Hi there,
That adapter includes a glass lens element to ensure infinity focus is achieved. You see, the distance between flange (mount) and focus plane (film/sensor) is shorter in the Minolta MC system than the Canon. Also referred to as "flange focal distance". If you put a lens with a shorter flange focal distance on a camera system with a longer flange focal distance, infinity focus is impossible - and in most cases normal focusing is also affected. It is as if the lens is on a macro bellows and can only focus very close.
The problems with the glass element in this adapter are twofold; 1) the lens element is typically very low quality, introducing all manner of optical aberrations (which eliminates the reason to use any lens with the adapter) 2) The lens element is tiny compared to most lens rear elements, and the Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 lens in particular, thus reducing the f-stop dramatically (reducing the lens's ability to gather light) which again removes any point of using such lens.
Just look at this lens (another one that I converted) and you can see why you don't want to channel its image circle through a dime-sized, poor quality lens element in the adapter:
Attachments
My wife uses the Tamron 90/2.8. Great wedding lens as well. You can go from shooting portraits to close-up ring shots to candid shots of guests without swapping lenses. It has never let us down and produces beautiful photos.
I used the Tamron 28-200 for a long time as a "travel lens", and I agree 100% with your assessment. I wish I hadn't sold it. I replaced it with the Tamron SP 24-135 which was a sharper lens but it was considerably heavier and was focal length limited compared to the 28-200 so I didn't find it as useful for travel. Then I decided to just bear the weight of a camera bag and bring a 28, 58 and 85 with me. It was worth it
Here are a few from a night-time summer festival we attended in my wife's hometown, in southern Japan, back in 2008. No flash. Just the 5D body fed by the Rokkor 58/1.2:
Attachments
In reality this means, that lens is only usable when the sun shines. That is crap, a lens that could only be used when stopped down to f8, the asians sell those under their label "7 artisans" for Leica as third party manufacturer. They are real cheap, but otherwise crappy.
I love shooting with my Cron 50 and 28mm wide open, because that gives the special bokeh effect. Its razor sharp at wide open, colors are perfect.
Thats the difference between an excellent lens and one you can only use stopped down. And thats why I choosed Leica lenses.
Cogitech has shown that other, selected lens could fit quite well to digicams but that is more like an adventure ride. I'm more of the plug and play type of shooter.
His b/w nightshots are first class photography. I'm not able to do that with the Leica M, because its so grainy at low light. Leica was never good at that, but the new model is much better. Its just that you should have real deep pockets to buy new Leica stuff and my Leica is all second hand. But I'm so happy to own and shoot such a first class camera I've always dreamt of. It enables real creativity and images look so unique, can't shoot with a mobile phone. But if you look around, most of the people are fully satisfied mobile phone shooters. Does this have anything in common with their audio systems? I fear it has a lot, they might hear the same crap low quality and are easy marketing victims who simply have such a bad taste. The world is in great despair, this year the whole artificial stuff being produced worldwide has been bigger than all lively materials and every 20 years this stuff doubles. Mostly what is being produced is cheap shitty quality stuff. We should work on this topic before we drown in garbage.
Last edited:
F8 in the sunshine often works for fine daytime travel "snapshots". The 28-200 and other small "super-zooms" filled this role just fine. However, cell phones take such great "snapshots" these days that the utility of a dSLR with a super-zoom is less appealing for sure. Although the extreme high ISO available on modern cameras (with clean output) make f8 even usable at night-time now.
If I could only have one lens, it sure wouldn't be a cheap super-zoom.
Later, I will post a sample or two from my wife's Tamron 35mm f1.4, wide open. I think that might help change your mind about Asian lenses. Plug and play, and be amazed.
If I could only have one lens, it sure wouldn't be a cheap super-zoom.
Later, I will post a sample or two from my wife's Tamron 35mm f1.4, wide open. I think that might help change your mind about Asian lenses. Plug and play, and be amazed.
Last edited:
Leica does zooming just by cropping the image. They use a wide angle lens and crop into it, voila, here you have your 50mm snapshot. Thats why I sold my Leica 90mm, because it was of lower quality compared to the 50 and I can crop everytime into the 50 and have a 90mm shot. But by comparing my wide angle 28mm with the Cron 50, this wins by a huge margin.
My ISO ends with 3600 and that produces grainy pics and lower quality colors. Thats why I still believe in the fast lenses instead of high ISO pictures. A Noctilux will always have its merits that no ISO dial can achieve, because its such a special lens with such an incredible bokeh.
The priority focus with Leica is always on fast, superior lenses instead of hyper wide ISO range and that makes sense to me. With analog photography, 400 ISO was very much and the people bought fast lenses and made phantastic pics. I wouldn't be satisfied with a turtle like slow lens with f8 and a high ISO dial, thats the kind of pics everyone can make with an automated mobile phone, too. In some cases, I bet the Iphone shoots better quality. For me, those pics lack individuality and own style a lot.
P.S. When I started with SLR photography, those Rokkor lenses were the actual generation, it was early 80s I think.
My ISO ends with 3600 and that produces grainy pics and lower quality colors. Thats why I still believe in the fast lenses instead of high ISO pictures. A Noctilux will always have its merits that no ISO dial can achieve, because its such a special lens with such an incredible bokeh.
The priority focus with Leica is always on fast, superior lenses instead of hyper wide ISO range and that makes sense to me. With analog photography, 400 ISO was very much and the people bought fast lenses and made phantastic pics. I wouldn't be satisfied with a turtle like slow lens with f8 and a high ISO dial, thats the kind of pics everyone can make with an automated mobile phone, too. In some cases, I bet the Iphone shoots better quality. For me, those pics lack individuality and own style a lot.
P.S. When I started with SLR photography, those Rokkor lenses were the actual generation, it was early 80s I think.
Attachments
Last edited:
Thanks Cogitech for refreshing my memory on the adapter issue, it all makes sense, nowadays being on the mirror less with its often much shorter FFD it's easy to forget the limits dslr's are drawing with. hah 
I guess the 24-135 is this one, I actually had one too for my past D700, I found it to be a really nice and well rounded all-in-all every day lens considering the price range, really liked it, if anything negative it would be the AF which is a bit slow but on the other hand it locked on target pretty well, whereas a hunting AF can be quite frustrating which can be an issue in particular with some 3rd party lenses.
The 24-135 had a funny AF mechanism for Nikon mount driven by a mechanical screwdriver coupling via the mount flange by a motor inside the camera body.
ps. Like those BW pictures, very nice, I always found BW brings more of the story out of the shot, not everything about photography is about sharpest most mega pixels etc, also, any chromatic noise becomes considerably less distracting, almost fits in with a bit of noise in BW I would say. And something I liked about the D700 is it had such a nice film-like noise.
My old DMC-LX3* pocket camera which can shoot RAW as well still produces some odd visible artefacts.
* @Schmitz77, it's got a Leica lens.
Yes, Panasonic did collaborate with Leica, some of the entry level Leica's were re-badged Panasonic (Lumix), maybe there were some minor difference?
I guess the 24-135 is this one, I actually had one too for my past D700, I found it to be a really nice and well rounded all-in-all every day lens considering the price range, really liked it, if anything negative it would be the AF which is a bit slow but on the other hand it locked on target pretty well, whereas a hunting AF can be quite frustrating which can be an issue in particular with some 3rd party lenses.
The 24-135 had a funny AF mechanism for Nikon mount driven by a mechanical screwdriver coupling via the mount flange by a motor inside the camera body.
ps. Like those BW pictures, very nice, I always found BW brings more of the story out of the shot, not everything about photography is about sharpest most mega pixels etc, also, any chromatic noise becomes considerably less distracting, almost fits in with a bit of noise in BW I would say. And something I liked about the D700 is it had such a nice film-like noise.
My old DMC-LX3* pocket camera which can shoot RAW as well still produces some odd visible artefacts.
* @Schmitz77, it's got a Leica lens.
Yes, Panasonic did collaborate with Leica, some of the entry level Leica's were re-badged Panasonic (Lumix), maybe there were some minor difference?
Last edited:
Those B&W shots are first class!! I love B&W but have never been very good at it (my photography is a hobby and not something I have developed to the level that cogitechs works shows! ) .
I still have an undeveloped film in my Konika Autroreflex T that is only half finished. I keep thinking I should get a battery for the camera and finish the roll, but the film is so far out of date now that it is likely hosed. I don't even remember what is on the film, other than some pictures of a warf I took during a photography class. I'm not even sure if there is anywhere in Sydney I can get film developed any more.
The Tamron 28-200 is exactly what Cogitech said, a good travel lens (but I also find it great for floral photography, I have always liked it's bokeh. My travel kit originally was that + a 20mm prime. later expanded to that + a 50mm f1.4 I did change lenses quite a bit, but when the light is good, having the flexibility of the zoom is very handy. I have recently bought a samsung galaxy S20+ and it is going to be a game changer for travel shots. I can see the DSLR will probably be reserved for times I want a cut above shot.
One of the things that owning "crap" equipment has taught me, is the importance of knowing the limitations of the equipment you have. My first digital camera was a canon sureshot A70. I fairly quickly discovered that in order to get decent images with it, I had to shoot compleletly manually. Once I did that the quality of the images I could get was dramatically better. In fact the only image I have ever had published was taken with that A70. Its of the starbucks in the forbidden city. It is used in a Hong Kong Highshcool text book in a section on culture.
I'd love to be able to buy all the most fantastic lenses but I really can't justify the cost (and there is also the weight to consider). I do want to get a better lens than my trusty old tamron 28-200 but I really don't know what to replace it with. it is an old workhorse that has Served me well since I bought it with my Nikon F80 sometime in the early 2000's.
The first pic is the mentioned A70 pic , the other three are ones taken with my crappy Tamron 28-200. Sure a better lens would be sharper, but I like the colour and contrast that the tamron produces. I like these photos, and at the end of the day, i think that is all that matters for a non-professional
Tony.
) . I still have an undeveloped film in my Konika Autroreflex T that is only half finished. I keep thinking I should get a battery for the camera and finish the roll, but the film is so far out of date now that it is likely hosed. I don't even remember what is on the film, other than some pictures of a warf I took during a photography class. I'm not even sure if there is anywhere in Sydney I can get film developed any more.
The Tamron 28-200 is exactly what Cogitech said, a good travel lens (but I also find it great for floral photography, I have always liked it's bokeh. My travel kit originally was that + a 20mm prime. later expanded to that + a 50mm f1.4 I did change lenses quite a bit, but when the light is good, having the flexibility of the zoom is very handy. I have recently bought a samsung galaxy S20+ and it is going to be a game changer for travel shots. I can see the DSLR will probably be reserved for times I want a cut above shot.
One of the things that owning "crap" equipment has taught me, is the importance of knowing the limitations of the equipment you have. My first digital camera was a canon sureshot A70. I fairly quickly discovered that in order to get decent images with it, I had to shoot compleletly manually. Once I did that the quality of the images I could get was dramatically better. In fact the only image I have ever had published was taken with that A70. Its of the starbucks in the forbidden city. It is used in a Hong Kong Highshcool text book in a section on culture.
I'd love to be able to buy all the most fantastic lenses but I really can't justify the cost (and there is also the weight to consider). I do want to get a better lens than my trusty old tamron 28-200 but I really don't know what to replace it with. it is an old workhorse that has Served me well since I bought it with my Nikon F80 sometime in the early 2000's.
The first pic is the mentioned A70 pic , the other three are ones taken with my crappy Tamron 28-200. Sure a better lens would be sharper, but I like the colour and contrast that the tamron produces. I like these photos, and at the end of the day, i think that is all that matters for a non-professional
Tony.
Attachments
Very nice compositions, Tony. You have a good eye, in my opinion. That's 90% of taking good photographs. You also make an excellent point about gear limitations. They make you work for it, and the only way to get the results is to really learn what the limitations are and why they exist, and how to overcome them. Sometimes the answer is "better gear", but usually there is another answer that just involves more knowledge and effort.
Were any/all of those shot in RAW? A part of me wants to "do my thing" with them (actually the Starbucks and the flower wouldn't get much). I think you might be surprised - but perhaps offended or disappointed. Much of this has to do with personal taste, too.
By the way, thank you for the compliment on my photos. I do appreciate you saying that!
Were any/all of those shot in RAW? A part of me wants to "do my thing" with them (actually the Starbucks and the flower wouldn't get much). I think you might be surprised - but perhaps offended or disappointed. Much of this has to do with personal taste, too.
By the way, thank you for the compliment on my photos. I do appreciate you saying that!
Last edited:
Hi Cogitech, the two landscape shots were almost certainly shot RAW the A70 raw wasn't invented and the flower shot was on the D80 and I only shot jpeg on that.
I didn't shoot raw for a long time because I had a pre-conception about it that it would be useless to me because I am colour blind. I didn't realize the flexibility it gave you with respect to exposure and other things. I started shooting raw when I got the D750. I suspect both of those images I have manipulated from the original I'd have to pull them up and check. I can put them up on drive if you want to have a play with them! I know a lot of photographers go a lot further than I do with post processing. I tend to do a little with levels (going for more contrast usually) and sometimes some sharpening, but that is about it. I just use the nikon capture NX software.
I use a calibrated monitor, and often when viewed on a non-calibrated monitor the images appear a bit dark, so I probably overdo it a bit with the contrast.
PS thank you also for the compliment!
Tony.
and the flower shot was on the D80 and I only shot jpeg on that. I didn't shoot raw for a long time because I had a pre-conception about it that it would be useless to me because I am colour blind. I didn't realize the flexibility it gave you with respect to exposure and other things. I started shooting raw when I got the D750. I suspect both of those images I have manipulated from the original I'd have to pull them up and check. I can put them up on drive if you want to have a play with them! I know a lot of photographers go a lot further than I do with post processing. I tend to do a little with levels (going for more contrast usually) and sometimes some sharpening, but that is about it. I just use the nikon capture NX software.
I use a calibrated monitor, and often when viewed on a non-calibrated monitor the images appear a bit dark, so I probably overdo it a bit with the contrast.
PS thank you also for the compliment!
Tony.
Last edited:
I had a 3 speed bike in the 60s, and it had Sturmey-Archer coaster brakes, the only non-ten speed bike
that I ever had. Those were fantastic brakes as I recall, much better than those on most current bikes,
and no adjustments or cables, or slipping in the rain.
Last edited:
We called them back pedal brakes. My 1970's Malvern Star Dragstar didn't have any gears, and only had back pedal brakes. I rode that bike everywhere till I was 15, at which point I got a Malvern Star 12 speed racing bike. I had that till a few years ago when it got stolen out of my Garage!
Tony.
Tony.
In my case I think it was opportunistic school kids. It was school holidays, they dumped a mountain bike in the neighbours driveway (also stolen) and decided to take mine. Basically I guess joy riding. I guess the Police found the owner of the mountain bike as I never got a call to say I could have it (which is what normally happens if they can't track down the owner). Never saw my bike again
Tony.
Tony.
Tony,
I am by no means an expert photo processor, but I know my way around a couple of RAW processing applications and I would love to show you some power of RAW that you may find interesting. If interested at all, I would be happy to spend some time on those if you feel like digging them up.
I am by no means an expert photo processor, but I know my way around a couple of RAW processing applications and I would love to show you some power of RAW that you may find interesting. If interested at all, I would be happy to spend some time on those if you feel like digging them up.
Dont you find it disturbing how the homeless are accepted as normal, and blamed for such crimes?
We have a homeless problem too, and many may have arrived in there situation through misdemeanors, but hey....humanity hasn't got much hope if we treat every one as being a stereotype.
Theres enough of that hatred around already
Consistently stunned by the narrow mindedness, on a forum of "objective" thinkers, who by credit to any intelligence should be able to see beyond such archaic constructs of bigotry
ON topic, we also called them back pedal brakes, fixed cranks etc.
Anyone who has experience velodrome or street racing on a bicycle will have raced bikes with fixed crank, and fixed wheel, and probably only a single brake.
We have a homeless problem too, and many may have arrived in there situation through misdemeanors, but hey....humanity hasn't got much hope if we treat every one as being a stereotype.
Theres enough of that hatred around already
Consistently stunned by the narrow mindedness, on a forum of "objective" thinkers, who by credit to any intelligence should be able to see beyond such archaic constructs of bigotry
ON topic, we also called them back pedal brakes, fixed cranks etc.
Anyone who has experience velodrome or street racing on a bicycle will have raced bikes with fixed crank, and fixed wheel, and probably only a single brake.
Last edited:
