|
|
Post by byuphoto on Sept 16, 2006 19:41:41 GMT -5
Has anyone tried one of these and if so what are the results. Or do you know where to find any info?
|
|
|
|
Post by GeneW on Sept 16, 2006 19:49:46 GMT -5
Rick, I've not tried one, but I did some research on it a couple of years ago when I wrote an article on lens adapters for Shutterbug magazine.
The irony of the EOS mount is that because of the way it was designed, it is the most hospitable mount around for lens adapting, with one glaring exception: Canon's own FD lenses. The problem is that FD lenses adapted for EOS won't focus to infinity with a straight adapter so the adapters that have been made all have a corrective lens in them. Not one kind word could I find about these -- the sources I came across were unanimous in saying you lost a lot of image quality with them. They're also hard to find now.
On the other hand, I've had great personal experience with OM-mount, Nikon F-mount, and M42-mount lenses on EOS bodies.
Gene
|
|
|
|
Post by byuphoto on Sept 16, 2006 21:16:05 GMT -5
Yeah, that is what I thought. I am going to get some more M42 lenses for my yashica so I will try that route. Sure did want to use my big glass and macro
|
|
|
|
Post by physiognomy on Sept 16, 2006 22:30:52 GMT -5
Has anyone tried one of these and if so what are the results. Or do you know where to find any info? Rick, Stephen Gandy at Cameraquest stocks a lot of lens adapters, but he echoes Gene's comments about image degradation with FD to EOS adapters & doesn't carry them. www.cameraquest.com/frames/4saleReos.htmPeter |
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Sept 17, 2006 3:47:55 GMT -5
The irony of the EOS mount is that because of the way it was designed, it is the most hospitable mount around for lens adapting, with one glaring exception: Canon's own FD lenses. Perhaps it was quite deliberate so that you had to buy the new EOS lenses but a shame all the same. The Minolta AF/MD situation is much the same. The extra element built into the adaptors ruins the image quality. |
|
