mount help please

[technoimpaired]

Few I passed the IQ test at 06.20 AM so I dont know how I cant find this information hope someone can help !

For a D700 which mount would I need ? exakta, m24 or praktica bayonet ? Or do they all require a mount ? Is there one which will work better ?

[WolverineX]

any manual lens you want to mount on dSLR needs to have an apropriate adapter attached to it. (i think only exceptions are nikkor manual lenses on Nikon dSLR, and pentax-k mount lenses on Pentax dSLR)

[ManualFocus-G]

You are very limited by shooting Nikon. Generally it is only possible to shoot with Nikon AI or AIS mount lenses. Pre-AI lenses may damage your camera. Any other mount is likely to need an adapter with an optical element which will act as a mild teleconverter, slowing the lens and lowering image quality.

[technoimpaired]

So I read this

Just joined this group some days ago since I stumble upon a M42 Meyer Orestor 135mm 2.8, 15 bladed.

Got the lens a few days ago, but had to have an adapter to use it.

So I have been reading up for days about adapters and the focus problem of M42's and Nikon-F mount.
Because of that I ordered several of them, 2 "optics" ones (one cheap china thing, one a bit more expensive Japanse (Marumi?) and a flat-non optical one.

All these things have to shipped from China or USA so I will have to wait another week or 2 before I could see the lens on my cam.

Or so I thought . . .

Being the impatient person I am, I already took half the lens apart to clean some inside dust from the lenses, so I know the back-end M42 adapter can easily be unscrewed.

Because of the reading I got myself thinking about this focus issue.
The M42 adapter is rather deep, what if I could make that one a bit shorter so the back-lens comes a bit closer to the focal plain.

So I unscrewed the adapter and then I noticed the thread was almost similar to some macro extension tubes I have laying around.
I tried to screw on my smallest tube, and it "perfectly" fitted. So I screw the mount adapter on so I could, for the first time, use the lens on my D700.

Would this work on the Exa-Exakta mount or just the M42 ? Because the image quality would be better this way !?

[ManualFocus-G]

The Pentacon preset 200/4 and 135/2.8 both have the same mounting system, so Exakta mounts would screw off just as easily. They are interchangeable with the Exakta ones. You could probably sell the M42 parts to users with Exakta mount lenses

[technoimpaired]

So you can screw off the Exakta mount and put on a M42 mount !? Will this be easy to find and does it have to be off the same model lens or any of that particular make ?

[ManualFocus-G]

The mount for the 135/2.8 and 200/4 preset lenses is interchangeable between models. I.e. you can take the M42 mount from a 135/2.8 and replace the Exakta mount on a 200/4.

Same goes for the Meyer Optik versions, which are the same lenses.

[technoimpaired]

I know where I have got confused Its the same lens you stick a mount on to convert it to a different camera. This person adjusted the lens to fit a extension tube which means it does not matter which mount it already has the end of the lens is still the same ! Groin I hate technology when am I going to be able to take pictures with my eyes

You guys might like these nothing to do with manual lens

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTVfFmENgPU&feature=youtu.be


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr6YwI8JUvI&feature=relmfu

[ForenSeil]

The Meyer Orestegor 200/4 (Zebra) has also the same interchangeable mount as the Pentacon 200/4 I believe.

[Attila]

[technoimpaired]

Right so there is a seller on ebay saying he can fit a Nikon F mount on any Mere gorlitz trioplan 100mm f2.8 lens, but he is asking alot (about £230 just for the lens as I understood it they are in the region of £100) for it ! So if I got hold of the lens and a Nikon F mount then I unscrew the unwanted mount and put the F mount on !? If this is correct is it as easy as that ? The other M42 mount explanations were that you have to unscrew and change the distance inside and it will then attach to an extension tube which I think is way beyond my knowledge !!!!!!! I just like taking pretty photos all the technical side makes my head hurt

[luisalegria]

You can avoid all these problems and just buy lenses with Nikon AI mounts. There are plenty, and some are the best in the world or close to it.
You don't need to buy Meyer Zeiss or Pentacon lenses.

[iangreenhalgh1]

[luisalegria]

like this -

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikkor-50-f2-AI-/220918249666?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item336fc0f8c2

$35 BIN, free US shipping.
Cheap, good
I have no idea about the specific condition of this lens or the reliability of the seller, but its a good example of what you can get at low cost.

[technoimpaired]

Yes but its tools for the job ! I can take a good photograph I just dont understand technical things easily ! I know what I want to do and I first saw it years ago, now I know what I need to do it i just need to find out how to do it with my camera ! I aint paying £1000 for a filter so I cant use my 105mm Nikon macro to do the same job just because its the best in the world or near to it !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ManualFocus-G]

To the OP, I don't understand your logic. I've taken the time to explain about the 135/2.8 and 200/4 Meyer/Pentacon lenses and you've gone and bought something else altogether!

Sorry, but it is not easy to adapt the Trioplan at all. It is an M42 or Exakta fixed mount lens which isn't meant to have interchangable mounts. You could get a Nikkor 105/2.5 for much less, which is a way better lens. It just doesn't have the wacky bokeh.

If you want a camera which is easy to use with many different types of old lenses, Nikon DSLRs are not for you.

[luisalegria]

I don't understand what you want to do thats so unusual.

You say you got a 135mm f/2.8 lens. There are many thousands of these, perfectly good, already in Nikon mount.
The Orestor is a nice 135 with good bokeh but its not noticably better than most other 135's in most respects.
Sell it, get a decent Nikkor 135mm or even a Vivitar or Tokina in Nikon AI mount and just don't worry about adapters.
If you need a different sort of lens, look for the type you want in Nikon AI mount also.

One less problem to get in the way of art.

What $1000 filter do you need to fit on a Nikon macro ?
Maybe you can get specific and someone here can tell you how to do it, exactly. And probably quite cheaply too.

[technoimpaired]

OK. I want a Mere gorlitz ttrioplan 100mm f2.8 lens on a Nikon D700. I already have a Nikon 105mm. I am not interested in any other manual lens other than the previously mentioned 100mm but thank you for the suggestions. And no I dont have a 135mm f2.8 without looking I assume you are getting confused with the quote from someone who has changed their lens which clearly is not me as that is what I am asking.

OK how about what is the difference in the V series trioplans and not V series !?

[luisalegria]

Do you care if optical aberrations are introduced, or do you intend to use the Meyer Trioplan wide open for its "special character" BECAUSE of its optical aberrations ? Thats usually why people get the Trioplan anyway.

If you don't mind degrading the image a bit (at f/2.8 with the Trioplan its a moot point) get a glassed adapter.

Thats it. No need to talk mount conversions.

[FluffPuppy]

[luisalegria]

Its not lousy, its just different. Some lenses are lousy, if what they are designed to do they do badly.

This is a pictorial lens of a certain sort. Not my personal idea of a pictorial lens, the bokeh being very harsh indeed to my eye, but if thats the desired effect, then it is so. It would be very hard to duplicate the very sharply defined blur circles in PP.

[peterqd]

[technoimpaired]

No photoshop as I am a purist. It was a quote from another website but will in future write quote before and after any words of wisdom I may find. I certainly didnt mean for anyones time to be wasted. At least my spelling was O.K.
My only interest in the lens is the bokeh. I was attracted to the painted effect rather than the circles. If you backlight water droplets it creates a similar effect which I do like and I think in some circumstances this is attractive but in my opinion it is over baring in alot of cases from what I have seen.
Filters create the effect as a whole so you can not get the effect of a clear subject on an background. Unless you use Lensbaby ? Or someone similar who has an effect around the outside and the centre is clear but I have never seen a picture that I have considered attractive by this method as I personally dont like the messy edges. Unless you purchase the £1000 version which is ridiculous!

Does anyone know if there is a difference in the bokeh of the lenses with a red V on them and those that dont !?

[technoimpaired]

You forgot to moan about my spacing, I never leave enough spacing for ease of reading.

[peterqd]