leslie wrote:

Yes SR does work. It gives at least an extra two stops, more with a non tele lens On the Pentax it works with ANY lens. The effect is clearly visible on the camera LCD screen if you take a with and without shot. When a MF lens is mounted on the camera the camera asks you to input the FL so that SR can work effectively. Sony/Minolta SR doesn’t do this so does not work so well with MF lenses. Being a bit of a sceptic when it comes to new camera features I have given it extensive tests. Results its marvellous the technology is beyond me but it works. How often I could mange without is a different thing. It isn’t essential but it is good to have.


THAT is something that I value very high - I mean the anti-shake. More than the viewfinder.
And it's the reason why I am really considering a Pentax10K as my third body.
Currently, with the Foveon prices so high, it's really a matter of either a second 400D or a Pentax 10K.
The anti-shake for the moment makes me inclined towards the 10k. An anti-shake would have saved dozens of pictures in my carnival series. And the fact that it works with manual lenses, too, is of course decisive.
Since I have planned my third body for not earlier than next autumn, or more probably around Christmas, I hope that Pentax in the meantime may have introduced a newer model, and that the 10K price may decrease.
I will never, however, buy a digital camera secondhand through Ebay. Electronics are too much important and you have no way to make sure of them. A shop's guarantee is the only way.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If I had the money to spend, I would already have a K10D.
I guess it is a fantastic cam!


PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LucisPictor wrote:
If I had the money to spend, I would already have a K10D.
I guess it is a fantastic cam!


The K10 is a fantastic camera I had a walk around town with one for about twenty minutes and it was a joy to use. So much so I forgot my planned test pics. The feel and build quality is top notch, even the shutter noise is reassuring and quiter than all others I have tried (DSLR) viewfinder is of course Pentax excelent.

I am just not happy about the Sony 10 million sensor after having an Apha and being involved with test shots from a friends D200. He sent that back and kept his old D100. Also results from the D80 I have seen have been poor. This 10 million sensor looses lots of low end tone detail (Shadow) to digital noise at 400 asa and above. The JPEG from the camera cleans it up at the expense of detail by clipping the low end You see the problem when you do a RAW file or better compare a scene for scene shot from 6 million and 10. Unfortunatly I didn't do any RAW with the K10 because of time and I wasn't sure if I could convert them.
JPEG from it at 800 and even 1600 did look good.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 5:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
THAT is something that I value very high - I mean the anti-shake. More than the viewfinder.

You also have to take into account that built-in anti-shake is not very effective for tele lenses (it would require the sensor to move a few centimeters away from its place!), which are also the kind of lenses that need the anti-shake most. That's the reason why Canon (sensibly) keeps the stabilization in the lenses, not in the camera bodies.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
naplam wrote:
Orio wrote:
THAT is something that I value very high - I mean the anti-shake. More than the viewfinder.

You also have to take into account that built-in anti-shake is not very effective for tele lenses (it would require the sensor to move a few centimeters away from its place!), which are also the kind of lenses that need the anti-shake most. That's the reason why Canon (sensibly) keeps the stabilization in the lenses, not in the camera bodies.


I don't think any system could cope with shake where the plane of focus was moving a 'few centimeters' What you doing, throwing the thing up and down in the air!
The difference in movement between a wide, normal and tele lens is of course very real. Which is why the Pentax asks you to input the FL of the lens before shooting. Lens stabilization is without doubt better but has two major drawbacks. 1. It only works with that one lens. 2. That lens costs an arm and a leg. It certainly isnt'n an answer for using Manual focus lenses so is useless as far as the subject of this forum is concerned.
As for the Pentax SR and tele lenses, as a regular user of long FL I can say without doubt it works. With the help of a steady hand or better a monopd I have consistantly had good results with 300mm and shutter speeds as low as 1/60. Any lower than 1/60 and mirror vibration is going to come into play. I otfen have doubts that SR makes a better photographer. Before I had any confidence in it I would do the job with a tripod and be sure of a good result, the correct way. SR makes you lazy and then you get sloopy and often have bad shots because focus is out rather than shake With a 400mm lens at f5.6 subject distance two to three meters one has about an inch DOF to play with. In practice shot for shot at 300mm I doubt there would be that much difference between in camera SR and lens stabilization. As already written the minimun one could hope for is 1/60 sec below that and one has to go to mirror lock up and for that its a tripod job. At 400mm and above lens stabilization would be better but at what cost.

My friend Pete showing Canon image stabilization in use!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rob-leslie/sets/72157594567539625


PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 7:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
naplam wrote:
Orio wrote:
THAT is something that I value very high - I mean the anti-shake. More than the viewfinder.

You also have to take into account that built-in anti-shake is not very effective for tele lenses (it would require the sensor to move a few centimeters away from its place!), which are also the kind of lenses that need the anti-shake most. That's the reason why Canon (sensibly) keeps the stabilization in the lenses, not in the camera bodies.


But I don't expect miracles. You know something? Even if it could save only one stop, this would probably save at least the 50% of my motion-blurred images.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm probably going to get a 300D. They're cheap, I have lots of BP511/512
batteries for my G1s and G2, CF cards, etc. Plus, it's that CMOS sensor,
just like Orio stated. I'm split between medium format film and digital.
I'm not much interested in 35mm film anymore...

Bill


PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 6:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think to get a DSLR any kind of it, good idea.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 7:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Can we use Contax/Yashica mount lenses on Pentax cameras. I really like Carl Zeiss 50mm lenses.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
katastrofo wrote:
I'm probably going to get a 300D. They're cheap, I have lots of BP511/512
batteries for my G1s and G2, CF cards, etc. Plus, it's that CMOS sensor,
just like Orio stated.
Bill


OK, here's a little bit of advice: wait and save a little more, if necessary, but by all means, get a 400D. You will NEVER regret the extra money you spend on it compared to the 300D. I know, because I moved from the 300D to the 400D and the difference is so big:

- better exposure: the 400D finally gets the exposure correctly with international standards and for use with manual lenses, this is decisive

- much larger LCD screen with faithful colors: on the 400D LCD screen, you can really enlarge your shots and check the focus. Plus, the colors are true to real. The 300D screen is much smaller, and, like the one on the 5D, the colors are shifted

- antidust shaking sensor!! You will NEVER be thanking enough for this. Dust on 300D sensor used to be a nightmare. So is dust on 5D sensor. Believe me.

- fantastic resolution! With 10.1 megapixel, you really get the most out of the highly resolving manual lenses that we use. The 6MP of the 300D, although fine, are not enough to bring out the whole potential of the best manual lenses

- much faster and comfortable interface

- much, MUCH more lasting batteries! No comparison even possible. A 400D battery lasts for me about double the time a 300D battery used to.

Believe me, dont' make the mistake of getting the 300D to save some bucks. The 400D is worth all the difference. Sell a lens you don't use if necessary, but get the 400D.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ballu wrote:
Can we use Contax/Yashica mount lenses on Pentax cameras. I really like Carl Zeiss 50mm lenses.


I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think you can. I think that only Canon, Olympus and Minolta cameras can take the Contax/Yashica lenses, due to register distance.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The one niggle I have is that the 400D probably takes those flimsy
SD cards, right? I'll have to check the reviews on this.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital SLR Cameras
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2