|
Post by genazzano on Aug 12, 2014 14:52:31 GMT -5
I use a number of adapters but prefer purely mechanical ones. I did try one with contacts (both on on a wide-angle zoom where focus was not easy to pinpoint, and on a macro). Occasionally Canon electronics froze up due to it. It unfroze afterwards, but the chip was not all that useful. p. For me, I have no need for autofocus. Focusing, especially with very shallow dof , is such an important part of the creative process. My old and dear D70 AF still works even with my manual lenses. A little green light goes on in the viewfinder when the camera thinks the image is in focus. I never pay any attention to it. These big old 645 lenses mounted on my D70 give me the best of both worlds. Perhaps if I ever broke down and got a new DSLR with more capabilities? I don't know.David
|
|
truls
Lifetime Member
Posts: 568
|
Post by truls on Aug 13, 2014 10:05:29 GMT -5
Just a short note, my previous m42 adapter would press the aperture pin, to enable stop down. My current m42 adapter do not, so I must shoot wide open on some lenses, e.g. Fujinon 35mm 3.5. Or use lens with A/M switch. I did not know about the difference until now.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Aug 16, 2014 5:36:00 GMT -5
As always, it depends on the type of photograph being taken. It depends, too, on the format being used. Fixed focus works fine if the sensor size (whether film or digital) is small enough. Everything is in focus, whether you want it to be or not. For the best differential focus used a full-plate camera. Not that I have one, but a 600mm f2.8 lens on a full-frame 35mm camera will give far superior DOF capabilities than a 600mm (equivalent) f2.8 on the Panasonic FZ200.
The problem when first using autofocus is that it takes a bit of learning to obtain the best results. There is the classic case of taking a photo of two people but having the autofocus taking its reading from the background between them, so it is in focus but the subjects are not.
Personally, I would not be without autofocus. I almost always have it set to spot focussing. I now get a higher percentage of shots properly focussed on the (difficult) subject than I did with manual focus. That is not to say I use it exclusively. There are still times when manual focus is easier, macro for instance (but that might be because the one true macro lens I have has very slow autofocus). Indeed, the old method of just guessing the distance still works well enough for some shots.
|
|
|
Post by genazzano on Aug 16, 2014 5:53:30 GMT -5
Daveh: "Indeed, the old method of just guessing the distance still works well enough for some shots."
This is true which is why I use a reflex camera. With regard to adapters, it is possible to use manual lenses through a purely mechanical adapter and still utilise the AF function of the DSLR such as the Nikon D70. I don't know which other more recent models can provide this capability.
I am searching for a new DSLR on which I can mount my old manual lenses and still take advantage of the capabilities of the camera. For me, I primarily wish to increase the number of pixels captured. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
David
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Aug 16, 2014 6:19:24 GMT -5
The problem is that while I have had several digital cameras, they only form a small fraction of what is available. I'm sure if you ask a hundred different people, you will get two hundred different answers.
DSLRs: I have Pentax *ist DS & -k, Canon 30D & 7D. They range from 6mp to 18mp. What would I buy next? At the moment nothing, I am happy with what the Pentax-k and Canon 7D give me. If I had a couple of thousand pounds lying round I would buy a Canon 5D mkII - or rather I wouldn't - I spend at least some of it on lenses, and wait for the price drop as the next model comes out.
I can't really even tell you which camera I would have if I were just allowed one, although, perhaps, the Panasonic FZ200 comes closest to satisfying all requirements (one of which is having an HD video camera with a viewfinder).
There seems to be plethora of converters for use on Canon EF fitting. there don't seem anyhting like as many for Pentax. I have really looked at other types.
The 7D is really past its best. There must be a replacement out soon. (I must admit I haven't looked at recent news so there might already have been something announced. The big improvements, when they come, will be in high-ISO capabilities.)
On another point, I can't get past Tomei with thinking of Marisa, wonderful actress, and "My Cousin Vinny" which is up there in my top 100 films.
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Aug 16, 2014 6:53:23 GMT -5
There seems to be plethora of converters for use on Canon EF fitting. there don't seem anyhting like as many for Pentax. I have really looked at other types. The Canon is unique in that it has a wide lens throat and a short flange focal distance. Lenses from loads of systems can be used as there is room for an adapter. Apart from the older FD fitting - a bad move on Canon's part, Nikon and Pentax managed to keep the same basic lens fitting.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Aug 16, 2014 9:05:25 GMT -5
Canon had a spell of changing lens mounts that were incompatible with previous types. Fortunately, other than 39mm screw, I didn't get involved with Canon interchangeable lenses till they had settled on the EF mount. I have a couple of FD lenses that arrived from somewhere or other, but I have nothing to use them on.
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Aug 16, 2014 11:07:04 GMT -5
Canon had a spell of changing lens mounts that were incompatible with previous types. Fortunately, other than 39mm screw, I didn't get involved with Canon interchangeable lenses till they had settled on the EF mount. I have a couple of FD lenses that arrived from somewhere or other, but I have nothing to use them on. Unfortunately, I was a Canon FD user for many years. When they switched to EOS I was very unhappy. It took quite a while and a lot of hunting until I found a Chinese converter. It was expensive. It was not very good. I still have it virtually unused. I am not going to stick somebody else with it. I decided to go with Canon's converter, an eBay bargain. Considerably more expensive. Just as bad. Same fate as my Chinese convertor. P.T. Barnum mentioned me in one of his wise sayings. Mickey
|
|
|
Post by dee on Sept 1, 2014 16:39:34 GMT -5
One stunning adapter is the Amade Leica M to Contax/Kiev. The hand built quality is a match for Leica and totally transforms the camera into another world with it's replica Contax mount and interface. Obviously, not mainstream, but I have fun trying out my J8s.
|
|
lyn
New Member
I've decided on the Topcon/Voightlander/Exacta/Zeiss camera system. Any tips?
Posts: 4
|
Post by lyn on Feb 17, 2015 0:47:27 GMT -5
I have a fotasy Fuji XE-1::OM. Its my first adapter. Seems to do what its supposed to. Cost $17 w/shipping from amazon.
|
|
|
Post by rickoleson on Feb 28, 2015 9:06:18 GMT -5
I use a Canon DSLR, chosen at least in part for its ability to accept old lenses on adapters. I have adapters for Nikon, OM, M42, Pentax K, and Pentacon Six. Most of my adapters are from Roxsen, I have never had a problem with their products.
I once got a 20mm MIR lens very cheap because it had an M42 adapter screwed onto it that had been machined wrong and couldn't be fully installed or removed... I had to cut the adapter off of the lens to get rid of it. Don't know what brand that was, it was one that was solid at the back to depress the aperture pin, which made it that much harder to cut off. My M42 adapter is open at the back and needs an A/M switch on the lens.
One problem with using manual lenses on a DSLR is the screen design - the screen is not a regular groundglass, in order to increase brightness for the slow zoom lenses they come with the screen is a field of microlenses matched to the ~f/4 speed of the standard lens. This makes the screen blind to the shallow DOF at larger apertures and impossible to focus accurately on a fast lens. I tried a focus-confirming adapter first, but found it to be extremely irritating to try to use, the lights would blink on and off again and it was never really possible to find the in-focus point and keep it there. I finally solved the problem by changing the screen in my DSLR to a manual focus type with a split image rangefinder. I bought that from Virtual Village for $35 (years ago now). It took a little shimming to get it perfect, and the AF lights are lost in my camera - but once I got it right, I have never had focus problems with old lenses.
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Mar 1, 2015 0:15:13 GMT -5
I changed the screen in my Pentax K10 with a $9.99 one off ebay has split prism focusing and the lights indicating focus work too. I use Roxsen and big_is adapters with no problems on my Sony NEX.
|
|
|
Post by dee on Aug 15, 2015 12:42:24 GMT -5
NEVER mount a Minolta MD adapter to a 4/3rds body. The metal is so thin that it takes just a moment to jam it on permanently-£100 quoted to sort it. Now The Digiluz 3 is permanently Minolta and it's left to the L1 twin to adopt the two Olympus lenses !! dee
|
|
martin
Contributing Member
All I ever get is older and around (K. Kristofferson)
Posts: 20
|
Post by martin on Sept 16, 2015 11:15:57 GMT -5
Dee, until now I have no problems using a MD adapter on a Micro 4/3 body . not 4/3 I admit. With an electronic viewfinder those make nice combos. Regards Martin
|
|