Jump to content

Nikon with R lens


peachming

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is your problem specific to R lenses, or manual focus lenses in general? I read a few days ago where someone else reported problems manually focusing with a Df, and was quite pleased with the Nikon DK-17M 1.2X eyepiece.

My manual lens' maximum apertures range from f/1.5 to f/8.0, including several R lenses, and in decent light focusing with the Df is easy. When on a tripod I often use a DR-5 angle finder, and find the 2X setting useful in low light or with low contrast subjects.

 

I ended up selling the Df. Tried various well calibrated groundglasses with different microprism but I was missing too many shots .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I ended up selling the Df. Tried various well calibrated groundglasses with different microprism but I was missing too many shots .

 

 

The only aftermarket screen that worked for me was a KatzEye for the D700. Could focus my NOCT, R 90AA and 180 Elmarit APO spot-on every time. Sadly, Nikon changed the housing to make focusing screens for newer models technically impracticable. Regrettably, KatzEye went out of business early in 2015. The Dƒ seemed to hold promise before release but it was all a marketing ploy for the same old thing. So much for Nikon's commitment to the millions of AI/AIS lens owners. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The only aftermarket screen that worked for me was a KatzEye for the D700. Could focus my NOCT, R 90AA and 180 Elmarit APO spot-on every time. Sadly, Nikon changed the housing to make focusing screens for newer models technically impracticable. Regrettably, KatzEye went out of business early in 2015. The Dƒ seemed to hold promise before release but it was all a marketing ploy for the same old thing. So much for Nikon's commitment to the millions of AI/AIS lens owners. 

 

Found a newlike Df at a bargain price I could not pass and am back at playing with R lenses !

 

R 21 SA 4  on Df:

 

26369580593_1dc679e21a_c.jpg

Arc de Triomphe du Carroussel by JM__, on Flickr

 

26906409021_3ac7e6a8b3_c.jpg

Poésie urbaine by JM__, on Flickr

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Although the bulk of my equipment in 35mm is Nikon, I do have a few Canon bodies that I use with other than Canon lenses.  I wonder if there is a significant reason other than familiarity with the Nikon system that, with the cost of changing the mounts, it wouldn't be a bad choice to get a Canon body and use the relatively inexpensive Leica-Canon adaptors??

 

As a relatively new Leica owner, as I accumulate Leica lenses, I would appreciate any advice as to the above alternative versus changing mounts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Stephen, in my opinion, a Leica SL or a Sony A7-series are far better choices for using R-lenses nowadays than Canon/Nikon SLRs. Better focus accuracy and ease, brighter viewfinder when the lens is stopped down (so there's no need to turn the ring each time), in-body IS for both focusing and taking pictures (Sony), in-camera profiles and exif for ROM lenses (SL) etc.

 

I've removed all Leitax mount from my lenses long ago.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use my 21-35, the 60 and the 100apo on my Olympus PenF after having used them on Canon 5ii for quite some time. I found the extra manual-focus screen of the Canon better than the standard, but much inferior to focussing on the R9.

 

The PenFs 20Mp is adequate. Its optional extreme 4x resolution mode gives brilliant results, but needs a tripod. Hand-held, the electronic stabilizing feature is useful. For my purposes, no need for autofocus. I keep the rear screen closed and use the eypiece, so it behaves a little bit like an M. Some care is needed to avoid moving the metering spot since it has too many buttons that cannot be completely neutralized.

 

Having a sensor the size of the ancient cinefilm frame that inspired mr. Barnack, the field caught is halved, so for anything shorter than an effective 42mm i must use the native lenses -or electronic stitching. I have briefly tried the 80-200 on the PenF, yielding the same effective angle as 160-400 on fullframe, also good results.

 

The close focussing flexibility of the R60mm means that I have not seen any point in using M-optics on it although pocketability is a nice option.

 

So the conclusion is that using R-optics on digital mirrorless bodies is perfectly ok as long as manual focus and selecting your aperture is ok.

 

p.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just leitaxed the Elmarit-R 28mm 2.8 latest version 11333 (ROM) and put it on the Df.

The combination works just fine without further modifications , also at infinity.

 

I like the zeiss colors a bit more and they seem to give me a better starting point for RAW color rorrection, but the Distagons show those really muddy corners.

The Elmarit seems to be almost equally sharp at almost all apertures in the (not only very) center, corners are very good and usable even wide open.

It's a very very contrasty lens, bokeh ist nice, a bit smoother at f4 than at f2.8. Hard vignetting at 2.8 and f4.

Auto white balance is frequently off with the lens, don't know why this happens, so RAW is a must.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Doesn't the Nikon AF system (for Focus confirmation) work with manual lenses too?

 

It doesn't on Canon cameras, unless you have an EMF AF chip on the adapter, so I bought one for all my Leitz lenses (20 bucks each).

Haven't gotten around to properly calibrate the AF microadjustment for all of them yet, but at medium distance the manual focus confirm works like a charm.

 

From the 135/2.8 shot through a very narrowly meshed fence

c5t4841.jpg?w=510&h=764&crop=1

 

 

Summicron 90/2 in the streets

c5t5320.jpg?w=1088

 

Summicron 50/2 on the same day

c5t5309.jpg?w=1088

 

 

My 28/2.8 on my DSLR

mbp01102.jpg?w=1088

 

I love shooting Vintage glass on digital, and the Canon is great for this, because the AF points cover a reasonably large area so that I don't need to rely on "focus-recompose" like I do with film cameras..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't the Nikon AF system (for Focus confirmation) work with manual lenses too?

 

It doesn't on Canon cameras, unless you have an EMF AF chip on the adapter, so I bought one for all my Leitz lenses (20 bucks each).

Haven't gotten around to properly calibrate the AF microadjustment for all of them yet, but at medium distance the manual focus confirm works like a charm.

 

I love shooting Vintage glass on digital, and the Canon is great for this, because the AF points cover a reasonably large area so that I don't need to rely on "focus-recompose" like I do with film cameras..

 

 

Works just fine with MF lenses without the need for a chip.

 

Downside of Nikon is that you have to swap out the mount (reversible with Leitax, of course) and the green-dot focus confirmation isn't all that accurate with very fast lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...