I have 1dsmk2/3 have Contax , Nikon and Leica lenses and have no problems.

I have the chance of a 5D private sale (mainly for light walking etc.)

I see on 16.9 that the 21 2.8 has the iffy sign.

Here are my MF lenses, perhaps someone can give me an idea of what might be OK. I really must be able to use the 21 and 35-70. I probably wouldn`t change the focus screen so the 21 2.8 (which I use hypo focal anyway) would be OK and on that body my Canon 24-105 would probably do a good enough job. My 70-200 f4IS would suffice for the long end.

Contax
21 2.8 MM
25 2.8 MM
28 2.8 MM
35-70 MM
85 1.4 MM
100 3.5 MM
135 2.8 MM
Nikon
55 2.8 Micro
Leica
50 F2 Sumi (latest)

Thanks for any advice

Dave

I think that small variations in lens geometry (of the aperture lever and lever shield) and in 5D mirror clearances means that some people have clearance issues with some lenses, and not others. In my experience, the 28/2.8, 35-70 and 85/1.4 worked fine on my 5D, but I had to slightly snip my 35/2.8 and 45/2.8 to get them working without interference.

jcolwell wrote:
I think that small variations in lens geometry (of the aperture lever and lever shield) and in 5D mirror clearances means that some people have clearance issues with some lenses, and not others. In my experience, the 28/2.8, 35-70 and 85/1.4 worked fine on my 5D, but I had to slightly snip my 35/2.8 and 45/2.8 to get them working without interference.

Have you heard of many 21 2.8 problems/

Thanks

Because of the sloppy body-by-body tolerances in the 5D for mirror placement (or size), it's tough to say if you'll have an issue or not. Body #1 could be fine with the a lens and the guy's next to you choke on the same lens using the same adapter.

Some 5Ds choke on lenses they shouldn't have an issue with, some don't choke of lenses they should have an issue with.

Worst case, since DSLRs, especially pro-sumer versions, depreciate faster than rock off a cliff, shave the mirror on the 5D. A new mirror is only US$300 if you decide to sell it later with a clean mirror. of course by then that $300 might be 1/2 the market value ;>

If it's under 50mm in FL and/or extends at all rearward when focused towards infinity and/or has the CZ 'sharkfin' aperture lever (easily removed) - assume yes until proven otherwise with a particular 5D.

28mm 2.8 will probably cause problems. All the rest should be fine.

I use both the 28mm 2.8 and 35-70mm with my 5D and have no issues. With the 28mm lens you need to be careful about not using an adapter that is too thin. The happypage adapter I first used caused the mirror to hang. A subsequent Fotodiox Pro adapter solved the problem.

Thanks for the response.

The one that is really worrying me is the 21 , I must be able to use that lens.

I had a 5D when they first came out but sold it off to get the 1dsmk2 (which I still have)
You know how it is, I was searching through my drives looking for stock images and I opened a couple of images that blew me away and they were with the 5D and Canon primes( 85 1.8 and 135 f2) so while contemplating the 5D and waiting for replies to this thread I started to delve, I found some images taken with the 1dsmk2 and the 85 and 135 and i must admit(bearing in mind that I don`t have to up size the 1dsmk2 files for stock) the 100% crops are superb with enough light to avoid camera shake. I think since buying the 70-200f4IS and MF lenses(mainly for the 1dsmk3) I`ve tended to overlook those two primes. Being a couple of years down the line with better software and knowledge and learning that ISO 100 isn`t the carved in stone speed that it used to be then maybe I should blow the dust off of those two primes and put them through their paces on the mk2. It won`t get over the weight problem but as time goes by I`m learning more and more that with serious shooting you do just have to carry thet weight.
The weather looks set fair in the morning so I will give it a bash before making my mind up on Monday morning.

Anymore advice gratefully accepted

Dave

If it sticks the standard advice on the 28/2.8 is to get the non-pro (less expensive) fotodiox adapter. That's what I did and it works without modification. I would also use this adopter on the 35-70 as its a little borderline too.

On the 21/2.8 you will have the option of buying the ZE when it comes out. That will surely work on the 5D.

dcmiller wrote:
If it sticks the standard advice on the 28/2.8 is to get the non-pro (less expensive) fotodiox adapter. That's what I did and it works without modification. I would also use this adopter on the 35-70 as its a little borderline too.

On the 21/2.8 you will have the option of buying the ZE when it comes out. That will surely work on the 5D.

Thanks DC

I already have a (boxed new) 3 month old Contax 21 that is perfect.

Dave

I have no issues with the 21 2.8, 28 2.8 AE, 35-70 and 85 1.4 on my 5D.

I use all lenses with happypagehk-adapters. I have had problems with the 28 2.8 and another adapter. So the choice of the right adapter could be critical for some lenses.

I don't think anyone could give you a definitive answer, as 5D mirror problems vary from body to body.

I have used the 21mm f2.8 on my 5D without any problems, but I also use the supposedly problematic 28mm f2, 50mm f1.7, 85mm f1,2 and 135mm f2 without issue, so it may be that I just struck lucky with my 5D body.

Changing adapters is unlikely to make a difference, as the lens needs to be at a specific distance from the sensor to achieve perfect infinity focus, and it is the lens's rear element/shroud that may clash with the mirror. Using a thicker adapter to push the lens away from the mirror would simply lose infinity focus.

If you have the chance to "try before you buy" then take it.
If not, then presumably the good price you are getting would allow you to sell the body on without a problem, should you find it is not suitable for adapted C/Y lenses.

Cheers,
Matt

Ulff wrote:
I have no issues with the 21 2.8, 28 2.8 AE, 35-70 and 85 1.4 on my 5D.

I use all lenses with happypagehk-adapters. I have had problems with the 28 2.8 and another adapter. So the choice of the right adapter could be critical for some lenses.

Hello Markus,

I replied before reading your post.

I am curious to know if you have checked for precise infinity focus with the two different adapters. I didn't expect a different adapter to matter, for reasons stated in my previous post, but I would value the benefit of your experience in this situation.

Kind regards,
Matt

Hi Matt, I believe that the first adapter was too thin. With my recent adapter I've had no problems with infinity focus yet, but I must admit, that I haven't tested it properly with the 28 2.8. But I've tested the same adapter with other Zeiss lenses and got perfect infinity focus.

Interestingly I have another (no-name) adapter that is too thick and most Zeiss-lenses don't reach infinity, except the 84 1.4 (AE-version) and the 100-300. At least the 100-300 was build to focus beyond infinity (to compensate for material changes due to different weather conditions), so this may be the reason for this behavior.

Well I can only speak from my experience with my CZ lenses on my 5D:

28/2.8 - works fine
35/2.8 - works fine
50.1.4 - hangs on mirror when shot vertically, fine horizontally. Probably really close tolerance and the adapter must allow a bit of movement
85/2.8 - works fine
100/2.0 - works fine
135/2.8 - works fine

Oh, and the 50/2.0 works fine too.

I have a 5d and a 28mm Contax that didn't clear the mirror. I shaved the mirror, and now the 5D clears everything including a Leica 28mm, and the Contax 21mm f/2.8. Not that that solves your question, but I will likely be selling that camera in the 1200-1300 range with a Mack extended warranty. It is less than a year old. So bottom line, if you want to make sure it works, then I have the camera for you, ;^). I would also like to sell the Contax 28mm f/2.8 (? $260) as I now have the Leica. And as a matter of fact, I will likely be selling the Contax 21mm f/2.8 for $1500 plus a bit extra for a W-1 hood and PhamMinhSon adapter. I'm close to putting an ad up for them, but they are available now.

You are correct in that the 5D plus 21mm and 28mm are the ultimate light weight wide angle combo. That 21mm is sweet compared to the bulky Nikon, and the 28mm is even smaller. Sharp as the dickens.

My general hunch is that the newer 5D's are less likely to clear the alternative lenses compared to older 5D's, just having read through a bunch of notes.

Regards, Richard (Bucks County, PA)

dave chilvers wrote:
Thanks for the response.

The one that is really worrying me is the 21 , I must be able to use that lens.

I had a 5D when they first came out but sold it off to get the 1dsmk2 (which I still have)
You know how it is, I was searching through my drives looking for stock images and I opened a couple of images that blew me away and they were with the 5D and Canon primes( 85 1.8 and 135 f2) so while contemplating the 5D and waiting for replies to this thread I started to delve, I found some images taken with the 1dsmk2 and the 85 and 135 and i must admit(bearing in mind that I don`t have to up size the 1dsmk2 files for stock) the 100% crops are superb with enough light to avoid camera shake. I think since buying the 70-200f4IS and MF lenses(mainly for the 1dsmk3) I`ve tended to overlook those two primes. Being a couple of years down the line with better software and knowledge and learning that ISO 100 isn`t the carved in stone speed that it used to be then maybe I should blow the dust off of those two primes and put them through their paces on the mk2. It won`t get over the weight problem but as time goes by I`m learning more and more that with serious shooting you do just have to carry thet weight.
The weather looks set fair in the morning so I will give it a bash before making my mind up on Monday morning.

Anymore advice gratefully accepted

Dave

Well I couldn`t shoot with the 5D because (as yet) I don`t have one but I shot those two lenses today on the 1dsmk2 and 1dsmk3.

I already have a very impressive shot of the same subject from the 5D (the one that opened my eyes)
I used the 85 1.8 and the 135 f2 at varying f stops, I down sized the mk3 file to mk2 size and the mk2 file was a lot nicer to look at with more detail, I up sized the mk2 file to the mk3 size and still the mk2 file was nicer with more detail.
Surprisingly the 5D file upsized to the mk2 size held together very well and looked better than the mk3 file (although you could add lots of sharpening to the mk3 file to make it closer) but the mk2 file was the best in general.
Which now leaves the dilema, do I sacrifice the slightly better file from the 1dsmk2 to be able to carry a much lighter camera around? and face the possibilty that my contax lenses might not work perfectly on the 5D? Also I find that I need a split image focus screen with the MF lenses and from what I`ve read the 5D isn`t the breeze to change focus screens that the 1 series is.

One big thing that this testing has brought to light is just how good the 5D mk1 really was. If the 5Dmk2 perform similar to the 1dsmk3 it will obviously be a great camera with all the up to date features and the files(like the 1dsmk3) will be very flexible and afford a good amount of cropability but will it satisfy the die hard 5D users?

Dave