I have a question regarding experience with MC Rokkor-PG to Nikon F conversion adaptors. The two devices listed in URLs below are kind of self-explanatory (yep, no infinity but I can live with 10 meters max focus distance); however I am wondering if anyone is using any of them or similar adaptors on Nikon FF bodies and has any pro/con comments or advices. Thank you.
JaKo wrote:
I have a question regarding experience with MC Rokkor-PG to Nikon F conversion adaptors. The two devices listed in URLs below are kind of self-explanatory (yep, no infinity but I can live with 10 meters max focus distance); however I am wondering if anyone is using any of them or similar adaptors on Nikon FF bodies and has any pro/con comments or advices. Thank you.
the first one has crappy glass in it and will destroy the performance and character of the lenses for the most part. the second one is really only for macro, i doubt you'd be able to further than 1ft focus distance with a 50mm rokkor on that.
i replaced the rokkor MD 50/1.2 mount with a nikon mount (no adapter straight mount replacement) and could not get it to focus past 1m on a nikon camera even after doing the maximal infinity stop adjustment: http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6129/6022646670_58f67de10b_o.jpg http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6135/6022089225_c4dee0e5e2_o.jpg
the more famous rokkor 58/1.2 can be converted relatively easily to nikon mount and will reach infinity (due to a spacer that can be replaced with something much thinner), however it will cause a mirror hang on nikon cameras at infinity. most other rokkor lenses are much more difficult to convert and the wider ones will typically have mirror collision issues.
Thank you sebboh. Very helpful info, much appreciated!
I have MC Rokkor-PG 58/1.2 arriving soon (got it for a future, mirrorless use) but it looks like I may have to find another way to use it sooner. Perhaps on my old Canon EOS SLR.
JaKo wrote:
Thank you sebboh. Very helpful info, much appreciated!
I have MC Rokkor-PG 58/1.2 arriving soon (got it for a future, mirrorless use) but it looks like I may have to find another way to use it sooner. Perhaps on my old Canon EOS SLR.
glad to help, i suspect the old eos slr may have mirror issues just like your nikon near infinity btw.
Michael, I feel lucky finding this pristine copy. Based on posted images I feel the lens is a keeper definitely worth extra pennies for its good shape.
sebboh; after using Zeiss infamous lens caps Minolta's snap-on tight cap is a revelation to me.
BTW, how does Rokkor 58/1.2 behaves without hood in bright(er) scenes?
zhangyue wrote:
^^ Were you wear some green cloth with leaves hide there
the waxwing saw me put down my telephoto so he came over to mock me.
JaKo wrote:
Michael, I feel lucky finding this pristine copy. Based on posted images I feel the lens is a keeper definitely worth extra pennies for its good shape.
sebboh; after using Zeiss infamous lens caps Minolta's snap-on tight cap is a revelation to me.
BTW, how does Rokkor 58/1.2 behaves without hood in bright(er) scenes?
i've heard so many complaints about those zeiss caps, but i don't think i've ever actually used one. i tend to be very concerned about protecting my glass when i'm not using the camera/lens and completely unconcerned when the camera is in my hand so i use generic metal screw caps for all my lenses.
regarding the rokkor – it's got a big hunk of glass up front and using it without a hood in bright light can definitely increase the veiling flare, but not enough that i find it worth while to carry a hood. it does surprisingly well at minimizing the other weird flare artifacts common when the sun is near or included in the frame for a lens it's speed and age. with my thoriated version of the lens i had issues with a red hot spot appearing when the sun was just out of the frame, but for some reason i've never seen that with the non-thoriated version i use now.
twoeye wrote: My experience is that the 58 Rokkors contrast improves a lot with a hood, I use an ugly collapsible rubber hold
Thank you. Kind of make sense considering size and exposure of its front element glass. Other fast(er) lenses I used like Nikkor 50/1.2 or Nippon Kogaku 50/1.4 hugely benefited (reduced flare, ghosting and improved contrast) from fairly large lens hoods.
sebboh wrote: regarding the rokkor – it's got a big hunk of glass up front and using it without a hood in bright light can definitely increase the veiling flare, but not enough that i find it worth while to carry a hood.
Thanks. I may get few metals hoods just to try, perhaps starting with 1/2" long vented hood (it works well on my Nikkor 50/1.2) They're fairly cheap from Far East and decently made.
Anyhow, I should be using f/1.2 speed only in available light conditions and skip hoods unless for protection. I noticed that even early in the evening shooting WO in A-priority mode sets shutter speed around 1/6000s @ISO100.
Thanks for your info and images. Learned a lot from you.
