Another cult lens
- Thread starter ferider
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 163
- Views 60K
FPjohn
Well-known
Kudos! Fine images.
yours
FPJ
yours
FPJ
sanmich
Veteran
Careful about this:
I just checked two of the cheaper models on ebay, and the sellers told me that their adapters bring up the 35/135 frames, which is a problem because you can't even file them down.
ferider
Veteran
Interesting, Michael. Anybody can show a photo of the rear of an M42 copy of the Takumar ? (to use one of the Russian M42/LTM adapters)
Roland.
Roland.
hans voralberg
Veteran
Here you go Roland, rear end of a Takumar 50/1.4
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
raid
Dad Photographer
dude163
Member
Couldn't you use a M42>PK adapter ( the official one ) then the Kipon PK>Leica M mount to mount M42 lenses to a Leica body without coupling?
Having the RFF coupling is the key however! then I could use my takumars and my Helios 40 on my M8 🙁
Having the RFF coupling is the key however! then I could use my takumars and my Helios 40 on my M8 🙁
ferider
Veteran
Thanks for the photos, BT. The rear element ring doesn't seem as easily accessible as in the Pentax bayonet mount lens, I leave modifying this one for somebody else to try.
Raid, and others, the only options you have is a Novoflex adapter for a general M conversion (bringing up 50mm framelines), or the Kipon Pentax/M adapter, if you are OK with 35mm framelines (for example, if you want to use the lens on an M3).
Roland.
Raid, and others, the only options you have is a Novoflex adapter for a general M conversion (bringing up 50mm framelines), or the Kipon Pentax/M adapter, if you are OK with 35mm framelines (for example, if you want to use the lens on an M3).
Roland.
hans voralberg
Veteran
I think if anybody want to do it on a Takumar the cam would have to be stuck/solder on to the thin area surrounding the rear element, very small clearance there.
fbf
Well-known
Nice work Roland. Guess I should go get one. 😀
raid
Dad Photographer
I hear you, Roland. I need to buy either a Novoflex or a Kipon adapter. The latter is less expensive and is sold on ebay. I have an M3, so I could use the lens with that camera.
lam
Well-known
I must say this is very impressive and props for doing it, it's a great thing that you're expanding our knowledge on lenses available or may be available to us, rather than just shooting the idea down and counting pennies for a summilux or whatever.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Last night I was up far too late researching the rear elements of superspeed lenses to see which ones had metal shrouds.
I found that the best and probably least expensive candidate for this kind of adaptation would be the Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm f/1.2. The rear element is giant BUT it has a very thin metal shroud, not unlike the one in the LTM Canon 50mm f/1.2. There is also some space to work with between the rear element and the flange so we're not talking too much precision necessary.
I'm thinking that I'd simply JB Weld a tab to the shroud and then put a spring-loaded intermediate cam follower in the adapter (like the one in the 10.5cm Nikkor LTM.) Cost of the lens is a couple hundred for a mint sample, adapter is no more than $50, donor lens to source intermediate cam follower from (or just finding the cam follower itself in a junk bin, like from DAG, Sherry or Youxin) and the work involved would result in a MODERN 50/1.2 lens with RF coupling for well under $1000 USD.
I'm still trying to figure out how to adapt the Canon L 50/1.2 FD but the mount and the non-shrouded massive rear element are the problems I see.
Phil Forrest
I found that the best and probably least expensive candidate for this kind of adaptation would be the Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm f/1.2. The rear element is giant BUT it has a very thin metal shroud, not unlike the one in the LTM Canon 50mm f/1.2. There is also some space to work with between the rear element and the flange so we're not talking too much precision necessary.
I'm thinking that I'd simply JB Weld a tab to the shroud and then put a spring-loaded intermediate cam follower in the adapter (like the one in the 10.5cm Nikkor LTM.) Cost of the lens is a couple hundred for a mint sample, adapter is no more than $50, donor lens to source intermediate cam follower from (or just finding the cam follower itself in a junk bin, like from DAG, Sherry or Youxin) and the work involved would result in a MODERN 50/1.2 lens with RF coupling for well under $1000 USD.
I'm still trying to figure out how to adapt the Canon L 50/1.2 FD but the mount and the non-shrouded massive rear element are the problems I see.
Phil Forrest
ferider
Veteran
Cross posting with thread http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82523, because I think the lens did quite well on my M2 for portraits in the dark of a sport's bar ....
Cheers,
Roland.
Cheers,
Roland.
Ruhayat
Well-known
Awesome! I would definitely buy this adapter from you if you make it available for sale, too. I have a whole set of m42 lenses, and the Takumars are just a little bit bigger than M lenses.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Me too, I love the set up, but the coupling is really not something most of us can do. Still I'd like to run my M42 and/or K mount lenses on my IIIf. Great job, you have a talent.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Cult lenses????? I really think you mean rapport with a lens. The lenses that I have that I have rapport with are: My Olympus 35RC lens, my, as above, Pentax Super Takumar 50mm f1.4, my First Six Camera (folder) lens, and as it is a fixed lens on a totally automatic camera (which diminishes its value as a rapport lens) is my Konica C35 lens. I also like my but it is not in the rapport class is my Elmar 50mm lens. Recent shot with my Olympus 35RC, boy do I love this lenses.
I know simple and boring but it is so clean and so sharp, plus it seems to have the ability to get outside and inside with ease. Maybe, that is the film and the developing, but this guy (lens) does it best for me:
I know simple and boring but it is so clean and so sharp, plus it seems to have the ability to get outside and inside with ease. Maybe, that is the film and the developing, but this guy (lens) does it best for me:
ferider
Veteran
WRT "cult lens", I was just quoting Michael, CJC.
----------
Update:
With Novoflex discontinuing the adapter that I used above (replacement with a new and more expensive adapter with aperture control), I made a second lens for another RFF member using a Kipon adapter.
1) US 95 plus shipping for a clean lens on ebay
2) US 88 for the Kipon adapter.
Great news first: the Kipon adapter brings up 28/90mm framelines that can easily be modified to bring up 50mm framelines.
Here is the "new" lens as finished:
Here the adapter with mod
Also, the Kipon adapter is well built - the lens behaves great at infinity (this is focused at around 25m on the Antenna today early in the morning):
And here is a photo of my first SMC lens taken through the second copy at about its minimum focus distance of 0.7m (Rollei Retro 100, Rodinal 1:100 stand).
Cheers,
Roland.
----------
Update:
With Novoflex discontinuing the adapter that I used above (replacement with a new and more expensive adapter with aperture control), I made a second lens for another RFF member using a Kipon adapter.
1) US 95 plus shipping for a clean lens on ebay
2) US 88 for the Kipon adapter.
Great news first: the Kipon adapter brings up 28/90mm framelines that can easily be modified to bring up 50mm framelines.
Here is the "new" lens as finished:
Here the adapter with mod
Also, the Kipon adapter is well built - the lens behaves great at infinity (this is focused at around 25m on the Antenna today early in the morning):
And here is a photo of my first SMC lens taken through the second copy at about its minimum focus distance of 0.7m (Rollei Retro 100, Rodinal 1:100 stand).
Cheers,
Roland.
ChrisN
Striving
Bravo! Good work Roland!
Re-reading through this thread it again surprises me the people who have posted "I don't understand why you would even try this - why not just use an SLR body!". I guess that there will always be people who don't understand the challenge and the satisfaction, just as there will always be people who look for and rise to such challenges. Well done!
Re-reading through this thread it again surprises me the people who have posted "I don't understand why you would even try this - why not just use an SLR body!". I guess that there will always be people who don't understand the challenge and the satisfaction, just as there will always be people who look for and rise to such challenges. Well done!
menos
Veteran
Roland, this is my official new all time favorite thread on RFF ;-)
Thank you so much for sharing all this. There might be people, who just don't get the idea behind it, but others really get dirty thoughts from seeing the possibility alone of adapting lenses to a well working RF body.
Thank you so much for sharing all this. There might be people, who just don't get the idea behind it, but others really get dirty thoughts from seeing the possibility alone of adapting lenses to a well working RF body.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
