^
I have the fotodiox MF>EOS. Although not "cheap" ($80), it is such a high quality product. You may get lucky with a cheaper adapter, but in my experience, the fotodiox ones are top notch
helimat wrote:
Please forgive me if this has been asked before; But what would be good value Mamiya MF-EF adapter to get?
It pretty much seems to be the consensus here that the Fotodiox Pro unit is the one to get. It's a nicely machined piece. If you buy through ebay you don't pay shipping costs and you do get the same one as they sell on fotodiox.com (even though they show pictures of an older unit on the ebay page).
AhamB wrote:
It pretty much seems to be the consensus here that the Fotodiox Pro unit is the one to get. It's a nicely machined piece. If you buy through ebay you don't pay shipping costs and you do get the same one as they sell on fotodiox.com (even though they show pictures of an older unit on the ebay page).
Roger. I am used to buying el-cheapo Chinese adapters, but in this case it seems the extra expense is worth it.
I bought an Arax shift adapter, but it had issues ... fiddled with it for way too long 6+ months. Got a Fotodiox via Amazon (cheaper than at Fotodiox direct, no shipping, no tax) ... and have never regretted it. Money (investment) well spent, nice piece of workmanhsip ... cost LONG since forgotten.
NOTE: Fotodiox isn't necessarily the only game in town and I'm not 'endorsing' them necessarily, but ...
I AM ENDORSING A GOOD ADAPTER
... so worth it!!
You write the check once ... you live with it everyday, whether it be a pain or a joy.
Oddly enough, I had a problem with the Fotodiox today. My 150/2.8 nearly fell off because it wasn't locked into the mount well - I went to focus the ring and the lens popped out in my hand. Later, realizing that it still wasn't mounted securely, gave it a touch extra force and it bent the mount pin - I had to make a full rotation of the lens to get it off. Pliers fixed the largely unimportant pin, but the problem is that the release button has too weak of a spring. Now I make sure to pull it out with my fingernail to double check the seating. Regardless, depending on the lens, it could be a very costly problem.
Other that the spring and a *touch* of wobble (something only noticeable/annoying to serious MF users) it is a finely machined piece and I do not worry about the mount failing from stress from weight.
My first Mam>NikonF adapter was made from a M42>Nikon adapter superglued to a plastic tube, acting as my method for flange distance adjustment - superglued to a Mamiya 645 rear lens cap with a hole dremel'ed through the cap flat end.
It worked just fine, but after the the first mounting tries I added a solid 3mm layer of mixed epoxy-fiber outside the plastic tube (connecting all the way from M42-adapter to the lens-cap) as additional mechanical strengthening. Planacity error was less than 0.05mm for the entire circumference, but I don't know about centering... :-/
My Sony-Mam adapter is a hacked up Mamiya No.1 extension ring with a new back end made from a Sony-M42-adapter. Works perfectly.
RustyBug wrote:
I bought an Arax shift adapter, but it had issues ... fiddled with it for way too long 6+ months. Got a Fotodiox via Amazon (cheaper than at Fotodiox direct, no shipping, no tax) ... and have never regretted it. Money (investment) well spent, nice piece of workmanhsip ... cost LONG since forgotten.
NOTE: Fotodiox isn't necessarily the only game in town and I'm not 'endorsing' them necessarily, but ...
I AM ENDORSING A GOOD ADAPTER
... so worth it!!
You write the check once ... you live with it everyday, whether it be a pain or a joy.
Thanks gang, I have since ordered the Fotodiox Pro adapter on your recommendations. While there I picked up some nice C/Y-EF adapters as well, as I figure my kit is just about set ( ) so I might as well get some quality adapters for my most used lenses.
Now I have a problem. I grabbed a 120/4, but didn't realize it was the AF version. For what I paid, I'm not crying. So, with all the M645 glass I've bought, I've been thinking about actually getting a Mamiya body, either an AF body or a later Pro/Pro TL (yes, I know this won't help me with this lens).
The AF would also allow me to go digiback (and I always frown at manual bodies that need batteries) at some point, so I'm leaning that way but that point won't be soon. I have a general rule that I do not sell or return good lenses, even if I can't use them immediately. Problem is, I want the 120/4 for my Mirex+EOS, and I don't want to duplicate lenses for no good reason, either.
I don't care about the auto aperture on the AF bodies for this lens, so I guess what it comes down to is this - is the 120/4 A better than the N? Dramatically so? I obviously care more about subjects less than 20ft away (I have the 150/2.8, 150/3.5, 145/4, and 110/2.8 lenses, so I'm not hurting for longer shooting) mostly for portraiture and dabbles with still life setups.
Incidentally, the 120A will not mount on the Mirex, but is a nice fit on the Fotodiox. I guess Fotodiox's tolerances aren't as good (of course, I did complain about a minor wobble above).
---
I'll try and post some 145/4+Mirex shots later. I don't have a ton, because I was shooting inside and that setup gets *very* heavy, very quickly. There's still some light out, I think I'll take advantage of it...
Incidentally, the 150/2.8 vignettes badly on the Mirex, if anyone cares.
AFAIK, and as far as the information says, they should be identical optically. IF anything has changed, it's only a matter of AR coatings, and some mechanics regarding the aperture of course.
alipstadt wrote:
Incidentally, the 150/2.8 vignettes badly on the Mirex, if anyone cares.
The 150 vignettes badly with medium-extremes degrees of tilt but is fine at smaller apertures and up to medium amounts of tilt. The doco with the Mirex suggests using lenses 120mm or below. I haven't had too many problems withe the Mirex and 150 but you can't crank the tilt over too far without stopping the lens down, which reduces the vignetting. You get this kind of vignetting, but to lesser degrees, with the other, shorter, lenses too.
I've read the docs. I was comparing the 150/2.8 to like focal lengths, particularly the 145/4. It is notably more problematic in this application (the lens is nice, one of my favorites for a modern contrasty look, no need to run to its defense).
) so I might as well get some quality adapters for my most used lenses.