Infinity focus with 4/3 adapters

[Dez]

I suspect this is an old topic, but I haven't been able to find a thread that discusses it.

I have a nice Panasonic GF1 4/3 camera, and usually use the native lenses with it, but the idea of using other optics on it is attractive. I have bought a few adapters for Nikon, Leica M, and LTM, and it appears that they are all a bit too thin, and therefore always focus beyond infinity. This seems consistent, and I wonder why they are made that way. It's not a big problem for longer lenses, and of course I can focus the lens using the display or EVF, but in the case of really short FL lenses, this discrepancy limits their close focus ability.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[wolves3012]

I bought an LTM adapter for my Panasonic G2, Ebay item number 300673784185. It was claimed to allow focus to infinity and it does but it does not seem to go beyond. It seems, therefore, to be just the right thickness. For the record, the thickness from front face to back face is 10.71mm and I've used it with Jupiters 8 and 11 and Industars 22, 50 and 61L/D.

My only criticism of it was the red alignment dot is some sort of soft red paint that got smeared off rather quickly. I can live with that, there is an indentation that was filled with said paint!

 

[craygc]

I have a Voigtlander M to E adapter for my Sony Nex 5n - it also focused slightly beyond infinity. I get the feeling this is not uncommon in adapters. As to whether its to truly ensure infinity focus without doing excessive calibration of each unit or whether the flange to sensor registrations of these cameras have more tolerance that is expected to be absorbed through auto focus, I don't know. As for my adapter, the bigger problem was that I couldn't use the lens barrel markings for estimating-the-distance focusing. I ended up dismantling the adapter (twice) and shimming it another 0.2 mm using aluminium foil to get it to match the barrel markings.

 

[tbhv55]

I bought an LTM adapter for my Panasonic G2, Ebay item number 300673784185. It was claimed to allow focus to infinity and it does but it does not seem to go beyond. It seems, therefore, to be just the right thickness. For the record, the thickness from front face to back face is 10.71mm and I've used it with Jupiters 8 and 11 and Industars 22, 50 and 61L/D.

My only criticism of it was the red alignment dot is some sort of soft red paint that got smeared off rather quickly. I can live with that, there is an indentation that was filled with said paint!

Quick question: Do you think that you "got lucky", or do you know of any other people who have bought this particular adapter, and had the same success regarding infinity focus? I'm tempted to replace my existing adapter (which goes past infinity focus) with this one, but I'm trying to avoid replacing it, and still having problems with infinity focus. Thanks.

 

[colyn]

I've used several Fotodiox http://fotodioxpro.com/index.php/ adapter with no infinity focus problems.

 

[wolves3012]

Quick question: Do you think that you "got lucky", or do you know of any other people who have bought this particular adapter, and had the same success regarding infinity focus? I'm tempted to replace my existing adapter (which goes past infinity focus) with this one, but I'm trying to avoid replacing it, and still having problems with infinity focus. Thanks.

I don't know anyone else with a u4/3 body, nor anyone else who bought one and got the same result, so it's difficult to answer. It's chinese and it was cheap, which kind of leans towards the "got lucky" side of the probability! However, if they're mass-produced on machinery it's not that difficult to get consistency.

 

[tbhv55]

I've used several Fotodiox http://fotodioxpro.com/index.php/ adapter with no infinity focus problems.

colyn, thanks - I've heard good things about Fotodiox adapters, but I'm not sure whether they have a UK outlet. I presume that ordering from the US would incur an unfeasibly high shipping charge. However, I'll look into this to see if it's viable, and thanks again for the reply and suggestion.🙂

 

[tbhv55]

I don't know anyone else with a u4/3 body, nor anyone else who bought one and got the same result, so it's difficult to answer. It's chinese and it was cheap, which kind of leans towards the "got lucky" side of the probability! However, if they're mass-produced on machinery it's not that difficult to get consistency.

Thanks for this. Hmmmm, that suggests that it's fairly likely that I'd get a dud, but then again, at around £14 delivered it might be worth a punt.

I'll have to deliberate (i.e. prevaricate 😉) a while longer...

 

[Jim-st]

I've tried two: first was a Metabones: it had no idea where "infinity" was. Next up a Voigtlander: 3 times the price, but works just fine. I note what Craig says above, so maybe I was lucky. But I'd say if you buy one of these (or the c.£200 Panasonic), and find it doesn't work, demand a replacement, and keep on doing so til you get a good one.

Best of luck

 

[ZeissFan]

I would suspect that these are produced at high volume with little actual quality control. The ultimate goal is to make as much money as possible from those who want these adapters. So, if it focuses a bit beyond infinity, no harm-no foul. Better that the lens focuses beyond infinity than not reach it at all, which is what happened with some early M42=>K mount adapters.

 

[biomed]

...... Next up a Voigtlander: 3 times the price, but works just fine. ....... I'd say if you buy one of these (or the c.£200 Panasonic), and find it doesn't work, demand a replacement, and keep on doing so til you get a good one.

I have two Voigtländer adapters , M and F mounts. The infinity focus is fine on both. I do agree with Jim-st. If you get one (Voigtländer, Olympus or Panasonic) that is bad demand a replacement.

Mike

 

[tbhv55]

I don't know anyone else with a u4/3 body, nor anyone else who bought one and got the same result, so it's difficult to answer. It's chinese and it was cheap, which kind of leans towards the "got lucky" side of the probability! However, if they're mass-produced on machinery it's not that difficult to get consistency.

Just a quick follow-up on this. In the end I decided to try the one that you suggested... and it's very good! Infinity focus is now working properly - and all for less than £15 delivered...😱

Many thanks for the tip. 🙂

 

[craygc]

I thought I might just follow up with how I actually approached this as the focus past infinity wasn't the real issue in itself to me. Although with magnification I could discern focusing beyond infinity, I was more concerned about the accuracy of close range focusing. I accurately measured 2 mtrs from the sensor to a parallel target then focused via magnification. I then continued to shim the adapter until the 2 mtr lens barrel markings and the measured distance coincided (across a number of lenses). Infinity also seemed ok as well...

 

[mh2000]

Thanks for this. Hmmmm, that suggests that it's fairly likely that I'd get a dud, but then again, at around £14 delivered it might be worth a punt.

I'll have to deliberate (i.e. prevaricate 😉) a while longer...

I have not gotten a dud. All cheap adapters. Look for high ebay postives and you'll be ok.

 

[tbhv55]

I have not gotten a dud. All cheap adapters. Look for high ebay postives and you'll be ok.

Thanks - yes, since I posted the "dud" comment, I bought the item recommended in one of the posts above. The ebay supplier did have high positives, and all worked out well. 🙂

 

[GaryLH]

The cheaper the adapter the higher the chance u will have an infinity issue. U are just playing luck if the draw. It has to do w/ the manufacturing tolerences eing used.. As the parts come together, it s better to be slightly ahead of inf then to be beyond.

The other issue w/ cheaper has to do w/ off centering and how tight the lens fits.

W/ that all being said, I have tried a lot of different adapters from cheap $20 to over $200. So far I have been able to shimm the cheap adapters so that u can achieve infinity focus. For lenses I don't really use to often this is good enough. For Leica and Nikon lenses, I use novoflex.. Never had an inf focus issue and build quality is the best I have...

The head bartender (Cameraquest) says that his adapters (Raquel??) have no inf issue as well..

I have found fotodiox pro line to be pretty good.. About 80% of them have proven to be fine at inf focus.

In terms of shimming, all u need to do is buy some thin brass shim material, several thicknesses. U may have to make some thinner yourself. Sometimes even aluminum foil is good enough. Places like orchard supply hardware has them. Look for the thinnest u can find.

Just look for the screws holding the camera mount to the adapter and note any springs and stuff for the bayonet latch. Just place the shims under the mount and c where inf focus is now. U are going to need to experiment until it is good enough for u.. Trial and error.. Find an object u can focus on that is at least 5 blocks away. I actually use a electrical tower that is 4-6 miles away that I can c from my backyard.

Wide angle lenses can be tested shorter distance. Tele like my 300 need the longer distance. I just settled on using the longer distance for everything.

Gary

 

[wolves3012]

Just a quick follow-up on this. In the end I decided to try the one that you suggested... and it's very good! Infinity focus is now working properly - and all for less than £15 delivered...😱

Many thanks for the tip. 🙂

Glad it worked out for you too, I'm perfectly happy with mine 😀

 

[Dez]

My original issue with the "past-infinity" focus was with very wide angle lenses, where I could no longer get close focus. How wide? I have a nice old Nikkor 8mm f2.8 fisheye, which is a rather silly lens, but provides some good effects on the smaller 4/3 format when it's not being used for pointless/fun applications on my Nikon D700.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[kuzano]

I find this post interesting....

I find this post interesting....

But in context, I think most of the camera's I have ever owned focused past infinity....

What's the problem? I don't think focus at infinity should be assumed. I think you should visually focus the camera. It seems I have always had to hit the stop and back off a little with most camera's. (Yes Hannah, even the good ones!!)

Never met a leica I didn't have to pull back on to get the image sharp way out there.