Does anyone know whether it would be possible to use Nikon manual focus lenses on the EX3 ?
Thanks !!

Ofer Levy, nature photographer
http://www.oferlevyphotography.com

Yes, no problem. You can get a mount adapter made quite simply. Whether or not they'd do full justice to the sensor is debatable, but if I had an EX3 I think that's probably what I'd do.
www.lesbosher.co.uk, www.mtfservices.com and others make adapters.
Alternatively Century make an adapter to put Nikons on 1/2" Sony mount, and the EX3 will come with an adapter to that mount, so you could stack the two. BH Photo sell the Century adapter.
Steve

Thanks for that Steve !

Ofer, I don't know exactly what you meant in your question, but I can tell you what is the most common use for Nikon Lenses with video cameras. You can use an adapter like that mentioned by Steve, but most people use a 35mm adapter like the Letus Extreme or the Brevis, and then snap a Nikon lense to that. Prosumer video cameras have a small sensor size which limits its Depth of Field, and a 35mm adapter allows the camera to focus on a vibrating piece of ground glass which has a full 35mm image projected on it by your lense. Long story short, it gives you a 35mm DOF image from your still lenses on your video camera. I checked out your website, AWESOME pictures that you have taken, you are quite a talented photographer and would love to see what you would put out on video! One problem, most 35mm adapter have limitations with handling shutter speed and lense aperature - they can isolate the grain on the vibrating glass. To get great video of fast moving objects, you need to use high shutter speeds and that would need something more expensive with a spinning glass wheel like the Letus Ultimate, which is an awesome piece of kit but very expensive. If you already knew all of this, I apologize, but I didn't know if you wanted to snap a Nikon directly to the camera, or if you wanted to get a nice 35mm DOF with your lenses which is what most people are trying to get when using still lenses on their video camera.

Ofer, I don't know exactly what you meant in your question, but I can tell you what is the most common use for Nikon Lenses with video cameras. You can use an adapter like that mentioned by Steve, but most people use a 35mm adapter like the Letus Extreme or the Brevis, and then snap a Nikon lense to that. Prosumer video cameras have a small sensor size which limits its Depth of Field, and a 35mm adapter allows the camera to focus on a vibrating piece of ground glass which has a full 35mm image projected on it by your lense. Long story short, it gives you a 35mm DOF image from your still lenses on your video camera. I checked out your website, AWESOME pictures that you have taken, you are quite a talented photographer and would love to see what you would put out on video! One problem, most 35mm adapter have limitations with handling shutter speed and lense aperature - they can isolate the grain on the vibrating glass. To get great video of fast moving objects, you need to use high shutter speeds and that would need something more expensive with a spinning glass wheel like the Letus Ultimate, which is an awesome piece of kit but very expensive. If you already knew all of this, I apologize, but I didn't know if you wanted to snap a Nikon directly to the camera, or if you wanted to get a nice 35mm DOF with your lenses which is what most people are trying to get when using still lenses on their video camera.

Thank you Bill for your input and kind words !
I would prefer to use the still lenses with a simple adapter as I would like to get the best possible picture with no degradation. I am already using a few still lenses on my Sony HVR Z7 and I am pleased with the results. I just got an email from Mike Tapa who told me he will probably be able to make the simple adapter that I need so all is good...(-:

What Nikon still lenses would you recommend getting for the EX-3?

What Nikon still lenses would you recommend getting for the EX-3?

Seeing as the EX3 stock lens has things covered very well out to 80mm or so, you will most likely want something for longer focal lengths. The exception is that you might want to get a 50mm f1.4 and a 80mm f1.8 or something like that to get more light and shallower depth of field than the stock lens provides at these focal lengths. So for shooting sports scenes across a field or pulling in that rare bird in your nature film you would consider lenses around 100mm to 135mm. Anything longer than that will get extremely difficult to use.

With a Nikon lens, you will have no auto-focus, but more importantly no image stabilization. Anything you buy for the longer focal lengths will NEED a tripod and a good solid setup at that. With the fact that the lens won't be using its full image circle, you will be using the sweet spot of the lens. That also means that it won't be optimized for that sweet spot though and you will most likely need to use the most expensive of the lenses in whatever focal length you buy to meet the resolution requirements of the sensor. Expect to pay....
Examples:

Nikon | Normal AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Autofocus Lens | 1902 | B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/97413-GREY/Nikon_1902_Normal_AF_Nikkor_50mm.html)

Nikon | Telephoto AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF Autofocus Lens | 1933 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/108421-USA/Nikon_1933_Telephoto_AF_Nikkor_85mm.html)

Zeiss | 100mm f/2 ZF Manual Focus Lens | 1424-665 | B&H Photo (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/472574-REG/Zeiss_1424_665_100mm_f_2_ZF_Manual.html)

Nikon | Telephoto AF DC Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D Autofocus Lens (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/113487-USA/Nikon_1935_Telephoto_AF_DC_Nikkor.html)

Now those prices would seem steep to some casual photographer, but they are cheap compared to most cine lenses. I can't guarantee their performance on an EX3, but they are very good lenses for DSLRs and 35mm film. Of course you can used at better prices. If you need to compare different lenses and their performance, you can look at:
FM Reviews - Main Index (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/)
Nikon / Nikkor (APS-C) Lens Tests (http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests)
Both of those sites should give you an idea of the potential of a specific lens design, and the chances of getting a good one.

All things considered, when you look at the lens on the EX series, it is a real bargain and hard to beat for its purpose.

Ofer Levy has a decent set of long Nikkors on his EX3. Nærfoto Bjørn Rørslett: Professional Nature Photographer (http://www.naturfotograf.com) is Bjorn Rorslett's site and is a mine of info on Nikon lenses.
Some of the very best manual focus Nikkors can now be had relatively cheap, crackers like 55mm f2.8 micro, 105 micros, 105mm f2.5, 180 f2.8, all these are truly superb. The 300mm f2.8 is also a benchmark lens, while the 400mm f2.8 and f3.5, the 500mm f4P and 600mm f4 and f5.6 and the 800mm f5.6 are also A1. The old favourite 200-400mm f4 has a superb rep, but is rare, expensive and has no internal focussing. The 50-300mm f4.5 ED is also a great lens, though I know Ofer doesn't rate it as highly as the primes.
Some of the Sigmas are also very good, like the 120-300 f2.8 and the 300-800 f5.6, but be sure to get the older ones that still have aperture rings!
Oh and check out Aperture Photographic Tel. 020 7242 8681 (http://www.apertureuk.com) who have the incredible and rare 300mm f2 at a mere £8000! Also saw the 360-1200mm Nikon on ebay just recently, but let's stay sensible!
Steve

I"ve now tested the MTF adapter with much of my Nikon glass. It is fantastic and opens a whole new range of creative possibilities. A word of caution though, I am getting very strong CA on wide to standard lenses (which all become tele length using the adapter) on wide and sometimes even moderate apertures. Used with a long lens like a 80-200 f2.8 or 400 f2.8 it is pretty good given the right atmospheric conditions and a stable given tripod.

Dan

I always thought that aperture did not affect lateral CA, not like it affects the sharpness of a lens?
The reason that the longer lenses are better may well be their use of low dispersion glass. Bjorn's site often gives useful info on CA for specific lenses.
Steve

As Steve has mentioned I have been using a few Nikon ED manual focus lenses on the EX3 using Mike Tapa's adapter for the last couple of months.

From my somewhat limited experience I can tell that the Nikon 300 f2.8 ED AIS, 400 f3.5 ED AIS, 500 f4 ED P and 600 f5.6 ED P deliver fantastic results !
I see no or very little CA or any other noticeable artefact. The sharpness, colours, contrast, DOF are simply superb - even when compared to what I am used to from my still photography experience.
You should take my input with a grain of salt as I am new to videography but I feel that the EX3 must be one of the best cameras for wildlife in every price range. I just can't see how the quality of the footage can be improved much further.
Cheers,

Ofer Levy Nature Photographer (http://www.oferlevyphotography.com)

Ofer great to hear you Nikon lens are working so well with Mike Tapa's adapter. How are the Nikon's to focus while hand held following a moving object? Such as following a bird over cranked? Or are all of your shots tripod mounted?

Are you using the XDR Flash?

Paul, I'm sure Ofer is not using the long lenses handheld, he'd need to be an amateur and a body-builder for that! In my opinion not only is a tripod vital for any long lens work, but a VERY GOOD tripod is needed, folks trying to get away with the cheapy Manfrotto/Bogen ones are always going to struggle I think. For a full-size camera and long lens setup I think you need something like an O'Connor 2060, Ronford Baker 2004 or Sachtler Video 30. You can get away with a Sachtler 20, Ronford Baker 2003, O'Connor 1030 or the like, but they're not really ideal, but would be great for an EX3 telephoto setup.
Ofer, any footage to show yet?
Steve

Steve yes a 300mm hand held is very hard to get a stable picture. I did not know if Ofer had a stabilizer unit that he might use with the 300. I am able to go 3/4 zoom on my EX1 hand held with rock solid results on a custom two gyro rig. For me a tripod is a treat since 90% of the time I have to be hand held. I am looking for better glass options an a possible EX3, Scarlet, Panasonic, an others so the reason for the question.

Wow a $9000 tripod head that can take 83 lbs seems like overkill unless you deal with a lot of wind.

I don't think you can spend too much on a tripod, it's an A1 vital piece of kit.
In 35mm terms, a 300mm lens on an EX3 is the equivalent of about 1500mm, so I'm astonished that you can hanhold it with "rock solid" results! My O'Connor head tripod is 9kg and my previous Ronford Atlas 30 was 11kg, and even with these often you get some wobble with long lenses, even without strong winds. It's more of an issue these days than it used to be as people are now viewing on larger screens, so any unwanted movement is more noticeable.
Steve

Steve I am not hand holding a EX3 with a 300mm lens. I am hand holding my EX1 at 3/4 zoom and a lot of the load goes to my shoulder/waist on the rig an the gyros are a HUGE help. I have been using two Kenyon KS-8 gyro rig for years. You can not do it long maybe one hour at a time then I need a break and it is a workout. A EX3 with the 300mm at 35mm equivalent of 1500mm is a NO WAY. Just seeing if anyone has tricks to learn.

And I agree with you a good tripod is a must. I have a Gitzo G1380 with carbon legs for the EX1 and that is max weight for it to be stable. In over 20K of wind well it does not cut it. So thanks for the tripod recommendations since that will also be a upgrade with my next camera.

Hi Paul and Steve, thank you for your input.
Steve is right and I won't even consider hand holding such a long less. I don't even touch the handle on the fluid head as this introduces vibrations. I use a rubber band to pull the handle when panning and tilting. (Don’t do much of that either.)
I use the Miller CF tripod legs and the Miller Arrow 25 fluid head and I am very happy with the results. The fluid head gives me smooth, vibration free movement even when using the 600mm lens.
In case there is wind I don't think any tripod can help to avoid the vibrations. I am going to try an umbrella mounted on a tripod to block the early morning light wind we sometime get in Sydney.
Paul, I bought the Flash XDR a while ago but I am still not using it on a daily basis as CD are still upgrading the firmware and I would like to have it fully functional for my needs. I am sure others are using it though.
I hope to start using it all the time when they release the new firmware next week. I do believe it is a wonderful device which when coupled with the EX3 will make the ultimate wildlife production setup.
Regarding showing some footage – I am still waiting to know what is the best NLE to work with the footage obtained using the Flash XDR so this will take some more time.

Cheers,

Ofer Levy Nature Photographer (http://www.oferlevyphotography.com)

Thank Ofer. The Miller Arrow 25 Fluid Head looks like great deal if you can use a lens as long at the 600mm and be happy with the results.

I am on the list to receive the XDR Flash in a few weeks. I agree it looks like a great piece of gear.

I like you work.

Paul, sorry, I thought by 3/4 you meant a 300mm f4! Heard about those stabilisers on and off but never tried one, don't think it'd suit my uses.
Never tried the Miller heads, and that one seems a little light to me, but maybe on the smaller cameras it's OK. Probably best one I tried was an O'Connor 2575, but that was about 13kg I think just for the head, so just too insanely heavy for field work, that's why I got rid of the Atlas, and settled for the comparatively light 2060! The appeal of a "small" camera like the EX3 for wildlife is strong though, not just because the camera is lighter itself, but batteries are lighter, tripod doesn't need to be so heavy, and lenses of the same focal length has 50% more reach so you can take smaller lenses too. Be interesting to see how the EX3 compares to my PDW700 when I try it, thing is the 700 is only just borderline in terms of acceptance by BBC etc., so the EX3 will need to be at least as good to be in with a shout, particularly when you take into account the prejudices against compact cameras! XDR may be the final link in the chain that takes it to top level. Maybe.
Steve

Sorry Steve I should have been clearer a problem running three computers at the same time and the email always suffers.

I am going to B&H in the next few weeks I will put the O'Connor 2060 an Miller Arrow 25 Fluid head on my list to check out.

Also I am very interested in your findings with your PWD700 since that is one of the cameras on my list. But I agree if the EX3 with XDR Flash and the right glass is accepted all the better.

Bear in mind that the latest 2060HD head is supplied with very light fluid levels (why, I have no idea) and even on maximum drag it's not really good for long lens work, but O'Connor can supply it with drag levels the same as on the older 2060 model for no extra charge. Maximum level (9) on the new version seemed equivalent to about level 4 on the older version, that's how great the difference was!
I would hope that you'd see quite a difference between a big head like the 2060 and the Arrow 25, but on a smaller camera maybe it won't make enough difference to justify the extra weight. If you do want something lighter the O'Connor 1030 is also apparently good and only the same weight as the Miller (Phil Savoie uses one with an Arriflex and 800mm lens!)
Steve

Thanks Steve for the inside information on the O'Connor fluid level. It can't hurt to go a little bigger on the head and legs. I might not say that when I am 6 miles into a hike but I will love it when the long lens is on.

Ofer I have found a used Nikon 300mm f2.8 ED AIS for $1199US in excellent condition in a very nice padded hard box. Do you think this is a good price and worth getting compared to a Sigma 120-300? I would be using the Nikon on the EX3 with Mikes adapter locked on a tripod with rails to shoot some of my stock shots when a long lens is needed with shallow DOF.

Or is the Nikon 200-400 f4 ED AI-S a better all around option? Is this better then owning 3 prime lens? I know it would be a lot easier when I am walking in the marsh with a load on my back.

For expert and detailed reviews of all nikkor lenses, check out http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm

Thanks Ronn that is a great link loaded with info for me to research.

Paul, the 200-400 f4 is no good (even if you could find one) as it's not got internal focus, so the focus mechanism would be pretty heavy and liable to cause you to shake the camera. The new 200-400 is no good either as it's got no aperture ring.
If it was me I'd go for the Sigma, as it's so useful to have a variable focal length lens, both for different shot sizes and also to be able to find the subject. The Nikon 300mm f2.8 is a benchmark, excellent lens for sure, but the Sigma is right up according to all user comments I've seen.
Steve

Thanks Steve,

Yea I saw that the 200-400 was internal focus.

I agree that is would be nice to have the Sigma 120-300 for the range of focal lengths if the quality of the picture is there and most seem to think it is.

Does the Sigma fit on mikes adapter? If not what do you use? Found the answer looks like it fits on Nikon so it should work with Mike's adapter for the EX3.

All the still lens are new ground for me.

I don't use the EX3, but have played with one.
The Sigma will fit on the MTF adapter, but some of the latest Sigmas even in Nikon mount have no aperture rings, so check that out before buying, certainly the 120-300 in Nikon used to have a ring and they work fine.
The old ultra rare Nikon 200-400mm f4 has EXTERNAL focus and looks very unbalanced, the new one is supposed to be fabulous, BUT no aperture ring.
Not had a chance to put my long Canons on the EX3 yet (all Universal mounts) but hope to very soon (Canon FD 300 2.8, 500 4.5, 800 5.6 and 150-600 5.6). Also be nice to get some Nikon macros on it (I've got a 55 and 105).
Btw the Sigma 100-300 f4 also has a good rep.
Steve

I'm having trouble getting good quality from my nikon lenses. When wide open it's really bad. If I stop down 2 steps it's better but not as good as the original lens. Any ideas? The sample below is from a 300/2.8 ED lens which is supposed to be a really good lens. I have also tried the 80-200 ED and a 135mm lens with about the same result. Is there something I can do in the camera to minimize this problem?

Lens engineers will tell you not to be surprised when a lens for a larger format doesn't perform too well on a smaller one, it's because they're not made to give the same resolutions as the smaller sensors need. BUT in my experience it's not as bad as the science might suggest. I would expect the Nikon 300 to have good resolution (but not as good as the stock lens on EX3 or Canon XL-H1). I tried a Canon 300 and 150-600 on an F355 (1/2" chips like EX3) and they both worked really well.
There's a lot of lateral chromatic abberation on there too (blue fringing), and older stills lenses tend to be worse than newer ones in that respect. I hope to rry my stills lenses next week on the EX3, be interesting to see how they look.
Steve

Marten, I have a 300mm 2.8ED, and an EX3 as well. Although my MTF adapter is not here yet, I am excited as all get-out to try the two together. I wouldn't worry too much about your problems. You can shoot around them. First of all your sample shot is just about the worst condition you could ever shoot under. I mean, if you wanted to show a camera/lens combo's worst traits - you'd shoot a tree branch against a bright white snow background, over exposed, wide open. Maybe the EX3 and the stock lens can handle that better than your Nikon, I'm not sure. I haven't shot with it much at all yet. But my guess would be it's not perfect under those conditions either. While Steve is right, we're pushing the image rendering envelope with this combination (big lens/small chip) I can speak from a lot of experience using these lenses and an even smaller chip (1/3" HD200). Trust me, you can get great results. Stop the lens down a bit and "Go away from the light....."

http://www.reelsense.net/HD-200/JVC-Nikon_Adapters/Frame_Grabs/Mallard.tif

What is the magnification factor when using 35mm lenses. I know with the Canon XL it is X7. Does anyone have a link to where I can buy the nikon lens adaptor.

Vincent it is 5.5x on the EX3 with MTF adapter.
MTF Services Ltd (http://www.mtfservices.com/)

Thanks Paul, I knew hanging on to my collection of Nikkor lenses was going to pay off one day.

Vincent, Les Bosher also does one Les Bosher - Camera Engineer (http://www.lesbosher.co.uk)

Good advice from Eric, one thing to add though is be wary of stopping down too far as diffraction kicks in real early with smaller chips, and going below f5.6 or at most f8 will probably get you mushy results (again according to the science at least! In fact I think optical science would put the diffraction limits of a 1/3" chip probably down at about f4).
Also these big fast telephotos are supposed to be computed to give just about maximum performance wide open or about 1/2 - 1 stop down.
Steve

Vincent, Les Bosher also does one Les Bosher - Camera Engineer (http://www.lesbosher.co.uk)



Thanks Steve, I didn't see any prices I tried to ring but it is engaged.

Les charges about £250 or so. I had one done a couple of weks ago, it's a simple metal adapter that utilises the EX3-1/2" adapter that comes with the camera. Haven't tried it yet but looks good.
Steve

Steve, if you don't mind, can you shed any light on why the small chips muck the images up when you're stopped down? I wasn't aware of this, and have sometimes mysteriously struggled to get crisp images. Maybe this is why?

Hi -

I usually shoot 35mm still images with a Nikon d300 and have found the following site to also be very useful with regard to Nikon lens and equipment evaluations (It usually has a more subdued evaluation of the lenses than you will find on kens site, however, both are very helpful):

Lens Evaluations (http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html)

(The link to his home page is: http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html )

Recently, I purchased an ex3 and was considering the mtf adaptor, however, I was curious to know whether any of you own the nikon 80-400 lens and what sort of results you got with it on the ex3. One of its advantages, if I recall correctly, is that it weighs slightly less than the ex3 stock lens - but, unfortunately is f4-5.6.



Any comments would be appreciated.

Marten, I have a 300mm 2.8ED, and an EX3 as well. Although my MTF adapter is not here yet, I am excited as all get-out to try the two together.

It will be interesting to hear how yours turn out. I'm dissapointed that it performes so bad under these conditions. I live in snowy contry during many months and it's difficult to avoid these situations... In the beginning I thought it was my lenses but I guess I have to accept the situation. When everybody says they get great performance with nikon lenses and I don't, it's not fun. Of all 6 nikon lenses tested so far all of them are to me unusable wide open with the EX3 even under better circumstances then my sample picture. They turn out very soft wide open. I have a 50/1.2 which I hoped to use quite a bit, but even stopped down it's almost unusable.

Martin, maybe try using filters up front?

Eric, the exact science is a bit beyond me but you can find some very complex descriptions by Googling.
But basically as the aperture gets smaller the light rays spread wider. The larger the film or sensor the less problematic this spread as it's not as wide relative to the film size. This is why if you shoot 10x8" film you can quite easily use f45 with no problems, but an APS-C size digital camera like a Canon EOS20D might be limited to f11 before it starts to soften, and a tiny chip like a 1/3" will be even more problematic.
Steve

Ofer and others,

Now having shot with the EX3 for several months using Nikon long telephotos, how much of an issue are you seeing with wobble from the rolling shutter. Barry Green had a good article saying it will be especially noticeable with using long telephotos---I just wanted to see if you can confirm this. It is one of the determining factors of me going with the EX3 or possibly the JVC HM700 (CCDs).

Ofer and others,

Now having shot with the EX3 for several months using Nikon long telephotos, how much of an issue are you seeing with wobble from the rolling shutter. Barry Green had a good article saying it will be especially noticeable with using long telephotos---I just wanted to see if you can confirm this. It is one of the determining factors of me going with the EX3 or possibly the JVC HM700 (CCDs).

Hi Steve,
I have been using the Mike Tapa adapter with a selection of long Nikon lenses for the last six months or so and I am thrilled with the results. I only use it for wildlife and haven't noticed any issues at all.
Check out Mike's adapter - an awesome device and now in a great price:
Nikon to Sony EX3 adaptor (http://www.mtfservices.com/mtf-products-list/mounts-and-adaptors/21)

Cheers,

Ofer
Ofer Levy Photography (http://www.oferlevyphotography.com)

Thanks Ofer. Good to know. I have been concerned about the potential for CMOS Wobble or Jello-effect using a long telephoto with a CMOS sensor. Have you had any shots where you panned at long telephoto or do you shoot mainly static shots? I suspect in the long lens pans is where the problem of jello would surface.