Using manual legacy lenses on a digital cam...

[andyoxon]

Has anyone tried/persisted with using manual focus lenses on a digital camera, or was it something you tried for a bit then gradually moved away from?

I've just been given a Lumix G2 m4/3, and so (using an adapter) have been trying my old Nikon AI-S lenses.  No IS, but my 50mm f/1.7 becomes a pretty good portrait 100mm f/1.7; MF of course... I'm unlikely to use my uber heavy 28-70 (56-140) f/2.8 much. 

[T42]

Yes, I used my 1980s Soligor 24-45 + macro on an EP-3 with quite good results.  About the only decent pic I got with that camera, come to think of it.  I didn't stick with it because the action had become very stiff with years of disuse.

Also used an old straight-through Danubia 400mm on a Nikon D70.  Less agreeable - on my old OM-2 I could actually use the split prism with it, but digitals don't got none, although I think Fuji mimic one with software.  Tried it on the D600 too, pretty crappy.  Funny thing is that the same lens gave comparable quality to a Zeiss mirror lens back in the 80s.

[clarion]

An Olympus would be a better platform than a Panasonic for this, as it has the IS in the body.

I've considered it, but even my shortest OM lens comes out at 70mm, which is a bit longer than I'd desire.  I suppose the format turns my pedestrian 50/1.8 into a decent portrait lens, but I don't do much of that.

[Biggsy]

Has anyone tried/persisted with using manual focus lenses on a digital camera, or was it something you tried for a bit then gradually moved away from?

I have used old MF lenses with Pentax DSLRs - but not very often as I find modern zooms more practical in general, not just because of the AF.  However, I can't beat the image quality and max aperture of my 1970s Pentax K 135mm F2.5 with any modern equivalent that I can afford, so it will remain in my arsenal.

Old zooms often don't have the image quality of modern lenses.  It's the old primes that still compete, with low/medium budgets anyway.

A split prism focusing screen helps with MF with DSLRs, although I'm not using one with my latest model.

[Jaded]

I've got three Nikon primes from the early 1970s, 35mm, 50mm and 105mm

I've put them on digital bodies but never got round to really testing them out. The latter is, I believe, considered to be one of the best Nikon lenses ever.

[David Martin]

Used 135 and 180 primes on Nikon DSLR. For some things they are absolutely spot on.

[drossall]

I inherited my late father-in-law's 400mm, and I use that occasionally on Pentax DSLRs.

[PaulR]

I've got a couple of old Super-Takumar lenses (135mm and 200mm) that I use for astrophotography, and I also have a new but totally manual Samyang 85mm f1.4 lens for the same purpose and with the same constraints.

But for non-astro work it's rather a lot of faff for me, particularly as I am not a serious picture-taker.

[T42]

Damn. This thread is rekindling the never-saw-a-camera-I-didn't-want urge I thought I had conquered.

[geraldc]

The G2 isn't that good for focusing, as it just uses a magnifier. The later models have peaking which makes it a lot easier.

[IanDG]

I use a Pentax 50mm and a Sigma 28-70mm on an E620 body when I'm in the mood.

[frankly frankie]

I've got an E620 as well, and several adaptors and legacy lenses.  I don't think a single one of them has much to offer over the Oly kit zooms however.

My 'best' lens is probably a 50mm Zeiss Planar f1.7 in mint condition, but even that is no improvement over the Oly kit 40-150 at the same focal length.  Even the speed advantage is largely nullified especially in very modern cameras by their high-ISO excellence, and in Oly cameras by the kit lenses being at their best nearly wide open (whereas legacy glass is at its best stopped down some way).  (I should add, I have no interest in narrow DoF effects.)

But fiddling with aperture rings and so on is nice, and if I were spending money my ideal camera would be something small and slab-shaped with a M-converter and a Voigtlander prime.

[andyoxon]

Had my first real test with 100mm eq. f/1.7 last week, taking portraits when out on a walk.  A tad gloomy, using wide apertures in A mode - missed good focus on a few images.  I don't think VF even gets magnified images when focusing with G2, as the 'use camera without [lumix] lens' (IIRC) needs to be set in the menu.  Overall good - different experience going back to twiddling aperture & focus rings.

[rogerzilla]

As discussed in the grey import thread, DSLRs don't make it easy to use manual lenses.  There is no split-image, the focus confirmation lamp has way too much tolerance either way to get sharp pictures and on Nikons the focusing screen and/or mirror are often not accurately in register, so something that looks perfectly sharp in the viewfinder isn't perfectly sharp on the sensor.  This matters not a jot for AF, which works independently of the viewfinder optics, but screws up manual focusing.

[Wombat]

Focus peaking...  Having explored that on my Sony A77, its a brilliant thing for manual focusing.  Only works on devices such as my Sony SLT or mirrorless cameras that have rather fine OLED viewfinders (don't just assume "no optical finder = rubbish"), but once explored, I'm no longer scared of using manual focus.  Do other systems have this on the LCD screen?

For those who don't know, you get an effect rather akin to the display of burnt out highlights on the LCD display, but shows the areas actually in focus, rather than the blown highlights.  This works both on the viewfinder and LCD screen, and even works on the LCD (it ain't got a viewfinder) of my RX100 compact, a pocket sized device i'm very pleased with.

[clarion]

Olympus micro four thirds cameras have focus peaking.

At least,  the later ones do

[frankly frankie]

Recently acquired a Panasonic GX7 (before that model becomes unobtainable) and the focus peaking is 'interesting', but I think I find the screen magnifier more useful.  You can have both simultaneously of course.  It would have to be a pretty special legacy lens to be worthwhile on this camera, because the converter adds about 25mm so that even a nice compact SLR prime turns into a bulky brute.  I have got a MF 8mm fisheye (Pentax K mount) which I use quite a lot, was already big and now is huge.
M-mount lenses would definitely be the best option. because that's a nice thin converter and something like a Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 might be rather gorgeous (and would fill a gap between my 2 AF zooms) - but again it's pointless really as both Oly and Pana have very good (and cheaper) AF primes around this focal length.

[LEE]

Olympus micro four thirds cameras have focus peaking.

At least,  the later ones do

Magic Lantern firmware adds it to several Canon DSLRs

[MagnusOpus]

I pretty much only use old MF Nikkors or M39 lenses on my GX7 (and before that D200)

Just love how they feel, like to have an aperture ring, and don't like computers deciding what I want to focus on

With the focus aids on the GX7 it's so easy and such fun