Canon DSLR and analog lenses (M42, Contax etc.)

Hi all,

Since I couldnt find a section discussing putting old lenses on new Canon DSLR's I thought I open a thread here.
I am an avid collector of old Zeiss Jena prime lenses like the 35mm Flektogon, the 58mm Biotar and the 135mm Sonnar. I got the fever already at a young age using the old camera of my father; an Exacta Varex with a Zeiss Biotar lens( in those days there was no digital...). Other things became more interesting, like fishing and girls. However when I wanted to pick up photography again beyond mobile phones or compacts I noticed that my brothers camera (a 400D) with its kitlenses did not produce the same quality as in my youth. Googling and going through forums, I noticed that these old lenses could be placed on Canon! Off to Ebay I went resulting in the following collection:



I will post some photos taken with these as well shortly.

Do you have any old lenses that you still like to use on your new equipment?

 

I'm mostly using my Eos as a test bed for lenses I sell on eBay, so I've used it with a lot of weird and wonderful stuff. Currently I have converters for Pentax K, M42 (both chipped for focus confirm and metering), a Nikon converter I've never used because my main system is Nikon, also Olympus OM and Contax-Yashica. I've also got an M39 macro adapter on order, and a Minolta MD adapter that I picked up very cheaply, but turns out to be defective - it's missing a corrective lens and can only be used for macro. I'll be asking about that in a separate post. What I'd love to get is a Minolta Dynax compatible converter - it would have to have a corrective lens, but since I wouldn't be using it for serious photography I can live with that. If anyone knows of a source please comment!

The lens I've used repeatedly is a 500mm f8 telephoto, just an ordinary T-mount thing - I mostly use it on my Nikon but I can swap to an M42 mount and an M42-Eos converter and it gives me focus confirm and metering, which the Nikon doesn't support. Nikon-compatible AF confirm mounts and converters are usually expensive and VERY badly made compared to the Canon equivalents, which is why I haven't gone that route so far.

 

M42 with chip is indeed nice to have, but I noticed not quite accurate, esspecially with shallow depth of field, here I rely on LiveView with 5x peeping zoom. As long as the subject doesnt move, thats fine for me.
I also love to put the F to 16 on my Flektogon 35mm in street photgraphy and make it a point and shoot camera.
Next consideration is a Flektogon 20 or 25mm for even deeper depth of field and wider angle of course. I might consider also a OM Zuiko 24mm 2.8 as it is rediculously small and in the top 3 of best 24mm lenses of all times according to a shoot-out I found on the net, winner was a Canon L lens by the way... but for the price... test can be found here: http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/24mmcup/final/24mm_final13.html

 

I agree, the metering part of it is much more useful than the focus confirmation.

 

I have a number of vintage Russian M42 lenses that I use - Industar 50 and 50-2, and Helios 44. I also use a very nice Auto Sears (Rikenon) 55mm f1.4 in M42.

http://mattsclassiccameras.com/lenses/rikenon-f14-55mm/

I have also used a number of M42 Takumars, which are gorgeous.

 

I've been guilty of shooting like that with a Meyer-Optik 30mm 3.5 set at f11 (shooting off the hip feels so dirty but its addictive)

on another note what metering modes do you guys use?, I've had more success shooting with partial metering when using vintage lenses (I have a split prism focusing screen installed in my 1100d and use the focus on subject, lock exposure and recompose method)

 

Got the bug for old lenses two or three years ago. My oldest child was shooting video on their 550d and was dissapointed in the overall kit lens performance. I had several m42 and om lenses from previous systems and with the aid of cheap adapters pressed them into service. We now have 60 plus film era lenses in the pool of kit! Beware, it becomes addictive!
At first it was mostly primes, Takumar, Zuiko etc but we found Adaptall and Series 1 Vivitar zooms to be effective.
The other danger is that the lens often comes with a usable camera attached, this leads to restoration frenzy and before you know it, you've become a "Collector".
It's all good clean fun and I can recommend the results.

 

Just the one. Recently(ish) acquired a helios 44-2 58mm lens

 

Sold an aluminium 13-bladed Helios 44 a year ago ; sure would love to see that Biotar beauty. Great collection. Probably some quirks, but a lot of character...

 

Some of the old lenses have a rendering that is slowly being lost as we progress towards the mythical 'optical excellence' that computer predicted performance is steering designers towards.

M42 adapts very well but it's also worth considering Pentacon Six, Pentax 67 and Pentax 645 lenses. Pentacon Six mount lenses are available from a whole bunch of manufacturers (including CZJ, Kilfitt, Meyer and Arsenal) and a 35mm full frame body is only using the centre 44mm of the 90mm image circle which helps eliminate the often poor corner performance.

Here's my Heinz Kilfitt Pan-Tele-Killar 300/4 (Pentacon Six mount) on a Canon 1Dx.
The lens has rack and pinion focusing for the longer distances and a helicoid at the front for the 'macro' range....


Bob

 

One ends up with dull view finders and very poor image quality compared to modern lenses.

 

I would only go that route if i needed to shoot something with a tilted perspective (you can pickup Pentacon six to eos tilt-shift adapter and lens fairly cheap) the novelty of using it for anything else will wear off when you realize its not wide enough limiting you to portrait and macro, and its to heavy to carry in your bag daily

Does it have a field of view close to a 600mm? since it will be around a 2x crop on a 35mm sensor?!?!

not so sure about that, the canon FDn f1.4 50mm is just as good as the EF 50mm 1.2L and some 3rd party brands like sears and vivitar, porst and revuenon released some really epic lens. finding one is like winning the lottery

 

The field of view is that part which is captured (or cropped) by the sensor so it behaves eactly the same as a Canon 300/4 lens.

 

I asked the question cause i don't know the answer (and i don't have the money to find out by doing tests myself)

field of view = angle
crop = portion of the image circle captured

if there is a crop factor then it might make medium format lens a good choice for shooting wildlife on a 35mm or aps-c body
(I love crop factors its like a teleconverter without the drop in light)

but i guess you haven't compared it to a canon EF lens at the 300mm focal length so you might not have the answers i seek yet

 

There is no crop factor involved. A medium format 300mm lens on a 35mm body gives the same FoV as a Canon 300mm lens.....ie, I see the same FoV on my 1DxMkII with any 300mm lens......my Canon EF300/2.8, 300/4 or a medium format 300/4 lens (I have several of them) If I were to use the medium format 300mm lens on a medium format body then the AoV would increase and appear similar to a 150-200mm lens on a 35mm body (the exact 'equivalent focal length' would depend on the specific sensor size/aspect ratio).

Bob

 

thanks bob, you have answered a question that been bugging me for ages

 

You're welcome.....consider the lens properties (focal length and aperture) as the constant and the sensor/film size as the variable.

 

I sometimes use a Zeiss Jena 180 f/2.8 Sonnar (Pentacon 6 mount) with an adapter as a portrait lens on my 6D. Sometimes with an extension ring in between because of the 2.2 m MFD. Magic.
I also had a Meyer 300 f/4, that did not really please me, and an aluminum 13 bladed Helios 44 58mm f/2 (copy of the Zeiss Biotar)...

 

Hello Weetbix!

You may not be sure but I am....! (No offence, but I only post if I have personal experience of the subject and eqpt.)

I never needed the normal lens for my work; don't have any, so won't specifically comment on the FD 50mm/1.4 and EF 50mm/1.2 you refer to. That said, I have a number of FDn and EF lenses and no way a FDn 85mm/1.8 or 50mm/3.5 compare with their equivalent in Canon EF. Or for that matter the FD 300mm/4 with the EF version - all of which I own and have tried on the Canon 5D Mk II as well as on the Sony A7 Mk II.

The fact that you favourably compare the Canon FDn 50mm/1.4 with stuff from Sears and Reveunon almost shakes my confidence in Canon quality! (I had no idea Sears marketed 50mm/1.4 lenses in Canon FD mount. So I won't comment on those other brands you mention... a couple I never heard of - having no experience of them.)

But Canon FDn and Canon EF lenses offer very different results on a modern Canon EF mount and Sony E mount DSLR FF sensor.


The best!

 

Walk through any park or down any street and you'll see people who are carrying 10, 15 or even 20 kgs of excess weight and they're carrying it 24 hours/day, 7 days/week. Is a 480g (17oz) lens (a P6 mount 50mm Zeiss) really going to be a challenge to have in the bag over your shoulder?