Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Theodoros on January 27, 2015, 07:02:06 pm
-
The JAS adapter (850 USD cost), arrived 3 days ago so that I can now mount my 7 Contax lenses (all but the 350mm) on my 36 & 16mp FF Nikon cameras with full aperture dedication and AF compatibility! The adapter was purchased in order to considerably decrease the size of equipment I have to carry when both MF & DSLR is needed... Up to now I have come up with the following conclusions:
1. All the lenses have enough resolution to cope with the 36mp sensor's pixel size even at wide open aperture...
2. The famous contrast, flare resistance, colour saturation and bokeh of Zeiss, is in a class of its own if compared with Nikon glass.
3. AF performance is very good (much better than C645) on the Nikon... you do loose your DOF preview button though.
4. AF accuracy seems fine right out of the box... (although it hasn't been examined thoroughly yet).
5. JAS adapter is well made but tolerances need to be even tighter when considering the price... The lenses are easy to fit and lock securely, but (for my taste) there is some slight "wobbling" when they are locked in the bayonet... (can't affect lens performance as the movement plane is parallel to the focal plane). There is also some "idea" of tolerance (maybe a 20th of a mm) between the mount and lens... (can't be felt when shooting - only if one forces the lens to bend against the mount). OTOH, Nikon side mount of the adapter, performs just like if it was a Nikkor lens.
To make a long story short, I decided to sell all my Nikkor lenses but the 17-35mm f2.8, the old 35-70mm f2.8 & the 85mm F2.8 PC micro and replace the rest with the Contax glass.
I had in mind to buy a Cmos Leica S007 with Contax adapter to do the same (use my Contax glass on it) and only add the 24mm Leica lens while selling all my Nikon gear at the same time, but since then, I also bought a Sinarback 54H alongside the Imacon 528c I was using on my Contax... I then thought "why use two 16x able backs?" and decided to replace the Imacon 528c with a Hasselblad 39MS back (just after service and IR filter replaced). Since I was planning to use the S007 as single-shot MFDB with additional low light capabilities, the plan was changed into using the CF-39MS on Contax for single shot and keep low light capabilities with Nikon. A large amount of money was saved too...
-
Thanks for posting this Theodorus that is good to know. Also looks like it works fine with Canon too at least according to this (http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1288534/0) user review
-
Hi, thanks for the link (I was unaware of it). By coincidence he first tried the same lenses first as I did, which is explainable as teles would be the most demanding ones for focus accuracy... I also added the 210/4 and then both the 140/2.8 and 210/4 with the mutar 1.4x added on... No focus inaccuracy observed either even at (almost) 300/5.6....
I'm surprised he doesn't comment on lenses performance, the result is clearly better (even with the TC added on) than the Nikkor lenses I used to use... Maybe less so for resolution (my Nikkors where no slouch), but again the rest of the performance (more important than res IMO) is clearly better with the Zeiss glass.
DR has improved considerably too... I don't mean the captured DR, but rather the DR you are left with after processing... this must be because of the higher contrast that the Zeiss lenses exhibit... Less contrast is needed with processing and thus more DR is retained... Another thing is that with the Zeiss, (all of them) one can point the camera towards the sun and flare resistance is such, that can watch the sun through the VF easily and actually capture the perimeter of the ultimate light source in real! ...Honest! ...that impressive!
I only have some (personal - maybe I'm too demanding) complains about the tolerances on the Zeiss mount side... Clearly I'm not going back on using Nikkor glass on my FF cameras. They are now a step further close to MF performance... More "filmish" than ever and with higher resolution than film. Clearly Impressed!
-
Thanks for the "mini review"! ;D
But this made me lift an eyebrow...
... I decided to sell all my Nikkor lenses but the 17-35mm f2.8, the old 35-70mm f2.8...
May I ask, why not these two?
-
Thanks for sharing Theodoros, sounds like a good option for C645 glass owners. Please show us some examples!
I wish someone would make such an adapter for my Leica S lenses.
-
Thanks for the "mini review"! ;D
But this made me lift an eyebrow...
May I ask, why not these two?
One to have for ultra WA on Nikon (because 35mm is the widest C645 available) and the other (the 35-70) because it is cheap to sell, great in performance, fast aperture and compact enough to have as a walk around lens.
-
Thanks for sharing Theodoros, sounds like a good option for C645 glass owners. Please show us some examples!
I wish someone would make such an adapter for my Leica S lenses.
I believe that Steel is working on this... (don't know if leaf shutter will work though - not that I would care with flash sync up to 1/250). But again, if one goes for the new S007, or doesn't need or use higher ISO with one of the older S-series, why use a DSLR at all? ...I find the Leica compact and flexible enough...
-
I would like to see a Sony A-mount version to couple my Contax 645 lenses to a body with in body stabilization, even though these days the future of the Sony A-mount seems to be blowing in the wind, so it may not be worth investing time and money in R&D required to do this. These days the pundits seem more excited about the E-mount... but given Sony´s mercurial track record that may not last much longer than the A-mount did?
-
Hi,
The A-mount was introduced 1985 and the E-mount 2011.
The Canon EOS mount was introduced after the A-mount.
Canon has two different EOS mounts, full frame and APS-C. Really same with Nikon.
Canon has also the EOS-M mount, introduced in 2012.
So, I don't see Sony more mercurial than Canon.…
That said, there are reasons that Canon is number one and Sony distant third in interchangeable lens cameras.
Best regards
Erik
I would like to see a Sony A-mount version to couple my Contax 645 lenses to a body with in body stabilization, even though these days the future of the Sony A-mount seems to be blowing in the wind, so it may not be worth investing time and money in R&D required to do this. These days the pundits seem more excited about the E-mount... but given Sony´s mercurial track record that may not last much longer than the A-mount did?
-
Canon has two different EOS mounts, full frame and APS-C. Really same with Nikon.
Nikon has the F mount, just some lenses don't cover FX and the oldest ones need some filing or the nikon df, but the mount is the same.
-
I would like to see a Sony A-mount version to couple my Contax 645 lenses to a body with in body stabilization, even though these days the future of the Sony A-mount seems to be blowing in the wind, so it may not be worth investing time and money in R&D required to do this. These days the pundits seem more excited about the E-mount... but given Sony´s mercurial track record that may not last much longer than the A-mount did?
Actually I don't see why making an adapter for Sony Alpha would be a problem for Steel... With such an adapter one could then add the Sony Alpha to Sony-E adapter and have all functions on both cameras... Why don't you mail Steel and ask him? I believe that Sony Alpha CPU contacts and logic are very similar to Canon Eos (which are very similar to Contax-N) and thus, there could be an easier than making the Nikon adapter task... Here is Steel's mail: [email protected] he is also a member in Lula.
-
Hi,
The A-mount was introduced 1985 and the E-mount 2011.
The Canon EOS mount was introduced after the A-mount.
Canon has two different EOS mounts, full frame and APS-C. Really same with Nikon.
Canon has also the EOS-M mount, introduced in 2012.
So, I don't see Sony more mercurial than Canon.…
That said, there are reasons that Canon is number one and Sony distant third in interchangeable lens cameras.
Best regards
Erik
Good to know... in this case the e-mount may outlive many of us :D
-
Actually I don't see why making an adapter for Sony Alpha would be a problem for Steel... With such an adapter one could then add the Sony Alpha to Sony-E adapter and have all functions on both cameras... Why don't you mail Steel and ask him? I believe that Sony Alpha CPU contacts and logic are very similar to Canon Eos (which are very similar to Contax-N) and thus, there could be an easier than making the Nikon adapter task... Here is Steel's mail: [email protected] he is also a member in Lula.
Thanks Theodoros, if this is the case then maybe better to wait and see if Steel comes up with an E-adapter rather than requiring the piggyback solution you mention, and also if Sony comes up with a Nex 7II with image stabilization that could be a good sidekick for the larger Contax 645.
Being able to use Contax 645 lenses on the A7II that seems to be getting good reviews particularly for the image stabilization system could also be fun to try though maybe a bit big and heavy to carry around together with the Contax 645 system.
-
Hi,
Same with Sony, both A- and E-mounts can take both FF and APS-C lenses. But Sony is called mercurial and Nikon not.
That said, Nikon has kept the F mount mechanically the same since Nikon F. I would agree that is a very good thing.
Best regards
Erik
Nikon has the F mount, just some lenses don't cover FX and the oldest ones need some filing or the nikon df, but the mount is the same.
-
Thanks Theodoros, if this is the case then maybe better to wait and see if Steel comes up with an E-adapter rather than requiring the piggyback solution you mention, and also if Sony comes up with a Nex 7II with image stabilization that could be a good sidekick for the larger Contax 645.
Being able to use Contax 645 lenses on the A7II that seems to be getting good reviews particularly for the image stabilization system could also be fun to try though maybe a bit big and heavy to carry around together with the Contax 645 system.
Making an adapter for C645 lenses to work on Sony Alpha with full dedication will provide a second option for one to use them on Sony-E mount (again with full dedication) since this option is already available through the C645 to EOS JAS adapter. One can add the JAS adapter for C645 lenses to work on EOS and then add the Metabones one for EOS to work on Sony E-mount.
-
I would love to see some raw samples, theodoros :D
-
I would love to see some raw samples, theodoros :D
You'll have to wait... (I'll sent some whenever I have time for decent ones) Nikon is not my first priority system (C645 & Fuji GX680 with my MFDBs are....) and my posts here, have been decreased considerably due to projects running (as you may have noticed)... This post is purely informative on solutions that concern many people. OTOH I don't like to post random picts or have portraits of my family or cats posted... I'll try to post some landscape (with the WAs) or landscape details (with the teles) whenever I'll have time to do so...
Also... Raw you may forget about it, it will be Jpegs from Raws developed with Focus software and 100% "cuts" out of them...
-
Excuse me if this is a dumb question but I would like to ask anyway what happens in terms of crop factor and 35mm equivalent focal lengths when you mount a Contax 645 lens (for example the good old Zeiss 80mm f2?) on a FF Canikon DSLR and also what about if the same lens was mounted on an APS-C sensor camera?
-
The focal lenght of the lens does not change when using different sensor sizes. An 80 mm is always an 80mm, so the Zeiss 80mm F/2 will be the same as an 80mm lens made for 35 mm
The "lens equivalence" concept is related to "angle of view" or Field of view, because many people are familiar with 35mm, where a 50mm is a normal, 80-100 medium tele, 28mm wide angle and so on.
When you mount the 80mm on a APS-C, it will still be an 80mm, but the angle of view will be similar to a 120mm on FF (considering 1.5x).
Comparing FF 35mm to medium format, an 80mm is a normal lens in medim format but a short tele for FF 35mm (in terms of angle of view).
More info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35_mm_equivalent_focal_length)
-
thanks for explaining this and the useful link. If I understand right this means the angle of view of the same 80mm lens would be a whopping 180mm on an aps-c body... maybe good for photographing sea lions?
-
No,
You don't understand, 80 mm is 80 mm on an APS-C body. But, on an MFD it is about a normal lens.
On the APS-C it is a short tele lens. If you assume that a subject fills the frame on APS-C you would need around 120 mm on full frame 135 and around 180 on medium format to fill those larger frames.
You can photograph sea lions with an 80 mm lens on APS-C, if they are behind a cage or you are in cage. You can of course shoot sea lions with an 80 mm on APS-C in the wild, it is just that you your life expectancy may be shortened.
Best regards
Erik
thanks for explaining this and the useful link. If I understand right this means the angle of view of the same 80mm lens would be a whopping 180mm on an aps-c body... maybe good for photographing sea lions?
-
By the way... Since a FF DSLR is about 1.5xcrop frame of 6x4.5 (when held at "landscape" orientation) and since Nikon's 16mp sensor is of 7.2microns of pixel size (Same as Dalsa 33mp - 1.33x crop factor with respect to DSLR) and Nikon's 24mp sensor's pixel is of 6microns (as plenty -todays majority- other MF sensors are), one can easily imagine -if he is familiar with the lenses performance on MF (or Leica S)- the kind of performance he would expect on a FF DSLR... If I would have to add, I only worried for performance on the 36MP sensor before I ordered it... but it proved to be fine... Just fine! Another thing is that corner/edge performance is uniform with the centre one at any aperture... but this is to expected... and of course, vignetting is an unknown word for the system.
-
Hmmm.... lots to learn about crop factors and sea lions :o
Let me ask this then, when I look through the "normal" 80mm MF lens via the viewfinder of my Contax 645 what I see of the subject included within the frame is "about" the same as what I used to see when I looked at the same subject through the "normal" 50mm Leica R lens via the viewfinder of my old 35mm Leica RE camera, right?
So, if I mounted this same 80mm MF lens via an adapter on my old 35mm Leica RE body would I see more, less or the same subject within the frame?
How much more or less of the subject would I see within the frame if I mounted the same 80mm MF lens via an adapter on a camera with an APS-C-sized sensor?
Maybe I should post this in Beginner´s Questions rather than here?
-
Hmmm.... lots to learn about crop factors and sea lions :o
Let me ask this then, when I look through the "normal" 80mm MF lens via the viewfinder of my Contax 645 what I see of the subject included within the frame is "about" the same as what I used to see when I looked at the same subject through the "normal" 50mm Leica R lens via the viewfinder of my old 35mm Leica RE camera, right?
So, if I mounted this same 80mm MF lens via an adapter on my old 35mm Leica RE body would I see more, less or the same subject within the frame?
How much more or less of the subject would I see within the frame if I mounted the same 80mm MF lens via an adapter on a camera with an APS-C-sized sensor?
Maybe I should post this in Beginner´s Questions rather than here?
You'll see less angle, exactly the same angle as if you would use a Leica R 80mm lens...
-
Ah huh! Thanks, now even I understand ;)
-
I'm back with a mirco-review of this adapter for those interested:
(1) I'm using the adapter with Contax 140mm and 210mm lenses thus far on a Nikon D800. It works really well. Fit and finish are good and focus is both relatively fast and fairly accurate (very little focus hunting and sharp focus in the resulting pictures).
(2) Indeed, judging from my recollection as a long-time Contax 645 user, focus with these lenses on the D800 via this adapter is significantly better than on the Contax 645 body itself. As those of you who use or have used Contax 645 know, AF was always somewhat slow, lots of hunting in anything other than the brightest light, etc. Because I loved the lenses, I was willing to live with that (often just resorting to focusing manually). But on the D800 with this adapter, AF is *dramatically* better than on the Contax 645 body. I'd say it's at least as good as my non-AFS Nikon lenses are on the D800. (That doesn't sound impressive unless you've used the Contax lenses on the Contax body, where the AF performance was nowhere near as good as even a non-AFS Nikon lens on a Nikon body).
(3) As it happens, I also have a Leica S and the Leica-made Contax-to-Leica S adapter. The JAS adapter + Contax lenses on the D800 body also has significantly better AF than the same lenses used with the Leica adapter on the Leica S body. I did a fairly extensive back and forth last night since I have both adapters and both bodies, swapping the same lens on each body using each adapter. There's no question that the AF performance with the JAS+D800 is much better than with the same Contax lenses using the Leica adapter+Leica S. I was completely flabbergasted by this. The Leica S adapter is decent: that is, its AF performance is reminiscent of the performance of the Contax lenses on the Contax body, so I really can't complain (Plus I didn't pay full price for mine: bought it used). But compared to using these lenses with the JAS adapter on the D800, it's no contest. I'm not sure if this is because the D800 AF motor is better/stronger than the Leica S AF motor, or if it's because the JAS adapter is better than the Leica adapter, or a combination of both. But whatever it is, it's pretty impressive that some random guy (no offense, obviously a very talented guy) made an adapter that rivals or exceeds the adapter made by a multi-billion dollar company, for less than half the cost. (I realize I may be comparing apples to oranges, since the difference may well be attributable to the different AF motors driving the lenses, rather than to the different adapter, or at least not solely due to the different adapters.) It tempts me to lobby him to make a JAS Contax-to-Leica S adapter....
(4) The AF performance of the Contax lenses on the D800 body via the JAS adapter is at least as good in terms of speed and accuracy as the AF performance of the two native Leica S lenses I own on the Leica S body. My initial impression is that it's definitely better than the AF performance of the 70mm Leica S lens (with the old firmware -- haven't been able to update the lens firmware yet for that lens) and at least as good, if not slightly better, than the 30-90 Leica S lens (with latest firmware), especially in dim light. In bright light, they're roughly comparable, but in dim light, it's pretty compelling that Contax+JAS+Nikon D800 is faster and more accurate than my Leica S lenses on the Leica S body.
-
But compared to using these lenses with the JAS adapter on the D800, it's no contest. I'm not sure if this is because the D800 AF motor is better/stronger than the Leica S AF motor, or if it's because the JAS adapter is better than the Leica adapter, or a combination of both.
Hi William, thanks for confirming my observations... Actually D800 has no AF motor in its body, the Contax 645 Zeiss lenses have an AF motor inside them (much like the AF-S Nikkors).... So there is no other explanation but that the AF problem with the C645 is in the camera's AF sensor for sensitivity and accuracy... which is explainable given how old the system is.
-
Hi William,
many thanks for your mirco-review, much appreciated. I tried two Contax-Leica S adapters but one was so tight, I couldn't attach it to the camera, the other had firmware problems. After that, I gave up. Is your adapter working as advertised?
I believe that Steel is working on this... (don't know if leaf shutter will work though - not that I would care with flash sync up to 1/250).
I think that's good news since such an adapter would make the S lenses more versatile. If you look at the MTF's, performance on a FF sensor would be outstanding.
But again, if one goes for the new S007, or doesn't need or use higher ISO with one of the older S-series, why use a DSLR at all?
Indeed it's the reportage/higher ISO work that makes me want to use my lenses with an adapter on a fast DSLR.
...I find the Leica compact and flexible enough...
Absolutely!
-
The D800 definitely has an AF motor in the body for screwdriver style old AF Nikkors.
-
The D800 definitely has an AF motor in the body for screwdriver style old AF Nikkors.
It sure has... but it is inactive with the C645 lenses via the JAS adapter on it... which is what I was referring to. The C645 lenses have two motors in the lens, one for focus and another for aperture (although there is an aperture ring, the aperture is electronic), that's why one couldn't fit C645 lenses before on a Nikon camera... he couldn't control the aperture! The JAS adapter manages to both connect the AF motor in the lens with the AF system of Nikon cameras and also to control the aperture motor via the camera's dial.
-
Thank you very mach indeed. Very useful info:
"""' m(3) As it happens, I also have a Leica S and the Leica-made Contax-to-Leica S adapter. The JAS adapter + Contax lenses on the D800 body also has significantly better AF than the same lenses used with the Leica adapter on the Leica S body. I did a fairly extensive back and forth last night since I have both adapters and both bodies, swapping the same lens on each body using each adapter. There's no question that the AF performance with the JAS+D800 is much better than with the same Contax lenses using the Leica adapter+Leica S. I was completely flabbergasted by this. The Leica S adapter is decent: that is, its AF performance is reminiscent of the performance of the Contax lenses on the Contax body, so I really can't complain (Plus I didn't pay full price for mine: bought it used). But compared to using these lenses with the JAS adapter on the D800, it's no contest. I'm not sure if this is because the D800 AF motor is better/stronger than the Leica S AF motor, or if it's because the JAS adapter is better than the Leica adapter, or a combination of both. But whatever it is, it's pretty impressive that some random guy (no offense, obviously a very talented guy) made an adapter that rivals or exceeds the adapter made by a multi-billion dollar company, for less than half the cost. (I realize I may be comparing apples to oranges, since the difference may well be attributable to the different AF motors driving the lenses, rather than to the different adapter, or at least not solely due to the different adapters.) It tempts me to lobby him to make a JAS Contax-to-Leica S adapter...."""
I am ready to support the development of the JAS C-to-Leica-S adapter. Count me in. Or a Rolley-to-Leica-S adapter....?
-
Hi Yevgeny, do you know if leaf shutter lenses can be supported by Contax 645? If it could (obviously in a Similar manner to Mamyia or Leica), a Rollei to Contax adapter should be interesting...
-
I am ready to support the development of the JAS C-to-Leica-S adapter. Count me in. Or a Rolley-to-Leica-S adapter....?
I would actually also be interested in both.
Especially the Rollei to Leica S adapter (strangely enough no Leica equivalent yet) would be very nice...!!!
-
Hello, Theodoros.
Never heard about Rolleiflex-to-Contax adapters. I heard a rumour about Rolleiflex-to-Leica adaptation two years ago, no confirmation from anyone knowledgeble since. I am mostly interested to find a use of the 55 mm. TS lens on a current digital platform.
-
Why don't you mail Steel and ask him?
I did and he was kind enough to reply, saying:
Currently I have C645/EF and C645/NIKON adapters for sale. To use C645 lens on Sony E-mount , you need another EF/NEX adapter to make it work...
-
Somewhat unrelated but does anyone have a clue as to what a good copy of the 80/2 should go for? Im trying to find one and can't get any idea of price for a lens without body.
-
Alex, try the Lens Price Database here:
http://www.jcolwell.ca/photography/lens$db/index.htm
-
If you don't have a Contax 645 yet, it may not worthwhile. To support a larger image circle, it has to sacrify something compared to a lens designed ffor a smaller image circle. Do no expect magic if it involves one of the best 35mm system providers, you will get different image endering for sure.
In my view, ths adaper is for people/ who already have a Contax 645 system and a Canon or Nikon system. You wil find it is very hard to find the C645 lens you wanted. The lens price is atually very good if you find one. Go check out keh.com. But I feel $850 for the adapter is hard to justify. YMMV.
-
Hmmm... I don't really know about that... FF format is basically 1.5x crop of 6x4.5 format. As some may have tried with the best FF lenses used on APS-c format, the lenses cope very well with it, despite the fact that the pixels on APS-c (in most cases) are considerably smaller. With FF the pixels are of comparative size with MFDBs in all other but the D800/E/810 cameras and even there there is not much difference than an 80mp back... My D800E didn't "complain" at all with the Zeiss glass on it and the usual Zeiss characteristics (superb anti-flare performance, contrast and colour saturation e.t.c) where more than welcome... Clearly the output files hold more DR after processing (especially with HLs) and they need less processing too (due to the higher contrast they exhibit - with Nikkors "out of the camera" files are visibly duller).
One can expect the usual Zeiss "bite" that is known with the ZF lenses and additionally have (fast and accurate) AF performance with the C645 lenses and also... C645 lenses are much better build and cost "peanuts" to what they really worth... I really should expect prices on C645 lenses to rise considerably with all these adapters that enable them to be used on Leica/Canon and Nikon with full dedication... Lets not forget that there is a Contax mount coming for Cambo Actus too and the wider image circle will be most welcome there if a Sony A is mounted on the Actus.... That way one can have one series of superb lenses all for his FF, MF and view camera... That would be something great.
-
I understand your points. I am fancied about Zeiss and Leica, I have almost every legandary stuffs from them.
But, technology is moving fast. Nikon and Canonmay nevery be able to demonstrate Laica and Zeiss aesthetic charactereitics, but the resolution, uniformity, etc., the non-aesthetic properties may compensate a little that I think worth to consider. My advice is if you will or already have a c645, it will make perfect sense to adapter c645 lens on Nikon, but if only Nikon, my prsonal opinion is it is not.
-
I have to admit that if I didn't already have a huge C645 system (almost everything they ever made but the 350 lens which isn't among my considerations), I wouldn't consider the adapter... But since I've tried it, I've also have to admit that if I didn't own the C645 system but was familiar of the lens properties, as I am... then I would most certainly do the same... My post was purely to share gained experience with people that don't... I tried my best to explain that resolution wise there is nothing worth considering to make the choice. But OTOH, I do know that the vast majority of "true" photographers are more than satisfied with the resolution they are now offered... Yet, I believe, that there's still a good part of very good photographers that don't think of resolution (as long as they already have more than they need) as being a first priority aspect when they choose a lens (I'm among them)... To them, I started this thread as to give them (the best I could) an idea of an alternative, which in my opinion is better too... and explain the reasons as to why I consider it as being better, so that they can judge themselves if my priorities match theirs...
OTOH. there is the big problem with many pros (me among them), where they have to carry lots of equipment to perform a certain task... Imagine for example one that has to carry all his FF system and all his MF and MFDBs and additionally his view camera and lenses for a project, just to use some of each system for parts of the project... Now what if the same pro. for the very same project, carries only his MF system, adds only a couple of FF bodies (one of them mirrorless) and a Cambo Actus (or Arca Universallis) with it and use his MF lenses for the lot? ...and then there is the matter of cost involved for that (very real) pro...
-
I had C645 350mm before, but it was stolen together with all my camera stuffs. I didn't recover that piece of glass. The 350mm I had is not sharp at all, and focusing very slow. It's as heavy as an elephant too. I found Canon and Nikons is the way to go for super tele. -- not counting Leica's super tele lenses. They are too hard to find.
The C645 to Canon will be useful since I already have a pretty decent C645 system, but I fell $850 for an adapter is hard to justify.
-
Hi Theodoros,
You mention that
"Lets not forget that there is a Contax mount coming for Cambo Actus too and the wider image circle will be most welcome there if a Sony A is mounted on the Actus...."
Where did you hear this information?
I know that they make a Contax 645 REAR mount for their digital back version but have only heard of a electronic Canon Eos FRONT mount for the Cambo Actus..
http://www.cambo.com/Html/products_photo/set01/english/internet/Item34418.html
I also know that Alpa are making a Contax 645 shift adapter for the Alpa FPS system..
Are you thinking of that?
:)
-
Apparently Theodore is very close to the JAS adapter maker.
Alias name of Steel.Chen?
-
Hi Theodoros,
You mention that
"Lets not forget that there is a Contax mount coming for Cambo Actus too and the wider image circle will be most welcome there if a Sony A is mounted on the Actus...."
Where did you hear this information?
I know that they make a Contax 645 REAR mount for their digital back version but have only heard of a electronic Canon Eos FRONT mount for the Cambo Actus..
http://www.cambo.com/Html/products_photo/set01/english/internet/Item34418.html
I also know that Alpa are making a Contax 645 shift adapter for the Alpa FPS system..
Are you thinking of that?
:)
Steven Hendrix mentioned it on another conversation a couple of months ago... then I checked the Conon Eos adapter that Campo is going to release during the second half of the year... and found out that ...it is not an EOS adapter (!!!) but rather a universal aperture control for all lenses that have electronic iris... If you check the picture of the ACB-CA that Cambo has published, you may notice that it is two parts... one is the iris control (ACB) and then there is a Canon (CA) mount in it which is interchangeable... Hence, you should expect an ACB-CO soon after, as the the name ACB-xx suggests...
No... I wasn't thinking of the Alpa...
-
Hi Theodoros,
Well I definitely like your theory, that would be amazing indeed!
Unfortunately, I cannot see what you see :(
Looks like a Canon Eos electronic mount to me.. Also, I could not find any mention of Steven Hendricks talking about the Cambo Actus and a electronic Contax 645 mount..
Would you please be able to provide a link to that?
I know that Cambo are making a version of the Actus for MFDB and that probably includes one with a Contax 645 mount.. That is at the rear of the camera though..
Thanks again, I hope you are right and we will end up being able to use our Contax 645 lenses on the Cambo Actus :)
-
Actually I think ACB stands for Aperture Control Base.... I can't find the link either, but it was a conversation where both Steve and I where involved and Steve mentioned that Contax mount for the Actus is among Cambo's plans... I hope Steve will jump in the conversation and enlighten us both further... both for the Contax lens mount, as well as for the ACB....
-
Actually I think ACB stands for Aperture Control Base.... I can't find the link either, but it was a conversation where both Steve and I where involved and Steve mentioned that Contax mount for the Actus is among Cambo's plans... I hope Steve will jump in the conversation and enlighten us both further... both for the Contax lens mount, as well as for the ACB....
You are correct, I did say that a Cambo Actus Lensboard for Contax 645 was being considered. That does not guarantee it will come to fruition, but we shall see. I will say this - if anyone who wants a Contax Lensboard for the Actus will PM me, I will put them together with my existing requests and provide them in bulk to Cambo.
On the surprising and positive news front, a Pentax 645 Lensboard (with aperture control lever for newer lenses) showed up today at our Atlanta office. Previously, I was selling a Cambo Nikon F Lensboard with a FotoDiox Pentax 645 Adapter (which fit together very nicely) to mount Pentax 645 lenses to the Actus. Now this is no longer necessary, there is a direct Pentax 645 Lensboard for the Actus, and also, Cambo just updated the Nikon F Lensboard with aperture control as well (previous version had no aperture control capability).
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
Of course one can mount Contax lenses on the Actus via the Canon ACB and use an additional JAS Contax to Canon adapter, but this would add to the cost and some of the lenses could have their image circle restricted...
-
I would personally love to see a Contax 645 lens board on the Actus :)
With regards to how these "electronic" adapters work, are they actually communicating with the camera? Where is the connection between the lens board and the camera itself?
Or is it somehow just altering the aperture and then you are needing to focus the camera in what is essentially "aperture stop down mode"?
So, if shooting at f16, focus would need to be done at f16... as opposed to focusing being done wide open and then the lens stopping down at the moment of exposure..
Hope that makes sense : )
Of course one can mount Contax lenses on the Actus via the Canon ACB and use an additional JAS Contax to Canon adapter, but this would add to the cost and some of the lenses could have their image circle restricted...
This is not necessarily true.. I have been in contact with Steel before and there was a period there where his adapter was not able to effectively communicate with the Canon Metabones adapter...
So possible but no guarantee..
Steve, any idea if the Pentax 645 has similar large image circle to that of the Contax 645 lenses? Or is very much restricted to a 645 area?
-
I would personally love to see a Contax 645 lens board on the Actus :)
With regards to how these "electronic" adapters work, are they actually communicating with the camera? Where is the connection between the lens board and the camera itself?
Or is it somehow just altering the aperture and then you are needing to focus the camera in what is essentially "aperture stop down mode"?
So, if shooting at f16, focus would need to be done at f16... as opposed to focusing being done wide open and then the lens stopping down at the moment of exposure..
Hope that makes sense : )
Of course one can mount Contax lenses on the Actus via the Canon ACB and use an additional JAS Contax to Canon adapter, but this would add to the cost and some of the lenses could have their image circle restricted...
This is not necessarily true.. I have been in contact with Steel before and there was a period there where his adapter was not able to effectively communicate with the Canon Metabones adapter...
So possible but no guarantee..
Steve, any idea if the Pentax 645 has similar large image circle to that of the Contax 645 lenses? Or is very much restricted to a 645 area?
There is total communication for all automatic aperture and AF through the CPU contacts... The adapter has a logic circuit build in, which supplies the power needed from the camera's battery to the lens and "fools" the camera's CPU contacts as if it was a dedicated lens used on it... Hence, focusing is at full aperture and the lens "stops down" automatically just before shutter is activated. S & P modes also work and meter correctly.
I wouldn't expect much difference between 6x4.5 MF lenses as far as image circle is concerned... never the less the image circle should be sufficient for a FF 35mm equal sensor... Let's not forget that the image circle is larger when a lens is focused to its minimum focusing distance and that the Actus has sufficient distance between its front and rear standards to compensate for focus to infinity.