What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
/forum/topic/982966/169

1       2       3              169      
170
       171              186       187       end

JohnJ
Registered: Jul 09, 2005
Total Posts: 1992
Country: Australia

carstenw wrote:
I could also go M39. I am not sure what is better. I would like to have the option of either F-mount or Contax mount.

Btw, yes, RMS.


I use a Nikon PB-4 and have no issues with either M39 or M42 adapters but some times the M42 mount is better suited to using other adapters. I've never had problems arising from using multiple stacked adapters on the PB-4 (or the PB-4 on a Canon body) so I would suggest you try the cheap option and see how that performs.



freaklikeme
Registered: Apr 08, 2005
Total Posts: 5635
Country: United States

JohnJ wrote:
carstenw wrote:
Zeiss Luminar 63mm f/4.5 Now I need to find out how to adapt it to my Contax Bellows and the bellows to my D800 or A7, without breaking the bank. The adapters I have seen so far are in the 150 Euro ballpark!


Is the Luminar an RMS thread? If so then RMS > M39/M42 etc adapters are cheap and readily available, as are Contax or Nikon M39/M42 adapters for the bellows.

Why is it going to cost 150 Euro ? I've had (several) adapters custom made for much less.


There's a genuine Contax adapter for the lenses that goes for that or more. Shooters end up competing with collectors for those types of things, so the prices are high.

Where are you finding M39 to Contax adapters? I'm trying to find one for a Rodenstock 90 and the closest I've come is a funky looking M42 to Contax and a step down ring.



mjbetch
Registered: Dec 22, 2008
Total Posts: 162
Country: United States

Sold the Fuji 35mm for it. I absolutely love this lens more than the 35mm.

GBRL3327.jpg by gbrldz, on Flickr



Peire
Registered: Apr 27, 2010
Total Posts: 1305
Country: Poland

sceptic wrote:


Peire wrote:
Hexanon AR 85/1.7.

I assume you mean 85/1.8, in which case I congratulate you on a great lens. Very sharp from f/2.8 and very good build quality.


Right.85/1.8.Thanks.I know.This is my second copy as is the Rokkor MC 85/1.7.I couldn't resist - Hexanon was like new and only 160 Euro.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15313
Country: Germany



freaklikeme wrote:
JohnJ wrote:
carstenw wrote:
Zeiss Luminar 63mm f/4.5 Now I need to find out how to adapt it to my Contax Bellows and the bellows to my D800 or A7, without breaking the bank. The adapters I have seen so far are in the 150 Euro ballpark!


Is the Luminar an RMS thread? If so then RMS > M39/M42 etc adapters are cheap and readily available, as are Contax or Nikon M39/M42 adapters for the bellows.

Why is it going to cost 150 Euro ? I've had (several) adapters custom made for much less.


There's a genuine Contax adapter for the lenses that goes for that or more. Shooters end up competing with collectors for those types of things, so the prices are high.

Where are you finding M39 to Contax adapters? I'm trying to find one for a Rodenstock 90 and the closest I've come is a funky looking M42 to Contax and a step down ring.


I think you are right, I can't find all the needed bits. I ended up buying an RMS to M42 adapter, as well as M42 to F and Contax mount adapters, and a Contax to F mount adapter for the camera side. I already have the F to E adapter, in case I want to use my A7, so I should be set, as long as all the rings are properly removable and nothing interferes anywhere. In a few days I will know.



JohnJ
Registered: Jul 09, 2005
Total Posts: 1992
Country: Australia

freaklikeme wrote:
...Where are you finding M39 to Contax adapters? I'm trying to find one for a Rodenstock 90 and the closest I've come is a funky looking M42 to Contax and a step down ring.


I'm simply suggesting that there are sometimes inexpensive methods that work well. If it's difficult to get an M39 to Contax adapter, but an M42>Contax is easy then why wouldn't you use an M42>Contax even if another adapter/ring is needed in between? I regularly do that with m42 adapters.

By the way, you can also use T2(M42x0.75)>Contax adapter and then use an M39>T2 adapter. I don't know if that's any cheaper, but some enlarging lenses are threaded with M42x0.75, eg. Schneider Componon-s 135/5.6.

In reality, there are very few off-the-shelf adapters other than the usual M42/M39 for most mounts so when you want to use an M32.5, M25, M40x0.75 etc. then you usually have to use multiple adapters anyway.

If you are interested in following it up then PM me for the details of a company I've used for custom adapters. I can't speak for them but they might be able to make an M39>Contax, if you really want to do that.



e6filmuser
Registered: Oct 11, 2008
Total Posts: 2093
Country: United Kingdom

I now have a Printing Nikkor 105mm which I find gives excellent results for macro. My images are posted over in the Macro World forum. At the time of posting this, I am using it with an Olympus E-P2. I have an OMD EM-1 on its way to me which may put the images in another league.

Harold



Alpha_Geist
Registered: Apr 20, 2011
Total Posts: 320
Country: United States

Stephen Gandy at Camera Quest sent this little gem my way. Thank you JaKo for twisting my arm (lol) to pull the trigger!


Voigtlander Nokton 50mm 1.5 by Alpha Geist, on Flickr



JimBuchanan
Registered: Jan 11, 2006
Total Posts: 1448
Country: United States

JohnJ wrote:
I use a Nikon PB-4 and have no issues with either M39 or M42 adapters but some times the M42 mount is better suited to using other adapters. I've never had problems arising from using multiple stacked adapters on the PB-4 (or the PB-4 on a Canon body) so I would suggest you try the cheap option and see how that performs.


Excuse the diversion from new alt gear purchases, but using the PB-4 implies a rather long lens register for the enlarging lenses. Is there a standard register or what is the range of registers for enlarging lenses?



jcolwell
Registered: Feb 10, 2005
Total Posts: 20616
Country: Canada

JimBuchanan wrote:
Excuse the diversion from new alt gear purchases, but using the PB-4 implies a rather long lens register for the enlarging lenses. Is there a standard register or what is the range of registers for enlarging lenses?


Generally, the 'film to flange' distance is more-or-less equal to the focal length (shorter for 'telephoto' MF/LF lenses). That usually works OK for me, on my M645 bellows. Seems to work for my EL lenses, too. Of course, you already know that.



JohnJ
Registered: Jul 09, 2005
Total Posts: 1992
Country: Australia

JimBuchanan wrote:
JohnJ wrote:
I use a Nikon PB-4 and have no issues with either M39 or M42 adapters but some times the M42 mount is better suited to using other adapters. I've never had problems arising from using multiple stacked adapters on the PB-4 (or the PB-4 on a Canon body) so I would suggest you try the cheap option and see how that performs.


Excuse the diversion from new alt gear purchases, but using the PB-4 implies a rather long lens register for the enlarging lenses. Is there a standard register or what is the range of registers for enlarging lenses?


Yes, as jcolwell said. There is no standard or common register for el's, it all comes down to the focal length of the lens and it's design to some degree.

The PB-4's minimum film to flange distance is about 90mm, give or take a bit. I can get infinity focus with longer el's from approx. 100mm upwards. However if infinity focus is the goal then helicoids are a better choice than bellows.



2ndviolinman
Registered: Jun 09, 2013
Total Posts: 32
Country: United States

I am proud that I have bought nothing in a whole year, but a Pentax-M 135/3.5 is coming today. Will have to freelens until the adapter comes from China. To go with Tokina 17/3.5. Oly 21/3.5 Contax 28/2.8 Pancake 40/2.8 Contax 85/2.8 and a 12mm extension tube for my general purpose go everywhere 5Dii kit with no excuse to leave anything home.



SS76
Registered: Apr 22, 2014
Total Posts: 25
Country: Canada

12-32 vario pancake. I get it in a few days.



contas
Registered: Jul 21, 2010
Total Posts: 1047
Country: Vietnam

Here is my new Mamiya RZ67 APO 500mm f/6 on SD1M.The built and optics seem far better my Canon 400L f/5.6.



rsrsrs
Registered: May 14, 2008
Total Posts: 752
Country: Germany

is it a wifi antenna on the lens?



contas
Registered: Jul 21, 2010
Total Posts: 1047
Country: Vietnam

rsrsrs wrote:
is it a wifi antenna on the lens?

A ...bead I guessed.



e6filmuser
Registered: Oct 11, 2008
Total Posts: 2093
Country: United Kingdom

rsrsrs wrote:
is it a wifi antenna on the lens?


Looks like a sight to me. It's a bazooka!

Harold



arduluth
Registered: Oct 25, 2013
Total Posts: 135
Country: United States

This image was from a month ago, but here's an image from my most recent alt lens purchase, a Canon New FD 100mm f/2.8.





Peire
Registered: Apr 27, 2010
Total Posts: 1305
Country: Poland

I have two copies of the optically identical 100/2.8 SSC,which is a great lens with plenty of 3D look.I came across two 100/2.8 FDn's lately,but they had greasy apertures.

Meanwhile I manged to get a second excellent copy of the Canon FD 85/1.8.What a little,nice lens!



bhairavp
Registered: Jan 20, 2014
Total Posts: 28
Country: India

Pentax A50/2.8 Macro and a Yashinon 55/1.2 M42.



1       2       3              169      
170
       171              186       187       end