Adapting Camera Lenses: What Works
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 сер 2024
- SUBSCRIBE and like Northrup...
Buy the #1 book with 14+ HOURS of video on Amazon: help.tc/s
Worldwide use 10% off coupon 'UA-cam': sdp.io/sdpbook
Lightroom video book $10 on Amazon: help.tc/l
Photoshop video book $10 on Amazon: help.tc/p
Photography Buying Guide on Amazon: help.tc/b
Worldwide use 10% off coupon 'UA-cam': sdp.io/buybg
STARTER CAMERAS:
Basic Starter Camera ($280 used at Amazon): Canon T3 help.tc/t3
Better Starter Camera ($500 at Amazon): Nikon D5300 help.tc/d5300
Better Travel Camera ($500 at Amazon): Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II help.tc/em10ii
LANDSCAPE CAMERAS:
Good ($550 at Amazon): Sony a6000 help.tc/a6000
Better ($1,400) at Amazon: Nikon D5500 help.tc/D5500 & Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 help.tc/s35
Best ($3,150) at Amazon: Pentax K-1 help.tc/K1 & Pentax 24-70 f/2.8 help.tc/p24
PORTRAIT CAMERAS:
Beginner ($950 at Amazon): Canon T6i help.tc/t6i & Canon 50mm f/1.8 help.tc/c50
Better ($3,000 at Amazon): Nikon D610 help.tc/d610 & Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 help.tc/t200
Best ($5,300) at Amazon: Nikon D810 help.tc/d810 & Nikon 70-200 f/2.8E help.tc/n200e
WILDLIFE CAMERAS:
Starter ($1,100 at Amazon): Canon 7D help.tc/7D & Canon 400mm f/5.6 help.tc/c400
Great ($3,200 at Amazon): Nikon D500 help.tc/d500 & Nikon 200-500 f/5.6 help.tc/n500
VIDEO CAMERAS:
Beginner ($500 at Amazon): Panasonic G7 help.tc/g7 & Panasonic 14-42mm help.tc/p42
Better ($1,400 at Amazon): Panasonic GH4 amzn.to/2p5dAmD & Panasonic 14-140 f/3.5-5.6 help.tc/p140
Best ($4,300 at Amazon): Panasonic GH5 help.tc/gh5 & Metabones Speed Booster XL help.tc/mbxl & Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 help.tc/s35 & Sigma 50-100 f/1.8 help.tc/s100
DRONES:
Beginner ($400 at Amazon): DJI Phantom 3 help.tc/p3
Travel ($1,000 at Amazon): DJI Mavic Pro help.tc/Mavic
Better Image Quality ($1,500 at Amazon): DJI Phantom 4 Pro help.tc/p4p
📚 Buy Our Books on Amazon! 📚
📕Stunning Digital Photography: help.tc/s
📘Lightroom 6 Book: help.tc/l
📙Photoshop Book: help.tc/p
📗Buying Guide: help.tc/b
So how to the adapters do with video? Are they only really good for photography?
When I think about adapting lenses, I only think vintage. And no, they aren't tack sharp or flawless, but that's actually the reason for using them - unique flaws and characteristics I miss on modern glass, like say, the swirl effect of a russian Helios, soap bubble bokeh of old Meyer-Görlitz etc. Mostly great for "artsy stuff" and portraits where some softness can actually be an advantage (like skin rendering). Not to forget the fun of discovering that you simply like the characteristics of a lens you found for ten bucks on a flea market. It's a great way to try out different focal lenghts on the cheap too before you decide you like the look of a specific prime and buy a "real one".
On Speed boosters, my Mitakon Lens Turbo II was the best buy I did for the above purpose, there's really nothing complicated or problematic with it, works like any other dumb adapter I have, just with an additional lens inside. All my vintage glass works like it should and in general is much sharper and contrasty than on a dumb adapter, with the added benefit of that extra stop of light that turns a mediocre lens into a half-decent low light performer. The most common complaint about it is lack of sharpness in the edges and some vignetting, but those things can also benefit a unique look. Adapters and vintage glass are simply not made for pixelpeepers who want technically perfect pictures. Again, for portraits I think they're simply great.
I remember my first camera was an Olympus epl-1 and went crazy with adapting FD lenses to it and I loved it. I still use those FD lenses on occasion with my a6000 and it's still just as fun.
Your thoughts on adapting vintage lenses were very well put. A healthy dose of realism, along with some encouragement and enthusiasm.
When Leica decided to drop their SLR/DSLR line I switched to Nikon. I adapted 2 of my Leica lenses for my Nikon D300. I bought 2 kits to actually change the Leica lens mount to a Nikon mount. They are quality mounts. Since all Leica SLR lenses were manual focus there is no issue with autofocus. I did notice a lack of sharpness - seemed soft. I should try my Leica 280mm f/2.8 lens on my Nikon D4s to see if there is a difference in sharpness.
You're right, image character and fun is probably the best reason for using vintage lenses. Researching the history is pretty interesting as well - it's a historic artifact you can still use.
MFT is the most user friendly system to date. I believe this part of art will become more popular through MFT standard. Not all of us want to be professional photographers, some of us love to have pretty photos of their own memories.
Tony dresses like a superhero that is trying to fit into society.
It's because he's so chill.
nicodimus2222 he's one cool guy
What would be Tony's superpower?
Lighting vision - he can visualize different lighting scenarios in his mind.
Chelsea.
Newer Native Glass is always sharper than vintage but the old has a lot of flaws but has character. Experimenting in a different Genre by using the Leica M8 with that sensor. With Color and variety of differet filters. Love that Classic look too! Cheers!
Ah, a topic near and dear to my heart. Great job covering all the bases here. I'd like to second two points in particular. First, I own the Sony fe55/1.8 and on my a6000 it is a CA machine. On my a7 CA is almost non-existent. The crop factor absolutely increases the flaws of this lens. Secondly, while I love shooting vintage lenses from many different makers, there is no doubt that they are not clinically sharp. Outside of nostalgia and character, the advantages come down to feel and in the case of rangefinder lenses, size.
Again, nice job as always!
Tony you know your stuff... only someone like you can review the technical aspects of adaptors. Great thanks for this
I would like to add that it is possible to ignore the flange distance, as long as you realise that you will lose infinity focus. If you, for instance, want to use a lens for macro or studio work, it might not be a problem for you. I bought a very cheap m42 mount 135mm lens for my Nikon, if I put it to infinity focus, the focus really is at around 10 meters. Which is fine for portraits. it's like using a macro ring
Hi Tony. Thanks for you nice info. A lot of adapters on a Canon EF-s works perfectly. Also in infinity. I Use a lot of vintage lenses of diffences brands. Only everything is manual. For example: M39, M42, exacta, Pentax KP, Canon ND (correction glass), Minolta (Correction glass),
im looking for a 35mm lens to adapt to my canon 80d can you please recommend me a lens?
As someone looking for a wider range of lenses for his M4/3, this could not have been a more perfect time for this video! Extremely informative as always.
what did you end up doing
Tony the vintage lenses aren't my grandfather's their mine although it is funny. LOL. I bought a Zenit E with a Hielos 44 lens in 1975 then sold it in 1981 a bought a Contax 139 SLR with a Carl Zeiss 50 mm 1.7 and then 3 other SLR lenses in 1981 and kept them all. Then went digital with 6 compact superzooms 2006 to 2019. Now October 2019 I bought a Sony A7 new & cheap body only when I learnt about the lens adapters for C/Y to E-mount. Tony you mentioned lots of fun with vintage glass and I'm having a blast since I already had 4 vintage lenses and now using them for free on the Sony A7 body is amazing. I love experimenting with the manual setting and focus assist/magnification and the Electronic View Finder helps a lot with manual lenses as you see the finished image. I just set the shutter speed and the F-stop and the camera sets the ISO. Being back into SLR photography again is amazing even better than before after shutting it down in 2005 my last SLR 35 mm film shots. Thankfully digital there's no film or developing costs so I can shoot thousands of SLR shots for free.
I have a Canon 5D mark II and i'm purchasing a Sony a6000 and this was SO useful!!!!!!! I also have quite a few vintage cameras too!!! Thanks for this video :D
It's interesting to watch videos from a while ago and get impressed by how technology improved in such a short amount of time.
Even more now.
I'm still nostalgic for the Pentax lens I learned with in high school - for its tactile metal feel
I know this is an older video but .. damn ... there is a wealth of good info here.
I would like to add one thing that isn't perfect yet would does work, the Techart PRO adapter. With that adapter you can auto focus your leica m lenses on your sony E bodies. You can even adapt other manual slr lenses to the leica m mount and auto focus them too.
Tony thanks for covering the technical aspects in your videos. I find the tech information really useful for getting around the marketing hype prevalent on the web. Thanks for being a nerd!
Was thinking/hoping this would be about vintage lenses, but it was still very interesting. Thanks.
Thanks Tony, great review. I'm an A7ii shooter. I have the Metaboes Mk4 and have been obsessing over whether to buy the gmaster 70-200 or the Canon. I can see myself moving back to canon at some point, but the gmaster look sooo good.
I've done mount conversions with M42, Olympus and Pentax lenses to fit on Nikon and have infinity.
Nice video! I currently use nikon AI/AIs manual lenses full time, with my a6000 and Speedbooster ultra. Tele lenses definitely tend to work better, but I like using my 105mm macro a lot, and I've still been able to print shots taken on my 28mm. I decided to go with this system since there are barely any sony lenses both and fast and cheap, so I researched the best value nikon lenses and got a few! I'm now looking at getting an a6500 next year, and at some point after, switching to canon lenses (and a canon Speedbooster) This seems like the perfect system for me, though I am cautioned by what you said about using manual focus anyway, I better make this switch gradually and carefully.
Awesome and timely video as I was looking into canon to sony adapters.
Notes about dumb adapters, however tempting it may be to buy a fotodiox adapter off ebay for $15, don't do it. In my experience, using the cheap adapters work in the short term, but can be detrimental to the condition of your lenses in the long term. I have experience with 5 different adapters, Metabones, voigtlander and novoflex have always provided quality machining and they seem to spend a little extra on the build quality of their adapters. Fotodiox cuts every corner, they wiggle, don't lock correctly, and can deteriorate very quickly with moderate usage. I had a fotodiox adapter I used to go from Leica M to Sony FE. It was a placeholder adapter until I could buy a metabones. In the 4 months that I used it, the cheap metal wore down, leaving metal shavings, dust, and shards all over the mount for the lens. A few actually made their way onto the rear optic. Luckily, the lenses I was adapting weren't summiluxes and summichrons, but I still care about the quality of my gear. Had I not immediately noticed and carefully removed all the metal shavings, they could've easily damaged my lens or even my camera sensor.
TLDR; If you're gonna be mounting your lenses on an adapter with any frequency, make sure to spend extra on a good quality adapter. If not, it may wear down and damage your gear.
I haven't noticed metal shavings on my cheap adapters, but the fit is much better with the Metabones and Novoflex that I use. Cheap adapters do wiggle...which also means you lose contacts if they are smart adapters. I agree, cheap adapters are a waste of money.
K&F Concept are cheap and good in my experience.
I have yet to find a cheap adapter that isn't tight. Not to mention that the cheap adapters are so cheap, I just buy one for each of the lenses I am using them for and leave them there.
My options for adapting M42 to F mount seems a bit limited. Only glassless adapters I found were both fotodiox.
I bought a Fotodiox to use my medium format Bronica 75mm lens on my Canon 5D full frame. I find it excellent quality and very well made..
Agree on your bit on the vintage lens. The FD 50mm f/1.4 looks washed out compared to my EF 50mm f/1.8, which is the cheapest of the lot. But it creates an image that takes you back so that’s why I love my old glass.
Then why is it that I open a National Geographic Magazine from the 70's and the images are absolutely sharp and beautiful?
Not all old glass have properties. I would guess the gear that nat geo photographers were using super high quality glass.
The lenses that you will find on ebay for 30 bucks is probably not the same grade of lens that they used back then.
Of course the cheaper old lenses are much sharper at higher f stops than lower f stops, so you might have seen photos taken at f5.6 instead of their largest aperture.
Lenses within their original environment can perform very differently outside to it. Also, a magazine image is made up of dots and it tends to increase the apparent sharpness. Edges become crisper even though there is no added detail or true sharpness. Film era lenses - film camera - silver/analogue print is very different from film era lenses adapted to digital cameras outputted to a digital format. Film is flat, not all digital camera brand
planes are flat.
from my experience (on Sony E-mount):
adapters for the mounts you use a lot - Fotodiox offers a really nice range of adapters, which all work perfectly with MF (Nikon F lenses lose the AF with all adapters on the market unfortunately).
adapters for the mounts you barely use and are low-tech lenses - K&F Koncept is cheap, but still has a good build quality and the adapters are really good for MF lenses (old lenses).
i would get the Meta Bones only for the mounts you truly use as a standard.
you don't need an expensive adapter for an M42 or FD lens!
I have been shooting with a Sony mirrorless body for the past year (or so) and my first lenses were (newly purchased) adapted lenses with the metabones adapter. The only complaints I have are balance when hand holding as the combinations are front heavy primarily due to full frame glass being heavier, and loss of autofocus speed and functionality (e.g., eye af).
Even the FTZII nikon Adapter or EF to RF Adapter works best in the Native Systems. But if You do not mind manual focusing and use the IBIS in the camera works great. Leica M to Nikon 1, Nikon F to Leica L and M. Sigma has adapters for different camera systems also. I agree that some adapters are lousy but if saving your money until you can afford better native glass it is the cheapest way to utilize the equipment that is owned already. Megadap ETZ21 Pro Sony E to Nikon Z is fantastic. Your favorite Sigma APSC lens 50-100mm on Leica SL2-S I mainly use in 1:1 no vignetting. All other 3:2, 4:3, 7:5 and 16:9 do. Hit & Miss. Love trying though. So when trying Nikon AI, AI-S, D lenses the focusing doesn't work but figuring the distance and having the aperture set correctly from the lens the pics were fantastic most of the time. Some out of focus but by moving forward and backward fixed that. Cheers!
We can definitely adapt micro 4/3 lenses into Sony E mount body, as the focal flange were shorter in Sony E / FE. But, heavy vignette and no working aparture might be quite troublesome..but we could do it, in fact you could find the adapter in ebay :p
I use a Canadian made Leitz 200mm f/4 Telyt of Visoflex 1 fitting on my Panasonic Lumix GH3 with two adapters - Visoflex 1 to V II/VIII (OUBIO) and then a VII/VIII to M4/3 adapter - it all is solid and works to infinity focus, and gives me an effective 400mm result. The same should work with any old Viso. 1 fitting lens and, with the second adapter only, with any V II/VIII fitting lens.
24:24 -- @Tony, it's fairly criminal to quickly dismiss the Canon FD 50mm f/1.4's image quality based strictly on the sharpness/contrast at-or-near-wide-open when (1) sharpness/contrast is quite good from f/2.0 on up and is absolutely crisp from f/4.0 on up and (2) most people get an f/1.4 for DoF more so than sharpness/contrast... the SEL50F18 (a fine lens in many ways) obviously can't offer f/1.4 DoF and can't be speed boosted.
I like vintage lenses myself, but I look for the specific looks of historical value of the lenses rather than how fast they are. 1/3 of a stop and 1mm of DOF here or there hardly constitutes spending the money on an FD lens and losing things like autofocus and sharpness as a result.
I bought an adapter for my CANON camera. I am using my old ROKKOR 28mm 1:3.5 . It was my favorite glass back in the day!
Amazing technical knowledge.
Thank you for sharing Tony. Great work.
Along with Mister Felpful, I must also take issue with your dismissal of the 50mm f1.4 FD SSC. The one I own does not perform poorly as in the images you present here. Comparing it directly against my Zeiss Planar and current vintage Summicron, its by a narrow margin the best of the three. (At ALL stops where differences are visible) Comparing it directly against one sample of the Zeiss OTUS, it was preferable above f 2.8 as well, except wide open where the SSC becomes “foggy” and the OTUS does not. All in all, my sample is a superb performer. Older FL and chrome nose versions tested almost as good.
I know you said you'd cover it in a later video with other slr lens compatibility, but I just wanted to add a few things on dumb adapters, I have a lot of eos adapters with chips that give metadata all lenses are set to 50mm but you can save the info for the fstop on the camera setting from 1.4 to 22 but the real bonus is that it gives you AF confirmation so when you manual focus it will beep when it is in focus. I also have an eos adapter for my mf cameras that has a built in aperture with 8 blades which actually helps with some lenses that only have 5 blades look nicer like the 50mm 1.8 and 24mm 2.8. The Canon EOS system also supports infinity focus on many old SLR lens not just K and F. There are EOS adapters for m39, m42, Yashica, Mamiya CS, Olympus OM, Leica R, Pentax 645. There are even FD adapters made by edmika that with a bit of work can change FD mount to EOS mount but it is initially more work as you have to take some things apart. I mostly agree with the disclaimer at the end that old lenses are not better than newer lenses in image quality in most cases, but remember some canon EOS lenses were made in the film days and are still super sharp, like the Canon EOS 85mm F1.2L made in 1989, the 135 F2L made in 1996, heck even the original 70-200 2.8L no IS came out in 1995 and is still being produced by Canon and according to DXOmark when mounted on the 5DSR is actually sharper than the 70-200 2.8L with IS that came out in 2001 (I would argue still film days as the 5d didn't come out till 2005). Still I do agree a lens from the 60s and 70s is still most likely going to be garbage in image quality, still in video they can be comfortable and inexpensive for fast lenses. I mean ~$50 for most old 50mm 1.4 lenses, 135mm 2.8 lenses for ~$15, I've even got 450mm 5.6 for ~$20. Most are on the struggle bus when it comes to great image quality, but honestly not super awful especially in 1080.
An interesting point is that you can sometimes use teleconverters with crop lenses to use them on full frame bodies. Teleconverters have negative power lenses in them, which is the opposite of speed boosters which have positive power elements. Speed boosters compress the image down for a smaller sensor, increasing the brightness/area, whereas teleconverters spread out that light, making the image dimmer and more magnified. Because of this magnification, lenses that don't cover full frame can have their coveraged increased by the teleconverter.
The catch is that most teleconverters are 1.4x whereas the typical crop factor is 1.5x or 1.6x, so you might still have some vignetting. Although, 2x teleconverters should work i.e. give no vignetting.
I have a Minolta MC Rokkor - PF that does well on my G7, but like you said it's not the sharpest and its basically a 100mm lens after crop. Kind of hard to use in doors.
Tony, can you recommend a dumb adapter for the Panasonic gh4? I am getting ready to purchase a Rikonan 85mm, f1.2 but I don’t know which adapter will fit my camera. Thanks!
Dude - thank you. this is something I have wanted to know for a long time. I bought some low profile adapter one time for my old AE-1 and it got stuck and I couldn't get it to disengage. I have a dozen+ film cameras of all different brands and I have wanted to try the old glass on my 6D and 5D mk II
As a former Medium Format guy, I adapted my Mamiya 645 (film) lenses to the Nikon F system (dSLR)... the crop factor to full frame is something like 0.6x which makes for some nifty angles and apertures.
i actually find vintage lenses, despite weaknesses, really nice. and center sharpness wide open is often good. i think Tony might not be the type of experimenting guy to go deep into this. Adapt ing old glass and using manual modern glass is like one of the coolest things about mirrorless and once you had a f1.1 lens on your apsc You find speedboosters, which you get for 100bucks , are huge. one f stop! thats expensive usually. also Theres tiltadapters .
Hi Tony, Can you clarify "FF lenses on APSC bodies isn't really the best (paraphrasing a little)". Looking at DXO, 18 out of the top 20 sharpest lenses for both APSC Canon & Nikon cameras are full frame lenses. Thank you for the great video.
I'd love to adapt my old M42 glass to my D7000. My understanding is I;d need an adapter with an element to correct the flange distance.
regarding vintage lenses.
Older lenses have far different color rendition and the coatings on the lenses are completely different. I use vintage lenses because I have found that older lenses have much nicer lens flare colors. But this depends on whichever lens you buy, obviously. I had 2 of the same russian zeiss copy lens and on one of them the coating had a gross yellow tint from just years of exposure to open air and what not. But I got it on ebay for 10 bucks, so that's cool.
I agree. I use my old Pentax SMC 50mm f1.7 lens (bought in 1981) with my Canon 5D and a cheapo PK EF adapter. OK you have to use manual settings & focus but the quality of that old lens is astonishing on a full frame DSLR. Any colour correction is not a problem to fix - in fact the retro colour is lovely. Also you get fabulous bokeh with this lens. Lots of video guys use them. Available for about $25 at Rocky's Cameras in the UK.
Nikon F mount flange distance is a little bit longer than Pentax K (46.60mm vs 45.46mm)...
After hearing what you said carefully, I think with my tight budget it's nice to get a low end smart adapter and canon lenses to pair with my A6000. This way I get electronic F stop control and get to play with the most amount of lenses. I'm also getting some T mount lenses which will need converters anyway.
it would be amazing if you can make a video comparing Z mount vs RF mount and E mount regarding future compatibility, advantages and disadvantages
So adaptors that increase the flange distance are just gonna function like very tiny extension tubes though, right? Everything still otherwise optically works right?
I love your geeky videos Tony and you're right with many things
10.45 Which adapter is that Nikon to MFT adapter?
I would like a update of this video :)
I mean now with the z6 and 7 how have this change? is is mostly thr same?
Another awesome job Tony!
Note: rangefinder lenses aren't so good an a standard A7 (any type). This is because Sony placed a thick piece of glass on the sensor which causes corner softness (and purple corners) with wider lenses (even 50mm lenses). You can send your A7 to some companies to remove the glass (and replace it with a much thinner one).
Awesome . Great information. Awesome presentation.
This is probably the most complete and easy explained Video on lens adapters. I can't understand why has got only 200 thousand views an a channel with 1.4 Million subscribers: maybe because it's 27 min long?
Tony! Apsc lenses for full frame bodies which have croped video mode! Video, afap please
have you had issues with adaptors and comms pins. It seems I have melted the surround of a comms pin with a cheap adaptor. Can a smart adaptor negate any further damage?
Poor performance of vintage lenses, will avoid. Encouraged by speedboster abilities. Wish for a episode on using ASP-C as a stepping stone to FF cameras. I was thinking canon m50 + speedbooster (viltrox for cost) + Canon EF lenses with the idea of carrying those over to a Canon FF body in the future.
Tony, have you try Tamron(Sigma) 150-600 mm lens with Sony A7iii for video, I know you have (or had) both, is this is workable configuration, and which adapter will be best.
Also GH5 and which configuration you will think will be better, GH5 or A7iii with Tamron(Sigma).
Greetings and thanks very much for a great topic. Right after watching your presentation on the Canon EOS 80D, I ordered one and finally received it a few days later. I would like to purchase a Vivitar Series 1 70~210mm Lens with a Canon FD mount and need to know if I can use this lens on the 80D without much difficulty. With an adaptor, what issues will I encounter as far as image quality and focusing distance? Thanks very much for your assistance. I did purchase your book through Amazon and it is quite amazing. Very much appreciate your hard work. Cheers, Anthony J Tarquinio. :)
im looking for a 35mm lens to adapt to my canon 80d can you please recommend me a lens? or any other special choices ?
Well explained and very useful as usual.
Thanks Tony. I want a smart adapter as much for the file data as autofocus. That is why I don't use a dumb adapter even though it is cheaper
Very informative video. Thank you for sharing your knowledge!
Any experience with an adapter to mount a Pentax SMC lens (K mount) to a Nikon APC (DX) body? I purchased a Vello Pentax lens to Nikon body adapter and yes it adapts the two but it seems the correction lens in the adapter that corrects for flange distance ruins the image. Never really in focus. Reviews from users say they like it. Did the job, etc. but honestly I don't like the results. Is this something I'll realize no matter what PK to NK adapter I use? Am I just really wanting this to work and it just won't? You can tell me the truth. I know you will.
Excellent information. Thank you.
I read "smart and dumb adopters" and I thought you were talking about me.
I have to disagree on the part of vintage lenses because I own several vintage lenses that were built back in the 1980s. These are Nikon AIS and Nikon AIS E Series lenses. I used them for night photography, black and white photography and color photography. At night, they do show some chromatic abbreviation but they can be sharper while in focus than the example photo that you have shown. I have noticed that modern lenses can show chromatic abbreviation as well for night photography. Sometimes, chromatic abbreviations can make a seen look cool too. These vintage lenses do work well with my Nikon F5, Nikon F100 and Fujifilm XT-10. I do use the metabones adaptor for the Fujifilm XT-10 camera so I can use these Nikon Lenses. I do remind myself of the crop factor which is 1.5X. During the Solar eclipse, the crop factor helped my Nikon 70-300mm F4-5.6 ED D lens turn into a 105mm-450mm lens. I have some great time laps photography done last year in capturing the solar eclipse in sequences for a few hours. Peace, Flood!
Nice to have this explained in such detail; but I will stay a Canon guy nonetheless. (As an amateur I have a limited budget and will stay with just one ecosystem.)
Hi Tony,
You said putting the full frame lense on a APS-C body will, change the angle of view, (mm x CF), also you said that the aperture would be (1/f x CF). does this mean that only the amount of bokeh is affect or the amount of light as well?.. like your example, 24mm 2.8 on a micro 4/3rd body would mean it would give you similar results of a 48mm 5.6, does that mean it only affects the bokeh or also robs the lense of some light?
Thanks,
Jesal
Canon EOS has a longer flange distance than Canon FD, but back in the day there were adapters with lenses that corrected focus. Canon had an official one which functioned like a 1.26x teleconverter and only worked with telephoto primes and zooms.
Probably too impractical and niche today though unless autofocus is uncompromised. With FD there was no AF to begin with :P
Edit: Small correction, but Nikon's flange distance is the longest and longer than Pentax'. Pretty sure a Pentax to Nikon adapter is impossible, but there is an M42 (screw mount) to Pentax K adapter which makes it possible to use the earliest Pentax lenses and some other like Mamiya M42 lenses.
many years ago I bought many FD lenses for my Canon Ftb, I sometimes with and adapter use them on my newer Canons, does that make me my own grandpa?
Thanks for your dedication. This video was really didactic an useful
Great video, thank you
an ocean of knowledge. Thanks a lot!
very very helpful 👍
I love to film is older "vintage" glass just to get a fun/ interesting look
Now we have fringer for fuji to use canon lenses and it work pretty well
I want to switch from canon 80d to a6100 without selling my 50 f1.8, 24 f2.8, 55 250, and 18 55 Stms. Reason 4k 24p and fhd 120p slowmo.
What adapter do you recommend. Thanks.
hey tony great video. I have a question, using full frame lens on MFT brings less sharp image, is it because of lens diffraction?
Unless your using an aperture that is narrow enough to cause diffraction, that is probably not the case. It could be because the MFT camera might not be using the full resolution of the lens and only using the center of the adapted lens for the image so you don't get the full resolution of the lens so the lens won't be as sharp. It could also be that FF lenses are designed for sensors with much bigger pixels than MFT sensors have and don't work as well with smaller pixels. Speedboosters might be better as your getting a less crop on the lens than you'd get with a normal adaptor as you could be using more of the lens.
I have a Sigma 105mm EX DG Macro lens and used to use it with my Canon 600D and kept wondering why it could never produce sharp images like I have seen online, then found out it was a full frame lens I was using on a ASP-C body and would never get the same sharpness I would if I used it on a FF body.
Hi Tony, what do you think about the full automatic Nikon to Sony E adapter introduced recently by Fotodiox? Thanks.
A small error at 18:00, but nice info video overall.
I have Nikon d5500 I like Rokinon Cine DS EF 85mm T1.5 Lens so how can I adapt it please?
As a former musician i've never been able to understand the reluctance of camera manufacturers to implement a single standard fitting. Back in the day, Synthesizers used to be controlled via the cv gate and if you had a Korg and you wanted to link to another synth, it needed to be a Korg or it just wouldn't work. The same problem as cameras have with lenses in effect.
Come the early 80's and everyone got together to develop MIDI (Musical Instrument Digital Interface) and it revolutionised things to such an extent that MIDI became like "I..." is now. Everything was being called MIDI-something, cars, phones, whatever, it was the new buzzword. For synth players, it meant we could now connect our Roland's to our Korg's, or Moogs or Prophets, etc, and sales went through the roof!
The fears that manufacturers had about losing their locked-in market went out of the window. In camera terms, sure, a few Nikon guys would go off and buy Canon lenses, but equally Canon guys would go and buy some of the Nikon lenses. Not to mention all the Sony, Pentax, Olympus, etc, etc guys. Instead of your small locked in market, every single camera user would now be your market. It's a win-win for everyone!
Too bad you can't make speed boosters without moving the lens closer to the sensor. Would be nice to utilise that extra light of full frame lenses on aps-c bodies within the same system. Ye can't trick physics... :(
The Sony LA-EA4 adapter doesn't have slower AF with a-mount lenses. The Sony LA-EA4 isn't a simple adapter. It has an internal focus motor for older a mount lenses and a translucent lens with autofocus sensors. The adapter is actually a SLT camera without the image sensor, shutter and photo processing electronics.
The Sony LA-EA3 adapter is cheaper and indeed has slower autofocus because it is a simple, small and light adapter. It is similar to Nikon and Canon adapters for their own mirrorless cameras.
The Sigma mc-11 is the only adapter from a major company that permits the use of EF, EF-S mount lenses to Sony e-mount cameras.
Actually only Sony has many adapters with autofocus capability.
Tony I have a Sony6000 I'm new to photography,😁 and I admire all your videos keep up the great work. My question is what's the best cheap Canon lens or anything like canon because I have the cheap adapter for it already. I normally shoot sunsets landscapes etc getting into capturing my grandson in action. Right now I'm playing with 70mm - 300mm promaster. Witch I find not bad after post editing lol.... thanks again Tony👍🏼.
Tony, I think the Canon M5 will be an option for many photographers looking to use adapted lenses. Why leave out Canon mirrorless system from your analysis?
I included only the most popular systems in the chart.
Hi, does any know if AF works better with a Sony A to E smart adapter compared to a Metabones V Cannon to E mount adapter?
I gonna use some Zeiss Contax lenses on BMPCC4K, meanwhile looking for some basic photo camera to share those Contax vintage lenses. Which camera would you like to introduce? Canon or Fujifilm?
Only thing I disagree with is your take on vintage lenses.... I've found that many vintage lenses actually render at MINIMUM comparable results to that of modern glass... In the images you've shown with the Canon 50mm FD lens... I believe you may have some haze covering the glass because i've done a side by side comparison with a 50mm FD SSC 1.4 vs the modern 50MM 1.8 STM and I could BARELY tell the difference.. I would say when stopped down the vintage FD lens was sharper both on the subject AND around the edges.. that lens is actually legendary for its sharpness even shot wide open! Great content though I love your videos!
As always ur videos are amazing Tony, and the education you provide is quite literally collegiate level. However, I think you should have addressed budget as a critical aspect of vintage lens use. As a hobbiest, I have no desire to spend over $500 for a lens, yet I think sharpness is overrated and extremely thin DOF creates unique and amazing shots. So... I bought a $20 135mm F2.8 and a $10 M42 to emount converter, and the result is a thinner "looking" DOF than my $200 Sony 50mm F1.8. But, I wonder if a $40 Takumar 50mm f1.4 and a $80 1 stop speedbooster would be better than the $250 Kamlan 50mm F1.1 MKII or a $400 Mitakon 50mm F0.95? Also, does anyone know if the F1.4 Takumar with 1 stop speedbooster would have the same theoretical DOF as the Mitakon F0.95?
Since it is very popular to use vintage lenses, especially the ones with the old M42 screw mount, I bought some and an adapter for my Nikon, this gives me a problem with the flange distance, there's no focus to infinity, it can be fixed with an adapter with some cheap poor glass in it. But my other choice is to get a mirrorless camera, since I personally don't have too much money, I'll have to settle for a used X-T1 or used Olympus E-M1 mk1.
I would really love to get a Sony honestly, but I'll have to maybe sell my Nikon, which I'd rather not do.
I tried using some old Nikkor-S lenses (with adapter) for the old 5D Classic. The 50 mm 2.0 works fine, but the 35 mm F2.8 and the 50mm F1.4 have a protruding lip on the back flange that interferes with the operation of the flipping mirror. I have no idea why Nikon made the flange that way, just wondering if possible to grind that flange smooth to the same shape as the 50 mm F2.0 flange.
Thanks. I'd like to get one of these Russian 44-2 Helios just for the bokeh. It would go on a Panasonic GH5S. Foresee any difficulties?
Very good video, thank you!
I have Panasonic GH4. I use 3 Voigtlander MFT lenses with it. I also have vintage Prime lenses like the Nikon Nikkor 50mm F/1.8, Pentax SMC 50mm F/1.2, 50mm F/1.7, then Olympus Zuiko 50mm F/1.8, 35mm F/2, 28mm F/2.8, 100mm F/2.8, 135mm F/3.5, and 35 to 70mm F4 Zoom. I don't know which Metabones adaptor to purchase due to the wide variety of lenses I use. Any suggestions?