My preset lenses on a digital SLR??

[SCOTFORTHLAD]

😱Apologies for raising this one,but I know that you won't hold it against me😱
My consumption of film is gradually decreasing,and it occurs to me that I could utilise my M42 preset lenses on a digital SLR.I know that adaptors are available for manual use on in particular Canon digital bodies,possibly other marques also,but I have been told in my local camera shop that correct exposure is not a given and that the idea is not worth the effort.

I'm not sure if I can accept that at face value,so if anyone can give me any guidance I would be very grateful.

Cheers,
Brian.

 

[aad]

Pentax. That's where the lenses came from!

 

[jarski]

dont know where the shop got their information. I've used Canon's, not the low end though, with adapted lens (Nikkors). on A-priority camera metered just fine. lens iris is permanently stopped down though, so focusing on small apertures can be a problem without dedicated focus screen. mirror of Canon models (e.g. 5D) can contact rear of some lens too, so you should do some googling before buying. Sony's should work with M42 too. because M42's were made by many companies over long time, some improved the original mount in various contacts with their own camera models. this too can sometimes cause surprises if not studying lens-adapter-body combination beforehand.

 

[sevo]

Some Nikon consumer bodies will not meter with non-electronic lenses - don't know whether any of the lesser Canons have similar limitations. You can still do all-manual mode, setting exposure using test exposures and the histogram, or using a handheld meter. Or you could glue a chip to the adapter to trick the camera into believing it has a electronic lens attached.

But overall, both Canon and Nikon are a less than ideal choice for manual focus lens attachment, as their register length is longer than that of most (affordable) lens mounts, so that you'll often fail to reach infinity without modifying the camera or lens.

If it must be a DSLR, Pentax, which has a shorter register length (originally designed to be able to attach adapted M42 lenses) is a better choice. The most popular choice among adapted MF lens users are EVIL cameras (where most have significantly shorter register and can even use RF lenses). In particular the Sony NEX series and Panasonic/Olympus MFT cameras, though Fuji X seems to catch up regarding adapter availability.

 

[teleparallel]

I think canon has a shorter register(if you mean, film-flange distance) compared to pentax. But, unless you buy a fullframe, Pentax is more old style, and it's lens selection is way cooler, having a nice selection of non-zoom lenses, with nice equivalent focal lengths, for future buys. Also there is adapter that have infinity focus for pentax(as well as canon).

 

[Jack Conrad]

Currently, my two favorite m42 pre-sets are an Auto-Takumar 55/2 with 9 iris blades and a Kyoei M. Acall 35/3.5 pre-set. Set, focus, twist, shoot.
Simple and pleasurable.

An entire world of legacy and exotic lenses can become available for very little money. I love the m42's. Lenses become like colors on an artists pallet.

The parrot at the camera store doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

[oftheherd]

...

The parrot at the camera store doesn't know what he's talking about.

Or perhaps he does, he's just not say what he means. He will get better profit selling new brand name lenses than an adapter. But that's not to fault any of the advice given above about what lenses can be used safely on what cameras.

 

[Murchu]

😱Apologies for raising this one,but I know that you won't hold it against me😱
My consumption of film is gradually decreasing,and it occurs to me that I could utilise my M42 preset lenses on a digital SLR.I know that adaptors are available for manual use on in particular Canon digital bodies,possibly other marques also,but I have been told in my local camera shop that correct exposure is not a given and that the idea is not worth the effort.

I'm not sure if I can accept that at face value,so if anyone can give me any guidance I would be very grateful.

Cheers,
Brian.

They probably just meant they would not autofocus properly..

😉

 

[SCOTFORTHLAD]

Thanks everyone for the interest and advice---very much appreciated,🙂
Cheers from snowy Wales,
Brian.

 

[Dave Jenkins]

Preset lenses are actually easier to use on a DSLR than later model manual focus lenses. You can focus with the lens wide open for maximum accuracy, then close the lens down to the taking aperture. If your camera is set to aperture-preferred metering, it will set the exposure when you touch the shutter release and you can then make the photograph.

 

[hipsterdufus]

My own experience adapting M42 lenses to a 5D has been mediocre, at best. The more you stop down the lenses, the worse the in-camera exposure accuracy becomes (unusable at f16 without massive exposure compensation). Also, at the smaller apertures, it's almost impossible to see your subject through the viewfinder. For people photos, good luck catching the expression that they're trying to make. Also, if you like doing people photos at anything other than wide-open, the stopping down becomes cumbersome and (unless you're paying someone to take their picture), most subjects will get annoyed with waiting on you. The only way I can see this method being useful is if you're taking pictures of static objects using a handheld meter.

I'm not saying that the folks above are wrong (please don't take it as such). However, in my experience, you're better off shooting lenses made for the system. I now have a Canon 50mm f1.4 that is just epic on the 5D and I don't have to futz around with stopping down. YMMV.

 

[ZorkiKat]

Manual focusing on the screen of the many DSLRs is not the easiest thing to do. 8 in 10 times, a large aperture lens focused wide open, will result to some focusing error. The screen/mirror systems in most of these cameras were not made with visual focusing on the screen in mind- the viewfinders were mostly for composing, with focusing done by the camera's AF system instead.

This is why replacement screens with split spots at the centre are available for many DSLRs- some visual confirmation for focus becomes possible with these.

I have always used adapted M42 lenses for the DSLRs I had and have. My first was a Nikon-mount Fujifilm S2, but the Nikon lens register is almost equal to M42, so adapted lenses can't focus all the way to infnity. Adapters with 'corrective' lenses tend to degrade the image quality.

With the Canons, the EOS-adapters made adaptation easy. However the Canon screens were difficult to use for manual focusing.

Then came the Pentax K10. With an OEM K to M42 adapter, M42 lenses went on the camera easily. The Pentax also use an electronic focus confirmation which greatly improves manual focus accuracy. It however tends to work slowly in certain situations. Pentax are the only makers to officially 'acknowledge' the use of M42 lenses on their DSLRs. Pentax focusing screens also appear to be 'rough' enough for manual focusing. The image snaps in and out of focus to a more obvious degree than what is seen through a Canon screen.

M42 lenses with preset or M/A aperture switches are best to use. Some M42 lenses with auto-only diaphragms will be difficult to use unless the adapter has an edge in it to push the diaphragm pin in. The original Pentax K adapters don't have this. With the auto-diaphgram only lenses, they will be at full aperture all the time.

You may also want to consider mirrorless cameras for adapting M42 lenses. When I had the Samsung NX200, its "Kit" zoom lens was only Samsung lens I had; M42 to NX adapters allowed me to extend the range from 20 to 400 mm lenses. The mirrorless layout allows more lenses to be adapted. The live view focusing can be enlarged for critical manual focus.

 

[sevo]

My own experience adapting M42 lenses to a 5D has been mediocre, at best. The more you stop down the lenses, the worse the in-camera exposure accuracy becomes (unusable at f16 without massive exposure compensation). Also, at the smaller apertures, it's almost impossible to see your subject through the viewfinder.

That is a side effect of the high-brightness screens that have grown common in AF SLRs - these show dramatic vignetting with very slow or stopped down lenses, which may also affect the peripheral sensors of the exposure metering system.

Alternative (genuine matte) screens may be some help. But even with these, DSLRs are inferior to EVIL system cameras when it comes to using alien lenses at working aperture. The latter have no issues at all with stopped down lenses that turn even the best SLR finder into something barely visible with an unadapted eye...

 

[hipsterdufus]

But even with these, DSLRs are inferior to EVIL system cameras when it comes to using alien lenses at working aperture. The latter have no issues at all with stopped down lenses that turn even the best SLR finder into something barely visible with an unadapted eye...

Agreed. I have used a Samsung NX10 with adapted lenses and I liked it quite a bit more than the DSLR. However, I was not a fan of the crop factor. The new Leica M looks to be the holy grail for adapting film lenses. Now to come up with $7K. 😛

 

[ZorkiKat]

Seeing how ancient Takumar 1.4/50mm, Biotar 2/58, Jupiter 37A 3.5/135, and scores of other M42 lenses is more than enough to justify the use of, and the effort required to make this possible, adapted lenses on digital cameras.

 

[Godfrey]

I've used adapted, older lenses on Pentax, Panasonic, and Olympus DSLR bodies. Success varies a lot depending upon the specific body and lens.

The most important thing to consider is that most adapted lenses will require manual control of aperture, making them ALL pre-set lenses, often metering only stopped down. The body has no information about the lens to work with, and the meter therefore typically loses a bit of range and some of its more sophisticated capabilities. I've found that in average, decent light there are few problems with center-weighted averaging meter pattern, no form of matrix or evaluative metering is really sensible, and spot metering results can be very variable. In general, in very low light (below EV6 to EV4 circumstances), it's generally more successful to do test exposures and check with the review function, or use a hand held meter.

But the results can be terrific. Some combinations just work magic, like the Olympus E-1 fitted with either Konica Hexanon 40/1.8 or Nikkor-H 85mm f/1.8 lenses.

So don't worry too much what some store clerk has to say. Get yourself a body to work with (Canon and Olympus DSLRs are the most adaptable mount-wise, an older pro-grade body from either is a better base for adaptation than a new consumer body due to the quality of the viewfinder; or get a DSLR body which has the same mount that your pre-set lenses already have), and have at it. There's nothing like first hand experience to educate you best, and once you have the body, a battery, and a storage card, experimentation is free.

G

 

[Michael Markey]

Before Jessops went bust I tried my Pentax 50/1.2 on a K5 in their store .Didn`t find the focus a problem.

I

 

[Dwig]

I've used adapted, older lenses on Pentax, Panasonic, and Olympus DSLR bodies. Success varies a lot depending upon the specific body and lens. ...

The Pany and Oly DSLRs are now a thing of the past, but their current Micro4/3 systems, which lack the reflex mirror that defines the "SLR" whether digital or not, also accept the M42 thread mount lenses via adapters.

BTW, The auto-diaphragm Takumars will function as preset lenses when used on adapters. Their M/A switch provides that function. Very few other brands have such a feature.

I rather like my old 55mm Auto-Takumar f/1.8 mounted, via an adapter, on my Pany G-1.

 

[zuiko85]

Only used a couple of Super Takumar's on my Olympus E-410, of course with a 2X crop factor. The 50 f1.4 (with the traditional radioactive coffee stained elements) has atrocious veiling flare wide open but cleans up nicely by f4. The humble and cheap 135 f3.5 is champion, even wide open. Granted, only the center of the image circle is used on the little 13X18mm sensor. Screen focusing is a problem and I don't want to spend $120 on a Katz Eye screen for a camera that may not last another 3 years.

 

[hipsterdufus]

As I read this, you are saying the folks above are wrong. Perhaps had you written: . . . in my experience I'm better off. . . .

No offense intended. Apparently, my writing does not lend itself to splitting hairs... Geesh.

I was merely stating my opinion, as I thought the OP requested.