Lauffray
Invisible Cities
I agree with Gavin. I had a crop camera and manual focus was nearly impossible, exaggerated by the fact that I wear glasses. On my friend's D700 and my old F100 no problem whatsoever
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I had a look through the viewfinder of a friend's recently bought 7D ... nice camera but I was shocked at the viewfinder. Luckily he'll never focus it manually!
usayit
Well-known
If manual lenses you mean Pentax-K, a later prism viewfinder equipped Pentax DSLR is going to be your best bet. They still have the linkage to auto stop down the diaphragm. I think the Canon 5D was popular because it has a shorter than most DSLR flange distance (EF mount, 44mm) and is a full frame camera. I would assume that the shorter the flange distance of the body, the larger variety of lenses can be adapted and still maintain infinity focus. This excludes the Leica M9 and M8 because adapted lenses wouldn't engage the rangefinder mechanism thus limited to zone focusing.
Last edited:
topoxforddoc
Established
The best manual focus digital SLR is the Leica R9 with Digital Modul R. It may be long in the tooth, command stratospheric prices for old technology, have noise issues at moderate to high ISO and support limitations. But as a digital MF 35mm SLR, it has no peers if you are interested in manual focus and need a bright VF and easy to focus screen. Oh and the image quality is pretty good too.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I appreciate that the D700 is one of the better DSLRs for manual focus but it's still woeful compared to my near forty year old OM-1 ... that frustrates me for some reason! 
ChrisN
Striving
Thanks for your thoughts, everyone. As expected, no absolute concensus, but a fair bit of support for the full-frame offerings from Canon and Nikon, and for Pentax in the APS-C format, and a few good ideas from left field.
I actually have a K5 and find that I can't accurately focus my 50/1.2 lens wide open, except by using live view, which effectively ties it to a tripod. What I see in the viewfinder (the optical viewfinder) simply does not agree, focus-wise, with what ends up on the sensor. The K5 does have a system for fine-tuning the auto-focus (focus confirmation with MF lenses) but that does not remember the settings for the MF lenses. Wheras with the modern 50/1.4 (autofocus) lens I can hit the spot every time, even wide open. I've always suspected that the ground glass needs to be accurately shimmed to bring it into agreement with the autofocus/sensor alignment.
I actually have a K5 and find that I can't accurately focus my 50/1.2 lens wide open, except by using live view, which effectively ties it to a tripod. What I see in the viewfinder (the optical viewfinder) simply does not agree, focus-wise, with what ends up on the sensor. The K5 does have a system for fine-tuning the auto-focus (focus confirmation with MF lenses) but that does not remember the settings for the MF lenses. Wheras with the modern 50/1.4 (autofocus) lens I can hit the spot every time, even wide open. I've always suspected that the ground glass needs to be accurately shimmed to bring it into agreement with the autofocus/sensor alignment.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I tried out a Nikon D7000 with my Voigtlander 40/2 AIS Manual lens and it was really easy. Live view was awesome to use.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
The fraction is pretty large if you choose the right camera
With Canon you can adapt lenses from pretty much any significant SLR system except Canon FD; with Pentax it's a bit tighter, and with Nikon a bit tighter still, but with both of those you get better ergonomics with those lenses that do work. So from that point of view it's pretty OK actually.(I don't know about you, but I don't buy cameras for the purpose of adapting odd eBay lenses to them; I have a few good legacy lenses for Leica R, Nikon and various screwmounts, and I'm happy to have a full frame camera solution that works with all of those, even if it doesn't support e.g. Konica AR lenses that I don't have anyway.)
Regarding prices, those obviously apply only to new cameras....If you don't mind buying used, nowadays you can find Canon 5D's for under $1000, which is a nice full frame camera with good (if basic) ergonomics and good image quality up to about ISO 1600. (If you are really short on money and don't mind shooting museum pieces and restricting your shots to ISO 400 and under, you can find Kodak DCS Pros for $500 to $700 with Canon or Nikonmounts.)
NEX, Micro 4/3 &c. are nice and all, but what kills them for me are the ergonomics. I don't like shooting handheld cameras at arm's length if they have a heavy lens on them, and so far I've found electronic viewfinders largely unconvincing - the NEX7 seems to have a better one (haven't seen one in the flesh yet), but it seems to have other issues from what I read that make me skeptical. Also I don't like Sony for some of their business practices ever since I've had audio CDs that tried to install Sony backdoor software on my computer, so a product from them will have to be outstandingly unique for me to consider it.
uhoh7
Veteran
I have to agree if you can go full frame its the best
And the fractions are plenty big really, as many rightly point out.
I can't see much point in anything other than nex right now in aps-c, since the new evf is so good and you have the focus peaking, but certainly its a matter of personal preference.
And the fractions are plenty big really, as many rightly point out.
I can't see much point in anything other than nex right now in aps-c, since the new evf is so good and you have the focus peaking, but certainly its a matter of personal preference.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Can you clear this up for me "Only a fraction of MF glass can be used at infinity on any of them" ? Do you mean they will not focus to infinity?
Bob
Bob
Roscoe
Established
I dont understand why it's shocking... Yes, it's smaller than a full frame, but what you see is what's recorded on the sensor. I look through it, quickly compose, and shoot. The viewfinder is not what I look at on my wall. And I'm not a stranger to a bright, large, finder. While a 7D is my only digital, I also have an OM1, 1n, 2, and a 4. As well as an EOS 1n. Not mentioning the other film SLR's on the shelf.. While it is slightly more difficult to focus manual glass on a 7D than an SLR designed for it, it's not THAT hard. I regularly use my OM and C/Y lenses with chipped adapters and have great results. Although my paycheck doesn't depend on the results.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
There are usually two issues with those screens - one is size, the other is brightness and focus accuracy... Size-wise, it's clear that from an APS-sized mirror you have a hard time getting a big image, even though they have become a lot better in recent years. The more important problem is the screen itself, though... most modern focusing screens are made for slow-ish autofocus lenses, they are relatively transparent and hence bright, but as a reason not very good for accurately judging focus because the eye tends to accomodate on the light from the lens, rather than focusing on the screen.
That's why it's a good idea swapping out the screen for one that is slightly less bright, but gives more focusing accuracy. In the 5D I swapped out the stock screen for the Eg-S "high precision" screen; while that's said to be meant for lenses "f/2.8 or faster", I find that it's still sufficiently bright when I use it with slower lenses, and the focus "pop" and manual focus accuracy is much, much better.
ssmc
Well-known
That is almost certainly the case. See my post here on how this worked out for me with my D700: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98098
Having said that, the better APS-C DSLRs (K5, 7D, D300) are not quite as bad as people think for MF because the high magnification allows a better view of the focusing screen image texture, even though the overall image is smaller. Once you learn what to look for (when the shimmer just disappears) it's pretty easy with these cameras. The D700 is okay. The 5D I & II have similar magnification to the D700 but slightly larger coverage (and look a bit brighter to me) and you have the big advantage of factory screens for MF (why Nikon do not offer this for the D700 is beyond me). The A900 is reputedly very good too.
Of course none of them are as good as a cheap MF 35mm SLR from the 70's or 80's... :bang:
Regards,
Scott
kanzlr
Hexaneur
my K5 also was not shimmed correctly out of the box.
You can order shims of various thickness from Pentax to adress this.
Also, the stock screen shows a DoF of f2 wide open for your f1.2
If you want to be able to focus it accurately, get an S-Type screen from focusingscreen.com or buy a Canon Ee-S screen and file it down. It is pretty accurate even for f1.2 lenses.
a magnifying eyepiece helps a lot, too.
You can order shims of various thickness from Pentax to adress this.
Also, the stock screen shows a DoF of f2 wide open for your f1.2
If you want to be able to focus it accurately, get an S-Type screen from focusingscreen.com or buy a Canon Ee-S screen and file it down. It is pretty accurate even for f1.2 lenses.
a magnifying eyepiece helps a lot, too.