p.167 #3 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
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.
p.167 #4 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
JohnJ wrote:
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.
p.167 #7 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
freaklikeme wrote:
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.
p.167 #8 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
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.
p.167 #9 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
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.
p.167 #11 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
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?
p.167 #12 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
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.
p.167 #13 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
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?
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.
p.167 #14 · What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
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.
