p.3 #1 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Emanuele_C wrote:
Hi,
can you provide some infos about the 17-35mm conversion: availability, test shots, etc? Could I suggest to make some video-tutorials in which you illustrate the conversion process step-by-step? Have you considered to make directly the conversion @ a competitive price (say for example the cost of the package + 100USD) ? I think it would be great for us in having more options and less trouble.
Again, thanks for your great effort!
Ciao,
Emanuele
1. I am still working on 17-35 and it will be ready in November.
2. Yep, I thought of doing a video tutorial but sorry I have no time now. My highest priority is to make all 9 N-mount lenses available in the shortest possible time.
3. We do not do installation because we do not wish to ship expensive lenses over long distances, have a long turn around time and deal with customs paperwork. However, if you are stuck you may talk to us and pay us to do the work. But expect shipping to be really expensive. (Note that postage costs a lot more in Canada than in the US or some other parts of world.)
Aug 31, 2006 at 11:52 AM
Andi Dietrich Offline [X]
p.3 #2 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Dear Mr. President
-Is the soldering required for some of these lenses a normal job for a camera repair professional or is it likely that even there is some risk that the lens comes back useless and lost?
-how about lenses hitting the mirror on a FF
-any chance your are going to attack the Alpha mount?
Congrats btw
p.3 #3 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
1. Good point bathman. I would imagine a repair professional who have only worked with mechanical cameras throughout his/her life might not be good at soldering. They may do the solderless install for 24-85, 28-80, 70-200 and 70-300 just fine, but for 17-35, 50, 85, you will need to find someone who is specialized in electronic camera repair.
2. This is a big topic, so I use the "Elmer glue" test. Paint some Elmer glue on the circuit board at the back of the lens, put it on the camera and see if the mirror has some glue on it after firing. I do not have a full frame DSLR, but I did this to a bunch of film cameras. To make a long story short all N mount lenses pass this test. My standards are very stringent - I am not satisfied with just being able to successfully take a picture - it must do so without hidden problems. What I found was that sometimes the mirror may touch the lens but it still moves on. I spend a lot of time on the design to ensure no touching occurs.
3. I am attracted to the idea, but I need to stay focused and deliver the rest of the N line-up as well as 645 before I could attend to something else. I don't know any specifics of what might be possible there. Are you looking at using Alpha lenses on EOS?
Aug 31, 2006 at 12:36 PM
Andi Dietrich Offline [X]
p.3 #4 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
3. adapting an alpha ZA lens would make more sens for my use than one of the ZF/ZS lenses
The missing aperture control on the Z and c/y lenses are a mayor drawback for me in using the longer Zeiss lenses. I do not use them for people shots.
Now, I had a look at the prices for the currently available Sony lenses and I see they are very expensive and unless there are more ZA options coming up I would not get one, after all. Still would make more sense to use a ZA lens than a 645 lens on EOS, unless there are shift adapters available for it IMO
I did put up a WTB for a N lens here in Switzerland and wonder what is coming?
p.3 #5 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Did you know if the new ZA lenses have in-lens AF motors, or do they rely on the camera body to drive their AF shafts?
Either way, I think their aperture coupling is mechanical, even if you don't care about AF. There is very little room and maybe not enough for an actuator (only 0.5mm). Aperture coupling is very important even if you don't need AF. I am not that optimistic, but there may be a slim chance.
p.3 #6 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Wow, definitely an interesting development in this area. Do you know whether any of the EXIF data will get transferred? I know it is no big deal but I am curious nonetheless . I don't know to whom this question should be addressed, cybestudio or Lotusm50?
cyberstudio, any chance of converting Contax G lenses to work on Digital M anytime soon ?
p.3 #7 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Unfortunately, G on M won't work. There is no focusing ring on a G lens. There is no point doing it if you can't focus the G lens at all, let alone not being able to couple the focusing to the M rangefinder mechanism.
p.3 #8 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
AGeoJO wrote:
cyberstudio, any chance of converting Contax G lenses to work on Digital M anytime soon ?
Any lens in the Leica M mount will fit the Digital M, but whether they will work well with the digital sensor is another matter. There is a shop in Japan that can convert the Contax G lens to a Leica M mount. It can be done, but it is not a trivial conversion. Further, it is quite clear that the 16mm, 21mm and 28mm Contax G lenses will not work well with a digital sensor because their rear element is too close to the sensor (and accordingly, light will hit the sensor at too oblique of an angle).
p.3 #9 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
AGeoJO wrote:
Do you know whether any of the EXIF data will get transferred? I know it is no big deal but I am curious nonetheless .
Lens focal length and aperture information is included in the EXIF information when using the N lens (along with all the other information Canon includes with the file).
p.3 #10 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
There has been a test comparing the Contax N 17-35mm with the Canon 16-35mm L, conducted on a 1Ds II. Particularly at 17mm, the Contax clearly outperformed the Canon with regard to corner resolution, distortion and chomatic aberration.
Marc Williams used The Force* to mount the N17-35 to his Canon for the duration of the test. Unfortunately he no longer has the files, but if it's better than the 16-35L on a jury-rigged setup, we might reasonably have high hopes for its performance when properly converted . . .
* Dark Side and a Light Side it has – holds the universe together it does, hmmm. (ie, duct tape)
p.3 #11 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Another guinea pig here, I just ordered a conversion kit for a 24-85. Love my C/Y Zeiss lenses, and really looking forward to trying out an N-mount lens. I likely won't get mine together for a couple weeks, though, with shipping and everything.
p.3 #12 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Lotusm50 wrote:
Any lens in the Leica M mount will fit the Digital M, but whether they will work well with the digital sensor is another matter. There is a shop in Japan that can convert the Contax G lens to a Leica M mount. It can be done, but it is not a trivial conversion. Further, it is quite clear that the 16mm, 21mm and 28mm Contax G lenses will not work well with a digital sensor because their rear element is too close to the sensor (and accordingly, light will hit the sensor at too oblique of an angle).
Ah, my mistake and thanks for correcting me. The Hologon 16/8 does have a focusing ring, and yes there is a conversion of that one lens to Leica M mount. It is pretty extensive surgery, since the film-to-flange distance of Contax G is shorter than Leica M.
All other lenses in the G line-up have no focusing ring and cannot be converted to Leica M.
p.3 #14 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
cyberstudio wrote:
All other lenses in the G line-up have no focusing ring and cannot be converted to Leica M.
I don't want to argue with you on this, but is has been done. You have to add a focusing ring, but there is a focusing helical in the lens. I found the link to the shop in Japan that does it. See here: http://www.hayatacamera.co.jp/services/miyazaki.html#01
The text is in Japanese but the pictures are self-explanatory. I did say that it was not a trivial conversion. There is a lot of work involved and the cost is about $430. I wouldn't think it would be worth the effort, but some might -- the G lenses are so cheap right now that it may be worthwhile for a Leica user.
p.3 #15 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Ok thanks for correcting me again but I learned a lesson. Never say something is impossible in the world of alternative lenses!
I should have known a lot better, being the very person attempting something once thought to have been impossible (uncovering both the Contax N protocol and the Canon EF protocol) myself, and succeeded.
And my poor Japanese reading ability tells me after the conversion it is even rangefinder coupled, right?
p.3 #16 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
hubsand wrote:
There has been a test comparing the Contax N 17-35mm with the Canon 16-35mm L, conducted on a 1Ds II. Particularly at 17mm, the Contax clearly outperformed the Canon with regard to corner resolution, distortion and chomatic aberration.
Marc Williams used The Force* to mount the N17-35 to his Canon for the duration of the test. Unfortunately he no longer has the files, but if it's better than the 16-35L on a jury-rigged setup, we might reasonably have high hopes for its performance when properly converted . . .
* Dark Side and a Light Side it has – holds the universe together it does, hmmm. (ie, duct tape)...Show more →
Hmmmmm, it would be REALLY interesting to see some "duct-tape driven" tests of the 17-35mm on a Canon body: one could decide if it's worth or not to buy the lens now and wait for the proper mod kit when available.
I hope Son (or other extimated guys) will perform some comparison shots soon...
p.3 #17 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Forgive me for coming late to the party...
Can someone explain in detail what is happening here? It sounds like you can convert a Contax AF lens to Canon mount and still keep AF and auto aperture? Is this right?
I'm having serious problems with my 24-70L lens at problem with canon having screwed up the calibration so badly that it has been back and forward to them for over a month (CPS) and I'm on the point of giving up!
Rather than buy a new 24-70L which is not cheap, this looks like an incredible alternative albeit not as fast. Does anyone know how they compare and what the price for the conversion is (I don't do stuff myself, wife doesn't let me based on past experience!).
p.3 #18 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Beni wrote:
Forgive me for coming late to the party...
Unfortunately, I am not empowered to forgive you. ;-)
Beni wrote:
Can someone explain in detail what is happening here? It sounds like you can convert a Contax AF lens to Canon mount and still keep AF and auto aperture? Is this right?
Right.
Beni wrote:
I'm having serious problems with my 24-70L lens at problem with canon having screwed up the calibration so badly that it has been back and forward to them for over a month (CPS) and I'm on the point of giving up!
Rather than buy a new 24-70L which is not cheap, this looks like an incredible alternative albeit not as fast. Does anyone know how they compare and what the price for the conversion is (I don't do stuff myself, wife doesn't let me based on past experience!).
Yes, there are trade-offs. It may not be as fast -- a half stop at 24 mm and a full stop+ at 70mm. However, it is a much better lens throughout its range -- sharp at 24 from corner to corner even wide open, goes longer to 85mm, and has less CA. At about $1200 for the 24-70L, a converted Contax N VS 24-85 (for a cost of about $750) is a bargain.
Sep 06, 2006 at 11:00 AM
Andi Dietrich Offline [X]
p.3 #19 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
Lotusm50, all Contax N lenses I saw was brand new and very expensive. The 1.4/50 around 1000$, the 17-35 close to 3000$. There does not seem to be a lot of used equipement on the market. Did you see this prices on the bay?
p.3 #20 · Contax N to Canon conversion - initial results
bathman wrote:
Lotusm50, all Contax N lenses I saw was brand new and very expensive. The 1.4/50 around 1000$, the 17-35 close to 3000$. There does not seem to be a lot of used equipement on the market. Did you see this prices on the bay?
Wow, where did you see those prices? Obviously someone holding out for a collector wo will pay anything.
Yes, you have to look at ebaY. Recent VS 17-35mm lenses have been offered at (roughly) $1500, $1800, and $2100, but that has always been a very expensive lens. $1000 for the 1.4/50mm is ludicrous, you should expect to pay half that or less. The price I was quoting was for the VS 24-85 plus the conversion. The VS 24-85 is fairly common and have been selling on ebay for $300-$500.
Edited by Lotusm50 on Sep 06, 2006 at 01:22 PM GMT
. I don't know to whom this question should be addressed, cybestudio or Lotusm50?