markhout wrote: johnvanr wroteSo, to broaden my horizons on using ALT lenses, how do you use yours and in which combinations of lenses and bodies?FWIW - I don't use adapted lenses on my M10-R.
My 50S2 has been subjected to many adapted experiments though. Most of them failed - I did not like my venture out in the world of Hasselblad - for example the 180mm CFI did not render as nice as my Nikon 180mm 2.8 AF-D on the 50S2. The Pentacon 180mm was too difficult to deal with flare-wise.
Same for Mamiya 645 lenses - the 45mm had 'character', but not as much as I liked.
On the positive side, the Pentax 645 120mm Macro is brilliant. My 85mm Helios 40-2 is a favorite. The Rokinon 135mm 2.0 is shockingly sharp wide-open, but the focal plane wide-open at MFD is razor thin. Nikon lenses work OK on the 50S2 - think of the 20mm/4 and the 105/2.8.
I do agree that for critical work nothing beats modern, more sterile lenses. The Fuji GFX line of lenses is generally unbeatable, as are the Zeiss / Voigt / Leicas for the M10-R. I too have my share of mistakes bringing an adapted lens to an event that required a more modern approach. However, the modern image editors are increasingly good at re-creating a vintage effect on modern-lens raw files.
In my case, the Alt lenses I have for my Fuji GFX I either already owned (Zeiss 21mm and 135mm in EF mount) or bought specifically because I didn't want to lug around the large Fuji lenses (now Mamiya 645 210mm and 150mm, previously the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8). Those lenses have specific roles and aren't so expensive anymore that I wonder whether I'm wasting money just keeping them around if I owned them previously.
Then I have a whole bunch of Olympus film era primes that I can use both on my Olympus film cameras and on my Canons. Most of them are nice, small and cheap, but the 100mm f/2 is also special (and pretty expensive). Those will stay as well. Still debating whether I'm going to replace my 55/1.2 with the 50/1.2.
Where I'm not sure is with a bunch of M mount lenses which I see more as part of my mainstream kits, but I'm not so sure they belong there. There is for example the Leica 28mm Elmarit (my only Leica lens). I use it for street only. It has quite a bit of color shift on the R8. For the same token, I can use my old Olympus 28mm on the R8, which like the Elmarit, I would mostly use by zone focusing. Or I can use my Fuji X-E5 with the tiny Voigtlander 18mm. But I could also sell the Fuji and replace the Elmarit with the Voigtlander Ultron, which apparently is cleaner on the R8.
So, 28mm is my main street focal length and that lens together with other wide lenses I consider mostly for how I'd use them on the street. Problem is of course these wider lenses have issues on the R8 and I can easily use my MFT lenses for comparable focal lengths (there is no great 28mm equivalent MFT lens). This affects my Zeiss ZM and Voigtlander wide angle lenses. But like some others here, I do love Zeiss ZM lenses.
Beyond wide angle, it becomes a bit different, because the issues with the Canon clear up and I generally work slower with longer lenses (or I'd use dedicated AF lenses instead), so then the small size and high quality of some of the Alt lenses become more important. This is true for lenses like the Zeiss ZM 35/1.4, the ZM 50/1.5 Sonnar and the Voigtlander 50/2 APO and 75/1.5. And the Contax G 90mm.
I asked my question in the OP because until now, except with the Fuji GFX, I mostly regarded my Alt lenses as street lenses and before I do anything silly like selling really nice stuff, I want to explore beyond using those lenses for street.
rico wrote: freaklikeme wroteHmm, yeah, the 80-200/4L. The mini-magic drainpipe. Loved that lens...Nice pic. This zoom has a fluorite element which helps color saturation I think. My one complaint is the one-touch design.
Thanks. Same with me and the MD, but at least it's focus and zoom action is still fairly tight. Plus, I don't have a ton of two touch options for the X-570 that are as good.