AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
I don't know where to post this so I'll try it here.
I have some legacy lenses in M and LTM mount that I'd like to use on a digital camera body.
My question is which body will work the best, short of an M8/9/240?
I have adapters for the LTM to M mounts already. I have a D7000 but don't think that'll work. Or will it?
I'm open to suggestions as I'd love to use these lenses but realize I can't afford film as easily as I can digital.
What do you think?
Is there a digital body that can use my old lenses?
I have some legacy lenses in M and LTM mount that I'd like to use on a digital camera body.
My question is which body will work the best, short of an M8/9/240?
I have adapters for the LTM to M mounts already. I have a D7000 but don't think that'll work. Or will it?
I'm open to suggestions as I'd love to use these lenses but realize I can't afford film as easily as I can digital.
What do you think?
Is there a digital body that can use my old lenses?
Sejanus.Aelianus
Veteran
I've used both M and screw mount lenses on my M43 cameras. I can't think of any dSLR with a short enough back focus to use either type other than for macro.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
Sony A7/A7r is the current body of choice for many.
uhoh7
Veteran
Your cheapest option is some version of the Sony Nex cameras
A good used nex-3 or 5 is about 200USD.
These are apsc sensors, so your crop is 1.5x, i.e. a 50mm lens is 75mm effective, since the sensor only sees the center portion.
Adapters are about 20 USD for any mount for the Nex.
Their mount is the "e" mount, which since this fall has a full frame option, i.e. 50mm equals 50mm. That's the A7 1600ish or A7r (not desirable for lots of alt glass)
Keep in mind a good used Leica M8 is often found for less than 2k. The M9 around 3k. These will give you the sharpest images.
Here is a canon 50/1.8 on the nex-5 (worth around 200usd)
here you can see what the nex-5 with RF glass is capable of:
note: the nex-5n or newer "5" gives you the option of a high quality external viewfinder (EVF), which is bought separately for about 200 used. The nex-6 and 7 include EVFs. The nex-7 is less desirable for RF glass.
A good used nex-3 or 5 is about 200USD.
These are apsc sensors, so your crop is 1.5x, i.e. a 50mm lens is 75mm effective, since the sensor only sees the center portion.
Adapters are about 20 USD for any mount for the Nex.
Their mount is the "e" mount, which since this fall has a full frame option, i.e. 50mm equals 50mm. That's the A7 1600ish or A7r (not desirable for lots of alt glass)
Keep in mind a good used Leica M8 is often found for less than 2k. The M9 around 3k. These will give you the sharpest images.
Here is a canon 50/1.8 on the nex-5 (worth around 200usd)
here you can see what the nex-5 with RF glass is capable of:
note: the nex-5n or newer "5" gives you the option of a high quality external viewfinder (EVF), which is bought separately for about 200 used. The nex-6 and 7 include EVFs. The nex-7 is less desirable for RF glass.
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
I guess I should have mentioned my budget. It's small.
I like what you've just shown uhoh007.
Anyone else have any other suggestions?
I like what you've just shown uhoh007.
Anyone else have any other suggestions?
grandallj
Grainy
I think your other main options will be Micro 4/3 systems (i.e. Olympus, Panasonic) or the Fujifilm X series.
I use the Fujifilm X-Pro 1 with some M and LTM lenses and it works nicely.
If you like shooting wide angle, however, you may be disappointed with the performance of your lenses on any of the systems mentioned, both because of the effective crop imposed by the smaller-than-24x36 sensors and because wider lenses sometimes leave the image corners unsharp and/or with unpleasant color rendering.
All that said, both the Fuji system and Micro 4/3 have quite a nice selection of native lenses.
I use the Fujifilm X-Pro 1 with some M and LTM lenses and it works nicely.
If you like shooting wide angle, however, you may be disappointed with the performance of your lenses on any of the systems mentioned, both because of the effective crop imposed by the smaller-than-24x36 sensors and because wider lenses sometimes leave the image corners unsharp and/or with unpleasant color rendering.
All that said, both the Fuji system and Micro 4/3 have quite a nice selection of native lenses.
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
Thanks Gordon, I may have to look into the Fuji X series.
The X-Pro 1 is little too much camera for me so the others may work out.
The X-Pro 1 is little too much camera for me so the others may work out.
Scrambler
Well-known
The larger the sensor the more your lens will perform as intended. "Standard" 50mm lenses have the angular view of a 100mm on Micro 4/3 and use 1/4 of their intended imaging area.
The full frame options in digital are still well above $1000.
APS-C mirrorless cameras are the best price/performance balance in my view. I use a Sony a3000 which has a built-in electronic VF and retails for around $350 with kit lens. The sensor is stunning, the packaging including VF less so. Fuji has some interesting options, but quite pricey. There are others such as the Canon EOS-M which did badly in the marketplace but can be had cheap with good results with adapted lenses. IMHO the NEX-6 is the best option if $600 or so is OK.
Make sure you check your lenses with your intended camera. Buy an adapter in advance - just a cheapie at first. Take a blank SD card with you and use your lens and adapter and SD card in the camera then check the results, check the manual focusing options. Read up because some disable non-native lenses in the menu (NEX, a3000) but can be set to "fire without lens."
Plenty of options, none really bad - it's the worst kind of "first world problem"
The full frame options in digital are still well above $1000.
APS-C mirrorless cameras are the best price/performance balance in my view. I use a Sony a3000 which has a built-in electronic VF and retails for around $350 with kit lens. The sensor is stunning, the packaging including VF less so. Fuji has some interesting options, but quite pricey. There are others such as the Canon EOS-M which did badly in the marketplace but can be had cheap with good results with adapted lenses. IMHO the NEX-6 is the best option if $600 or so is OK.
Make sure you check your lenses with your intended camera. Buy an adapter in advance - just a cheapie at first. Take a blank SD card with you and use your lens and adapter and SD card in the camera then check the results, check the manual focusing options. Read up because some disable non-native lenses in the menu (NEX, a3000) but can be set to "fire without lens."
Plenty of options, none really bad - it's the worst kind of "first world problem"
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Every year during the slow times I rationalize my ownership of a digital camera against shooting film and aside from the convenience of digital capture, film always wins out (if the investment in new gear is over about $500-600.) Granted, I get paid for much of my work but shot for shot, I've never gotten to the point where a digital camera has paid for itself. I recently posted a breakdown of film vs digital ownership and time and again, digital has always come up more expensive, all things taken into consideration.
Phil Forrest
Phil Forrest
xyz3450
-
How about the Ricoh GXR with M-Mount module? An older camera now but has the advantage that it is engineered with M-mount lenses in mind. Wide angle lenses work well. It has a unique focusing system. Various (positive) reviews exist. (e.g. see http://www.reidreviews.com/). And, of course, many admirers in the forum here: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=162
kaiwasoyokaze
Half Frame Goodness
compared to a 2nd hand m43 or sony nex body, it is considered moderately expensive though for the budget, otherwise an excellent choice.
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
You all have given me much to think on here. Thank you.
kshapero
South Florida Man
In my experience these lenses work superb on the Sony NEX and the Fuji X cameras. Enjoy.
Dralowid
Michael
Think about Nex 6 if you can afford it, the built in EVF is worth the extra
GaryLH
Veteran
M43 - 2x crop factor, so your 50 is a 100fov
Nex - apsc - 1.5 crop
If we are talking 300 dollar range used
M43 - Panasonic gx1
Apsc - Nex 3, 5, 5n
500 dollar range used
Fuji xe1, nex 6, and maybe a Ricoh gxr w/ m module (but closer to 600 side).
Depending on what lenses u are talking about.. In general, the gxr was specifically designed to work w/ a wide range of rf lenses. Ymmv w/ the other lenses, especially the super wides when it comes to the other cameras.. Most issues w/ supper wides can be fixed w/ a sw program called cornerfix.
Gary
Nex - apsc - 1.5 crop
If we are talking 300 dollar range used
M43 - Panasonic gx1
Apsc - Nex 3, 5, 5n
500 dollar range used
Fuji xe1, nex 6, and maybe a Ricoh gxr w/ m module (but closer to 600 side).
Depending on what lenses u are talking about.. In general, the gxr was specifically designed to work w/ a wide range of rf lenses. Ymmv w/ the other lenses, especially the super wides when it comes to the other cameras.. Most issues w/ supper wides can be fixed w/ a sw program called cornerfix.
Gary
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
So something like this body only would be OK?
http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/pho/4391845593.html
http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/pho/4391845593.html
Scrambler
Well-known
perfect. IMHO.
Classique
Well-known
Nex 6 would be great but that ad is a bit above the selling price for Nex 6 these days (rapid drop due to A6000 coming soon). If you could find Nex 6 for ~350 that would be perfect.
Personally, I've used Nex 5n with viewfinder in the past with good results and theses days use the A7 (but native lenses are VERY good also)
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
I would only be buying something like the Nex to allow me to use my old lenses on a digital body. Not interested in getting into another 'system'.
philipaloft
Member
I'd also suggest Nex 5n.
I don't miss a viewfinder but choose to keep a grid pattern on rear screen by way of helping with alignment when composing - I do appreciate the ability to tap on the screen to enlarge whatever portion of the screen I'd like to exact the focusing. A half-touch on the shutter returns the full image for composition.
I'd add that with legacy lenses it's worth the extra money to get a helicoid adapter which will allow focusing much closer. It's a lose comparison but I'd guess my 40mm Summicron can usually focus a couple of feet, but with the helicoid adapter, which stays on my camera, I can comfortably photograph the face of my wristwatch, if I felt so inclined.
The only caveat I have about that type of adapter is that the helicoid can be moved inadvertently, ruining a focus settling that had previously been just fine. Being a rather sloppy camera user, I had to fashion my own lock on the helicoid which has to be lifted with a fingertip before the helicoid action can be engaged.
I have one of the cheapest helicoid adapters I could find and it's surprisingly well made and works flawlessly ( even without the homemade lock.)
Philip
I don't miss a viewfinder but choose to keep a grid pattern on rear screen by way of helping with alignment when composing - I do appreciate the ability to tap on the screen to enlarge whatever portion of the screen I'd like to exact the focusing. A half-touch on the shutter returns the full image for composition.
I'd add that with legacy lenses it's worth the extra money to get a helicoid adapter which will allow focusing much closer. It's a lose comparison but I'd guess my 40mm Summicron can usually focus a couple of feet, but with the helicoid adapter, which stays on my camera, I can comfortably photograph the face of my wristwatch, if I felt so inclined.
The only caveat I have about that type of adapter is that the helicoid can be moved inadvertently, ruining a focus settling that had previously been just fine. Being a rather sloppy camera user, I had to fashion my own lock on the helicoid which has to be lifted with a fingertip before the helicoid action can be engaged.
I have one of the cheapest helicoid adapters I could find and it's surprisingly well made and works flawlessly ( even without the homemade lock.)
Philip