Adapting from other systems

[Cagey75]

Let's talk cheap and nasty, or cheap and excellent if you find it!

We joke on here about dirt cheap primes a lot calling them 'council house primes' [if you haven't seen these discussions, bless you, you haven't missed a thing!] - there's the pro who thinks anything below a 'G-master' [what a silly name for lenses!] or L lens or whatever the 'pro' level is for any given system is beneath them - there's the 'enthusiast' which I would say is most on here, who scrape a bit, they want those juicy pro lenses but can't really make their whole kit work that way so maybe buy a couple cheaper alts to compensate. Then there's the true budget shooter or beginner who is juggling cost vs performance with a little more fragility. We [I am definitely in this category] may have a nice main lens, but outside of this, for some variation we look to all kinds of budget friendly alternatives. We don't care about AF speeds or DXOmark charts when it comes to these alt choices, we want best 'bang for buck' and the more variety and bonus quality we can squeeze into out budget the better.

SO ... who's a thrifty specialist here? What are you doing to maximize that 'bang per buck' [hate that expression but it's best we got to describe it]

I've just bought a Canon 50mm STM lens ... though I'm shooting with a Panasonic body ... why? because I already have an AF adapter for this lens to work with because I've recently bought a Canon 55-250 - Why? Because that lens and the adapter combined were cheaper than even a used Panasonic 100-300, and the Canon lens, even adapted performs just as well so why not?. I actually find it a better lens than that Panasonic so it makes sense. I just leave the adapter on it, like it's part of the lens. Got me thinking, why not have some more cheap and cheerful [another expression drives me nuts but works] options. I'm planning to buy the speed booster version of this adapter to go with, which will double my options when I use Canon EF lenses [plus EF-S if i decide to 'hack' them]

So who's adapting? What's your bastardized set up? Are you adapting Canon AF lenses to your Sony/Fuji/Panasonic/Olympus/whatever? [Canon EF lenses are known to be the single most adaptable AF lenses to any other system] Or, are you into MF glass? are you going right on the cheap with 'dumb' adapters and old MF lenses? Do you have the patience, the time, the stubbornness!

I love seeing people come up with weird yet wonderful combinations, so let us know, what you got?

 

[woof woof]

As you may know I've been using adapted lenses since the early day of Micro Four Thirds and still do with my Panasonic MFT cameras and my Sony A7.

The first old lens I bought to use on a digital camera was a Minolta Rokkor 55mm f1.7 I bought from Rocky Cameras (maybe be careful if you go there...) for something like £15. That lens really impressed me not because it was razor sharp across the frame and into the corners but more for the way it rendered and the way the DoF fell away. It was quickly followed by a couple of Olympus Zuikos which I also briefly used on my Canon 5D. I say briefly as I knew my DSLR days were numbered and when I got the A7 I sold all of my DSLR kit.

These days the only old lens I use on MFT is a film era 50mm f2.8 macro but I use old lenses on my A7 quite a lot. I have Minolta Rokkor, Olympus Zuiko, Canon FD, pre AI Nikon and a few third party primes in those mounts from 17 to 135mm and I have one old zoom, a Tokina 70-210mm. I have several lenses of the same focal length, for example I have multiple 35 and 50mm lenses, and some may find this odd but I don't as they are all slightly different to use and all give a different look if only at their widest apertures.

My favourites include the Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro, Minolta 50mm f1.2, 55mm f1.7 MC, 35mm f2.8 MC and the Zuiko 24, 28 and 35mm f2.8's and 50mm f1.8 because they look exactly like I think a lens should. I also really like the Nikon lenses as again they look just about perfect and that they'll last more than a lifetime. The Miranda 24mm f2.8 "macro" is an interesting lens and although it's nowhere near a true macro it does focus closer than you'd expect a 24mm to. Other interesting lenses are the Tokina 17mm, Vivitar 19mm and Minolta 45mm f2 which has lovely bokeh.

I use Novoflex adapters on my A7 for Minolta, Olympus and Canon FD mount lenses and I use cheap adapters for the Nikon lenses and for Minolta and Olympus mount lenses on my MFT cameras.

I tend to put branded lens caps in a tin for safe keeping and instead I use a cheap modern centre pinch cap. I also have cheap metal RF style lens hoods but to be honest I hardly ever use them and instead I embrace flare

My A7 with a Nikon 50mm f2 mounted via a cheap adapter.

When I first started buying old lenses you get really cheap 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8 and 135mm f3.5 lenses but these days prices seem to have risen and the cheap old lens that might have cost £15 then might cost £40+ now.

If I'm with other people I'll probably pick an AF lens for speed of shooting and to not be the geek holding things up but if I'm by myself I'll be much more likely to pick a MF lens. There's a Rokkor 55mm f1.7 on my A7 at the moment and 30 odd pictures waiting to be processed.

 

[Cagey75]

Very nice collection there. I've adapted vintage lenses for years on any system I was using but just recently I've started doing it with AF lenses. I bought a Viltrox EF-M1 which is EF/s to M43 and is working very nicely with the Tele lens I got to test it out with. That is also going to become my macro option using a raynox (sold my last 250 and regretted it since so just bought another) and I've ordered a Canon 50mm STM. Next step is to get the speed booster version of the adapter which will open up a bunch of options. I can use EF lenses as standard, or focal reduced - this adds a stop of light too. The 50mm for example becomes a 31mm f/1.2, an 85mm would become more like a 60mm 1.2mm (before any equivilance) It's just experimenting, could just buy more native lenses but I'm bored and want to give this a try

I have some nice vintage lenses on watch across a few sales sites so will dabble in that side of it again too. Atm I crave close up or macro capabilities in lenses, so some research needed. That's part of the fun, reading up on these old.classics

 

[gad-westy]

I realise this isn't an adapted lens but I'm sure this thread was titled 'Council house primes' earlier today and it definitely fits with that. I nominate my 7Artisans 25mm 1.8 prime MFT fit. It's all metal construction and the aperture is 'de'clicked'. If you were being kind, you'd say that is to appeal to video shooters. If you're being realistic, it's because it's cheaper not to have aperture detents. Given the lens cost me £37 brand spanking new, I'd probably suggest the latter! But other than the fact that I cannot tell the aperture ring and focus ring apart without looking at them, I really like this little lens. Probably wont be appearing at the top of any MFT lists anytime soon but it feels nice to use (it's not a zeiss but it feels better than £37), decent enough IQ and it's small enough to go anywhere and cheap enough to not care if it didn't come back.

 

[Cagey75]

I realise this isn't an adapted lens but I'm sure this thread was titled 'Council house primes' earlier today and it definitely fits with that. I nominate my 7Artisans 25mm 1.8 prime MFT fit. It's all metal construction and the aperture is 'de'clicked'. If you were being kind, you'd say that is to appeal to video shooters. If you're being realistic, it's because it's cheaper not to have aperture detents. Given the lens cost me £37 brand spanking new, I'd probably suggest the latter! But other than the fact that I cannot tell the aperture ring and focus ring apart without looking at them, I really like this little lens. Probably wont be appearing at the top of any MFT lists anytime soon but it feels nice to use (it's not a zeiss but it feels better than £37), decent enough IQ and it's small enough to not care if it didn't come back.

It was, lol, changed it as though it was just for fun I could see it starting some BS on here so went with something more boring I have been eyeing the 7Artisans lenses and have looked at a few reviews, the 50/55mm 1.1 and 1.4 look pretty sweet. They are not apparently very sharp wide open but they do have a look about them that is akin to old vintage primes, you can certainly get creative with them

 

[gad-westy]

It was, lol, changed it as though it was just for fun I could see it starting some BS on here so went with something more boring I have been eyeing the 7Artisans lenses and have looked at a few reviews, the 50/55mm 1.1 and 1.4 look pretty sweet. They are not apparently very sharp wide open but they do have a look about them that is akin to old vintage primes, you can certainly get creative with them

The 25mm seems okay wide open I'll not claim it's great or anything. In truth I haven't looked all that hard as it's not the sort of lens I use for anything very important but it always looks fine on screen. No idea about the 50/55 though I was interested myself. But I have a bit of a hankering for an fast MFT prime with auto focus (how the other half live, right!) so not sure I'll go for one.

 

[Cagey75]

The 25mm seems okay wide open I'll not claim it's great or anything. In truth I haven't looked all that hard as it's not the sort of lens I use for anything very important but it always looks fine on screen. No idea about the 50/55 though I was interested myself. But I have a bit of a hankering for an fast MFT prime with auto focus (how the other half live, right!) so not sure I'll go for one.

The Sigma 1.4 range look fantastic for the money for M43, think they have the same line for Sony APSC, they get nothing but great reviews. The 30 1.4 looks a sweet one for portraits

I'll be messing about with some Canon lenses for a bit, I'm sure the fun of it will wear and I'll return to just using native but what the hell, why not give it a go and get it out the system One bold move I could make is to sell my beloved Olympus 12-40 and get a Canon fit Sigma 18-35 1.8. That lens is incredible! And even more so on a focal reducer. With the FR you turn an M43 sensor effectively into a little wider than an APSC sensor, but you also get the extra light and from what I have seen IQ doesn't degrade, it actually improves!

 

[Petrochemist]

I only use adapted lenses on my NEX6, but I've only had the camera since Christmas. In that system I have specific adapters for c-mount, Pentax 110, LTM & µ4/3 (and have used all of them) via µ4/3 I can mount a much wider variety, but have rarely got round to it yet.

On µ4/3 I use M42, PK, OM, Pentax 110, c-mount, LTM, T2, Sony A, jury rigged projector lenses and a few more - but I also have 3 native AF & 4 native MF lenses which account for the bulk of the images taken with my µ4/3 cameras.

I think with the exception of my 1930's Kodak 12cm astigmat & a few macro efforts all the mounts I've used on my Pentax DSLRs I'd previously used on film SLRs (PK, M42, T2 & adaptall), again most of the shots taken with these cameras would be with native lenses.

My Sigma DSLR has considerably less options - I've only seen M42 adapters for it, but it came with one of those.

My 5x4 system is only progressing slowly, but any lens I use on that is likely to be adapted, some with lens boards I've made myself.

Altogether I have lenses in over 15 different mounts, as well as a collection of oddments not in any sort of standard mount. So yes I do adapt lenses occasionally

When adapting SLR lenses to mirrorless bodies I often make use of specialist µ4/3 to EF adapters, with another adapter (or two) in series to give helicoidal (extending), focus reducing, or tiltable connections for each lens. All together this gives me quite a large selection of lenses to choose from, I've not had time to try them all yet.

 

[Cagey75]

I only use adapted lenses on my NEX6, but I've only had the camera since Christmas. In that system I have specific adapters for c-mount, Pentax 110, LTM & µ4/3 (and have used all of them) via µ4/3 I can mount a much wider variety, but have rarely got round to it yet.

On µ4/3 I use M42, PK, OM, Pentax 110, c-mount, LTM, T2, Sony A, jury rigged projector lenses and a few more - but I also have 3 native AF & 4 native MF lenses which account for the bulk of the images taken with my µ4/3 cameras.

I think with the exception of my 1930's Kodak 12cm astigmat & a few macro efforts all the mounts I've used on my Pentax DSLRs I'd previously used on film SLRs (PK, M42, T2 & adaptall), again most of the shots taken with these cameras would be with native lenses.

My Sigma DSLR has considerably less options - I've only seen M42 adapters for it, but it came with one of those.

My 5x4 system is only progressing slowly, but any lens I use on that is likely to be adapted, some with lens boards I've made myself.

Altogether I have lenses in over 15 different mounts, as well as a collection of oddments not in any sort of standard mount. So yes I do adapt lenses occasionally

When adapting SLR lenses to mirrorless bodies I often make use of specialist µ4/3 to EF adapters, with another adapter (or two) in series to give helicoidal (extending), focus reducing, or tiltable connections for each lens. All together this gives me quite a large selection of lenses to choose from, I've not had time to try them all yet.

Atm I have a few adapters spare for M43 but no lenses to go on them I need to rectify this! I have Canon FD, Minota MD and M42, I had lenses for all 3 but sold them on - the cool thing is I never lose money doing this, I look for a good deal on old lenses in good nick and usually get what I paid at least when passing them on. They are also nice and cheap [in general, after some hunting and research] and can be picked up any time, so I'm never in a mad rush to get some. I'm awaiting delivery of a raynox macro attachment and I'll try that on the Canon 55-250, but if it doesn't work great I will be on the prowl for a decent MF macro.

 

[Petrochemist]

Atm I have a few adapters spare for M43 but no lenses to go on them I need to rectify this! I have Canon FD, Minota MD and M42, I had lenses for all 3 but sold them on - the cool thing is I never lose money doing this, I look for a good deal on old lenses in good nick and usually get what I paid at least when passing them on. They are also nice and cheap [in general, after some hunting and research] and can be picked up any time, so I'm never in a mad rush to get some. I'm awaiting delivery of a raynox macro attachment and I'll try that on the Canon 55-250, but if it doesn't work great I will be on the prowl for a decent MF macro.

The Raynoxs are great I have both the DCR150 & the DCR250 - I find the 150 more usable on long lenses, but either work nicely. I've never tried the higher power models +8 is quite enough for me. At some point I'll try one of them as a tube lens for a microscope objective (that's without a normal lens)

I've never really understood the concept of selling lenses, perhaps it's something I should try as I need more space.

 

[Cagey75]

The Raynoxs are great I have both the DCR150 & the DCR250 - I find the 150 more usable on long lenses, but either work nicely. I've never tried the higher power models +8 is quite enough for me. At some point I'll try one of them as a tube lens for a microscope objective (that's without a normal lens)

I've never really understood the concept of selling lenses, perhaps it's something I should try as I need more space.

I know people who never sell a thing, and I find that strange, if I'm not making using of something I'd rather someone else did. Also, if nobody sold on lenses, you wouldn't be able to buy them One reason is clutter I guess, I don't like to have stuff in boxes, if I own it I want to be using it or it's in the way. Another is budget, selling on allows me to try out other gear, and I know I can buy that lens back at any time, it's unlikely they'll suddenly shoot up in price

I used the 250 on a 100-300 lens in the past, it was definitely much easier to use at the 100mm end where it offers 1:1. But it's also nice to have that extra magnification, I have shot with it at 300mm which is insane and definitely not easy - but I feel it improves my technique, and it's even more satisfying when you nail a shot at up to 3:1 magnification

 

[LeeRatters]

I've never used adapted AF lenses. I'm on the original A7 so there's not really much point........ It would be quicker to MF!!

From what I've used.....

The Canon FD range isn't too bad but I preferred the Yashica ML range in all honesty. The 44-2 has to be tried on FF - I bought a 44M-4, the 44-2 & Pentacon 50/1.8 for £15!! That is my best bargain buy ever. I only have the 44-2 now but not used it for ages. The Yashica ML50/1.9 is also great IMO, weighs nothing, is tine & I think I paid about £15-20.

I've also owned more expensive stuff like Voigtlander 40/1.4 & Leitz Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 both in M mount. I wish I never sold the latter now!!!

I still have the CV40/1.4, 44-2 & all my Yashica lenses (plus two film bodies anyway) I'm pretty much native mount now with Voigtlander bringing out E mount primes.

 

[Cagey75]

I've never used adapted AF lenses. I'm on the original A7 so there's not really much point........ It would be quicker to MF!!

From what I've used.....

The Canon FD range isn't too bad but I preferred the Yashica ML range in all honesty. The 44-2 has to be tried on FF - I bought a 44M-4, the 44-2 & Pentacon 50/1.8 for £15!! That is my best bargain buy ever. I only have the 44-2 now but not used it for ages. The Yashica ML50/1.9 is also great IMO, weighs nothing, is tine & I think I paid about £15-20.

I've also owned more expensive stuff like Voigtlander 40/1.4 & Leitz Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 both in M mount. I wish I never sold the latter now!!!

I still have the CV40/1.4, 44-2 & all my Yashica lenses (plus two film bodies anyway) I'm pretty much native mount now with Voigtlander bringing out E mount primes.

This is the first time I've ever adapted AF lenses, I was wary of how good they would work but the Viltrox works just as good as a Metabones. It's not perfect, C-AF is pants, but I never use that anyway, but for anyone pondering on trying it they should know this going in. S-AF isn't bad, you're not going to shoot fast sports or BIF, but for slower moving or stationary subjects it's working perfectly fine for my needs. One good thing is the lenses I'm trying, for now, are dirt cheap new and I would easily get my money back selling local. Buying from the likes of HDEW new can be cheaper than some are trying to sell used, always puzzles me that! So I have the advantage that I would only ever want what I paid or close enough back, and I keep my gear minty which always helps. I have nothing to lose basically. I had the Helios 44-2 on Fuji and really liked it, had some fun using it. I also used to reverse it for macro with some decent results.

 

[Cagey75]

In case anyone might be interested, the Raynox 250 arrived and I've since tried it on the Canon 55-250 stm lens I'm adapting via the Viltrox - set up works nicely, AF is better than I thought for close up work. Of course I switch to MF [nice that for such a cheap lens it has it's own AF/MF switch, another for OIS] when I go beyond a certain point but for a cheap and cheerful set up I have tele and macro in a small bundle. Disappointed the 50mm 1.8 hasn't arrived yet, ordered last Friday from HDEW, but hopefully it'll get here tomorrow so I can test that then, see how it goes on the AF adapter.