| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sjak
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 696
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:53 pm Post subject: M42 lenses with rear element (almost) not protruding |
 |
|
Sjak wrote:
I've recently acquired a Sigma DSLR. A fine machine, and works with adapted lenses too.
1 important issue on these camera's is the dust protector / IR-filter mounted between the mirror and the lens mount.
So not every lens can be safely mounted and still be set at infinity; the protector/filter can break easily and replacements are not available off the shelf for my specific cam.
For this reason, I am looking for M42-lenses where the rear-element does not protrude much or at all (max. approx 2-3mm beyond the mounting flange of the lens)
Preference would be something between 20mm and 40mm, or a nice 80 to 100mm lens is very welcome. Fast is not a must, but just an added bonus.Â
Any recommendations? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Anatol_M
Joined: 23 Dec 2017
Posts: 34
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anatol_M wrote:
The soviet Kaleinar-5N 100mm 2.8 in it's M42 variation has a rear element, that does not protrude at all.
Although the Nikon diaphragm lever remains and sticks out of the M42 mount (but it can be cut down with minimal effort)). Must note, that finding a good copy seems to be hard these days, fungus just loves this lens. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sjak
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 696
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sjak wrote:
Thanks, that's a nice suggestion. I also happen to have an unhealthy interest in Soviet lenses  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guardian
Joined: 18 Mar 2009
Posts: 1746
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:20 pm Post subject: Re: M42 lenses with rear element (almost) not protruding |
|
|
guardian wrote:
| Sjak wrote: |
I've recently acquired a Sigma DSLR. A fine machine, and works with adapted lenses too.
1 important issue on these camera's is the dust protector / IR-filter mounted between the mirror and the lens mount.
|
If it would not be too much trouble, would you mind please saying which model Sigma DSLR you have?
Thank you |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sjak
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 696
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sjak wrote:
Oops, forgot to mention... an SD10. Looks like it's built to survive WW III  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guardian
Joined: 18 Mar 2009
Posts: 1746
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2018 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
guardian wrote:
| Sjak wrote: |
| Oops, forgot to mention... an SD10. Looks like it's built to survive WW III |
Thank you. The SD10 is a really fine camera body.
I have the SD14 which is only one model newer, I think. But I have the same dilemma you face. So far I have been fortunate in not damaging my IR filter. But perhaps I need to purchase a spare just in case I forget and try to install the wrong lens. That is, if it is possible to buy a spare IR filter . . . . .  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sjak
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 696
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2018 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sjak wrote:
Let's make a Sigma-thread here >>> http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1508615.html#1508615
So we can keep the thread here about M42 lenses  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ADDCollector
Joined: 06 Mar 2018
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
ADDCollector wrote:
Just checked my modest collection.
Most of my lenses don't have protruding back elements. I have four Vivitar m42 lenses and none of them have protruding elements.
Technically, two are t4 lenses. This includes a 24mm f/2.8 lens which falls in one of the ranges you asked about.
Vivitar/Soligor t4 mount lenses should work with no problem. The m42 adapter for those lenses should be long enough that the back element shouldn't protrude. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sjak
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 696
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2018 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sjak wrote:
| ADDCollector wrote: |
| This includes a 24mm f/2.8 lens which falls in one of the ranges you asked about. |
Thanks so much for your effort, this looks indeed like a lens to look for! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sjak
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 696
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2018 4:23 pm Post subject: Re: M42 lenses with rear element (almost) not protruding |
|
|
Sjak wrote:
| Sjak wrote: |
For this reason, I am looking for M42-lenses where the rear-element does not protrude much or at all (max. approx 2-3mm beyond the mounting flange of the lens)
|
I made a mistake here.
Measured from the mounting flange of the lens, the rear element should not protrude more than approx. 7Â to 8 mm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dickb
Joined: 04 Apr 2008
Posts: 821
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:50 pm Post subject: Re: M42 lenses with rear element (almost) not protruding |
|
|
dickb wrote:
| Sjak wrote: |
| Measured from the mounting flange of the lens, the rear element should not protrude more than approx. 7Â to 8 mm. |
I just checked a couple of my favourite M42 lenses, they are all protruding 6 or 7mm, Pancolar 80/1.8, Vivitar S1 90/2.5 and Vivitar 55/2.8 macro. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sjak
Joined: 29 Sep 2017
Posts: 696
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2018 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sjak wrote:
Yes my wrong measurement lead me to dismissing most of my own M42-arsenal. Although some really extend too much (or at least too much for peace of mind)
And thanks for checking those lenses, some could be very interesting for me |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
