Bronica mount question

[willy35]

Hi,

I am new to Bronica, but great deal and cheap lenses later, I have start to collect.

I have the 75mm MC, will get the fotodiox adapter for Sony, but I have the opportunity to get a 40mm EC as well.

Are PE, MC, EII lenses the same mount ?

fotodiox adapater is called ETR to EOS then EOS to NEX.

Thank you !

[Oldhand]

Yes these are all for the ETR series ETR, ETRC, ETRS and ETRSi
There are lenses for other Bronicas that do not have the same mount.
MC, EII and PE were three generations of lenses all with the same mount, with each series being an improvement on the previous.
Most of the MC lenses are very good. Some of the EII lenses are like the MC's and some seem to be early PE's.
The PE lenses are generally regarded as the best, but there isn't much really between them.
If you are going to collect them, then look for a Bronica body and shoot some film with them. The results are great
Tom

[awa54]

As Oldhand said, the ETR system is well worth using if you can process 120 or 220 film. The sheer detail that is captured on medium format film will be a revelation to most photographers... The smoothness of bokeh transition is different as well and often gives the images a more subtle and sometimes almost holographic/3D look that isn't often seen in smaller formats.

I own an ETRSi and the 40 mc, 50 mc, 60 pe, 75 eII, 100 mc macro, 105 mc, 150 mc , and 200 mc. lenses as well as extension rings and a doubler.

The first generation MC 75mm and 150mm f/4 are reputed to be softer than the later versions, while the PE series add half stops on the aperture controls and allegedly better coatings.

Honestly, I don't see a big difference in image quality or flare resistance between my PE 60 and the MC 50, and sharpness, contrast, flare and linear distortion are all excellent in this entire lens family!

Now if only there was an affordable 40+MP back available for the ETR body...

[Oldhand]

[awa54]

Yeah, the 1/500 top speed is a bummer some days, but then again, I shoot mostly 100 or 160 ISO print or 100 B+W, so that limitation doesn't rear it's head often and I'm not scared to drag out the ND filter when it does
**What? you say you need a higher shutter speed to shoot action?? with a 645? ...how's that working out for you so far?**

The 150 f3.5 MC was my first lens for the system, at first I was dubious about a 90mm equivalent being useful, but I have to say that it and the 105mm f3.5 get the most use by far. I'm also of two minds about the "standard" lens for this system, I *like* their choice in as much as I prefer a slightly wider view than 50mm equivalent as standard, but baffled, since 50-55mm is what most photographers expect (and what is completely missing from the line!).

The 105mm was apparently intended for macro work when paired with extension rings (grrr... why can't the damned things be stacked?!?), but is a great standard+ for general use. As far as the true macro lenses, I'm somewhat amused that the one I have only goes to 1:4 without rings, not very macro by most standards... but the somewhat extended focus range plus rings, while cumbersome, certainly delivers great results.

Now that the weather is nice here in the northeastern US, I'll have to drag the Bronica rig out more often, however I'm nursing a damaged shoulder, so I'll have to work up an abbreviated kit, since the full pack is *very* heavy!

[Oldhand]

Hmmmm - not much point having a 40 Megapixel back that only goes to 400ISO.
But then with a top speed of 1/500 sec how are higher ISOs all that useful?
So it is film shooting as the camera was intended
Of course the OP was asking about adapting the glass to other camera systems, and this can work even though the lenses can be cumbersome for their focal lengths - ie better choices available from an ergonomics perspective.
Tom

[cooltouch]

Willy, you mention you're adapting your ETR lenses to your NEX and then you mention the 40mm. The 40mm is a very special lens for the ETR-series cameras -- roughly the 35mm equivalent to a 24mm focal length. Very useful. But a 40mm focal length on a NEX will be a mild telephoto. Its special characteristics will be wasted on a crop-body camera such as the NEX. Heck, they'd even be wasted on a full frame camera like an A7. You're really best off using the 40mm on an ETR-series body, where it works best.

[willy35]

I would like to test, and I would like to try on A7

40mm - 75mm - 105mm - 150mm

It is not worth on A7 Full Frame ? ETR lens are so cheap right now, I found many around 40 euros...

I tried large format lens like Hasselblad Zeiss Sonnar 150mm f/4 and I was very pleased

[cooltouch]

There's no question they're great lenses. 40 euros? Whew, that's cheap. I see the 75s for around that price, but not any of the others. Wish I could find a few more for that price. I have "only" a 75, 150, and 40 for my ETRSi, and I'd like to get more -- especially that cool 500mm Bronica made. But that one remains expensive, I've found, especially the later EII version.

[willy35]

I have to admit this is not all day, but in a year there is some at low price.

500mm I read the specs, 3760g

[awa54]

[cooltouch]

[Oldhand]

[awa54]

The E and EII have the same element count (7/6), but the PE has 11 elements in 10 groups and a filter size of 122mm rather than the 95mm of the earlier designs.

It still seems improbable that it would weigh over twice as much as the next heaviest version...

[dickb]

I happen to have the PS version of this lens and I can confirm it is massive. Must be all that fluorite..