300mm 2.8 lenses adapted to M43?

[Sheeno]

Hi all, I was considering purchasing an old 300mm f/2.8 lens (any mount) to adapt to both M43 and L-mount. Although EF -> L with AF is possible via the Sigma adapter, I think I would rather save the money by getting one without AF (though I understand manual focusing such a lens is no mean feat). I have no idea which lens I would get - I've seen quite a few Tamrons, Sigmas, Canons, Nikons, and a few Tokinas for sale that fit the bill. Most are manual focusing, but a couple are old AF lenses that are going cheap since losing their electronic functionality, meaning no AF and stuck always wide open (but likely better optics than the older ones). I've got to say all the different iterations of these lenses from the DSLR days makes choosing one quite overwhelming!

Whatever lens avails itself to me, it would likely be more expensive than any other of my old adapted lenses, so the quality would need to be reasonable wide open. I think there isn't really a worry for that on L-mount as I've seen samples of some of them on FF and they look fine (lens-dependent I'm sure), but I am wondering what it is like on M43. These older lenses are sharpest in the centre wide open - so that's a positive - but the M43 sensor is still going to push them to the test and emphasise negative characteristics e.g. CA which many seem to suffer from.

I was just wondering if anyone had some examples of these lenses adapted to M43 so I can see if I can justify the ~£400 outlay. Also appreciate any advice or warnings people may have! I would be planning on shooting them mostly wide open and am aware of the challenges in terms of size and skill required to focus.

 

[JimH123]

Hi all, I was considering purchasing an old 300mm f/2.8 lens (any mount) to adapt to both M43 and L-mount. Although EF -> L with AF is possible via the Sigma adapter, I think I would rather save the money by getting one without AF (though I understand manual focusing such a lens is no mean feat). I have no idea which lens I would get - I've seen quite a few Tamrons, Sigmas, Canons, Nikons, and a few Tokinas for sale that fit the bill. Most are manual focusing, but a couple are old AF lenses that are going cheap since losing their electronic functionality, meaning no AF and stuck always wide open (but likely better optics than the older ones). I've got to say all the different iterations of these lenses from the DSLR days makes choosing one quite overwhelming!

Whatever lens avails itself to me, it would likely be more expensive than any other of my old adapted lenses, so the quality would need to be reasonable wide open. I think there isn't really a worry for that on L-mount as I've seen samples of some of them on FF and they look fine (lens-dependent I'm sure), but I am wondering what it is like on M43. These older lenses are sharpest in the centre wide open - so that's a positive - but the M43 sensor is still going to push them to the test and emphasise negative characteristics e.g. CA which many seem to suffer from.

I was just wondering if anyone had some examples of these lenses adapted to M43 so I can see if I can justify the ~£400 outlay. Also appreciate any advice or warnings people may have! I would be planning on shooting them mostly wide open and am aware of the challenges in terms of size and skill required to focus.

I have the Tokina 300mm f2.8 lens with Minolta A-Mount. I was going to give it a try on adapting to m4/3, but had forgotten that the pin in my AF to m4/3 adapter had its pin broken off that moves the lever in the lens to control the aperture setting. Maybe I can drill out the place that holds the pin, and to insert some makeshift pin. But instead, I went to Amazon and ordered a new adapter to replace the broken one and it should be here by the 7th. I will mount this 300mm f2.8 lens on my Olympus EM1ii and let you know what it is like adjusting aperture and focus on this adapted lens.

Amazon.com : Fotasy Manual A mount Lens to M43 MFT Adapter, Compatible with Sony A Minolta AF lense, Compatible with Panasonic G9 GH5 II GM5 GX9 GX850 G90 G91 G95 G100 Olympus E-M1 E-M5 E-M10 I II III Pen-F E-M1X : Electronics

The adapted aperture adjust will be uncalibrated. It's just a ring on the adapter that moves the aperture control at the base of the lens from full open to max closed. Don't know why on the adapter they call the max closed position "lock". It is possible to set the camera in Aperture priority mode and with ISO fixed to then adjust from wide open where you note the shutter speed which would be f2.8. Then slowly adjust in the closed direction until the shutter time doubles. This would be f4. Continue noting the position for f5.6 and f8 which is likely as far as you need to go.

I haven't done very much adapting lenses to my m4/3 cameras because I like the results I get with native lenses, and the fact that I have access to all the focal lengths I am interested in for these cameras.

One thing about this Tokina 300mm f2.8 lens is that it is so heavy!

Here is what Ken Rockwell had to say about this lens 6 or 7 years ago. He tested the one with the Nikon mount which has the build in aperture control ring. Mine is for A-mount and does not have the aperture ring. Autofocus works great with my Sony cameras.

Tokina 300mm f/2.8 Review (kenrockwell.com)

Here is a sample image using this Tokina lens on a Sony A99 and shot at f4.5. I have had this lens since 2014, but have not used it very much due to its weight.

 

[John Crowe]

Don't bother with non-functioning AF lenses. They will show less CA than the manual lenses, but that's about it. The little CA of the manual lenses is easily fixed in post. Some of the AF lenses won't manual focus when they are broken. It is also nice being able to stop down, when possible, to increase sharpness.

Make sure the lens has internal focus. I had the Canon FD 300/2.8 SSC Fluorite and the focus throw was crazy.

I recommend the Nikon 300mm f2.8 ED AI-S first, as it's aperture mechanism is easier to adapt. Then the Canon FD 300mm f2.8 L, but be sure to get the right adapter that activates the aperture. It may have the least CA though. There are two versions of the Tamron Adapt-All. Avoid the original white one. Tamron was a serious competitor back then, I have not been impressed by Tokina.

The recommended lenses will also work extremely well with their matched 1.4x teleconverters to provide an effective 420mm f4 lens. Even a 2x will provide a still bright 600/5.6. Stop down one additional stop with teleconverters, when possible, to bring back sharpness.

These lenses will not be challenged by todays best sensors. They still perform superbly.

 

[JimH123]

Hi all, I was considering purchasing an old 300mm f/2.8 lens (any mount) to adapt to both M43 and L-mount. Although EF -> L with AF is possible via the Sigma adapter, I think I would rather save the money by getting one without AF (though I understand manual focusing such a lens is no mean feat). I have no idea which lens I would get - I've seen quite a few Tamrons, Sigmas, Canons, Nikons, and a few Tokinas for sale that fit the bill. Most are manual focusing, but a couple are old AF lenses that are going cheap since losing their electronic functionality, meaning no AF and stuck always wide open (but likely better optics than the older ones). I've got to say all the different iterations of these lenses from the DSLR days makes choosing one quite overwhelming!

Whatever lens avails itself to me, it would likely be more expensive than any other of my old adapted lenses, so the quality would need to be reasonable wide open. I think there isn't really a worry for that on L-mount as I've seen samples of some of them on FF and they look fine (lens-dependent I'm sure), but I am wondering what it is like on M43. These older lenses are sharpest in the centre wide open - so that's a positive - but the M43 sensor is still going to push them to the test and emphasise negative characteristics e.g. CA which many seem to suffer from.

I was just wondering if anyone had some examples of these lenses adapted to M43 so I can see if I can justify the ~£400 outlay. Also appreciate any advice or warnings people may have! I would be planning on shooting them mostly wide open and am aware of the challenges in terms of size and skill required to focus.

I have the Tokina 300mm f2.8 lens with Minolta A-Mount. I was going to give it a try on adapting to m4/3, but had forgotten that the pin in my AF to m4/3 adapter had its pin broken off that moves the lever in the lens to control the aperture setting. Maybe I can drill out the place that holds the pin, and to insert some makeshift pin. But instead, I went to Amazon and ordered a new adapter to replace the broken one and it should be here by the 7th. I will mount this 300mm f2.8 lens on my Olympus EM1ii and let you know what it is like adjusting aperture and focus on this adapted lens.

Amazon.com : Fotasy Manual A mount Lens to M43 MFT Adapter, Compatible with Sony A Minolta AF lense, Compatible with Panasonic G9 GH5 II GM5 GX9 GX850 G90 G91 G95 G100 Olympus E-M1 E-M5 E-M10 I II III Pen-F E-M1X : Electronics

The adapted aperture adjust will be uncalibrated. It's just a ring on the adapter that moves the aperture control at the base of the lens from full open to max closed. Don't know why on the adapter they call the max closed position "lock". It is possible to set the camera in Aperture priority mode and with ISO fixed to then adjust from wide open where you note the shutter speed which would be f2.8. Then slowly adjust in the closed direction until the shutter time doubles. This would be f4. Continue noting the position for f5.6 and f8 which is likely as far as you need to go.

I haven't done very much adapting lenses to my m4/3 cameras because I like the results I get with native lenses, and the fact that I have access to all the focal lengths I am interested in for these cameras.

One thing about this Tokina 300mm f2.8 lens is that it is so heavy!

Here is what Ken Rockwell had to say about this lens 6 or 7 years ago. He tested the one with the Nikon mount which has the build in aperture control ring. Mine is for A-mount and does not have the aperture ring. Autofocus works great with my Sony cameras.

Tokina 300mm f/2.8 Review (kenrockwell.com)

Here is a sample image using this Tokina lens on a Sony A99 and shot at f4.5. I have had this lens since 2014, but have not used it very much due to its weight.

The adapter I ordered to mount the Tokina 300mm f2.8 onto the Olympus EM1ii has arrived. I started by trying to take some images by just hand holding. Not a good idea. The lens is almost 5 pounds and is very difficult to hold, focus, change the aperture ring on the adapter, and did I say Hold.

Here are 4 images where I set the aperture wide open (f2.8) for the first image. ISO was 200 and the shutter speed was 1/1600 sec. Adjusted the manual aperture ring until the shutter speed was 1/ 800 sec (f4), then 1/400 sec (f5.6) and finally 1/200 sec (f8).

I find that manual focus is a bit difficult in that this lens is designed for AF and the rotation is not quite fine enough to make it easy as it would be on a native manual focus lens.

Also had a bit of purple CA at f2.8. Treated it in Lightroom and adjusted curves a bit for a little more contrast, but nothing else. Didn't need to do that with the others, but I did adjust the curves a bit.


f2.8


f4


f5.6


f8

Considering the weight of this lens, I don't intend to do much walking around with it. It is easier using my Sony cameras where it has auto focus and camera control of the aperture, but it is heavy enough that this might not be very often.

 

[JimH123]

The Olympus 75-300mm lens is not considered the best of the Olympus lenses, but it is a whole lot easier to carry and hand hold. It's downside is that wide open at 300mm is f6.7.

First image is at f6.7. I didn't aim at exactly the same spot.


300mm @f6.7

Second image is at f8


300mm @ f8

No purple fringing noticed.

 

[Michael Benveniste]

I was just wondering if anyone had some examples of these lenses adapted to M43 so I can see if I can justify the ~£400 outlay. Also appreciate any advice or warnings people may have! I would be planning on shooting them mostly wide open and am aware of the challenges in terms of size and skill required to focus.

I have a Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AI-s, which I can mount and use on a Viltrox MF-N1. It works, and wide open the image quality is quite reasonable. But since you asked for advice or warnings, here goes. Unless your intended use involves a pre-focusing on a particular spot on a track, course, or wildlife perch, I'd suggest looking for an EOS mount lens that would allow AF operation.

I haven't tried any of the 3rd party options, but IIRC all of them used a more complex optical formula than my Nikkor. Part of that may be that Nikon had access to optical glass that wasn't available to Sigma, Tamron, or Tokina, but part of that may be that my Nikon's optical design dates from 1977. In 2023, wear, tear, and sample variation likely matter more than design differences. Canon's 300mm f/2.8L should be a solid step above all of these, but that comes at a significant bump in used prices.

 

[Sheeno]

Thanks a lot Jim, John and Michael; your posts have been hugely informative.

Jim - really appreciate you taking the time to take and post those example images, thank you. The Tokina looks like a decent lens, although it does appear there is a fair bit of difference between f/2.8 and f/4. Coupled with what John has says, it's good to know I might be better off focusing on other brands. I wouldn't want to get a 300mm f/2.8 lens unless I was happy shooting it at f/2.8 the majority of the time, given the size and weight I'd shoulder for the f/2.8 luxury. I don't really have much need for the Oly 75-300 as I have the 40-150 f/2.8 and an excellent copy of the MC-20, so already have a nice 300mm f/5.6 set-up.

I will absolutely heed your warnings about the weight of it though. I'll be honest, I am planning on handholding the lens. My rationale for that is that many of these are not much heavier than my 150-600 which I am very happy to handhold, but I'm aware a big prime with a front element like that will likely be much more front-heavy and less wieldly.

John - thanks for the advice. Interesting that the non-functioning AF lenses may not be the best idea. So rather than getting a lens like this, you think that IQ would not be much worse (correctable CA aside) if I went for an older MF lens which generally seem to go for similar prices? It's really good to know the lenses' sharpness will still hold up today.

Michael - thanks for the advice, and the info about the different lenses. I was planning on manually focusing rather than pre-focusing, but assumed that it would mostly be on stationary subjects. This would just be for fun, and I'd expect my hit rate to be low. However, I do need to make sure that the set-up is remotely fun to handhold, otherwise it would defeat the point for me. I think I'm happy handholding set-ups of comparable weight, but as mentioned above, I need to confirm that I'd still enjoy shooting with a lens with such a front-weighted centre of mass - I can certainly see how it could severely limit enjoyment.

Definitely more thinking to do on account of all this info!

 

[JimH123]

Thanks a lot Jim, John and Michael; your posts have been hugely informative.

Jim - really appreciate you taking the time to take and post those example images, thank you. The Tokina looks like a decent lens, although it does appear there is a fair bit of difference between f/2.8 and f/4. Coupled with what John has says, it's good to know I might be better off focusing on other brands. I wouldn't want to get a 300mm f/2.8 lens unless I was happy shooting it at f/2.8 the majority of the time, given the size and weight I'd shoulder for the f/2.8 luxury. I don't really have much need for the Oly 75-300 as I have the 40-150 f/2.8 and an excellent copy of the MC-20, so already have a nice 300mm f/5.6 set-up.

I will absolutely heed your warnings about the weight of it though. I'll be honest, I am planning on handholding the lens. My rationale for that is that many of these are not much heavier than my 150-600 which I am very happy to handhold, but I'm aware a big prime with a front element like that will likely be much more front-heavy and less wieldly.

John - thanks for the advice. Interesting that the non-functioning AF lenses may not be the best idea. So rather than getting a lens like this, you think that IQ would not be much worse (correctable CA aside) if I went for an older MF lens which generally seem to go for similar prices? It's really good to know the lenses' sharpness will still hold up today.

Michael - thanks for the advice, and the info about the different lenses. I was planning on manually focusing rather than pre-focusing, but assumed that it would mostly be on stationary subjects. This would just be for fun, and I'd expect my hit rate to be low. However, I do need to make sure that the set-up is remotely fun to handhold, otherwise it would defeat the point for me. I think I'm happy handholding set-ups of comparable weight, but as mentioned above, I need to confirm that I'd still enjoy shooting with a lens with such a front-weighted centre of mass - I can certainly see how it could severely limit enjoyment.

Definitely more thinking to do on account of all this info!

Just want to comment on the issue of hand holding this big lens. Several things required me moving fingers around. To change the aperture, the ring was on the adapter. And to focus, I needed to turn on the focus magnifier, then find the focus ring, Then back to the focus magnifier to turn off the magnified view. Maybe the EM1ii has the option to turn off the focus magnifier with a touch of the shutter, but if it does, I haven't found the setting for it. Now Sony bodies all turn off focus magnifier as soon as I half push the shutter button and that removes this problem.

Anyway, using this big lens in AF mode with my Sony bodies is an entirely different story as dealing with the above problems now goes away. And I can handhold.

And I do have the 150-600 which is also heavy.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I agree that MF with a big heavy lens can result in busy fingers whilst juggling a substantial lump of metal and glass and all the time trying to conserve a modicum of help to the stabilisation.

I don't have the E-M1ii but do have its ancestor the E-M1 and MF can be switched permanently on or off by Fn2 which is next to the shutter button and not a big problem accessibility wise.

Panasonic bodies and most other that I have had experience with cancel magnified focus with a soft press. This in itself has its own issues even if it is somewhat more useful than a separate magnify on/off switch. Mainly re-instating the focus view after it is lost by soft press.

I see two user views - Magnified view assisted by focus peaking for best focus and fullscreen view without focus peaking for composition view.

The only camera I have seen that did this truly gracefully was the Ricoh GXR with mount module.

ie: set which combination of magnified view and focus peaking by preference then this defaults as focus view. Then a soft press of the shutter gives composition view - full press captures. But if your subject moved or you simply wished to re-check your focus accuracy then simply release soft press and you are back into magnified/peaking view. Simple, effective, and intuitive. I can only wonder why other brands have not copied it. The soft press of the shutter becomes a toggle between focus and composition views. Can even make keeping focus tabs on a moving subject do-able with practice.

Panasonic follows the more universal practice of cancelling focus view on soft press.

If you are using a systems lens the magnified view can be invoked by setting MF either from the camera body or by a MF clutch of some description on the lens. Rotating the focus ring magnifies the view and soft press cancels - almost but not quite as good as the Ricoh toggle (you have to reset the previous good focus)..

With a legacy purely MF lens the camera basically understands that if there is no electronic handshake then MF is assumed. Usually 'left arrow' will invoke magnified view at any time and if there is a dedicated clickable rear wheel it also will magnify focus. With your eye to the evf where it is provided you can also dab a thumb anywhere on the rear touch screen when looking through the evf. Sometimes easier then even looking for the left arrow.

As far as hand-held weight is concerned - I don't have the EF 300/2.8 (2550gm) but I do have the very similarly weighted 200/2.0 (2520gm) and it can be fairly easily hand held if using AF - but it would be close to the limit that I could use comfortably. When needing to work apertures and manually focus maybe 1500gm might be quite enough weight to manage.

 

[M_digicapt]

[No message]

 

[John Crowe]

As you can see that lens won't work on a Canon body. That is the sort of thing that worries me, even though you won't use it on Canon. I also suspect that you will have no way of setting the aperture.

I would prefer the older manual lens. The focus mechanism is better to use and will likely last longer.

 

[PC UK]

Hi all, I was considering purchasing an old 300mm f/2.8 lens (any mount) to adapt to both M43 and L-mount.

I have had success with a tokina 300mm F5.6 (also sold as Hoyas, Vivitars etc). Here is the spec.

Minimum Focus Distance (m) : 4.5
Focus rotation: ~280°,
Filter Diameter (mm) : 58
Lens Diameter : 65
Lens Length Range (mm) : 147 - 171 (infinity focus - close focus)
Weight (g) : ~640g

I use it to isolate mid-ground in landscapes and sometimes for "perspective compessed" outdoor portraits. Usually there is great focus "pop". I also have a great manual focus 200mm F2.8 that I use in a similar way.

My tips

• I found that a monopod enabled me to handle it better, even though I used my left had to support the lens when shooting.
• I shoot bursts - that way I get to choose the best of 6 shots
• sometimes I "roll" the focus slightly during my burst - giving a "focus bracketing" sequence to choose between - hey, film is expensive but digital is cheap!
• For an "american shot" portrait, using this on an M4/3 and focused at F5.6 I get a camera to subject distance of about 23m, with a DoF of about 50cm before and behind. This can close down a very messy/busy background and create an almost "abstract" effect around the subject. The best shots take planning - so take a mobile phone as it is hard to direct a human subject shouting that far away!
• Most people use a super-tele like a telescope to "bring things closer" and wonder why the images are rubbish - this is because it compresses all the dust, haze and heat distortions in the air . For the best "long range" images you need very clear air - I mountaineer and the best is just after dawn at high altitude when it is too cold for moisture in the air and a long way from city smog. Crisp frosty winter day landscapes can also be great long range - otherwise I am using it in the 10-50m range to my target. Few big-tele's are optimised for infinity, so the best spot is usually in that mid-ground range.
• Noisy but sharp beats no-noise and vibration/shake - so ramp up the iso !
• Mine was mint. Internal haze kills contrast in these - so be prepared to reject lots to get a good optically clean one (or develop your repair skills).
• Older telephotos suffer CA in bright/contrast areas; you need aspheric/high density glass and lots of it to counter that and few but the top spec lenses budgeted for that, so learn how to remove it in post-processing. Most affordable 200-300mm primes I looked at had between 4 and 6 elements, while modern equivalent lenses often have more than a dozen!

I would love a 300-400mm Lumix lens, but the cost is still too high to justify ! However as more people opt for the 100-400mm lumix I hope the price of the secondhand Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm f/4-5.6 Mega O.I.S will fall.