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 option would you take? (adapters/conversions)
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 3:36 pm    Post subject: What option would you take? (adapters/conversions) Reply with quote
Hi all,

(Maybe it is a silly question, but I am still confused on my NEX(t) Rolling Eyes move)...

I am considering to buy a NEX camera (probably NEX-3) to complete the Canon 5D2 and also to use my manual focus lenses...

Till NOW to use most of my lenses on Canon 5d2 I use adapters (M42, C/Y and OM). They are fairly cheap when compared to nex adapters and I have plenty of eos adapters, almost one per 2 lenses!

Also have some other lenses that are not adaptable (Rokkor's and Canon FD's Canon) but still convertibles. My Canon 135 2.0 and Rokkor 58 1.2 are already converted but still have the FD 85L 1.2, 2x FD 24 2.0 SSC and Rokkors MC 85 1.7 and 35 to be converted..
In current scenarios, I will probably convert them all, so can be used not only on NEX camera, but also to take the advantage to use very nice glass on such a camera like Canon 5d2... Anyway it would take lots of time and money to have all them converted!!

MEANWHILE, I must consider some options:
a) Buy 1 NEX-EOS adapter to use most M42,C/Y and OM with current eos adapters, and also the converted rokkor and FD to eos??
b) Buy 3 adapter - EOS/NEX, FD/NEX and Minolta/NEX??
c) none of both. The solution would be a NEX adapter for any mount (M42/NEX, OM/NEX, and so on)???


BTW, who have both cameras how use the lenses for both cameras ?

Thanks
Regards


PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
b) and you will be fine.

You will have eos-nex for all your of your lenses for which you have EOS adapters, and MD, FD for the rest.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
std wrote:
b) and you will be fine.

You will have eos-nex for all your of your lenses for which you have EOS adapters, and MD, FD for the rest.


+1


PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I will choose b).

Since I have converted some of Canon FDs, Minolta MCs and the others,
I found those conversions are unnecessary in retrospect and destructive
to these industrial items, which some of our decendants can use them
fully in their original condition as Attila mentioned somewhere in MFlenses.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Indeed 'b' is a very good choice to make full use of lenses on hand, however in practical use, lenses of small size would be more convenient for Sony Nex. Usually when rangefinder lenses are adapted to Nex, the minimum focusing distance is longer than the SLR counterparts, which at times can be frustrating for some subject matters. Recently somebody in Taiwan developed an Nex to Leica M adapter witch built in helicoid. In normal use focusing is done with helicoid on the lens which reaches infinity, at distance closer than the minimum focus of the lens, helicoid on the adapter can be used for further extension. An interesting example: With a Zeiss 15mm Distagon, the closest you can get with full extension of the lens and adapter, the subject would practically be insider the lens hood...


PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
koji wrote:

Since I have converted some of Canon FDs, Minolta MCs and the others,
I found those conversions are unnecessary in retrospect and destructive
to these industrial items, which some of our decendants can use them
fully in their original condition as Attila mentioned somewhere in MFlenses.


I fully agree.
Anyway not all conversions are irreversible and one day the EF-MOUNT will also be adaptable to other mount, and EF lenses will become "vintages".. Razz

Nowadays, the problem is NO cheap mirrorless full-frame camera! Leica M9 too expensive, MTF and 4/3 have a 2x crop and NEX a 1,5x crop!
With tele lenses I am more reluctant to destructive conversionsbut with wide angle lenses it is a bit different... For instance, the nice Canon FD 24mm 2.0 ssc have really different purposes if used on full-frame, 1,5x crop or even 2,0x crop camera!


PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exaklaus wrote:
std wrote:
b) and you will be fine.

You will have eos-nex for all your of your lenses for which you have EOS adapters, and MD, FD for the rest.


+1


+1


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would go the a) way - but I did not understand why you want the NEX for that additional - or to have the FD 85/1.2L with infinity and without shaved mirror on 5DII?

I have converted some FD and Rokkor lenses, and like to use them on 24x36mm - that is the format they are designed for.
If you use such fine lenses on a crop camera, you are wasting corrected image field Smile

I love these old lenses on a real camera, and not a big lens and behind some small camera which I can not use and hold like a (D)SLR.
All my converted lenses could be hold with only gripping the camera, even the FD 400/2.8L.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ZoneV wrote:
If you use such fine lenses on a crop camera, you are wasting corrected image field


funny, i was under impression that with crop camera you are using the best corrected part of the lens


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
WolverineX wrote:
funny, i was under impression that with crop camera you are using the best corrected part of the lens


+1


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
WolverineX wrote:
ZoneV wrote:
If you use such fine lenses on a crop camera, you are wasting corrected image field


funny, i was under impression that with crop camera you are using the best corrected part of the lens


I wonder how photographers before 1990 make their phantastic sharp slide shows with FF transparencies?

Fact is, that all those fine FF lenses are designed and build for FF.

And for me the border image quality of my converted FF lenses is good enough Smile So I need no crop camera for Rokkor 58/1.2, FD 85/1.2L, FD 24/1.4L...
But I have to admit that I do not make reproduction photography but more artistic images.

I even think that my Porst 135/1.8 and Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8 are not able to give good sharp image quality on 4/3 cameras - wideopen. On the 8µm big pixel of the EOS 5D they look just sharp enough - for me.

I think using FF lenses on crop must be the same like owning an driving a big motorcycle with only half power (limiting because of driving licence).


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ZoneV wrote:
I wonder how photographers before 1990 make their phantastic sharp slide shows with FF transparencies?

Fact is, that all those fine FF lenses are designed and build for FF.


nobody said nothing against that. it's just that out of that FF image field center part is best corrected optically and crop cameras use that part of image field

ZoneV wrote:
I even think that my Porst 135/1.8 and Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8 are not able to give good sharp image quality on 4/3 cameras - wideopen. On the 8µm big pixel of the EOS 5D they look just sharp enough - for me.

you must have missed almost 60 threads of "testing my lenses"...all those samples were taken with Olympus e520 and 95% wide open...


ZoneV wrote:
I think using FF lenses on crop must be the same like owning an driving a big motorcycle with only half power (limiting because of driving licence).

that thinking is ridiculous


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
WolverineX wrote:
...
ZoneV wrote:
I even think that my Porst 135/1.8 and Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8 are not able to give good sharp image quality on 4/3 cameras - wideopen. On the 8µm big pixel of the EOS 5D they look just sharp enough - for me.

you must have missed almost 60 threads of "testing my lenses"...all those samples were taken with Olympus e520 and 95% wide open...
...


Please be aware that I wrote here about those two lenses Porst 135/1.8 and Meyer Goerlitz Trioplan 100/2.8 only - not about every FF lens.

And with these two lenses I have the experience that the sharpness is just enough for this 8µm pixel - for me.
This is my point of view with each 1 sample of the lens.

WolverineX wrote:
...
ZoneV wrote:
I think using FF lenses on crop must be the same like owning an driving a big motorcycle with only half power (limiting because of driving licence).

that thinking is ridiculous


Here in Germany those limited motorcycles are very common, because our driving licence system. Some buy bigger machines for the first time, and than they could upgrade to full power without big cost.

I would be very sad if I had to limit my camera to 4/3 format.
All the lenses would be way too long for my current way of working.
I couldn´t replace the Trioplan 100, the Rokkor 58, - better not think about the FD 24/1.4!

At the moment I am not sure, but I suppose even the 3D effect that is not that one with the small depth of field depends on sensor format (because MTF to image height relation).

The long lenses would be longer - to use this would probably be my solution if I have to go 4/3.

I am used to have sometimes ridiculous ideas and thoughts - at first glance Smile


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ZoneV wrote:

Please be aware that I wrote here about those two lenses Porst 135/1.8 and Meyer Goerlitz Trioplan 100/2.8 only - not about every FF lens.


please be aware that among tested lenses were Soligor 135/2 and Olympus 100/2.8 lenses that have similar specs to those you mention
and both worked just fine on crop sensor

ZoneV wrote:


I would be very sad if I had to limit my camera to 4/3 format.
All the lenses would be way too long for my current way of working.
I couldn´t replace the Trioplan 100, the Rokkor 58, - better not think about the FD 24/1.4!

I am used to have sometimes ridiculous ideas and thoughts - at first glance Smile


that's not a reason to belittle crop cameras, especially if you haven't used them first hand


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
WolverineX wrote:
...please be aware that among tested lenses were Soligor 135/2 and Olympus 100/2.8 lenses that have similar specs to those you mention
and both worked just fine on crop sensor


Don´t know about the Soligor 135/2.0 exactly, but some claim that they are sharper and have different optical design.

Similar specs?
Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8 - 3 elements in 3 groups
Olympus 100/2.8 - 5 elements in 5 groups
For me that are pretty different specs - and I would not claim them similar. But if that is similar enough for you to compare sharpness, ok.

WolverineX wrote:
...
that's not a reason to belittle crop cameras, especially if you haven't used them first hand


They are little. And they have a smaller image sensor than 24x36.

I belittle sometimes even FF cameras, because they are smaller than 4x5" largeformat. But on the other hand I have to work with even smaller sensors like 1/3".
Canon Crop cameras I use pretty often, but not 4/3, yes. But for me it is enough to see that my 8µm pixel show sometimes to much optical problems of a lens - I need not to verify that with smaller pixel.
On work I test lenses with cameras with ~ 2.5µm to 7.4µm, sometimes bigger.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 2:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
std wrote:
b) and you will be fine.

You will have eos-nex for all your of your lenses for which you have EOS adapters, and MD, FD for the rest.

OK


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ZoneV wrote:
I would go the a) way - but I did not understand why you want the NEX for that additional - or to have the FD 85/1.2L with infinity and without shaved mirror on 5DII?
...
I love these old lenses on a real camera, and not a big lens and behind some small camera which I can not use and hold like a (D)SLR.
All my converted lenses could be hold with only gripping the camera, even the FD 400/2.8L.


I agree. My rokkors and canon Fd were designed to use on 36x24, and I am on way to convert them sooner or later...

The NEX is for my WIFE:P.. (At least this will be the reason to buy it!)
(Kidding) Then she will not borrow anymore the 5D2 when I am shooting!!

Seriously: NEX is a smaller camera and can use almost any lens. There are advantages in a combo NEX with smaller lenses, but also once in a while I can use BIG glass on it!
More I am not sure yet to shave the mirror of 5D2 for just one or two lenses since I can still use them in other situations than infinity focus...


PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ZoneV and WolverineX,

Thank you both to contribute for this discussion. Congratz :clap

I really appreciated the new factor introduced such the performance of lenses that were designed to FF cameras when used on crop sensor..
Here, i was keen more for WolverineX arguments but realy have no know-how enough for that. Just can confirm that canon 5d2 demand for very good lenses in a way that old 5D and 40D or Xt, do not... More, some good results can come from lenses designed for medium format!

Also ver nice to introduce the "special effects" like 3D effect would be the same when use a FF or a Crop camera.
here, I am keen to agree with ZoneV since on full frame would be more "room" to the special effect become better produced. At least the WHOLE lens will be used to produce that effect.


So, to my initial question, at this point, I can resume:
- option b) : nice for my next 3-6 months or even more because not all will be converted to eos..
- option a) : Probably in future (about 1 year?)... The problem will be if more rokkor or FD lenses come in...(I must consider also the conversion costs when have like 10 lenses to convert)!!!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1