M42 for M4/3 / Nikon

Simon Blades

Simon Blades

1/2 a Daley
Suspended / Banned
Messages
94
Name
Simon Blades
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi Guys,

I was in Manchester earlier this week and popped into Real Camera Co. as it was just around the corner from my companies office.
The chap I was speaking to was very helpful in mentioning that there is a load of older M42 lenses which are cheap but provide great quality for the money.

I own a GX80 and a D3000, which of these would be worthwhile buying an adaptor for and purchasing some M42 lenses?

Also could anyone recommend some adaptors? I've read that sometimes you can't focus to infinity but some adaptors contain some glass which isn't very good quality?

Thanks
Simon
 
I don't know if it's worth bothering with to be honest.

First off you'll be dealing with the crop factor, for example a 50mm M42 lens will be 100mm equivalent on m4/3 and 75mm on the Nikon.
Secondly, second hand lenses for both Nikon and m4/3 can be had relatively cheaply anyway
 
M42 on Nikon requires an adapter with an optical element to correct for the nikon mount length and you may also not get metering to work correctly because the body won't know what the lens is doing. TBH I would bother for that camera.

OTOH a number of people like to use older lenses on M43. However generally M42 lenses were often made for budget cameras (not necessarily - Pentax used M42 mount for a while, though Pentax lenses in M42 won't be so common or so cheap) and I'd probably encourage you to look at other lenses from Olympus (for example) instead for M43 mount use.
 
Most of the better lenses I was told about did come from Pentax etc.

I just wanted to breathe some life into the D3000 primarily as both lenses I have (18-55 & 55-200) are showing signs of fungus as it was stored incorrectly.
 
You need a Focal reducer lens adapter if the cameras do not have a full frame sensor ( I'm not sure about your cameras), this not only adapts the lens mount but also corrects the crop factor. otherwise what happens is the cameras field of view will be reduced quite a lot meaning a 50mm lens used on you camera will see what a 75mm lens would on the 35mm film camera these lenses were designed for ( hope that makes sense !) If the Gx80 is micro 4/3 rds this could be even worse. I intend to do this as one the lenses are dirt cheap and I all ready have plenty.Two I'm don't like using menu driven settings and prefer the hands on approach that a manual lens gives. This crop factor problem can become a pain in the butt.

here is video about the same thing plenty more on Youtube
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvKySaO2RSY
 
Last edited:
Ste_S said:
I don't know if it's worth bothering with to be honest.

First off you'll be dealing with the crop factor, for example a 50mm M42 lens will be 100mm equivalent on m4/3 and 75mm on the Nikon.
Secondly, second hand lenses for both Nikon and m4/3 can be had relatively cheaply anyway
Click to expand...

You sound like you have never even tried it? M43 users don't worry about crop factors, they know this from the off, it's no different with adapted lenses. It can be a nice advantage in fact, an old 50mm 1.4 can be a fantastic portrait lens. I used a 200mm F4 Takumar lens for birds for a few years, if you're talking crop factor this gave me 400mm FF equivalent for less then £100.

Older lenses have a character about them, they're fun to use and tend to bring the creative side out in the shooter. They often have quirks like odd bokeh, strange flare, low contrast etc ... that can be used to great artistic effect in the right hands. Some of them are tack sharp too, a bit of research is required, it can become a nice side hobby in itself collecting old gems. They are almost always built far better than modern plastic lump lenses too, and even 'pro' modern lenses. They have a more 'filmic' look than the oft over clinical look we get from modern primes.

Dumb adapters [no electrics, no glass elements, just a spacer really] can be got for about £10, and if you do some hunting you can get really nice old glass for buttons.

Takumar, Helios, Carl Zeiss, Pentax [they pretty much are Takumar too but have lenses under both names] Minolta [old Sony] Yashica, Zenit ... all of these have some gems, they'll have their stinkers too hence the research.

The main thing to watch for is the condition - never buy one with fungus or mould, no matter how cheap
 
Cagey75 said:
You sound like you have never even tried it? M43 users don't worry about crop factors, they know this from the off, it's no different with adapted lenses. It can be a nice advantage in fact, an old 50mm 1.4 can be a fantastic portrait lens. I used a 200mm F4 Takumar lens for birds for a few years, if you're talking crop factor this gave me 400mm FF equivalent for less then £100.

Older lenses have a character about them, they're fun to use and tend to bring the creative side out in the shooter. They often have quirks like odd bokeh, strange flare, low contrast etc ... that can be used to great artistic effect in the right hands. Some of them are tack sharp too, a bit of research is required, it can become a nice side hobby in itself collecting old gems. They are almost always built far better than modern plastic lump lenses too, and even 'pro' modern lenses. They have a more 'filmic' look than the oft over clinical look we get from modern primes.

Dumb adapters [no electrics, no glass elements, just a spacer really] can be got for about £10, and if you do some hunting you can get really nice old glass for buttons.

Takumar, Helios, Carl Zeiss, Pentax [they pretty much are Takumar too but have lenses under both names] Minolta [old Sony] Yashica, Zenit ... all of these have some gems, they'll have their stinkers too hence the research.

The main thing to watch for is the condition - never buy one with fungus or mould, no matter how cheap
Click to expand...


Agree with all that.

Also certain Soviet era Russian lenses were on a par with the best of the German (East & West) and Japanese lenses of their time.

I have a PK adaptor from my Fuji days from SRB. Very well machined.

Also worth noting is if you get a M39 adaptor an enlarging lens can make a very effective macro lens.
 
Simon Blades said:
Most of the better lenses I was told about did come from Pentax etc.

I just wanted to breathe some life into the D3000 primarily as both lenses I have (18-55 & 55-200) are showing signs of fungus as it was stored incorrectly.
Click to expand...

In that case I'd buy replacements, rather than trying to adapt unsuited lenses to a body designed not to co-operate with them (nikon entry level cameras seem to have limited adaptability).
 
Yes to everything Keith said above :D

About the Nikon... personally I wouldn't bother as manually focusing with a DSLR can be rather difficult unless the subject is BIG in the frame or you're shooting zone or hyperfocal. I briefly tried Zuiko lenses on my Canon 5D and they worked well enough but accurate manual focus was difficult and wouldn't stand up to pixel peeping.

Back to MFT... for a while my most used lens on MFT was a 50mm :D I'd give it a go, adapters and lenses can be cheap and well worth it for the fun if nothing else :D As well as 50mm you could have a look at a 28mm lens as this will give you a rather useful 56mm FoV on MFT. 50mm f1.8's and 28mm f2.8's can still be found at reasonable prices and those two lenses could give you a lot of fun.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top