With the Sony NEX becoming a more and more popular base for "legacy lenses" I wonder what such is a system is capable of in practice. Have you seen something worthwhile shot on the NEX yet?
Or do we just have the ultimate "camera nerd´s camera" here?
Or do we just have the ultimate "camera nerd´s camera" here?
pvdhaar
Peter
Ok, there isn't much practical use in putting a slow 50/3.5 collapsible on the NEX indeed, aside from the 'look what I've done' effect.. I'll agree to that.
But there are other ways to look at the NEX and legacy lenses. On the one hand it's a platform to put lenses on for which there are no current digital bodies to use, and on the other, it's a means of getting access to focal lengths and apertures that are not available in E-mount. A lens being legacy doesn't equate to it being low quality. Perfectly legitimate reasons as far as I can see.
When it comes to seeing 'worthwhile' pictures, it's no different from any other camera.. Image quality is equivalent to a DSLR, but the camera is ever so much more portable. I can have it with me all the time and anywhere.
But there are other ways to look at the NEX and legacy lenses. On the one hand it's a platform to put lenses on for which there are no current digital bodies to use, and on the other, it's a means of getting access to focal lengths and apertures that are not available in E-mount. A lens being legacy doesn't equate to it being low quality. Perfectly legitimate reasons as far as I can see.
When it comes to seeing 'worthwhile' pictures, it's no different from any other camera.. Image quality is equivalent to a DSLR, but the camera is ever so much more portable. I can have it with me all the time and anywhere.
uhoh7
Veteran
You said it.
There's alot of great glass out there and the nex handles it better than anything made to date.
It's funny he calls it maybe a "nerd's camera", because all that whirring weight and 2k zooms on the DSLRs seem pretty nerdy to me--but maybe they just LOOK nerdy.
ampguy
Veteran
well
well
"worthwhile" can be subjective, but focused more accurately than any RF ever? definitely yes.
well
"worthwhile" can be subjective, but focused more accurately than any RF ever? definitely yes.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
It is fun to play with old lenses on these cameras, but beyond buying and trying them, how many lenses and camera systems do we really need? I got some great shots with old lenses on my E-P2, but ultimately decided it was just another camera and my photos still looked like my photos. YMMV, of course. 
peterm1
Veteran
In some ways I would love to own a micro 4/3 to try different legacy lenses but my experience is that I never persist for long in actually using specific lenses on such bodies (I had a full 4/3 camera which took most SLR lenses with adapters and after a first flush of love I fell back into using its stock lens.) I must admit however that some "c" mount lenses for movie cameras produce interesting effects and that ideea is intriguing. Never the less I suspect that the constraints of actually using and focusing legacy lenses on these cameras means that I would end up not using legacy lenses for much serious photograpy, although I would have a lot of fun buying adapters and trying different lenses in the near term. The thing I do not much like with most digital SLR cameras I have tried is manual focusing. The only real exceptions are my D200 which has pretty good focus confirmation and my M8 (although even with the latter I struggle to get good focus due to my cruddy eyes.) Still I have to concede its good fun while it lasts.
DougFord
on the good foot
with all the 'innovation' happening in the camera industry with respect to the compact mirrorless camera niche, I think we'll see a compact FF mirrorless camera with a hole in it announced come fall and available soon thereafter. Not quite the generic camera rather an interchangeable lens camera with some version of the hybrid VF. The hole accommodating any number of adapters for any number of legacy lenses. Manual focus confirmation via some sort of hybrid PDAF system. IMO its a'coming, just hard to predict when.
Well put..case in point, 35/2 Planar Contax G --- the only way to get the Planar 'look' at ~50mm effective focal length and speed.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I'm not sure you could successfully have a full frame camera adaptable to all of these lenses. There's a coverage problem for a lot of them. And even the current crop frame micro 4/3 cameras have problems with legacy wide angles.
zumbido
-
I use "legacy" lenses, and a Sony CCTV wide-angle heavily modified for focus from 2" to about 60', almost exclusively. Now and then outside in good light I pull out the kit lens for the AF for kid pictures.
Regular use (i.e., at least three times a week) lenses:
1. The modded Sony.
2. Super-Tak 50/1.4.
3. J8.
4. Industar-69, scavenged from a Chaika and used as a not-quite-pancake for a package that fits easily in a jacket or cargo pant pocket.
Regular use (i.e., at least three times a week) lenses:
1. The modded Sony.
2. Super-Tak 50/1.4.
3. J8.
4. Industar-69, scavenged from a Chaika and used as a not-quite-pancake for a package that fits easily in a jacket or cargo pant pocket.
Believe it or not but these combos are the way most professional photographers work these days. A "pro" with a NEX and an M-mount lens? I havent seen one.
What does that say about the real world performance of such a kit?
pvdhaar
Peter
Absolutely nothing..
If you're so dead set on positioning a camera either as "pro" or as "nerd" and hammering on your presumption that the NEX is leading nowhere, there's only one thing left for us to do..
Let's all agree that the NEX is only good as laughing stock, that pros wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole, and that anyone using an M-mount lens is a nerd. There, you've got your way..
Now, can I get back to having fun with the NEX again?
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
The NEX-3 I own is much smaller than my dSLR (a Nikon D200) and surpasses it in image quality by a considerable margin (noise, resolution, DR). Of course the NEX is small and is not as intuitive to use as the Nikon and doesn't have the robustness the D200 has. However, for my style of photography, the NEX is much better suited. Smaller, lighter, much more inconspicuous.
I actually have the Novoflex Leica M to NEX adapter right in front of me, and I will try it out tonight. I can already report that the Nikon F to NEX adapter works fine, and the big bonus is, it works well with non-Ai, AI, AF, and AF-G lenses, both full frame and DX!
Sony has stated that they are surprised how many legacy lenses are used on the NEX, but if you see how well integrated this functionality is in the NEX design you might wonder why...
I do not have anything 'worthwhile' to show yet, but when I have shot some nice B/W with my DR 'cron on the NEX, I'll get back to you...
Many Pros use boring equipment in all genres... it probably has to do with using what works and less about experimentation. Nothing wrong with either, but Pros generally care abiout just getting the job done with tools that are comfortable and capable. Experimentation is left to amateurs.
am·a·teur
[am-uh-choo
–noun 1. a person who engages in a study, sport, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons.
zumbido
-
No vignetting. The diagonal of (micro) 4/3 is about 22.5mm, 135 half-frame (18mm x 24mm) is 30mm. So it covers with generous leeway.
I like the image quality fine for most things. It's sort of an in-between character. Not thoroughly "classic", but definitely not modern either. I don't have a way of measuring it handy but I'm attaching a photo. The m39 adapter is maybe a millimeter deeper than the grip on the E-PL1, and the I-69 is about the same depth again as the adapter plus maybe two millimeters. So, eyeball estimate--the lens/adapters sticks out twice as far as the grip plus a couple millimeters. Not truly a "pancake" but close enough for easy fit in a jacket or cargo-pants pocket.
Lenses for 110 format match 4/3 almost exactly in image circle. I'm thinking of buying a junked Canon 110ED for its 26mm/1.9 tiny (glass) lens. Could easily be smaller than the I-69/adapter combo, depending on how I end up mounting it (and what sort of focusing helicoid I use).
Attachments
Last edited:
ampguy
Veteran
which Nikon adapter did you get?
which Nikon adapter did you get?
Ronald, just curious, which vendor's Nikon adapter did you get? I've seen a couple of variations, or even more if you count tripod socket and non tripod socket versions.
which Nikon adapter did you get?
Ronald, just curious, which vendor's Nikon adapter did you get? I've seen a couple of variations, or even more if you count tripod socket and non tripod socket versions.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Well I happen to really like using my slew of M and LTM mount lenses on the NEX for the same reasons someone would use primes on a DSLR. I do like the kit zoom, but using a zoom is not always the way to go.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
I do not think I am going to get a NEX, at least not a new one, but I like the Olypus E-P2 for this reason. Look, there are a lot of ways to alter the look of an image in these digital days. But lens selection is a pretty basic one. Now that you can't choose different film stock, it is nice to have the option of a Summar, a Takumar, a Nikon etc. Maybe when Sony comes out with a NEX 6 in a couple of years, one of these famous NEX 5's will come up for sale here. . . crazy? I don't thinks so.
Ben
Ben
zumbido
-
I would prefer the flexibility of the NEX's crop factor over the E-PL2, but everything else about it seemed so inferior that I couldn't imagine it.
Now, if I were heavily invested in things like 24mm and down Zeiss glass, or whatnot, I'd feel differently. But having no money already sunk into lenses any wider than 28mm (for 135), and with micro-4/3 already having a pretty decent (not awesome) array of native wide options, it wasn't so strong a consideration for me.
Now, if I were heavily invested in things like 24mm and down Zeiss glass, or whatnot, I'd feel differently. But having no money already sunk into lenses any wider than 28mm (for 135), and with micro-4/3 already having a pretty decent (not awesome) array of native wide options, it wasn't so strong a consideration for me.
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
In both cases, Leica M and Nikon F, I got the (expensive-ish) Novoflex adapter. I was not aware that there existed tripod versions of either. As stated, the Novoflex adapter allows aperture control with Nikon 'G' lenses without an aperture ring. Another advantage is, that the Novoflex Leica adapter works with the DR Summicron and the Nikon adapter works with non-Ai lenses. I have for example a dirt cheap 60's 135mm f2.8 that becomes a 200mm on the NEX and does beautifully there.
I chose to buy Novoflex because a friend wrecked his PEN with an off-brand adapter.