M42 Nikon adaptor - infinity focus

johnnypanic

johnnypanic

Messages
3,602
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

just having a wee lunchtime read and got curious about M42 lens and adaptors.

Having looked around there seems to be a multitude of different m42 adaptors for Nikon camera bodies. Just wondering how important the "focus to infinity" factor is and how much the additional optic required degrades the image.

Waiting replies so I can stop :thinking:
 
Last edited:
jacob12_1993 said:
without it, you basically have a macro lens that can focus to about 10 foot, anything further and you begin to struggle
Click to expand...

So pretty much essential. Thanks for that.
 
jacob12_1993 said:
I must warn though it does noticably degrade the image, but if you are using cheap old m42 lenses I don't expect you will be making billboard prints anyway

Jake
Click to expand...

No, just for experimenting with.

Tbh, I don't think I'll ever have a picture that would grace a billboard unless it was showing how not to do it :lol:
 
It's not absolutely essential to have the infinity element, some of the more expensive ones actually allow it to be removed and placed back in as you so wish. As for the quality? It's a subjective thing, as far as I can see. I've researched for a while on using Pentax K-mount lenses on Nikon bodies, so same thing, infinity element, and the 'reviews' (i.e. brief comments really) have ranged from absolutely appalling image quality to more than acceptable. I wish someone had produced a comprehensive guide/review on it, comparing across mounts, across different adapters and so on, but it's not a massive market I guess. Only the micro 4/3rds crowd is being spoilt with that really!
 
freecom2 said:
It's not absolutely essential to have the infinity element, some of the more expensive ones actually allow it to be removed and placed back in as you so wish. As for the quality? It's a subjective thing, as far as I can see. I've researched for a while on using Pentax K-mount lenses on Nikon bodies, so same thing, infinity element, and the 'reviews' (i.e. brief comments really) have ranged from absolutely appalling image quality to more than acceptable. I wish someone had produced a comprehensive guide/review on it, comparing across mounts, across different adapters and so on, but it's not a massive market I guess. Only the micro 4/3rds crowd is being spoilt with that really!
Click to expand...

There's a challenge for a TP member.
 
jacob12_1993 said:
I must warn though it does noticably degrade the image, but if you are using cheap old m42 lenses I don't expect you will be making billboard prints anyway

Jake
Click to expand...

Why would cheap old M42 lenses not be appropriate for billboard prints?
 
Bought an adapter from ebay - 15ukp... two lenses at 15 and 40 ukp the latter being 28mm vivitar f2.5.

Shots seem to be ok - maybe not crisp crisp but ok for what I do.

Hope I never get completely bitten by crisp crisp lol.... would ruin my vaguely ok shots.


If you want to check the sort of output I've been getting check the signature links under the m42 link.

the adapter I got was : here
 
manualfocus-g said:
Why would cheap old M42 lenses not be appropriate for billboard prints?
Click to expand...

Because if you are using them with a cheap chinese adapter to mount onto a nikon DSLR, the resulting image will probably not be suitable. Some of the m42 lenses I have are probably optically superior compared to some newer AF lenses (bar the MC). However if you are shooting images for billboards you will most likely be looking at a £xxxx nikon mount lens to get the very best quality

Jake
 
jacob12_1993 said:
However if you are shooting images for billboards you will most likely be looking at a £xxxx nikon mount lens to get the very best quality
Click to expand...

Billboard posters may be printed at less than 10dpi, to be viewed at a distance, by non-pixel peepers, who should be concentrating on other matters. Hello boys!
 
photon said:
Billboard posters may be printed at less than 10dpi, to be viewed at a distance, by non-pixel peepers, who should be concentrating on other matters. Hello boys!
Click to expand...

I might go and shoot one now on my d40 and kit lens, its easy doing this advertising photography malarky, all of my competitors using D3X's and Hasselblads are being ripped off, anyone can do it with a £200 dlsr and a £15 quid lens off ebay. :bang:
 
jacob12_1993 said:
Because if you are using them with a cheap chinese adapter to mount onto a nikon DSLR, the resulting image will probably not be suitable. Some of the m42 lenses I have are probably optically superior compared to some newer AF lenses (bar the MC). However if you are shooting images for billboards you will most likely be looking at a £xxxx nikon mount lens to get the very best quality

Jake
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but this is nonsense. You're claiming a lens isn't suitable without giving a reason why! Remember that some of these old lenses would have cost a huge amount when they were new too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top