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

Hexanon AR lenses on ROTM SLR cameras (not mirrorless)
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:46 pm    Post subject: Hexanon AR lenses on ROTM SLR cameras (not mirrorless) Reply with quote
The Hexanon AR register distance is too short to allow these lenses to be used on ROTM (run of the mill) SLR cameras, ones with mirrors, while maintaining infinity focus.

However, through use of an adapter with additional optics it becomes possible to lengthen that register distance. I acknowledge the "additional optics" needs to be of sufficiently high quality such that Hexanon AR optical standards not be compromised.

I'm curious to know if anyone owns such an adapter as this, whether purchased or home made.

I'd very much like to broaden the use of my Hexanon AR lenses. They are splendid MF lenses. I envision an adapter having AR female parts at the front end with an M42 male screw fitting at the rear. That would be, it seems to me, a reasonably universal design.

To any Chinese manufacturer participating here: "Build and sell this, and they will come!"

Finally:

Failing the above, I would also be interested in buying a similar item which is mechanical only, without the optics. I realize this would destroy infinity focus. But it would at least allow use of the AR lenses for some SLR applications. And something is better than nothing. Also, by removing the optics all concern about IQ would be erased. Only focus issues would remain.

Does anyone own a "mechanical only" AR to M42 adapter, whether home made or purchased?

Last edited by guardian on Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:35 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think a glass adapter would be a waste of time, much better to use Hexanons on a mirrorless camera.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I think a glass adapter would be a waste of time, much better to use Hexanons on a mirrorless camera.


Hmmm. That seems a rather abrupt comment. I hope you're not having a bad day. Smile

First, I never impugned use of AR lenses on mirrorless cameras. I do that now. A great many of us also do the same. It's a great marriage!

But to label something a "waste of time", absent further elaboration, is not helpful or instructive to others. Why would this be a waste of time? Are you saying the idea could not work? Because implemented properly, it could. Or is it perhaps your intent to discourage Chinese participation.

Frankly, a terse, "shoot from the hip" comment such as yours raises more questions than it answers.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I didn't mean to be abrupt, sorry.

Let me clarify. I believe it is a waste of time to put a piece of glass behind a lens to make it work as this is going to undermine the quality of said lens. It would be better to enjoy the Hexanons on a suitable camera and use lenses that can be adapted with infinity on SLRs.

Hexanons are great, I love em, but I don't think using a glassed adapter is worthwhile.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I didn't mean to be abrupt, sorry.

Let me clarify. I believe it is a waste of time to put a piece of glass behind a lens to make it work as this is going to undermine the quality of said lens. It would be better to enjoy the Hexanons on a suitable camera and use lenses that can be adapted with infinity on SLRs.

Hexanons are great, I love em, but I don't think using a glassed adapter is worthwhile.


Understood. Thanks. I appreciate hearing your thinking on this.

I have to confess you have cast light on my own inadequacy. I lack sufficient lens design knowledge to know what it would take to do this job well. Would a single lens do it? A compound lens? Multiple lenses? I cannot claim to know. And the more complex the arrangement the greater the cost and the more potentially problematic. You can't throw just any old lens, or group of lenses, behind a Hexanon and expect everything to be fine with no IQ loss.

Still, with modern, computer-designed lenses, who knows what might be possible! In addition, the adapter could be designed for digital SLR cameras only. That should make the lens design easier and make the adapter less expensive.

There are a great many fine MF Hexanon lenses out there . . and a great many digital SLR cameras . . what we need is an entity able to design and fabricate the "missing link". Smile


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
guardian wrote:
Still, with modern, computer-designed lenses, who knows what might be possible! In addition, the adapter could be designed for digital SLR cameras only. That should make the lens design easier and make the adapter less expensive.

Good glass is still expensive to produce. Those adapters are basically a teleconverter, take a look at how much it costs to get a good teleconverter now. A Kenko 1.4x is around $250 new, no one is going to pay anywhere near that for an adapter.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
guardian wrote:
[

There are a great many fine MF Hexanon lenses out there . . and a great many digital SLR cameras . . what we need is an entity able to design and fabricate the "missing link". Smile


..or just use a Konica film camera........problem solved Wink


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Essentially I agree with Ian. NEX-3/5 body can be had for less than 200 Euros, probably around 150. That allows you to enjoy Hexanon lenses in all their glory, and not only Hexanon, but a host of other great glass such as Canon FD, Minolta MD, Contax G, and what not as well. A quality glass adapter would cost about the same and still rob the IQ. Just treat NEX as the adapter that you wish Wink


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:52 pm    Post subject: Re: Hexanon AR lenses on ROTM SLR cameras (not mirrorless) Reply with quote
guardian wrote:
Does anyone own a "mechanical only" AR to M42 adapter, whether home made or purchased?

Such a thing would be like using an extension tube. The AR register distance (40.7mm) is already nearly 5mm less than M42 and the threaded part of that adapter would need to be beyond the bayonet wings, so the absolute minimum register distance you could achieve is going to be about 9 or 10mm, and that's not allowing for any flange on the adapter.

What camera did you have in mind? The reason Canon EOS cameras can accept so many different lens mounts is not just because of the register distance, but also because the opening is larger than most, giving space for adapters for smaller bayonet mounts to project inside it slightly. No other DSLR has this ability. Even so, you still won't be able to reach infinity focus even on a Canon.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:15 pm    Post subject: Re: Hexanon AR lenses on ROTM SLR cameras (not mirrorless) Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
guardian wrote:
Does anyone own a "mechanical only" AR to M42 adapter, whether home made or purchased?

Such a thing would be like using an extension tube. The AR register distance (40.7mm) is already nearly 5mm less than M42 and the threaded part of that adapter would need to be beyond the bayonet wings, so the absolute minimum register distance you could achieve is going to be about 9 or 10mm, and that's not allowing for any flange on the adapter.

What camera did you have in mind? The reason Canon EOS cameras can accept so many different lens mounts is not just because of the register distance, but also because the opening is larger than most, giving space for adapters for smaller bayonet mounts to project inside it slightly. No other DSLR has this ability. Even so, you still won't be able to reach infinity focus even on a Canon.


Agreed and understood. I did mention the infinity focus aspect in the OP.

My mirrorless is an E-PL1. Of course the Hexanons work well with that camera body no problem.

My only DSLR is a Sigma SD14. I don't care a whit about infinity focus. I'd just like to be able to hook up all those Hexanon lenses to my SD14. And it would have to happen via M42.

I do have a BUNCH of Konica film cameras, at least a couple of which actually work quite well. I only mention this in order to add a tad bit of humor here. Smile

Doubt I'll ever pull it off, but:

Am thinkin' about scavenging one of the Konica bodies for an AR female mount, then using a tube of some sort to connect that mount to an M42 male fitting. Finally apply lots of flat black paint. No lenses and no infinity focus, but at least there would be a connection.

Really a reason for posting this thread was I thought somebody might already have undertaken this project . . or something better/more sophisticated . . in order to make the connection.

Last edited by guardian on Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:44 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
to take full advantage of hexanon lenses, you would need a full frame NEX mirrorless.
Hopefully we will have one soon.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1