Best affordable system to adapt to Canon 5D2

[sper]

I have the 17-40 4L and the Voigtlander 40mm F2 for my 5D2. But I want some cheap lens options for special projects.

What's the best cost/performance/ease of use system to adapt to Canon? Leica R is a bit out of my price range, and so are Zeiss Contax....so I'm looking at Pentax, Olympus, and Nikon.

 

[gavinlg]

To be completely honest, the cheap canon EF primes can be had for very little, and although they're a little plasticy, they work well and are optically quite good. For instance the 24 and 28mm f2.8 are good optically and cheap, the 85mm f1.8 is superb for the money etc..

What focal lengths would you be looking to get?

 

[PatrickT]

Depends on what you like to shoot. I've adapted Olympus and Nikon primes to my 5D. I tend to like the Olympus lenses the best due to their size (small), quality, and relatively low price. The Olympus wide lenses are some of the best and some of their telephotos are quote good as well. I'm partial to their 50/1.4...it's served me very well over the years. Check my flickr and search olympus and nikon to see a bunch of samples if you're curious.

Also, there's no reason to be exclusive...why not try out Nikon and Olympus lenses? All you have to pay for is an adaptor and they're quite cheap. Like I said, I've adapted Olympus and Nikon lenses...both have their merits for sure.

 

[Jamie123]

I would go Olympus. You can get lenses such as the 55mm f1.2 for a good price and I'm sure they're up to par qualitywise with Canons in production (but quite outdated) 50mm lenses.

 

[Krosya]

It's Hard to find anything better than Yashica/Zeiss Contax mount lenses. Well, Leica R too, but not as good of a deal price-wise.

 

[Dave Jenkins]

I used Olympus OMs in my commercial/editorial photography business for 13 years and loved the Oly system. I carried my OMs to 27 countries on PJ assignments, but when aging eyes required a change to autofocus I regretfully sold everything and switched to Canon.

More recently, though, I inherited several OM lenses from my dad -- a 50 f1.8, a 75-150 f4, and a very nice Kiron 28-85 f2.8-3.5. Yesterday I ordered from eBay an adapter that will provide focus confirmation when used on any Canon EOS-mount camera. Cost was only $22.90.

I'm eager to try the Oly lenses on my 5D. Should be fun.

 

[HuubL]

I go with Gavin, why all the hassle: get some old glass, then a converter and hope it all fits. Perfect as these old primes may be, why would you want to use it on a 5D when some excellent Canon EF primes can be had for cheap. The 50 1.8 is absolutely top quality for next to nothing plus you get autofocus and auto exposure as well.

 

[sper]

Because the 50 is great, but I have a 40, which covers 35mm and 50mm as far as I'm concerned. The 85 I don't need, and the 28mm 1.8 is too expensive and not that good.

From older lenses I can get cehap 200mm primes, along with 28 f3.5 lenses for under 50 dollars. Plus they will have character, low contrast, be prone to flare, all fun things when working on special projects.

 

[f16sunshine]

OM zuiko lenses adapt well and the good ones are fantastic.
2 advantages to adapting zuikos come up in ergonomics.

1. The lens release is on the lens. Instal a high quality adapter into the 5Deisel and it becomes OM mount native.
2. The aperture ring is on the front of the lens. When working stopped down this is very handy.
Workflow usually goes... Focus at wide open, set aperture, shoot. When using Leica R and Contax lenses the action of setting aperture can move focus easily.

 

[swoop]

When I bought a 5D mk2 to hold me over while my M9 was being repaired I went with the canon 28mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4 and 100mm f2. It was a really nice setup. Then my Canon kit was stolen. =( currently contemplating if I should buy the whole setup again.

 

[ottluuk]

To be completely honest, the cheap canon EF primes can be had for very little, and although they're a little plasticy, they work well and are optically quite good. For instance the 24 and 28mm f2.8 are good optically and cheap, the 85mm f1.8 is superb for the money etc..

What focal lengths would you be looking to get?

Well, generally I agree. The 50/2.5 Compact Macro is criminally underrated IMO - sharp even at f/2.5 and has excellent field flatness and no visible distortion. (If you ever need to shoot flat art, this is the lens to use). A bit tricky to focus right at farther distances due to the focus throw being optimized for macro.

The 135/2.8 SF is another interesting lens - the dial-in soft focus comes in handy with busy backgrounds. It's also a good general purpose, medium contrast lens that becomes scary sharp at f/8. No replacement for a 135/2L but cheap and useful.

I would definitely avoid the EF 28/2.8 for a full-frame camera, though. I have one and the corner performance is miserable even on a 40D. It has visible chromatic aberration, too. It is very small and light and sharp in the center, though. I use it when I don't care about corners, often with the 250D close-up lens.

Some samples:

EF 135/2.8SF bokeh

The 50/2.5 in a non-macro situation

EF 28/2.8 wide open

EF 28/2.8 with 250D close-up lens. A makeshift "studio" shot for an article about honeybush tea 😀

 

[Krosya]

Ott,
Maybe it's just the particular photos, but from your pics I like ones taken with 28mm the best and 50 macro the least - I'm talking about the signatures of these lenses, the way they draw only. Than again - it's all personal taste, I suppose.

 

[gavinlg]

Because the 50 is great, but I have a 40, which covers 35mm and 50mm as far as I'm concerned. The 85 I don't need, and the 28mm 1.8 is too expensive and not that good.

From older lenses I can get cehap 200mm primes, along with 28 f3.5 lenses for under 50 dollars. Plus they will have character, low contrast, be prone to flare, all fun things when working on special projects.

It sort of depends on how much you want to or are willing to spend on each lens... An olympus 28mm f2 is probably overall optically a better lens than the canon 28mm f1.8, but it's basically the same price, if not more on the used market. Same goes with all the wide f2 zuikos. You can get the f2.8 ones and they're all pretty much good, just a little slow.

If you want some lenses with a bit of old character, maybe some really older slower nikon primes, or even some takumars?

 

[rxmd]

Because the 50 is great, but I have a 40, which covers 35mm and 50mm as far as I'm concerned. The 85 I don't need, and the 28mm 1.8 is too expensive and not that good.

From older lenses I can get cehap 200mm primes, along with 28 f3.5 lenses for under 50 dollars. Plus they will have character, low contrast, be prone to flare, all fun things when working on special projects.

If that's what you want the best affordable system is clearly M42. You get some excellent and LOTS of mediocre lenses for next to no money, and stopdown aperture etc. don't hurt you anyway on the EOS.

 

[ottluuk]

Ott,
Maybe it's just the particular photos, but from your pics I like ones taken with 28mm the best and 50 macro the least - I'm talking about the signatures of these lenses, the way they draw only. Than again - it's all personal taste, I suppose.

I like the 28 too, but it's a one-trick pony. It's nice and smooth close-up and wide open but it's not that great when you want corner-to-corner sharpness. No-go for distant, detailed landscapes, near-far juxtapositions with foreground objects near the frame edge etc. I use it for what it's good for, but I think it's sweet spot is probably too small for a full frame camera. Or maybe I have a bad copy.

The 50's background blur smoothens up quite nice in the closer ranges and I value its ability to separate fine detail even wide open. But yes, I see why you would like the 28 better judging from these images.