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

beginner's questions: Contax? Leica?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
montecarlo wrote:
peterqd wrote:
... there is no standard, "universal", bayonet mount.


Almost Pentax's bayonet became one beeing used in the '80, besides Pentax, by Chinon, Ricoh (with little ad-ons), Cosina, Topcon, (...and some chinese manufaturers) and many cameras manufactured by these were wearing different brands: Miranda, Exakta , Edixa, Quantaray, Hanimex, Soligor, Centon, Luxon, Vivitar, Revueflex, Agfa, Alpa, Porst, Sears, Sigma, ... all with K Pentax mount.


Yep, the K was fairly ubiquitous then. With the untold thousands of K-equipped cameras sold, I'd expect there to be a flood of dirt-cheap K lenses on the used market, so there must still be thousands of them sitting in cupboards and drawers all over the place.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
montecarlo wrote:
peterqd wrote:
... there is no standard, "universal", bayonet mount.


Almost Pentax's bayonet became one beeing used in the '80, besides Pentax, by Chinon, Ricoh (with little ad-ons), Cosina, Topcon, (...and some chinese manufaturers) and many cameras manufactured by these were wearing different brands: Miranda, Exakta , Edixa, Quantaray, Hanimex, Soligor, Centon, Luxon, Vivitar, Revueflex, Agfa, Alpa, Porst, Sears, Sigma, ... all with K Pentax mount.


This is true, but most of these brand names are of 3rd party lens manufacturers who also made lenses for Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Minolta, C/Y, etc. etc. as well. Nothing has changed, we still have this situation today except that some of the names have changed.

I was agreeing with Orio that all these different mounts resulted from camera manufacturers deliberately trying to prevent their customers from using each others' products. There is no technical advantage why Nikon chose a larger registration distance than Pentax, for instance. Think how much simpler it would be if there was a standard universal mount!! But then manufacturers would be in true competition with each other. Smile


PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ballu wrote:
The register distance is the "most" critical facto.. but not the only one...


Quite true. I've been thinking of producing a better chart to show what lenses can actually be used on what cameras, but it's quite an involved task and I only know a little. If I make a start could everyone pool their knowledge on adapters?


PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Peter
We would all love to help. From my experience:

On the Nikon - M42 adapter is easy, but no infinity
M42 adapter with glass works OK, but quality definitely drops
P6 works just fine

On the Canon - M42 works perfectly
Nikon works perfectly
C/Y works perfectly


patrickh


PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It might be worth putting soviet A mount in with T mount (theres little info on the web to say tha a mount is just the outer ring of a T2 mount).


PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I use an Olympus E500 and have a couple of adapters.
K-mount to olympus works good
Olympus OM to 4/3 works good
Minolta MD to 4/3 works good
C/Y mount to 4/3 works good
All my adapters are cheap to very cheap chinese products.
I have big problems with my 42mm adapters. I bought for of them and only one was build good enough to reach infinity. When you come above 135 mm, no infinity any more. I have sanded one and that was helpfull, but i don't use that adapter anymore because i am afraid of little particles coming from the sanding


PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Gerrit wrote:
I use an Olympus E500 and have a couple of adapters.


Excellent. Thankyou, that's the kind of help I need Smile


PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sigma dslr can mount Pentax K lenses, but the register distance is 1.5mm different. The Pentax K lens might hit the ir-dust filter on Sigma. Also it is necessary to break off things that stick out. It may be easy to put a 1.5mm cardboard or plastic spacer under the K mount to make the rear of the lens not hit the ir-dust filter.

In reverse, a Contax lens which converts to Sigma dslr will mount to Pentax K camera. The Contax lenses that don't quite fit on Sigma are Distagon 28/2, Yashinon 28/2.8. Distagon 21/2 is close, I don't know yet. Other Zeiss Contax should work on Pentax K.

I agree that bayonet mount is faster and easier and safer to glass than M42., and that it created the client-capturing vertical silo business plan. Now we are not using M42 as a screw mount lens, only by M42-to-bayonet adapters. Lenses made as M42 help to open the door to the proprietary lens enclosure. M42 conversion of non-M42 lenses threatens to reverse the trend to proprietary bayonets because several proprietary bayonets can be put on M42 by adapter. I have seen Contax/Yashica to M42 conversions.

When one camera can mount different makers' proprietary lenses, then the user gets to see which are better, and pick and choose some from one some from another manufacturer. Power to the People! Rah rah revolutionaries.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2