Different Types of 'look' from Adapted Lenses

[PhotosByHall]

I was a bit surprised at the super-cheap Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8 myself thinking that perhaps the crazy prices had finally found the bottom of the market. But maybe I am wrong - once pushed into the reality of rock-star the quantity/quality on the market determines prices.

If you're referring to the price I saw on my first message, I think I made a mistake - it might have been a Pentacon AV.

Vintage glass can be a bit of a minefield I think, with people advertising "Trioplan-like" bokeh rather than an actual Trioplan.

I am seeing the Trioplan 100s going for about £200. I think that might still be cheap.

 

[verybiglebowski]

Nope. Jupiter 9 in M42 should work on EOS DSLR but you have to ask the seller, since there were few made for rangefinder distance in LTM with added adapter to M42. Jupiter 3 however was made only for range finder flange distance AFAIK - (Leica thread mount aka LTM or m39 and old Contax/Kiev RF). These lenses (Jupiter 3) are therefore not possible to adapt to the longer flange distance of a DSLR (Canon 5D IV) but you can use them on M50 with the appropriate mount (m39-EF-M or similar depending on the lens mount).

That should be ok - these will be 99% of the time on my EOS M50, either with or without a speedbooster for focal reduction as appropriate.

There are no m39 (Jupiter 3) to Canon - M focal reducers AFAIK. In crop, you will get rid of the outer projection circle which usually has the most pronounced aberration effect. Jupiter 9 should be fine. (non-intended rhyme)

This has been converted to EF, so will this function like a normal manual EF lens on my Canon bodies?

Yes, that’s the solution I described bellow with the cheap focusing tube.

The Domiron is defo my fave - but it has a price tag to match

Does it have a cheaper clone?

I don’t have the bubble example from Diaplan, but use Flickr t

Finally, the cheapest solution is to flip your rear glass in the Helios 44 as I suggested earlier.

This is a non destructive modification and you can reverse it later when you get bored by bubbles. Lens will become softer and focus distances will be all off but you can get some serious bubbles up to donut madness.

Were these two images taken on a reversed Helios? I love the portrait shot.

I have a 44-2 and a 44-4, the 44-2 gives flare and haze and glow, which makes it interesting. The 44-4 is a competent, sharp portrait lens.

But I've got loads of competent portrait lenses! So it's gonna get modified!

I'm in the same boat, which is the whole point of this thread, I've gotten awesome Canon glass to shoot with, its about looking for something different\something unique. Earn with the Canon glass and shoot this stuff for fun!

Was it a 44-4 or a 44-2? (or does it not matter)

It was 44-2 but it should not matter much.



--

Verybiglobo photo blog

Everything about photography incl. some field tests of cameras and lenses

verybiglobo.com

viktor_viktor

Explore viktor_viktor’s 1,217 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[verybiglebowski]

I was a bit surprised at the super-cheap Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8 myself thinking that perhaps the crazy prices had finally found the bottom of the market. But maybe I am wrong - once pushed into the reality of rock-star the quantity/quality on the market determines prices.

If you're referring to the price I saw on my first message, I think I made a mistake - it might have been a Pentacon AV.

Vintage glass can be a bit of a minefield I think, with people advertising "Trioplan-like" bokeh rather than an actual Trioplan.

I am seeing the Trioplan 100s going for about £200. I think that might still be cheap.

To make things even more complicated, there is also Trioplan N 100/2.8, which has different optical structure and less pronounced bubbles. These are almost all black and look a bit different than the silver ones. They are also usually cheaper.

Cheers,

Viktor

 

[PhotosByHall]

There are no m39 (Jupiter 3) to Canon - M focal reducers AFAIK. In crop, you will get rid of the outer projection circle which usually has the most pronounced aberration effect. Jupiter 9 should be fine. (non-intended rhyme)

m39 can be converted onto Canon EF correctly though right?

I have a 5d4, and a Viltrox speedbooster EF -> EF-M. This makes the m50 practically a full frame camera (with quality loss obvs).

The difference is about 10%, so probably a light vignette around the edges?

Were these two images taken on a reversed Helios? I love the portrait shot.

I have a 44-2 and a 44-4, the 44-2 gives flare and haze and glow, which makes it interesting. The 44-4 is a competent, sharp portrait lens.

But I've got loads of competent portrait lenses! So it's gonna get modified!

I'm in the same boat, which is the whole point of this thread, I've gotten awesome Canon glass to shoot with, its about looking for something different\something unique. Earn with the Canon glass and shoot this stuff for fun!

Was it a 44-4 or a 44-2? (or does it not matter)

It was 44-2 but it should not matter much.

Cool. They look awesome. Gonna have a go at that when I get a minute.

 

[verybiglebowski]

There are no m39 (Jupiter 3) to Canon - M focal reducers AFAIK. In crop, you will get rid of the outer projection circle which usually has the most pronounced aberration effect. Jupiter 9 should be fine. (non-intended rhyme)

m39 can be converted onto Canon EF correctly though right?

No M39 can not be converted (without corrective optics) to Canon EF but it can to Canon EF-M.

There isn’t focal reducer for the most of m39 (rangefinder) lenses.

Focal reducers works well for any SLR lenses when adapted to APS-C and smaller sensors.

Existing focal reducers can’t be used on full frame sensors (unless you don’t use medium format lenses and find someone to design such a focal reducer. Maybe there are some already, I don’t know.)

I have a 5d4, and a Viltrox speedbooster EF -> EF-M. This makes the m50 practically a full frame camera (with quality loss obvs).

Yes, that works well and with the high quality FR such as Metabones, the image quality can be actually improved a bit in the major projection area.

The question is why using EF lens with FR on APS-C sensor when you have Canon 5D IV, if not for the smaller setup? Otherwise it doesn’t make much sense.

The difference is about 10%, so probably a light vignette around the edges?

No on APS-C. The image has a slightly narrower FOV so the vignetting should be similar as on a FF.

Were these two images taken on a reversed Helios? I love the portrait shot.

I have a 44-2 and a 44-4, the 44-2 gives flare and haze and glow, which makes it interesting. The 44-4 is a competent, sharp portrait lens.

But I've got loads of competent portrait lenses! So it's gonna get modified!

I'm in the same boat, which is the whole point of this thread, I've gotten awesome Canon glass to shoot with, its about looking for something different\something unique. Earn with the Canon glass and shoot this stuff for fun!

Was it a 44-4 or a 44-2? (or does it not matter)

It was 44-2 but it should not matter much.

Cool. They look awesome. Gonna have a go at that when I get a minute.

In a resume:

M39 lenses (rangefinder ones) can’t be adapted on a Canon EF (DSLR) but only on mirrorless cameras. (FF and smaller sensors, such as your EF-M)

You can’t use focal reducer with these lenses on any camera

There are a few m39 lenses, such as early Helios 40 e.g. that have m39 mount but they were design for the M42 flange distance and can be used on some DSLRs as well as with the focal reducer with a simple ring m39 to M42 adapter.

There is no real benefit apart of the size to use lenses with focal reducer on a APS-C or MFT camera if you have a native mount full frame DSLR for the same lenses (unless there is a big difference in resolution or noise).

Some lenses such as Canon FD, Minolta (MD-A mount and a few others) can’t be easily addapted on your Canon 5DIV, but can on your M50 with or without focal reducer.

Give your Helios 44 a try with the flipped rear element. You can aleays put it back.

Hope it helps,

Viktor

 

[PhotosByHall]

Give your Helios 44 a try with the flipped rear element. You can aleays put it back.

Hope it helps,

Viktor

Viktor => thanks for all your help so far, its been very useful.

Last question - its def the REAR element that needs flipping? I've seen FRONT element on lots of posts. Just to be sure.

Thanks!

 

[verybiglebowski]

Give your Helios 44 a try with the flipped rear element. You can aleays put it back.

Hope it helps,

Viktor

Viktor => thanks for all your help so far, its been very useful.

Last question - its def the REAR element that needs flipping? I've seen FRONT element on lots of posts. Just to be sure.

Thanks!

Hi,

by flipping the front element you will increase the effect of swirly bokeh but no bubbles. The image overall gets very soft and only very small area in the middle of the frame will remain somewhat usable in terms of sharpness (still very soft though with lot of glow).

By flipping rear element you get bubbles and donuts like bokeh with a larger image area with usable sharpness but no swirl.

Front element











Rear element



Cheers,

Viktor

--

Verybiglobo photo blog

Everything about photography incl. some field tests of cameras and lenses

verybiglobo.com

viktor_viktor

Explore viktor_viktor’s 1,217 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

 

[Eyeteeth]

Today my client asked me, who is that beautiful girl on the shot. Scarlett Johansson I said as it would be completely normal. Almost speechless he managed to ask - you know her? Sure I said, she lives in my apartment few years already. I bought her on eBay for a few bucks (well the doll doesn’t really look like Scarlett but it was advertised as such).

Now that says something about our recent photo perception habits - smartphone size, 1s of attention and gone for ever... For that, any lens is better than needed.


Sony A7R II + Domrion 50/2 processed on iPad (several softwares)

Cheers,

Viktor

--
http://verybiglobo.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/viktor_viktor/

Always enjoy your interesting posts Viktor but this really made me laugh.