peterm1
Veteran
I have had good luck with adapters mostly. And even with some adapters being smidge too thin, as you say this is only an inconvenience not fatal. Mostly I do not notice it much if at all (if shooting at infinity I tend to shoot stopped down anyway, so the depth of field increase caused by stopping down tends to "cover a multitude of sins".
Having said that, in principle I do rather like the idea of buying a helicoid type adapter for the reason you mention. I only have one - that is for Contax to LTM due to some Contax lenses not having their own helicoid. The problem with mine though, is that while in general it is quite well made, the helicoid is a little loose. This makes it a bit clumsy and annoying to use - a certain amount of resistance is needed. for the "haptics" to be just right. I would need to be assured that this does not happen.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
The SL typ 601 is an excellent camera! I got one just when they came out (about 2015..?) and used it for several years while I was still taking assignments: it performed superbly! The native L-mount zoom lenses are incredible although massive and expensive. I used mostly Leica R prime lenses with it other than for jobs, the control ergonomics fit the SL very nicely. Leica M lenses work just as well albeit the M lens ergonomics are quite as consistent as the R line.
The strategy of using M-mount to adapt through for various other mounts works, but be aware that you will run into vignetting issues with longer, fast lenses as M-mount isn't large enough diameter to avoid that entirely.
The SL typ 601 UI is very simple, very customizable and adaptable. Once you learn it and get it set up to your liking, the camera is very very fluid in use.
Good luck with it!
G
The strategy of using M-mount to adapt through for various other mounts works, but be aware that you will run into vignetting issues with longer, fast lenses as M-mount isn't large enough diameter to avoid that entirely.
The SL typ 601 UI is very simple, very customizable and adaptable. Once you learn it and get it set up to your liking, the camera is very very fluid in use.
Good luck with it!
G
I do the same thing with stacked adapters, in my case, M to Nikon Z. The adapter I have is an AF adapter so this means all adapted lenses become AF.
Bonus: for 'normal' use the lens is set to infinity, but if the lens is set short of infinity, this enables closer focusing.
So for example if the lens focuses to 1m natively, on the adapter it can focus much closer, in the 0.5m to 0.3m neighborhood depending on the lens.
Bonus: for 'normal' use the lens is set to infinity, but if the lens is set short of infinity, this enables closer focusing.
So for example if the lens focuses to 1m natively, on the adapter it can focus much closer, in the 0.5m to 0.3m neighborhood depending on the lens.
peterm1
Veteran
Yes, I have found that some are too tight to mount on the camera. Or another issue is that some mount the lens too loosely. I try to circumvent the latter problem by only buying adapters that (a) come from a reputable makers, and are not "no name" and (b) also have a spring type restraint to hold the lens on the adapter tightly. Mostly this works.
As to being too tight to mount on the camera - I have had very few adapters with this fault and mostly from quite a few years ago (quality has improved since then). But if it occurs, it can be fixed if necessary provided you have simple metal working skills and a willingness to be precise. The problem is that with too tight mounting on the camera, the underside of the lugs on the adapters (which engage with similar lugs on the camera mount) are a bit out of tolerance. This can be a matter of a few thousands of a mm. This can be fixed by using a thin plate diamond honing plate to polish the underside of the lugs on the adapter. This needs care and it needs to be done systematically - but anyone with simple metal working skills can do it. Just work systematically from one lug to the next working round and round and round being careful to administer the same number of strokes for each lug before moving to the next and keep going round and round till the problem is fixed. (Admittedly it is usually more satisfactory to chuck the bloody thing in the bin and buy a new one but occasionally this is not an option.
Last edited:
shawn
Veteran
I think mine is the Haoge close focus adapter. It works fine and the helicoid has a fair amount of resistance which is good. Unlike the Voitlander I had from my Sony the Haoge doesn't have a lock at infinity.
peterm1
Veteran
Thank you for this It sounds very reassuring. It sounds as if, as they say in the classics..............."All the lies they tell about it are true" (In a good way.)
peterm1
Veteran
I have had some of their hoods but did not know they made adapters too. I will look into it. Thanks!
brusby
Well-known
Dual range Summicron works beautifully with this camera even with just a standard non-helicoid adapter. Just switch to close range and press the little ball on top of the lens that is normally depressed by the goggles. It'll work perfectly and at closest distances without the goggles.
peterm1
Veteran
Cool thank you. Unfortunately I sold mine. I bought it in 1997 in Budapest of all places when travelling there having found it in a little camera store in the famous Ecseri Flea Market for not all that much money.
A lovely lens. Then I came back to OZ and in short order found the goggles to go with it for a whole $35.00 AUD (though I do not believe I ever used them but at that price I had to have it as I knew it had an impact on value).
I kept the pair for quite a few years and used it on film Leicas but when I got a digital M I eventually sold it as it did not mount on them (not the early models in any event. Damn! When will I ever learn - never sell anything that desirable because eventually in one way or another they will become ---------------even more desirable!
Last edited:
Leon C
Well-known
Ricoh Riconar 55mm f2.2, some interesting comments about this lens on the www, some think it's sh*t but it may have certain uses and for a £10 note, it has quirky appeal.
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
When this lens was made, we had reached the point where lenses of this speed and focal length are almost universally at least OK. Which is good if you want reasonably sharp photos, and usually bad if you want quirky character. But at that price, certainly worth a spin! What do the commenters indicate are its "interesting" qualities?
Leon C
Well-known
Riconar 55mm F2.2 Lens Reviews - Ricoh Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
Riconar 55mm F2.2 reviews and specifications. five aperture blades metal/plastic construction front element rotates when focussing. This is a Ricoh Prime lens.
www.pentaxforums.com
Some say it's the worst lens ever but I don't think like that, photography has to be fun.
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
"Leica glow" at a bargain!Riconar 55mm F2.2 Lens Reviews - Ricoh Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
Riconar 55mm F2.2 reviews and specifications. five aperture blades metal/plastic construction front element rotates when focussing. This is a Ricoh Prime lens.www.pentaxforums.com
Some say it's the worst lens ever but I don't think like that, photography has to be fun.
Leon C
Well-known
Going to throw an Ext Tube behind it when it lands and use some old gifted C41 film from the Xmas giveaway!
peterm1
Veteran
I have not owned this specific Ricoh lens but I do have others and have always been pleasantly surprised by them. But then again, mine are all labelled Rikenon not Riconar and I am not familiar with lenses sold under that branding name. I can say that Ricoh lenses I have experienced are all good to excellent and perhaps the one I like best for its rendering is the Ricoh 50mm f1.7 in Pentax K / PK mount. It is not just sharp it has that "certain something" so many of us look for in the rendering of really good lenses. It is known that at least some of them were made by Tomioka - this company being rated as amongst the best of the "unknown" Japanese optics companies which often designed and made lenses for the "big name" companies - granted, Ricoh never attained that first rank status itself but I have to say this is not in my experience due to its lens quality. More perhaps that it lacked the marketing "oomph" and reach to compete with the first ranked companies like Nikon, Canon and Pentax and so carved out a niche in making and selling to slightly less well-heeled customers.
I can also say that I do own several of Asahi Pentax's early 55mm Takumar lenses including that company's own f2.2 55mm Auto Takumar in M42 mount. I have never been able to establish if the Ricoh one is identical optically though yours has a 52mm filter ring (the Asahi one is 49mm) and it looks as if it may be in a later PK mount. In any event with mine, I rather like its rendering though I suspect many would not (I am very partial to the classic rendering look in lenses and my lens lives up to that - being lower in contrast and with residual aberrations that give that vintage look.) I therefore can see why opinion may be divided on the matter. This following review rates of your specific lens very low overall, but some of the photos posted look pretty competent (although one is terrible too - but this looks to me to be user error or something of the sort, it is so out of character by comparison with the other images posted.) I suspect many of those users ranking it were not afficionados of vintage glass.
Riconar 55mm F2.2 Lens Reviews - Ricoh Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
Riconar 55mm F2.2 reviews and specifications. five aperture blades metal/plastic construction front element rotates when focussing. This is a Ricoh Prime lens.
www.pentaxforums.com
PS Here is the review on the Ricoh 50mm f1.7 which I also mentioned. Its competence is obvious, and they go pretty cheaply and so it is worth owning one if it can be found. The portrait made with it in the review looks excellent and its overall rendering is delightful.
Ricoh XR Rikenon 50mm F1.7 Lens Reviews - Ricoh Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
Ricoh XR Rikenon 50mm F1.7 reviews and specifications. A manual K mount lens (focus and aperture) offered as a kit lens on Ricoh (and Pentax cameras in som. This is a Ricoh Prime lens.
www.pentaxforums.com
Leon C
Well-known
Thanks Peter for your welcomed and lovely insight into these lenses, as a predominatly Nikon user my knowledge is limited on other lenses and as we all know the www can be a mish mash of opinions, as you remarked "I suspect many of those users ranking it were not afficionados of vintage glass." which is a very interesting comment to me as I have found since my return to photography the importance of lens choice, characteristics and use is lacking in a lot of recent discussions about photography but a such vital part, it's a little bewildering.
When I was researching the Rikenon Lenses I did see the review of the 50mm f1.7 and it's on my hitlist, I do have 3 x XR designated Rikenon Lenses 50/2 ~ 135/2.8 ~ 28/2.8 and yet to try them but looking forward to it. I'm not of the type to follow convention really and I'll try anything if it gets me where I want to go so don't subscribe to following the most popular and that's what is exciting about it all, the 50 year old Tamron 135 I bought last year for peanuts is absolutely lovely to me and once I Iearn more about its capabilities, I'm sure it will be even better for certain uses.
There is a nice review and some better tests of the 55/2.2 Rikonar here which shows how nice it can be in the right circumstances, if it suits ones aims, I find it an interesting lens.
malykh.blogspot.com
Just for completeness: The first test picture with the Tamron 135/3.5 on a D70s, with adapter.
And here it is.
When I was researching the Rikenon Lenses I did see the review of the 50mm f1.7 and it's on my hitlist, I do have 3 x XR designated Rikenon Lenses 50/2 ~ 135/2.8 ~ 28/2.8 and yet to try them but looking forward to it. I'm not of the type to follow convention really and I'll try anything if it gets me where I want to go so don't subscribe to following the most popular and that's what is exciting about it all, the 50 year old Tamron 135 I bought last year for peanuts is absolutely lovely to me and once I Iearn more about its capabilities, I'm sure it will be even better for certain uses.
There is a nice review and some better tests of the 55/2.2 Rikonar here which shows how nice it can be in the right circumstances, if it suits ones aims, I find it an interesting lens.
Riconar/Rikenon 55/2.2 (K): It's not a triplet
The Riconar aka XR Rikenon 1:2.2 55mm (from Ricoh) is a somewhat strange Pentax K-mount manual focus lens. Basically it is a budget [kit] le...
malykh.blogspot.com
Just for completeness: The first test picture with the Tamron 135/3.5 on a D70s, with adapter.
And here it is.
peterm1
Veteran
Thank you Leon. You sound like me in many respects.............especially the bit about "not the type to follow convention "Thanks Peter for your welcomed and lovely insight into these lenses, as a predominatly Nikon user my knowledge is limited on other lenses and as we all know the www can be a mish mash of opinions, as you remarked "I suspect many of those users ranking it were not afficionados of vintage glass." which is a very interesting comment to me as I have found since my return to photography the importance of lens choice, characteristics and use is lacking in a lot of recent discussions about photography but a such vital part, it's a little bewildering.
When I was researching the Rikenon Lenses I did see the review of the 50mm f1.7 and it's on my hitlist, I do have 3 x XR designated Rikenon Lenses 50/2 ~ 135/2.8 ~ 28/2.8 and yet to try them but looking forward to it. I'm not of the type to follow convention really and I'll try anything if it gets me where I want to go so don't subscribe to following the most popular and that's what is exciting about it all, the 50 year old Tamron 135 I bought last year for peanuts is absolutely lovely to me and once I Iearn more about its capabilities, I'm sure it will be even better for certain uses.
There is a nice review and some better tests of the 55/2.2 Rikonar here which shows how nice it can be in the right circumstances, if it suits ones aims, I find it an interesting lens.
Riconar/Rikenon 55/2.2 (K): It's not a triplet
The Riconar aka XR Rikenon 1:2.2 55mm (from Ricoh) is a somewhat strange Pentax K-mount manual focus lens. Basically it is a budget [kit] le...
Just for completeness: The first test picture with the Tamron 135/3.5 on a D70s, with adapter.
View attachment 4855292
And here it is.
View attachment 4855293
. It definitely looks as if the Riconar is not the same optical design as the Pentax versions. Those lenses are all either 5 elements in 5 groups with later ones being essentially the same as the f2 55mm and the f1.8 55mm Takumars (i.e. 6 elements in 5 groups). These are all conventional Double Gauss layouts I think.
Your lens does look rather soft and glowy so its uses might be limited unless well stopped down. But I have never let that stop me from experimenting. I have a vintage Enna lens (I think - I need to check) which renders similarly.
I like the look of your Tameron 135mm. I have a kind of addiction to 100mm/105mm/145mm lenses and find that many of them render well . I would expect nothing less from a Tamron made lens.
These two pages may be of use if you ever feel inclined to research Asahi Pentax lenses further.
Asahi Takumar and Pentax normal lenses
My interest in Pentax lenses should be obvious considering the articles on this website. One of the reasons I went down the rabbit hole of...
Leon C
Well-known
Peter, thanks for the link, the site looks familiar so may have visited it before for something else but nice info and great non conventional minds think alike
The Riconar was vaguely linked to the Fujinon 55/2.2 I've read but it's nothing like it apparantly, the Riconar is 4/4 and only the front glass focuses, hence the weirdness, it's a very simple lens. [See pic below]
I'm looking forward to doing more with the Tamron but not even cleaned it yet!
And to finish on 'quirky'
Nikon D70s/Nikon Ext Tube/Nikon Adapter/Leitz Adapter/Minolta Rokkor 75/4.5
The Riconar was vaguely linked to the Fujinon 55/2.2 I've read but it's nothing like it apparantly, the Riconar is 4/4 and only the front glass focuses, hence the weirdness, it's a very simple lens. [See pic below]
I'm looking forward to doing more with the Tamron but not even cleaned it yet!
And to finish on 'quirky'
Nikon D70s/Nikon Ext Tube/Nikon Adapter/Leitz Adapter/Minolta Rokkor 75/4.5
Attachments
oldhaven
Well-known
This very clean Mamiya Sekor 135/2.8 from the 1960’s chrome nose TL series. It is very bright and easy to focus and meter even stopped down to f22.
JoseP
Established
Thanks G!
That's interesting. I have two buddies with Canon Ps (one bought his off me). Only Canon rangefinders I've ever seen in the wild were a couple of the fixed lens type and a couple bottom loaders at a camera shop in town. I've had a bunch myself though