Print Page | Close Window

Another Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 to Minolta AF conversion

Printed From: Dyxum.com
Category: Equipment forums
Forum Name: Other mount lenses
Forum Description: Discussions for non alpha mount lenses
URL: http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=19601
Printed Date: 21 August 2018 at 07:25


Topic: Another Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 to Minolta AF conversion
Posted By: Arkku
Subject: Another Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 to Minolta AF conversion
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 15:51
Hi,

I recently acquired an old Minolta MC -mount Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 lens (got a good price because it had stuck aperture blades, which was easy enough to repair with a bit of cleaning). Inspired by http://www.pbase.com/pganzel/58mm_f12_rokkor__on_maxxum_7d - Pete Ganzel's modification of the lens, I decided to try and convert it to the Minolta AF mount.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/arkku/1266938702/">

As I don't have the opportunity to machine any new parts for the lens, I opted to substitute an M42 to Minolta AF adapter for the MC lens mount, getting the AF mount from the adapter. This required only the drilling of some holes in the adapter and sanding down a ridge on a spacer ring on the lens (with only a tiny cosmetic impact if the modification is ever reversed). From receiving the lens in the mail, planning and executing the basic modification only took about 45 minutes, so it's definitely not a hard one to do, and gives access to a very nice old lens on Minolta AF cameras, without resorting to image-degrading adapters.

The fiddly part, taking maybe two and a half hours, was readjusting infinity focus on the lens, so that the distance scale and infinity position coincide exactly on the new mount. This step requires a bit more disassembly of the lens and lots of trial and error in finding the position, but in the end the result is perfect, with spot-on infinity focus and alignment of the distance scale, as well as the lens locator dot. The project requires only an inexpensive, expendable M42 adapter as parts other than the lens.

Here's the new mount on the lens, with a link to a series of photos and a http://www.flickr.com/photos/arkku/1266937278/ - guide to making the modification in my flickr stream:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/arkku/1266937278/">



Replies:
Posted By: Bob J
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 16:11
Looks like a great guide - thanks for posting!

-------------
RBJ ~ http://tinyurl.com/h7uhozk - Moderation on Dyxum


Posted By: dogears
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 16:31
Wow! and congrats! Wish I had the means to do the same... but first I gotta find that lens :))

-------------
http://shutteredlight.blogspot.com - woof!


Posted By: ricardovaste
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 16:57
Wow thats some awesome portrait lens youve got there now!
Id like to try this one day. But id probably just buy a kit off peter, so save any mistakes.
Though, when i was fixing my macro lens, and the metal mount of it was off. I fiddled with it and a (old/scratced/useless) minolta SR fit 28-70mm lens and managed to fit them together, by simply screwin it in! And infinity focus was there and all. Strange, didnt think it was that simple.
Id sure like to have a 58mm f/1.2 and a 24mm f/2.8 on my A-mount system =].
Congratulations btw!

-------------
I photograph the moments in people's lives that mean the most to them: http://www.rharris-images.com/ - Richard Harris Photography


Posted By: Anssisa
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 17:11
That looks nice, would be nice to try that one som time. Maybe some day at a Finnish Dyxum meet..

Do post pictures taken with it also.

-------------
"Click,Click,ClickClickClick" By: A700 + | S 50 f/1.4 | M 85 f/1.4 G (D) | S 135 f/2.8 STF | M 80-200 f/2.8 APO HS G |


Posted By: Dumont
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 17:13
Very nice. I would like to see some photos too, especially taken wide open at f1.2

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/148586121@N05/ - My Flickr
http://www.pbase.com/dumont - My Pbase


Posted By: ricardovaste
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 17:32
Yes, forgot to ask that! Would love to see some photos posted, especially wide open also, and f/3.5 =]

-------------
I photograph the moments in people's lives that mean the most to them: http://www.rharris-images.com/ - Richard Harris Photography


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 21:17
So far I have only taken a few shots with this lens, so I don't have much to post yet. I'll certainly play around with it come daylight again, etc, but so far here's one at f/1.2:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/arkku/1260632835/">

Note that it's also at ISO 400 and handheld 1/13 s, so it may not be the best example. I like the smooth bokeh, though.




Posted By: Sanjuro
Date Posted: 29 August 2007 at 22:27
Really nice Arkku, great guide. Now I need to find one of those lens.
A 1.2 would be great for the winter here.

-------------
Rgds
Sanjuro

"I paint objects as I think them, not as I see them." --Pablo Picasso


Posted By: carpents
Date Posted: 30 August 2007 at 05:21
Thanks for the instructions. I'm pretty confident that adjusting the infinity focus like this will allow me to use one of these on my Pentax. Normally I wouldn't be able to use it to infinity because the Pentax mount is deeper than the Minolta (both manual and AF) mount, but if I can change the focus point it should work.


Posted By: Dumont
Date Posted: 30 August 2007 at 06:26
That sample is nice, great job adapting the lens. I used several MD/MC mount lenses on my 5D but with the adapter with glass the lens could not be used wide open, the subject would "glow" no matter what shutter speed. I have since sold them all and stuck with AF or the occasional M42 lens.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/148586121@N05/ - My Flickr
http://www.pbase.com/dumont - My Pbase


Posted By: nazzza
Date Posted: 19 October 2007 at 14:28
I've recently bought a 58mm 1.2,
do you think that if I'll use an m42 with focus confirmation (like that of haoda) to convert this lens to minolta AF mount, I'll have focus confirmation working?


Posted By: georgiaboy
Date Posted: 19 October 2007 at 14:37
Yes you will.

-------------
"I'm fixing a hole where the rain gets in..."


Posted By: beline
Date Posted: 20 October 2007 at 03:08
Here's a question, with a lens like this set up like this, is it possible to have the camera automatically stop down the lens? I understand you have to set the aperture manually. And do stop down metering.... But I never understood how it works from there...

-------------
http://www.coverthisphotography.com/" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: hotwire
Date Posted: 20 October 2007 at 04:11
Stop down metering by definition is completely manual... in other words you are the one to stop down the lens.

Short summary of steps:
Turn lens detection off (aka shutter open with no lens attached)
Set to Aperture priority
Turn off AS/SSS

Open lens wide open
Focus
Close the aperture manually to your desired aperture
Press shutter.
Repeat

-------------
a99ii; Maxxum 9

CZ: 16-35, 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8; Minolta: 50/1.4; MC58/1.2; 85/1.4GD 300/2.8; 500/8; 600/4; Tam: 90/2.8M; Sig: 12-24/4.5-5.6; 15/2.8; Sony: 35/1.4G; 135STF, 70-200/2.8G


Posted By: beline
Date Posted: 20 October 2007 at 04:16
so, tripod-only shooting then eh?

not very practical for anything other that macro or very intentional portraiture...

from the looks of things... doesn't seem like infinity is a mush with an old MD/MC... for portraiture or still life anyway. also, seems like the added distance might make the lens a bit of a macro...

-------------
http://www.coverthisphotography.com/" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 20 October 2007 at 12:10
Why would this mean tripod only?

Image stabilisation doesn't work (without an electric adapter), granted, but none of the 35mm pro cameras ever had image stabilisation in the body.

Anyhow, you can use either A or M mode with the manual lenses (this or M42 or whatever). The only difference between the regular A and M modes is that you set the aperture by turning a ring on the lens instead of a dial on the camera. The lens stops down immediately once you turn the ring, so generally you will first wish to focus wide open (manually, of course) and only then turn the ring to stop down, but this is only a problem for moving targets (which are ill-suited for manual focus anyhow).

As for the infinity focus, my guide to the modification has instructions on how to adjust the infinity focus to match. Actually it's easy to get it going past infinity, the time-consuming part is trying to get it just right without limiting the maximum distance. So, non-perfectionists can just crank it a bit past infinity and sacrifice a bit of macro range.


Posted By: Turerkan
Date Posted: 20 October 2007 at 14:45
you can focus stopped down too, especially when there is enough light.

-------------
http://tinyurl.com/chaokc - Self moderate. http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic45171&get=last.html - Use Gimp. http://tinyurl.com/cj4qq8 - View My Photos.


Posted By: beline
Date Posted: 20 October 2007 at 20:04
the reason I say you'd need a tripod, is because if you are doing hand-held at close distances, the movement after the focus while you stop-down will throw you focus off (did that make any sense?).

you could focus stopped down, but the extra depth of field would make accurate focus slightly more difficult for some of us.

anyway, the reason I would be interested in M42 and old MD/MC lenses, as I don't currently own any, would be the (aperture + glass quality)/Cost ratio. wide open aperture, with a razor-thin DOF, and razor-sharp image, is a beautiful thing...

-------------
http://www.coverthisphotography.com/" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Turerkan
Date Posted: 20 October 2007 at 21:15
as the aperture decreases, required focusing acurracy also decreases.. for this reason i find myself using DOF preview when i'm at close distances, this way i don't have to go super-precise, i can see the actual DOF and act accordingly.

overall, imho stop down focusing is good for close up photography, provided that there is enough light to focus.. you don't try to shoot macros at night anyway, do you?..

-------------
http://tinyurl.com/chaokc - Self moderate. http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic45171&get=last.html - Use Gimp. http://tinyurl.com/cj4qq8 - View My Photos.


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 20 October 2007 at 23:11
Originally posted by beline beline wrote:

the reason I say you'd need a tripod, is because if you are doing hand-held at close distances, the movement after the focus while you stop-down will throw you focus off (did that make any sense?).


Well, I don't usually shoot very close distances with these lenses (everything focuses to infinity just fine), but with close-up and macro work I would use a tripod regardless of the lens (need to stop down for depth of field, increasing exposure time at my preferred ISO 100). For longer distances it's really not that sensitive with the focus, plus you don't need to move the camera away from your eye to stop down (count the clicks on the ring or just stop down until it the DoF looks about right).

Also, like Turerkan said above, if there's enough light, one can focus stopped down. With the increased DoF it's seldom problematic, and in bright light it's quite easy to tell where the point of focus is by looking at the edges of details in the area.


Posted By: edrice
Date Posted: 20 October 2007 at 23:39
Here's one I did some time ago with my A100 and the 58mm f1.2. This was shot at wide open. Notice that the depth a field is so narrow the clapper is in focus but the flange on the bell is bit blurry, front and rear.



BTW, it's news to me that one should turn off anti-shake with this lens. All the shooting I've done was with it turned on, inlcuding this one, and I haven't noticed any problems. Matter of fact, I thought I'd still get a degree of anti-shake, though not as much. Seemed to work for me. I've never embarrassed my A100 by hanging a tripod from its underments.

Ed



Posted By: Pete Ganzel
Date Posted: 21 October 2007 at 09:45
I'm with you Ed.

AS (or SS) seems to work to some extent without lens information, at least in this mid focal length range. I never shut it off. My entire 58mm Rokkor gallery was shot with AS on,hand held and wide open at f/1.2. The only images showing unsharpness are because of my careless focus.

Beline: There are lenses in AF mount which are four stops slower than the f/1.2 wide open and folks have no problem focusing with them.
BTW, why would you use this lens stopped down more than a stop or so? There are automatic iris, meter coupled, AF lenses that are probably better for that use.

As Ed mentioned, the area in focus is very thin wide open at f/1.2.
Here's a little chart done with calculations and testing showing what you are working with, but as you say, that's part of the charm of   these lenses.




Pete





Posted By: teko
Date Posted: 22 October 2007 at 08:12
Hi Guys,
Just want to tell you all Iíve done the same conversion for my 58/1.2.
Tribute goes to Pete and Arkku for their inspiration.
Pete in his homage said the thickness of the mount should be 7.75-8mm thick, and that gives me the idea of making the spacer myself, and plastic would be the most readily available and easiest material to handle.

So what I did is instead of filing the mount spacer, I took the whole part out and use a piece of plastic that I use for model making (about 1mm thick) and trim it to the size of the mount spacer. I then use that piece of plastic to act as the spacer and mount the M42 adapter to the lens, and thatís it, and I donít even have to adjust infinity. In fact, infinity focus at the 30 ft mark but thatís good enough for me.

One more thing, the M42 adapter has to be filed a little bit, cos the lens aperture linkage will be jammed when you adjust the aperture.

Hereís a picture I took wide open, hope you guys will like it.

Rokkor%2058/1.2


Posted By: terryg
Date Posted: 22 October 2007 at 12:03
I like it!

Terry


Posted By: Sanjuro
Date Posted: 29 October 2007 at 15:17
Originally posted by terryg terryg wrote:

I like it!

Terry


Indeed!
a 58/1.2 hmmm

-------------
Rgds
Sanjuro

"I paint objects as I think them, not as I see them." --Pablo Picasso


Posted By: ricardovaste
Date Posted: 09 November 2007 at 13:45
Would there be anything to stop someone *cough*me one day, maybe* successfully attempting to do a complete rokkor line up into a AF conversion?

20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2, 35/2.8, 85/2, 100/4 macro

All done by fiddling with the mount and adding a m42~af adapter?

Or would it not work for all lenses...??

-------------
I photograph the moments in people's lives that mean the most to them: http://www.rharris-images.com/ - Richard Harris Photography


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 09 November 2007 at 19:55
There isn't a theoretical reason why it wouldn't work, but the adjustability of individual lenses may vary, i.e. some may be more difficult to disassemble and/or have less opportunity for getting infinity focus right. Of course, other tactics may then be applied, with some creativity. =)

Personally I don't feel that all of the old Rokkors are so desirable over M42 alternatives that I'd bother going for a complete line-up. But, of course, if you already have the lenses and like them, why not go for it and post the results here? =)


Posted By: ocelli
Date Posted: 09 November 2007 at 20:06
I think it's possible.The difference in film to flange distance is only 1mm.
Minolta AF-44.5 Minolta MD-43.5

Even if it is possible, why bother?Modern lenses perform better especially with regard to resolution and flare.

Anyway for enjoyment purposes some lenses are worth converting especially the 58mm f1,2.


Posted By: Magnus Wedberg
Date Posted: 09 December 2007 at 20:19
Hijacking this thread a little. You owners, have you had "purple spot" reflection problems with your conversions?

-------------
Warning! Objects in viewfinder may be closer than they appear.
http://www.magnuswedberg.com - www.magnuswedberg.com


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 09 December 2007 at 21:06
I haven't noticed any in mine.


Posted By: Magnus Wedberg
Date Posted: 09 December 2007 at 22:04
OK! Which digital camera are you using it on?

-------------
Warning! Objects in viewfinder may be closer than they appear.
http://www.magnuswedberg.com - www.magnuswedberg.com


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 10 December 2007 at 01:21
The A100.


Posted By: ABramley
Date Posted: 10 December 2007 at 01:34
I've also never noticed it on a 7D. I'm really tempted to try to rejig mine with AF confirmation... Wouldn't we also get accurate AS information then?


Posted By: Pete Ganzel
Date Posted: 10 December 2007 at 06:40
Hi Magnus:

Like the others, haven't seen this flare with any of the f/1.2 Rokkors I have (58mm Old, 58mm new style, 50mm MD). The torture test at f/8 revealed a nice contrasty image without a center spot;



This is identical on all the f/1.2 Rokkors all the way down to f/16.

On the other hand, at the same time I tested a 55mm f/1.4 Rikenon (M42) and the central flare is obvious from f/5.6 and getting worse to f/16.


Might be a problem with all f/1.4 lenses. Do you want me to check the Takumar I have?

Pete


Posted By: Magnus Wedberg
Date Posted: 10 December 2007 at 13:12
Thanks all! Most interesting. Pete, actually there is a center flare in the 58 shot, but it's large and very faint, nothing else to expect and a great result -- much better than the AF 50/1.4 :-P No, I don't need anything else tested, I'm just curious, I might be in the market for a 58 to convert to AF mount... as well as possibly a 35/1.8.

-------------
Warning! Objects in viewfinder may be closer than they appear.
http://www.magnuswedberg.com - www.magnuswedberg.com


Posted By: dogears
Date Posted: 10 December 2007 at 13:36
Originally posted by Turerkan Turerkan wrote:

<snip>you don't try to shoot macros at night anyway, do you?..


You betcha!

-------------
http://shutteredlight.blogspot.com - woof!


Posted By: ankit
Date Posted: 10 December 2007 at 17:42
Great guide - thanks a lot to Arkku and Pete. I am tempted to try this myself. One question: from what I understand, the flange to film distance is 44.5mm for the AF mount, as opposed to 43.5 for the MD mount, and we are essentially moving the lens closer to the sensor when we adjust for infinity. Could this potentially interfere with the mirror assembly? I remember people shaving the mirror on their canon 5d to avoid this problem and was wondering if minolta (APS or full frame) would have the same problem?

-------------
For Sale: 100-300mm/4.5-5.6 D APO
http://ankit.smugmug.com - http://ankit.smugmug.com


Posted By: ocelli
Date Posted: 10 December 2007 at 17:55
Originally posted by ankit ankit wrote:

Great guide - thanks a lot to Arkku and Pete. I am tempted to try this myself. One question: from what I understand, the flange to film distance is 44.5mm for the AF mount, as opposed to 43.5 for the MD mount, and we are essentially moving the lens closer to the sensor when we adjust for infinity. Could this potentially interfere with the mirror assembly? I remember people shaving the mirror on their canon 5d to avoid this problem and was wondering if minolta (APS or full frame) would have the same problem?


No, I have used a rokkor 58mm with an A100.The 44mm Canon flange to film distance creates the problem.


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 10 December 2007 at 18:04
Originally posted by ankit ankit wrote:

One question: from what I understand, the flange to film distance is 44.5mm for the AF mount, as opposed to 43.5 for the MD mount, and we are essentially moving the lens closer to the sensor when we adjust for infinity.


I thought about this myself when I made the modification, but as I adjusted the infinity focus I went past the correct position once and could focus past infinity (i.e. the lens was closer to the sensor than it would ever really need to be), but still there wasn't a problem with the mirror clearance on my A100. It may have slightly more clearance than a full frame camera, though, but at the correct infinity setting there doesn't seem to be a problem on Minolta AF film camera either.


Posted By: bumblebee
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 18:23
Here is a very simple conversion of the 58mm 1:1,2.

I have attached a Minolta AF mount from a defect lens (Exakta 28-70 or Tok. 35-200, both fit). If you have luck, the screws fit without drilling. To align infinity focus I took the shims from the Tokina 35-200.
It takes about 30 minutes to change the mount and adjust focus.
Stopped down to f/5,6, the lens gets really sharp!
The best Bokeh is seen at f/2,8, not wide open.


A great piece of glass!



Posted By: ankit
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 19:13
bumblebee, interesting. Can you give a little more details on how you got infinity focus? Did you replace the metal ring on the lens with the shims on the 35-200? Great pics, btw!

-------------
For Sale: 100-300mm/4.5-5.6 D APO
http://ankit.smugmug.com - http://ankit.smugmug.com


Posted By: bumblebee
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 21:23
Hello!
Some more information about the AF mount conversion.

Remove the whole MC Mount, including the mount spacer.
The most AF mounts are not thick enough, so you have to fill up the space.
I took a 2,5mm thick AF mount + 0,5mm shim (red mark) to match infinity focus.

Because the tolerance between the aperture simulator and the mount is tight, the lever can stuck.


The dismantled Tokina delivers 7 shims (0,03/0,1/0,5mm).
Some mounts are not hole-compatible to the 58mm (Tamron 28-200).


This is a clean and fast solution, when you have found the parts...

Greetings
Simon





Posted By: ankit
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 21:29
Very interesting. Do all AF lenses have those shims? I guess I am going to have to look for a Tokina 35-200. :)

-------------
For Sale: 100-300mm/4.5-5.6 D APO
http://ankit.smugmug.com - http://ankit.smugmug.com


Posted By: bumblebee
Date Posted: 08 January 2008 at 21:48
The Tokina was the only one with shims, perhaps some other third party brands have those shims?


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 09 January 2008 at 00:21
You can also make your own shims out of paper (e.g. the kind used for baking, it's quite thin and water-resistant), or aluminium foil.


Posted By: pnaciona
Date Posted: 09 January 2008 at 00:33
@bumblebee: Did you have to drill new screw holes or did the holes match between the Rokkor and the A-mount bayonet?

-------------
Some call me Perry, Peri, or Pericles. You can call me Jack. You don't know me.


Posted By: bumblebee
Date Posted: 09 January 2008 at 22:41
pnaciona, the hole circle of some four-hole AF bayonets are not compatible to the mc-mount. But there are AF mounts you can use like the original MC mount with the original screws. No extra hole or drilling is needed, when the hole circle is the same.


Posted By: kutunluu
Date Posted: 09 January 2008 at 22:52
Ok, this is something I really really want to get my hands on! Now I just got to get looking for the lense. I already got some spare lenses I can use for the mount.

Btw. What a great forum this is.


Posted By: pnaciona
Date Posted: 11 January 2008 at 05:35
Thanks, bumblebee! I might play with one of my Rokkor lenses.

-------------
Some call me Perry, Peri, or Pericles. You can call me Jack. You don't know me.


Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 13 January 2008 at 10:29
Welcome to Dyxum kutunluu.

We have quite a few Finnish members -- http://www.dyxum.com/users/countrylist.asp - see.


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 13 January 2008 at 12:30
Originally posted by brettania brettania wrote:

We have quite a few Finnish members -- http://www.dyxum.com/users/countrylist.asp - see.


Still behind Sweden, damn it! =)


Posted By: AlexKarasev
Date Posted: 15 January 2008 at 02:25
Yes, I too have used a 58/1.2 converted to AF, for like 5 years now. I have used a genuine Minolta A mount part I had ordered from Minolta (yes, Minolta would freely send you any exploded lens diagrams with part numbers, and you could then order any parts you wanted). The mount I'd chosen was from 50/1.7, which only cost $15 and was made of chromed brass, for ease of machining:



I find the 58/1.2 is a great lens to convert and otherwise unattainable in our mount for any price. I feel as a group we should work together to expand the options available to us for such a conversion, namely:

1. Find out from SONY if we can order the genuine mounts and screws. These should be a more cost effective and better looking and fitting solution than bastardizing various 3rd party adapters. If, unlike Minolta, SONY won't sell one or two adapters, we should look into a group purchase.

2. Work with the two guys that make the AF confirmation chips. The present versions won't work on this lens - they are simply too wide, and not very conveniently accessible. I have slightly better access to St. Petersburg, Russia which is where one of the adapters is, and his stuff is cheaper - however I firmly believe we should cultivate both adapters. We need them to come up with improved narrow versions - with mounting holes that fit SONY mounts so there's no silly business with the glue and such. I'd like to see a further evolved version of this pic I'd faked:
http://public.fotki.com/SashaKarasev/sony-minolta-photo-eqpt/adapting_mf_lenses/romashkanarrow.html - http://public.fotki.com/SashaKarasev/sony-minolta-photo-eqpt/adapting_mf_lenses/romashkanarrow.html

(specifically, an adapter with a much narrower contacts panel with mounting holes in standard locations, plus the chip portion that can be snapped off and wired to the contacts part - via the available soldering pads, as an alternative to the one-piece version that won't fit on 58/1.2 and several other lenses.

3. The ideal solution would be fully enabling AF. This lens is unit-focusing, and the moving mass is comparable to 85/1.4, so a similar approach could work. Of course the MC aperture blades are heavier than today's lenses - which likely can be mitigated by setting the min. aperture in ROM to be f/3.5 or f/5.6 rather than f/16 or below - thus limiting blade travel. I am not sure how much and if SONY would sell a cam/barrel set for its 85/1.4 - Minolta wanted over $300 for its set for this lens back when I had inquired, which I thought at the time was not worth it. If we could pool our resources and get access to some cost-effective aluminum machining and anodizing options, perhaps a small batch could be made.

4 My dream solution for this optic in particular would be to also add a tilt mechanism for DOF control - on a 1.2 optic that would be awesome. It would probably be news worthy in photo circles. If combined with AF, this is likely out of scope unless we get higher tech than SONY itself and use in-lens motors on 50mm. Interestingly Minolta's 35/28 shift CA maintained body aperture linkage via a flexible shaft - apparently the only mechanical auto-aperture shift lens in the world (not sure if Canon's tilt-shift lenses are auto-aperture also - probably easier for Canon to implement if the aperture control is electronic).


Lastly, I feel we need a new forum for issues related to (more or less) permanent lens adaptations, including MC / MD lenses, rather than merely using M42 lenses on Alpha which is the topic of the present forum.

AK


Posted By: DLNY
Date Posted: 11 July 2008 at 00:06
Just bought a 58/1.2 (should arrive on Saturday) and in the meanwhile have taken the the A mount part off one of my broken AF lenses.
I can't wait to get this working and want to thank in advance everybody who made this thread such informative reading......

Might even sell my 85/1.4 G if I get this working


Posted By: ricardovaste
Date Posted: 11 July 2008 at 12:38
Originally posted by DLNY DLNY wrote:

Just bought a 58/1.2 (should arrive on Saturday) and in the meanwhile have taken the the A mount part off one of my broken AF lenses.
I can't wait to get this working and want to thank in advance everybody who made this thread such informative reading......

Might even sell my 85/1.4 G if I get this working


Congrats! It an awesome lens. I sadly had to sell mine shortly after I converted it because of financial issues at home. But since things have strengthened a bit, I've managed to convert a 50/1.2 rokkor-x for both my a-mount system and my brother in laws ef-mount system. They are definately too very different lenses; the 50mm is smaller and lighter and technically probably sharper, definately at f/2 anyway. the 58mm is much larger and heavier, but because of that little extra reach is just feels much better for portraits. the 50mm is probably more versitile, & there honestly isnt much between them in terms of bokeh at all, but i still prefer the 58mm I think... "there's just something about it"

-------------
I photograph the moments in people's lives that mean the most to them: http://www.rharris-images.com/ - Richard Harris Photography


Posted By: groovyone
Date Posted: 27 July 2008 at 03:40
I have a broken Sigma 400mm. I may pluck the AF mount off the rear and see if it could be used.

You guys have really sparked my interest in these great MD lenses.

Is the reason for doing the conversion to maintain the full focus range to infinity?

-------------
A99|A900|A100IR|A7|Maxxum 7|Maxxum 5|Polaroid


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 27 July 2008 at 11:40
Originally posted by groovyone groovyone wrote:

Is the reason for doing the conversion to maintain the full focus range to infinity?


Yes, since the other possible ways of using this lens on a Sony/Minolta AF -mount camera would be with a quality-degrading optical adapter (i.e. one containing a glass element, probably a cheap one at that) or with a glassless adapter that could be used for close-ups only.


Posted By: AlxK
Date Posted: 19 October 2008 at 00:03
Has any1 converted any longer lenses?
Something like http://cgi.ebay.com/Minolta-Tele-Rokkor-TD-1-5-6-f-600-MM-Telephoto-Lens_W0QQitemZ140275293873QQihZ004QQcategoryZ3323QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem - this ?
Or perhaps just a 135/2.8?
Or the 45mm pancake?
Should be possible, but how difficult?


-------------
A77 | A700 | SAL18250 | BEERCAN | KM 28-75mm 2.8 D | KM 100mm 2.8(D)Macro | KM 50mm 1.7 | Sigma 24mm 1.8D EX DG | HVL-F56AM | WIFE


Posted By: laptoprob
Date Posted: 19 October 2008 at 08:39
Yes, I converted my 300/4,5mm MD lens. The one with internal focussing. I added a chip from a deceased something-to-300mm lens to maken the 7D anti shake work. Brilliant!
Problem with the MD lenses is you have to shave off about a mm to make room for another mount. In my case a M42-Alpha adapter ring.
It is a lot smaller than my revived Sigma 400mm. The 7D has a splitprism focussing screen. Otherwise it is impossible to focus, manually ofcourse!

- now I lost how to add a photo from my harddrive. -


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 19 October 2008 at 19:48
Originally posted by AlxK AlxK wrote:

Has any1 converted any longer lenses?

Or perhaps just a 135/2.8?


I had a Minolta 135mm f/2.8 (literally found from a dumpster), which I tried converting. However, I gave up since the aperture control was one piece with the lens mount, and would have required some serious alteration to remain functional. As the lens had fungus, too, I didn't feel up to it.

So, some lenses are dead simple to convert (like the 58mm f/1.2), others have a more difficult construction.

(I'd be very interested in knowing about candidates for a simple conversion. =)


Posted By: hotwire
Date Posted: 26 October 2008 at 03:05
Originally posted by Arkku Arkku wrote:

Originally posted by ankit ankit wrote:

One question: from what I understand, the flange to film distance is 44.5mm for the AF mount, as opposed to 43.5 for the MD mount, and we are essentially moving the lens closer to the sensor when we adjust for infinity.


I thought about this myself when I made the modification, but as I adjusted the infinity focus I went past the correct position once and could focus past infinity (i.e. the lens was closer to the sensor than it would ever really need to be), but still there wasn't a problem with the mirror clearance on my A100. It may have slightly more clearance than a full frame camera, though, but at the correct infinity setting there doesn't seem to be a problem on Minolta AF film camera either.


The thing is, all this talk of a100's and a700's means smaller mirrors, and a lower likelyhood of this sort of thing happening.

I have been extremely hesitant to focus the lens to infinity on my Maxxum 9 or my *new* a900 because of that worry, especially given the larger mirror.

The problem on the Canon side only applies to the FF bodies which have the larger mirror.

-------------
a99ii; Maxxum 9

CZ: 16-35, 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8; Minolta: 50/1.4; MC58/1.2; 85/1.4GD 300/2.8; 500/8; 600/4; Tam: 90/2.8M; Sig: 12-24/4.5-5.6; 15/2.8; Sony: 35/1.4G; 135STF, 70-200/2.8G


Posted By: hotwire
Date Posted: 26 October 2008 at 19:05
I took a look at the rear flanges of my 35G and my 58/1.2 when both were focused to infinity. If someone has the proper measuring tools, maybe they can verify that distance to satisfy any worries as obviously the 35G is in compliance. They look close to the same.

How far does the rear flange protrude from the mount on a DT lens (say the 18-70)? I don't have one easily accessible to me at the moment, it's on my a100 in my car which is currently getting snow tires installed... I'll have it in a few hours.

-------------
a99ii; Maxxum 9

CZ: 16-35, 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8; Minolta: 50/1.4; MC58/1.2; 85/1.4GD 300/2.8; 500/8; 600/4; Tam: 90/2.8M; Sig: 12-24/4.5-5.6; 15/2.8; Sony: 35/1.4G; 135STF, 70-200/2.8G


Posted By: ricardovaste
Date Posted: 26 October 2008 at 19:15
FWIW when I was using my 50/1.2 (m42 convert) regularly, i asked a Canon friend (ex Minolta user) about whether he thought it would have any issues with a 5D (EG: FF, larger mirror). He gave me the measurements of how much clearance it needed for a 5D and proved it would have no such trouble (not saying the distances will be the same on the A900), he also said that he had some issues with other M42 lenses on his 5D with hitting the mirror (in the past). However, he was clear about this not being a big issues and that it certainly does not do any damage to the mirror or lens. If it hits, you will hear it, you simply slowly remove the lens and the mirror action will continue then rest.

I'm quite interested as to how this lens (58/1.2) will perform on the A900, although Pete has already shown us roughly the effect, with it mounted on his friends 5D. Would be nice to hear a more detailed report though.

-------------
I photograph the moments in people's lives that mean the most to them: http://www.rharris-images.com/ - Richard Harris Photography


Posted By: teko
Date Posted: 27 October 2008 at 02:26
Originally posted by hotwire hotwire wrote:



I have been extremely hesitant to focus the lens to infinity on my Maxxum 9 or my *new* a900 because of that worry, especially given the larger mirror.



Don't worry, the mirror would not hit the lens.
I brought my converted 58/1.2 to the Sony showroom in HK last week and mounted it to the new A900,(they allowed us to bring our own lens). Took some test shot and I did not hear any sound of the mirror hitting the rear of the lens.
Just a side note, since I have used a chipped nmount on my 58/1.2, I can use A mode. I have also brought my Zenitar 16mm w/o chip, and I can use M mode only.
Hope these info are useful, cheers.


Posted By: hotwire
Date Posted: 27 October 2008 at 04:08
Well I did some more looking today. The rear protrusion on the 18-70 DT is slightly longer than the protrusion of the 58 at infinity.

I believe it will not be an issue at all.

And yes, having focus confirmation on the 58 is sweet.

-------------
a99ii; Maxxum 9

CZ: 16-35, 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8; Minolta: 50/1.4; MC58/1.2; 85/1.4GD 300/2.8; 500/8; 600/4; Tam: 90/2.8M; Sig: 12-24/4.5-5.6; 15/2.8; Sony: 35/1.4G; 135STF, 70-200/2.8G


Posted By: ABramley
Date Posted: 27 October 2008 at 04:31
58 f1.2 definately doesn't hit the mirror on the A900 - at least not with my conversion.

Performance - it's a bit dreamy at f1.2 but sharpens up nicely by f2/2.8. Using extension tubes at f1.2 leads to silly bokkeh situations - lots of fun for getting the correct eyelash only in focus. CA is a huge problem - doesn't seem that easy to correct in lightroom either - it's so thick that lightroom thinks it's an actual blue line on top of anything metallic

I dunno if I'm going to keep mine - still not convinced it offers me much over a 50 1.4. Lovely focus ring though!

Few shots from messing about on flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/35398335@N00/

DoF at f2 & minimum focus distance:



Posted By: ABramley
Date Posted: 27 October 2008 at 04:33
Sorry - last shot was at f2. Here's the f1.2 version:



Posted By: 6tyNine
Date Posted: 01 November 2008 at 21:30
hmm, i didn't think much about the mirror collision thing.

I converted mine last night. I had a bit of work to make it work properly, but I always checked the protrusion side by side with my 50 M RS. They were identical so i didn't give it a second thought.

here it is when it was completed. did a photowalk today and am quite impressed.



in terms of the chip, how exactly do you get focus confirmation?? seems like you need to have the body set in AF mode, but then the AF motor takes a spaz.

-------------
Sony α100, Sony 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6, Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6


Posted By: hotwire
Date Posted: 02 November 2008 at 00:20
You should get focus confirmation in MF mode, but try to stick to the centre AF point since it is a 2.8 cross type.

-------------
a99ii; Maxxum 9

CZ: 16-35, 24-70/2.8, 135/1.8; Minolta: 50/1.4; MC58/1.2; 85/1.4GD 300/2.8; 500/8; 600/4; Tam: 90/2.8M; Sig: 12-24/4.5-5.6; 15/2.8; Sony: 35/1.4G; 135STF, 70-200/2.8G


Posted By: danwixson
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 01:16
I have done the conversion with a 135mm MC lens. What do i do with the post that sticks out of the lens? I don't want to put on sony alpha until i know it won't damage the camera, thanks.

-------------
Dan Wixson


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 02:36
Originally posted by danwixson danwixson wrote:

I have done the conversion with a 135mm MC lens. What do i do with the post that sticks out of the lens? I don't want to put on sony alpha until i know it won't damage the camera, thanks.


Can you post a picture of the lens showing the conversion and the thing that sticks out?


Posted By: Pete Ganzel
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 07:54
Dan:

Yes on some Rookkors the aperture pin will bind on your new mount because they are too long. When I have to do this, I use a thin abrasive slotting wheel on my Dremel to cut off 3 or 4 mm or so. I pack the rear of the lens with rag strips to prevent debris from going into the focusing helicoid and tape the rear element. Alternatively you could remove the aperture pin and cam assembly and do the grinding and cutting off the lens. You can also drill out the rivet end and remove the pin completely.

Pete


Posted By: foot
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 19:06
Another success story!

i just finished using Pete's 58/1.2 => M42 kit.

It's now working both on my A-mount cameras and the Pentax K20D (very nice camera!)

for the A-mount i use a chipped M42 adapter. For the K20D just a regular M42 => Pentax adapter

I'm still testing it on both mounts esp at infinity. So far it's looking pretty good!

Great guide - thanks a lot to Arkku and Pete.



Posted By: danwixson
Date Posted: 04 April 2009 at 02:10
I have pictures but I was able to remove the pin, no problem. Grabbed it with a mini set of needle nose pliers moved it slightly right and then left and pulled it out easily. Now I have the lens on the camera and it will not focus to infinity. I had to remove the black ring under the aperture ring and remove a side screw that limits the focus ring in and out. I unscrewed the front completely and restarted on a different thread, put all back together but it is the same. What would you recommend I try next? All I need to do now is figure out how to post the pics. Thanks Guys.

Dan

-------------
Dan Wixson


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 04 April 2009 at 16:36
To post the pictures, you need to put them elsewhere on the web somewhere and then use the IMG-tag (or the button with a picture of a tree on it in the edit bar) to provide the forum with a link to the picture file (or just give the URL if the picture is large).

As for infinity focus adjustment, the lens probably has some means of setting it, which probably involves removing some stops which couple the rotation to the focusing helicoid. Here's http://www.flickr.com/photos/arkku/1266932266/ - how to adjust infinity focus on the 58mm f/1.2 (older version), it may be something similar. Alternatively, I hear the newer version of the 58mm f/1.2 can also be adjusted from the front by unscrewing the nameplate to reveal a bunch of screws that you can loosen and then turn the lens to set the infinity position.


Posted By: clsmith
Date Posted: 30 September 2009 at 20:36
I am trying to convert a MD 50mm 1.4 as a trial-run first and wondering if anyone know if this is not possible ? Also I missed the caution from Arkku and others to watch out for the small bearing ball, so I lost it :( Anyone got suggestions on where I can find a substitute. Finally I see some ebay listings selling M42 adapters with chips for about $20 that supposedly work for all focal-lengths. Would they work ? Thanks CL


Posted By: Gabriel
Date Posted: 30 September 2009 at 22:27
You can try the small ball which is inside pen ink cartridges.

-------------
Pic a day http://tinyurl.com/2008-p-a-d - 2008 / http://tinyurl.com/2009-pad - 2009 / http://gabriel.mp3-tech.org/pics/galleries/2010_pic_a_day - 2010 galleries


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 30 September 2009 at 22:42
Originally posted by clsmith clsmith wrote:

I am trying to convert a MD 50mm 1.4 as a trial-run first and wondering if anyone know if this is not possible ?


How is the aperture linked in that version? If you remove the mount and turn the aperture ring, does the lens still stop down? If not, you may be able to add a spring (e.g. from a ballpoint pen) to pull the aperture mechanism, but even this possibility requires that the link mechanism itself (which relays the selected aperture from the ring to the lens) is not part of the mountóin some versions of some Minolta lenses it isÖ

Originally posted by clsmith clsmith wrote:


Also I missed the caution from Arkku and others to watch out for the small bearing ball, so I lost it :( Anyone got suggestions on where I can find a substitute.


The pen ink suggestion above is pretty good, I haven't thought of that before. Another option might be to somehow extract the ballpoint of a ballpoint pen. And many lenses have a ring near the mount with literally dozens of tiny ball bearings inside, probably your MD lens also (and this ring is probably a part that you are removing for the modification)Ö Removing one of those won't hurt, but be careful opening it up since they'll probably spill all over and it's really irritating to put them all back (trust me =). The size may not be an exact match, though.

Originally posted by clsmith clsmith wrote:

Finally I see some ebay listings selling
M42 adapters with chips for about $20 that supposedly work for all focal-lengths.


The adapter will work with any focal length in the sense that it will give focus confirmation (of unknown accuracy). It will not work with focal length(s) other than programmed in the adapter in the sense that it would give accurate SteadyShot.


Posted By: Pete Ganzel
Date Posted: 01 October 2009 at 02:24
CL:

The MD f/1.4 (plastic aperture ring) like many MD lenses, has the aperture preset cam linkage as part of the mount assembly. It can be converted but is not easy since you have to either fabricate a linkage to fit on your new mount or use the mount itself as a core for a new AF style mount. There is a return spring already in the lens body. The ball and detent spring on this lens are in the plastic aperture ring and not on the body of the lens as on the older MC lenses and are a little harder to reassemble.

Just a couple of notes on these little parts. If you use a little dab of grease on the end of a toothpick you can use that as "glue" and control positioning of the ball and spring. Do not try to maneuver with tweezers as they will really go flying. All fasteners and springs, balls,etc in cameras are now steel. I keep a magnetic mat on my workbench (car sign material) which really helps with errant parts. I have a powerful magnet that I sweep over the carpet where I work and usually find what I've misplaced (and often what I haven't). Sometimes the parts are in your clothing.

As Arkku says, junk lenses can yield dozens of these bearings. They are usually of two sizes, 1.2mm (as in your detent ball) or 1mm. PM me if you want a replacement as I have a few for spares.

Good Luck,

Pete

    



Posted By: clsmith
Date Posted: 01 October 2009 at 20:00
Thanks everyone for help. Gabriel's idea of using the ballpoint of a ballpoint pen was brilliant. It fitted well as a replacement for the aperture ring, there is still a very little free play, but totally workable.

I am going to order a M42 adapter and give it a try and will give an update later on my attempt on the MD 50m 1.4 success or not.

After reading through thread, I see others have questions on how to take apart old minolta lenses. I found the Japanese site below that gives a pretty good explanation on different Rokkor lenses. You can try to translate using google.

http://sa_ss.at.infoseek.co.jp/minolta/


Posted By: Alex H
Date Posted: 02 October 2009 at 02:56
Hello clsmith,

I did convert the Minolta MC Rokkor PG 50 1.5 into MAF mount but it was not easy. The aperture linkage has nothing to do with it - I did not have t modify anything. Just attaching the M42 adapter is also very simple task, but to be able to reach infinity I had to remove (with the help of Dremel) one or two millimeters of the metal base of the lens (where MC mount was attached to.

PM me if You want to know more details or see pictures.
Alex

-------------
http://www.holovachov.com/fluorescence - Ultraviolet-induced visible fluorescence photography - A7, A77, NEX6, NEX6-FS - http://www.holovachov.com - Gallery


Posted By: Pete Ganzel
Date Posted: 02 October 2009 at 05:41
Originally posted by Alex H Alex H wrote:

Hello clsmith,

I did convert the Minolta MC Rokkor PG 50 1.5 into MAF mount but it was not easy. The aperture linkage has nothing to do with it - I did not have t modify anything. Just attaching the M42 adapter is also very simple task, but to be able to reach infinity I had to remove (with the help of Dremel) one or two millimeters of the metal base of the lens (where MC mount was attached to.

PM me if You want to know more details or see pictures.
Alex


Alex:

CL is asking about a 50mm MD f/1.4 which is different than the MC lenses. The 58mm MC Rokkors are relatively easy to adapt.

Pete


Posted By: Josiel
Date Posted: 02 October 2009 at 05:53
Hi!

Does anyone know if the 500mm MD Rokkor (mirror) can be adapted?

Thanks!

-------------
A700 | A100 | 28-135 | 24-105 | 100-300 APO | 20 2.8 | 28 2 | 50 1.4 | 85 1.4 | 100 2.8M | 200 2.8 APO | TC 2x APO | Sigma 50 2.8M | Sigma 105 2.8M | TC 2x MC7


Posted By: Alex H
Date Posted: 02 October 2009 at 05:54
Pete, I am not talking about 58mm, but about 50mm 1.4 MC Rokkor-X PG. I mistyped it as 1.5 and forgot to add "-X" so apologize if I confused anyone.

It is not as easy to convert as 58mm MC Rokkor, but might be easier than the later versions of 50mm MD. And according to "rokkorfiles" it might be just a bit better than the MD version, although I never compared them myself.

Alex

-------------
http://www.holovachov.com/fluorescence - Ultraviolet-induced visible fluorescence photography - A7, A77, NEX6, NEX6-FS - http://www.holovachov.com - Gallery


Posted By: Alex H
Date Posted: 02 October 2009 at 05:57
As for the 500mm mirror lenses I would better go with the Tamron Adaptall or Sony/Minolta AF versions.
Conversion of the 500mm MD mirror is probably easy, since there is no aperture mechanism involved. Reaching the infinity focusing might be more complicated...
Alex

-------------
http://www.holovachov.com/fluorescence - Ultraviolet-induced visible fluorescence photography - A7, A77, NEX6, NEX6-FS - http://www.holovachov.com - Gallery


Posted By: Swiftyspix
Date Posted: 02 October 2009 at 06:16
Alex, I have a 500/8 right in front of me and it does not look easy. The mount appears to part of the lens base and installed from the inside. This portion is tapered to a diameter smaller than an AF mount. There are no screws showing from the outside other than the focus ring screws. The filters also mount inside the lens mount.

-------------
α850 α77 α700 7D Max7 BBC BC 70-300G 80-200G 28-135 35-105 28-70G 24-50/4 11-18KM AF500/8M 135/2.8 100/2.8M Macro 85/1.4O MC58/1.2 50/3.5 Macro 35/1.4O 35/2 24/2.8 HVL 58AM


Posted By: Alex H
Date Posted: 02 October 2009 at 06:29
Thanks Richard for information. In that case it is IMHO better to use the AF version (either Minolta or Sony) or the Tamron. I do not remember how much would You pay for the Minolta 500/8 for the manual focus minolta mount (am not sure if I can correctly call it MC or MD), but Tamron mirror in nice condition sells now for 150-200 dollars on the evilBay in US.

I think we are going a bit off-topic here now.

-------------
http://www.holovachov.com/fluorescence - Ultraviolet-induced visible fluorescence photography - A7, A77, NEX6, NEX6-FS - http://www.holovachov.com - Gallery


Posted By: Josiel
Date Posted: 02 October 2009 at 07:28
Thanks!

Off-topic mode [OFF]



-------------
A700 | A100 | 28-135 | 24-105 | 100-300 APO | 20 2.8 | 28 2 | 50 1.4 | 85 1.4 | 100 2.8M | 200 2.8 APO | TC 2x APO | Sigma 50 2.8M | Sigma 105 2.8M | TC 2x MC7


Posted By: debuggerus
Date Posted: 04 October 2009 at 05:27
The 500/8 mirror is one of the easier ones to convert. The lens is designed to focus beyond infinity so reaching infinity shouldn't be a problem. I had mine converted to M42 mount.


Posted By: Arkku
Date Posted: 04 October 2009 at 13:03
Also no aperture control to worry about on the mirror lensÖ =)


Posted By: Swiftyspix
Date Posted: 04 October 2009 at 16:24
Originally posted by debuggerus debuggerus wrote:

The 500/8 mirror is one of the easier ones to convert. The lens is designed to focus beyond infinity so reaching infinity shouldn't be a problem. I had mine converted to M42 mount.

Did you do the conversion yourself or observe how the installation was accomplished, i.e. are the screws internal? Are the rear filters a necessary optical component as in the G telephoto primes?
I can see being able to mount a M42 adapter however turning down the outside diameter to match the lens base, the Minolta AF mount's internal diameter places the flange beyond the lenses base diameter.
I have a Vivitar bellows adapter ( Minolta MF-M42 male) and tried this with a M42-AF adapter combination and it places the lens beyond infinity.

-------------
α850 α77 α700 7D Max7 BBC BC 70-300G 80-200G 28-135 35-105 28-70G 24-50/4 11-18KM AF500/8M 135/2.8 100/2.8M Macro 85/1.4O MC58/1.2 50/3.5 Macro 35/1.4O 35/2 24/2.8 HVL 58AM


Posted By: debuggerus
Date Posted: 05 October 2009 at 06:12
I did the conversion a while ago (last year). This is from my memory:

Remove the 3 screws and the move the back. Turn the back over and remove the mount thru the back. With the mount removed, I flattened the back and put an M42 mount (taken from a broken takumar 135mm). You can just put an M42-A mount or EOS adapter which should work fine. To adjust infinity focus, remove the focus rubber, then remove the tape that holds the focusing distance mark ring and adjust infinity focus. When infinity is tuned, put the tape back and then the rubber.
I once borrowed a tamron adaptall 500 f8 and thought that the minolta is sharper.
By the way, the rear filters (ND, red, orange, and yellow) are not required.


Posted By: mark
Date Posted: 26 July 2011 at 15:51
i have an a200 and am looking for a macro lens. i found a vivitar mc mount 70-210 macro for a good price. would this conversion work on that lens?

thanks!


Posted By: Basil
Date Posted: 26 July 2011 at 15:55
Mark,

If you are going to use the Vivitar for Macro work, you may just want to get a glassless MC to MA adapter. It will act as a short extension tube and allow even closer focus. That's how I use mine and it works great.

-------------
To see is to enjoy. To see beyond is to rejoice.

A77Mark II; A850; A700; A100; NEX 6; various film bodies and an ever-changing collection of lenses



Print Page | Close Window