?M42 macro lens for 550D

Elines

Elines

Messages
1,156
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
No
(I have searched on 'M42' and found various threads but none that answer my specific questions. So apologies if I have missed any:eek:)

I'd like to have a go at macro photography and was thinking that maybe a cheap way of trying (?even cheaper than the cheapest Raynox at about £40?) would be to get a M42 lens (plus adapter) for my Canon 550d.

?any views on this please and if it is a goer:

  • what spec lens would I need to look for to get a macro lens (I never can get my head round the technical description of lenses to work out if they are macro or telephoto or whatever)
  • I have seen references to it being important to get an adapter ring with a 'chip' on it - again - what is the spec I need to be looking for
  • The place to get M42 lenses seems to be E-bay - are there any other places to try?
And if anyone has a suggestion for other types of photography that a M42 would be good for, then please suggest away eg, portraits.

(My only lenses at the moment are the standard kit lenses - f18 - 55, and f75 - 300, plus a nifty fifty prime lens - so any M42 lens that helps fill a gap in coverage would be of interest.)

I understand that with the M42 lenses you have to focus manually - although ?in some cases you can get a 'green blob' confirmation in the view finder that you have focussed .

In any event, I am ok with using the camera on manual.

All help gratefully received
 
There are M42 to eos adapters on the usual auction site for as little as £3-4 and some have a focus confirmation ability.

Macro is usually thought to be the ability to achieve 1:1 on the sensor but sometimes the macro description is stretched a bit to include lenses that don't give 1:1 but perhaps focus a little closer than you'd expect them too. So if you're looking for a macro lens I suggest you double check any lens you're interested in by Googling it. On an APS-C camera I personally would be looking for a minimum of 50mm and possibly something longer.

I used to own Canon DSLR's and now own mirrorless. In my Canon days I liked to shoot pseudo macro shots such as close up flower and leaf shots and the like etc and for this sort of thing manual focus is actually preferable to AF, IMVHO, so old lenses are ok. However, I personally only found manual focus on modern DSLR's to be acceptable for hyperfocal and zone focusing type use and for pseudo macro stuff and other shooting when the subject is big in the frame enabling me to actually achieve acceptable focus. I did try general shooting with my manual focus Zuiko lenses and to be honest I didn't find it too joyful and quickly gave up. Mirrorless cameras are IMVHO the way forward if you want to use manual focus lenses for general use and with their various focus aids such as offering a magnified view I think they offer great focus accuracy, arguable better than AF, if you have the time to manually focus. Modern DSLR's are best at AF and not really too suitable for general MF shooting IMVHO. YMMV.

I don't know how accurate a focus confirmation adapter will be, the proof will be in the pixel peeping. I suspect that they wont be as accurate as an AF lens but I may be wrong. Another way to do the macro thing is to use extension tubes but with these you lose infinity focus.

You could also look at other mounts such as Olymus Zuiko. Be careful when choosing though as some converters require a lens in the adapter and this could potentially degrade optical quality, some also lose infinity focus.
 
Last edited:
OK Chris, here goes.
I use M42 lenses from time to time for closeup (not genuine macro) photography (insects, butterflies etc). I use them in conjunction with an adaptor (non focus confirm) and any one of three manual extension tubes - 10mm, 20mm, 30mm.
I bought everything off the "Bay", but some folks scour charity shops and boot fairs. Very often I looked in the camera sections, rather than just the lens sections, because I found that I could pick up camera/lens combos (as well as a load of accesories in some cases) cheaper than I could individual lenses - very strangeo_O.
I would rate Pentax Super Takumar - 55mm f1.8 and f2, 135mm f3.5, and you should be able to pick these up for between £20 to £30. The 135 is also decent as a portrait lens. There are also fine lenses from Pentacon 50 f1.7 and Helios, both of which should be cheaper than the Pentax lenses.
 
Hi Chris,

This is not a method I have tried as you got tired of searching around not finding much.

A lot comes down to what sort of Macro do you want to do? How much magnification etc.

I would recommend a prime lens either 60mm or a 90-105mm range obvious advantage is the 90mm + will allow you to be further away from subject. If you have a 18-55mm non STM kit lens the cheapest option is to reverse it though flash lighting is required.

If you do go with M42 lens then please post a review and guidance for others that might want to try that route on the below thread. On there is me talking more about a reversing ring.

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/we-need-you-in-draft-want-to-get-into-macro.551944/
 
Thanks Alan, Andy and Bryn.

Plenty for me to go at there. My general line will probably be to:

  • take each option
  • cost each one, taking account of the sound advice NOT to got for (say) cheapest plastic extension tubes etc
  • then decide which one looks most suitable for me, taking account of price and ease/flexibility of use
And yes - more than happy to post up the results of what I come up with for others to consider.

May not be soon though - I am generally trying to read 'From basics to Fine Art B&W photography' and am finding it really good and stimulating - so much so that it is not just a case of skimming through it but of considering the views expressed.

I give some preliminary views of it at:

http://bthedigitalmonochromeforum.runboard.com/t200829

(I did post a thread about it on TP but didn't get much reaction:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/th...ck-and-white-photography.565055/#post-6546975 )
 
YOU need to check magnification ratio, most old lenses are 1 to 2, modern ones are all 1 to 1

my tamron adaptall 90mm is 1.2 and its lovely :) but expensive

guess you could try extension tubes (with electrics) with your 50mm prime, that might be ok
 
Thanks Paul - At the moment my most likely options are an extension tube or a Raynox - at least until I understand better what I would be buying if I go down the M42 old lens route.
 
raynox are great for what they are, a "proper" macro lens enables you to go from infinity to close up and anywhere in between, while tubes and raynox not so much :)

but u can stick a raynox on your macro lens, same with extension tubes
 
Thanks Paul - if I can get a cheap M42 macro then I will but looking on ebay they seemed pretty expensive compared with tubes/raynox
 
Elines said:
Thanks Paul - if I can get a cheap M42 macro then I will but looking on ebay they seemed pretty expensive compared with tubes/raynox
Click to expand...

Prices of manual lenses do seem to be rising, maybe as CSC become more popular. I've noticed that on the auction site several of my manual lenses seem to go for more than I paid for them.

There are often manual lenses in the classifieds here so it might be worth keeping an eye out. Is there any reason you mention m42 specifically? Adapters are cheap so if a bargain comes up in another mount it may be worth considering. I have a Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro in Minolta mount and it's a good lens, not suitable for your Canon though.
 
Yep, I have a Pentax dslr and have noticed that 2nd hand manual prime lenses in both m42 and k mount prices are rising as more ppl buy cscs with adaptors.

Just seen a nice collection of manual m42 lenses this morning go for £300. When a while ago these might have gone for nearer £150.
 
woof woof said:
Prices of manual lenses do seem to be rising, maybe as CSC become more popular. I've noticed that on the auction site several of my manual lenses seem to go for more than I paid for them.

There are often manual lenses in the classifieds here so it might be worth keeping an eye out. Is there any reason you mention m42 specifically? Adapters are cheap so if a bargain comes up in another mount it may be worth considering. I have a Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro in Minolta mount and it's a good lens, not suitable for your Canon though.
Click to expand...

Thanks - I mentioned M42 simply because there seemed to be more of them than other types, but not ruling out other suitable types.
 
squintykid said:
Yep, I have a Pentax dslr and have noticed that 2nd hand manual prime lenses in both m42 and k mount prices are rising as more ppl buy cscs with adaptors.

Just seen a nice collection of manual m42 lenses this morning go for £300. When a while ago these might have gone for nearer £150.
Click to expand...


Mmmmm - seems it's not just my imagination then:(
 
:agree: nope, though on fleabay seems some items going for silly money and others not. I think the sale end time seems to affect the prices massivly.
 
you should find a list of lens mounts that fit on canon cameras with a adapter ok, opens up more options
 
pingu666 said:
you should find a list of lens mounts that fit on canon cameras with a adapter ok, opens up more options
Click to expand...

Yes - makes sense to do that so I open up the range of possibilities as already suggested by Alan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top