Using old lenses: on Sony, Fujifilm or Micro Four Third cameras?

I am discovering the wonderful world of adapters, and testing / using all these lenses I dreamed about when I was a teenager... I was using mostly Pentax lenses and some Leica lenses (I made money taking photos), but always wondered how my lenses would compare to Canon FD, Minolta MD, Olympus OM, Nikon AIs.....

But I just thought of the obvious: I am using these vintage lenses on Micro Four Thirds cameras, wasting three quarters of their useful field!

Should I bite the bullet and buy an expensive Fujifilm camera, and associated accessories (flash,...), to be able to use a larger area? Or a Sony Full Frame, but some people say that they are ill conceived, and I don't like the ergonomics of Sony cameras...

Do you have opinions? Experience with mirrorless cameras with different sensor size, using vintage lenses?

I have the APS-C Sony A6000 and have a bunch of legacy lens. Started with Pentax (as that's what I knew of old) and branched out into M42 and M39/LTM.

Haven't met a lens on here I'm not interested in trying so you're in the right place. Well I say right place. Right place to hear about the next lens you should be buying

I've found that getting involved in adapted lens has rekindled the fun and fascination I once had for photography. It appeals to nostalgia and my geeky side. The search for bargains or the best example of a sought after lens coupled with learning lots of new stuff and photographic techniques is a real antidote to the gear head mentality of many on DPR.

It has been a real joy and fun to discover what great lenses there are out there and I've learnt a lot about how they vary. Both in terms of quality some times but also the kind of photos they take.

My advice - pick a mount (or two) as there are so many lenses out there especially if you look beyond the current and recent big brands. If you really get the bug you'll be finding ways to fix 1930's enlarger lenses on your camera.

But to answer your question I don't think you need to go FF - I think many/most of us on here probably aren't using FF. Not having a FF camera I would suggest that most if not all of the benefits of adapted lenses apply to all the formats. Conversely the standard reasons for going FF do course still apply.

--
Richard

Belgarchi said:

But I just thought of the obvious: I am using these vintage lenses on Micro Four Thirds cameras, wasting three quarters of their useful field!

Should I bite the bullet and buy an expensive Fujifilm camera, and associated accessories (flash,...), to be able to use a larger area? Or a Sony Full Frame, but some people say that they are ill conceived, and I don't like the ergonomics of Sony cameras...

Click to expand...

If you buy a focal reducer (the Lens Turbo II and Speed Booster are often recommended), you effectively turn your MFT sensor into an APS-C sensor, so only waste about half of the field.

That said, if you buy a focal reducer and an APS-C body, you effectively turn your APS-C sensor into a FF sensor. A Sony or Fuji APS-C body and a focal reducer are probably a lot cheaper than a Sony A7.

Regards,

Alan

You made me think: I have a Schneider 50/2.8 on an enlarger in a closet, that I didn't use for 20 years! Can it be used on MFT camera? How would you focus?

Thanks for the suggestion. I am a little nervous about these focal reducers: they are expensive, and do they give sharp results? Did you try some of them? Which ones are good?

Belgarchi said:

You made me think: I have a Schneider 50/2.8 on an enlarger in a closet, that I didn't use for 20 years! Can it be used on MFT camera? How would you focus?

Click to expand...

PAGING THE ENLARGER LENS GUYS !!

This guy needs your assistance

Belgarchi said:

I am discovering the wonderful world of adapters, and testing / using all these lenses I dreamed about when I was a teenager... I was using mostly Pentax lenses and some Leica lenses (I made money taking photos), but always wondered how my lenses would compare to Canon FD, Minolta MD, Olympus OM, Nikon AIs.....

But I just thought of the obvious: I am using these vintage lenses on Micro Four Thirds cameras, wasting three quarters of their useful field!

Should I bite the bullet and buy an expensive Fujifilm camera, and associated accessories (flash,...), to be able to use a larger area? Or a Sony Full Frame, but some people say that they are ill conceived, and I don't like the ergonomics of Sony cameras...

Do you have opinions? Experience with mirrorless cameras with different sensor size, using vintage lenses?

Click to expand...

Have tried Ricoh GXR mount module (best) simply because it was made for MF lenses only. Ricoh has abandoned the very nice GXR modular concept. Still have the bodies. Lacking a built in evf was a serious omission.

Not so happy with Sony, but it works ok. FF sensor does give you the use of the full image circle of 135 film format lenses. Still have the bodies.

Really like the M4/3 bodies and the way they work. The lenses can be focal reduced to at least use APS-C size image circles. So I came there last an it is probably where I will choose to stay. I also like being able to use all my lenses in this format - including the M4/3 lenses I have acquired.

Fuji - don't know, never been there.

Anyway - explore but don't burn the bridges.

Follow this fellow


Or Gnarlydog (Damiano) when he gets back on line after his holidays.

They are both into making unusual combiations work.

Belgarchi said:

Thanks for the suggestion. I am a little nervous about these focal reducers: they are expensive, and do they give sharp results? Did you try some of them? Which ones are good?

Click to expand...

I think that they are all serviceable but there are obviously bad copies. Metabones is the original and is well regarded if you wish less risk but they are expensive.

I don't mind the RJ adapters but they are more often and not sold unbranded. Others say good things about the Zhongyi Lens Turbo.

One of the best adapter manufacturers is Yenon which are not nearly as well known - probably because they are quite expensive - but they are very well made - almost jewel-like in construction. If I had limitless funds all my adapters would be either Yenon or Metabones.

But any cheap focal reduction adapter will give you and idea of what they can do.

RJ make them for M4/3 in many mount styles but I think that there are fewer brands making focal reduction adapters for the M4/3 mount. FR adapters for aps-c are more common.

I am more excited about the Metabones EF to M4/3 electronic adapter which can give me full AF and other communication M4/3 body to Canon EF lens. This brought almost all of the remaining part of my old lens stock into being useful on the M4/3 mount system.

50mm enlarger lenses are usually quite easy (I don't have the Schneider, but I expect it's similar).

You need an M4/3 adapter which includes a focus helicoid, similar to this:


I use an M42-M4/3 adapter, as I have several M42 lenses, and then a simple M39/M42 conversion ring on my enlarger lens (I'm assuming the Schneider is M39 screw mount). I believe you can also get an M39-M4/3 adapter which similarly includes a focus helicoid.

Depending on the registration distance of the enlarger lens, you may or may not need an extension tube (this is the case with some I have in longer focal lengths).

Some (usually older) enlarger lenses have shorter registration distances, and (for example the 50mm f3.5 Ental), and different mounts, but I think you should be fine with the Schneider - and easy to check before you purchase any adapters.

Belgarchi said:

Or a Sony Full Frame, but some people say that they are ill conceived, and I don't like the ergonomics of Sony cameras...

Click to expand...

I use a Sony NEX-6 (5+ years old, APS-C). I really like the camera itself, and use it mostly with old adapted manual focus lenses. (Minolta MD, Tokina, Tamaron, and Vivitar in various mounts). I also use a Rokinon 12mm f/2.0, which is a new and un-adapted lens that I really like.

However, there are some things in the menu that leave me absolutely baffled. Why was it designed so that I can't I use a self-timer and auto-bracket at the same time? Why was it designed so that I can't use a remote release and auto-bracket at the same time? Why was the intervalometer app designed so that it could only output jpgs or video, but not RAW?

I think those are good examples of "ill-conceived" and I don't think they have been corrected in later APS-C models. I don't know enough about

widgetbox said:

But to answer your question I don't think you need to go FF - I think many/most of us on here probably aren't using FF. Not having a FF camera I would suggest that most if not all of the benefits of adapted lenses apply to all the formats. Conversely the standard reasons for going FF do course still apply.

Click to expand...

In my other post I forgot to answer this part of the question. For me, using an APS-C camera means I don't care if an old lens had a reputation for being "soft in the corners" or would vignette significantly, because I am not using the corners or the edges.

Thanks for all these info.

Will check these focal reducers,

Belgarchi said:

Thanks for all these info.

Will check these focal reducers,

Click to expand...

I've used legacy lenses for a while, starting with a NEX 3. It was small and handy with m39 lenses and really fun to use in spite of the Donald Duck shutter sound.

Rather recently I bought a Sony A7 because I wanted to try my legacy SLR lenses on the format they were constructed for, plus the A7 had been dropping in price and having held one in a shop I was stuck 1. by how much better it felt in the hand than the A6k and 2. The better EVF (refresh rate in dim conditions).

I really used to think this talk of "there's something to FF images that you don't get with smaller sensors" was hodgeposh, really, as I can get super slim DOF images with my A6k and the MD 50 1,2 for instance. Well, there is something 'special' to thin dof images taken with the A7 sensor as compared to every sony APS-C I've used to date that I didn't really expect to see.

Have an rj lens turbo that I'm not going to use again.

The only adapted lens I was totally happy with on the A6k was a Pen-F 40 1,4, and those aren't made for FF.

widgetbox said:

Belgarchi said:

You made me think: I have a Schneider 50/2.8 on an enlarger in a closet, that I didn't use for 20 years! Can it be used on MFT camera? How would you focus?

Click to expand...

PAGING THE ENLARGER LENS GUYS !!

This guy needs your assistance

Click to expand...

There are two ways.

1. Look for a Leica thread (M39) adapter with helicoid focussing. You may need a short extension tube too. An alternative is a Pentax thread (M42) helicoid adapter with a Leica-to-Pentax adapter -- two items, but may be easier to find.

2. Get a cheap Pentax thread bellows, a Leica-to-Pentax adapter, and the cheapest M42 to MFT adapter you can find. This will give you macro focussing.

You do need to check the thread on the lens. Most lenses for enlargers are M39, with 1mm pitch, but some Schneider lenses are non-standard.

AustinMN said:

Belgarchi said:

Or a Sony Full Frame, but some people say that they are ill conceived, and I don't like the ergonomics of Sony cameras...

Click to expand...

I use a Sony NEX-6 (5+ years old, APS-C). I really like the camera itself, and use it mostly with old adapted manual focus lenses. (Minolta MD, Tokina, Tamaron, and Vivitar in various mounts). I also use a Rokinon 12mm f/2.0, which is a new and un-adapted lens that I really like.

However, there are some things in the menu that leave me absolutely baffled. Why was it designed so that I can't I use a self-timer and auto-bracket at the same time? Why was it designed so that I can't use a remote release and auto-bracket at the same time? Why was the intervalometer app designed so that it could only output jpgs or video, but not RAW?

Click to expand...

Because good programmers are thin on the ground in Japan, and programmers are seldom also serious photographers.

AustinMN said:

I think those are good examples of "ill-conceived" and I don't think they have been corrected in later APS-C models. I don't know enough about

Click to expand...

I think they have been corrected.

Belgarchi said:

Thanks for all these info.

Will check these focal reducers,

Click to expand...

I agree to what Alan WF said earlier, focal reducers are the way to go if you don't want to change systems specifically for old-lens use, and Metabones Speed Booster and Lens Turbo II (not I) are, as far as I have seen, the ones that give the best results.

Actually, they improve image quality to the point that with a 50mm f/1.4 you get a 35mm f/1.0 that is better at f/1.0 than the original lens is at f/1.4 on a simple, lensless adapter.

Being a Four Thirds user since 2005, I've started experimenting early with adapted lenses (Minolta SR/MC/MD and Olympus OM) on my Four Thirds DSLRs, but manual focus was a matter of hit and miss with most of the optical viewfinders of the time.

Later, I added a Sony NEX-3 and C3 specifically for the purpose of re-using my Minolta glass, which got better results (also because of the thinner filter stack of the Sony compared to (M)FT. producing sharper images).

When the E-M1 came out, though, I switched from Four Thirds to Micro Four Thirds, bought an MD-MFT Speed Booster, and I'm happy ever since using my manual lenses. At 1.4x, they're even slightly closer to their original field of view than they were with the Sony (1.5x).

Cheers,
Robert

I went from M4/3 to Sony full frame, mainly with the idea of using my legacy lenses in the way they were meant to, keeping their FOV and covering the format efficiently: wide angle and especially UWA lenses are essentially "wasted" on less than FF cameras (the equation changes if you're mainly interested in teles...)

I have absolutely no regrets.

I always found M4/3 very clumsy to use with adapted lenses and the focusing wasn't very good either. With the Sony A7 & A7RII, adapted lenses work better than they did on their original platforms.

I still don't have a single native Sony FE lens, but instead have a nice mix of legacy MF lenes, primes, zooms & AF lenses, which I use happily. No complaint about the "feel" of the Sonys: basically they do a fantatstic job of being an adapted lens platform.

D Cox said:

widgetbox said:

Belgarchi said:

You made me think: I have a Schneider 50/2.8 on an enlarger in a closet, that I didn't use for 20 years! Can it be used on MFT camera? How would you focus?

Click to expand...

PAGING THE ENLARGER LENS GUYS !!

This guy needs your assistance

Click to expand...

There are two ways.

1. Look for a Leica thread (M39) adapter with helicoid focussing. You may need a short extension tube too. An alternative is a Pentax thread (M42) helicoid adapter with a Leica-to-Pentax adapter -- two items, but may be easier to find.

2. Get a cheap Pentax thread bellows, a Leica-to-Pentax adapter, and the cheapest M42 to MFT adapter you can find. This will give you macro focussing.

You do need to check the thread on the lens. Most lenses for enlargers are M39, with 1mm pitch, but some Schneider lenses are non-standard.

Click to expand...

Older Schneiders used a 25mm thread (IIRC), but I'm pretty sure the 50mm 2.8 was a standard 39mm.

AustinMN said:

Belgarchi said:

Or a Sony Full Frame, but some people say that they are ill conceived, and I don't like the ergonomics of Sony cameras...

Click to expand...

I use a Sony NEX-6 (5+ years old, APS-C). I really like the camera itself, and use it mostly with old adapted manual focus lenses. (Minolta MD, Tokina, Tamaron, and Vivitar in various mounts). I also use a Rokinon 12mm f/2.0, which is a new and un-adapted lens that I really like.

However, there are some things in the menu that leave me absolutely baffled. Why was it designed so that I can't I use a self-timer and auto-bracket at the same time? Why was it designed so that I can't use a remote release and auto-bracket at the same time? Why was the intervalometer app designed so that it could only output jpgs or video, but not RAW?

I think those are good examples of "ill-conceived" and I don't think they have been corrected in later APS-C models. I don't know enough about

Click to expand...

Someone else that has notice that Sony is a little "basic" in its firmware support

As far as I know Sony made the first NEX cameras for the compact camera market where it thought that some users might wish to trade up to a camera body with replaceable lenses but as they were basic users would not like anything that was "complex". As a result the the early NEX bodies were fine but pretty basic in what could be done with them. I remember some talk about how some managed to wring "surprising" levels of performance out of them. In any case I think that the acceptance level surprised Sony as much as it surprised the rest of the market. So they set about making the NEX a more sophisticated camera. By the NEX7 and NEX6 (which I also have) they were verging on serious cameras - but after a camera such as the Ricoh GXR the very basic firmware support for the NEX6 was screamingly obvious - as were the hangover "heritage" cutesy icons. The NEX6 is the only camera of its type where I ran out of things that I could to assign to functions that is despite limited (one button) function controls and no custom modes.

The "a" series went on to new pastures that I have not explored and of course the A7 series brought us dslr awkwardness morphed into a evf equipped body with a crazy-good sensor, nice EVF and LCD as a consolation prizes.

In the end maybe Sony should licence Ricoh or even Olympus/Panasonic firmware and make good gear into something really special.

But I have fond regard for the NEX6 it is comfortable in hand, competent and easy (dead set simple) to use.

One of the best things I ever did with the NEX6, and what I think is a good tip, was to move the magnify screen command to the AEL lock button where it should logically be for MF lens use in my opinion. The button is prominently shaped and right next to the thumb position where it can be easily and naturally accessed for critical focus operation. Much better than the stupid location at the bottom right edge of the LCD. Which requires a grip change and serious thumb swivel to operate. Unfortunately the AEL lock function has to be discarded to do this and the regular screen magnification button cannot be re-assigned to anything else that might be useful. We end up with two screen magnification buttons.

But with re-arranged magnify button the NEX6 is a great host for MF lenses - I should use it more - pity that the focal reduction adapters I have for it were pre-user-capable updating of the firmware.

The LCD screen coating is tender and rubs off easily, they work but get to look ugly. Something that the early Ricoh GXR and GRDIII models also shared as they used Sony LCD screens. At least Ricoh was replacing them free even outside of warranty with screens having lasting coatings.