A1 + adapter 35 mm, what lenses? at DVinfo.net

Luca Ghione · September 25th, 2007, 05:23 PM

I would buy a 35mm adapter (i think sgpro), but I have some doubts about the lenses to use. What lenses is better to use?

I saw some: es- canon fd: 24 mm 2.8, 28mm 2.8; 35 mm 2.0; 50 mm 1.4 or 1.8; 85 mm 1.8; 100mm 2.8; 135 mm 2.5.
thanks for your help.

Steven Dempsey · September 25th, 2007, 05:38 PM

I use a 28mm f2.8, a 50mm f1.8, a 100mm f2.8 and a 200mm f4 and I find that to be adequate for most applications. A 24mm or 20mm would be nice but not necessary for me.

Luca Ghione · September 25th, 2007, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Dempsey

I use a 28mm f2.8, a 50mm f1.8, a 100mm f2.8 and a 200mm f4 and I find that to be adequate for most applications. A 24mm or 20mm would be nice but not necessary for me.

24 mm is more different than 28 mm? is there some distorsion effects?

David W. Jones · September 25th, 2007, 06:03 PM

As an example...The 28mm lens might give you an angular field of around 75º, while the 24mm might give you around 83º.

Bill Pryor · September 25th, 2007, 09:26 PM

In 35mm still photography I always used a 24mm, a 35, and a 105 as my basic lenses. With those three I could do about anything I needed to do. Later on I got a 50mm micro, a 200mm and a 135. All Nikkor lenses.

If you use a 28mm as your widest angle, then you probably should get a 50 instead of a 35mm for your "normal." And maybe a 135 instead of a 105. I always prefer wider angles for most things.

Tiago Melo · September 27th, 2007, 10:23 AM

I'm not trying to hijack this thread, so don't get me wrong...
I've been reading about using 35mm adapters with the A1 for a few months now, but I still can't seem to come to a conclusion of what lenses would be necessary for shooting macro with the A1 + 35mm adapter...
I'm a dentist and my macro shots (speaking of photography here) are done with a Nikon D70 + 105mm Nikkor lens + flash... Would I be able to use the same 105 lens with the A1 + a 35mm adapter??? In case it is possible, would I get a comparable framing capability???

Again, I'm realy sorry for asking my own questions in Luca's thread, but I believe the answers will probably be of interest to some other members...

Peace,

Bill Pryor · September 27th, 2007, 12:20 PM

Short answer is yes, that's the purpose of the adapters--so a 105mm lens looks like a 105mm lens. But if you want macro shots, why not try something like a +1 diopter, which should allow you to zoom in all the way and get much closer to focus.

Tiago Melo · September 27th, 2007, 12:25 PM

Thanks Bill...

I have just created a thread and posted some pictures of what I intend to capture, so that more people can make suggestions:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...d=1#post750963

Thanks and I apologize again to Luca for anything...

Peace...

Bill Pryor · September 27th, 2007, 12:31 PM

The problem you might have with an adapter is light. I don't know how bright the dentist's lights are, since I'm always on the receiving end at such times. Anyway, a diopter, maybe even a stronger one than +1 might do what you want a lot cheaper (like under 50 bucks or so).

Luca Ghione · September 27th, 2007, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

In 35mm still photography I always used a 24mm, a 35, and a 105 as my basic lenses. With those three I could do about anything I needed to do. Later on I got a 50mm micro, a 200mm and a 135. All Nikkor lenses.

If you use a 28mm as your widest angle, then you probably should get a 50 instead of a 35mm for your "normal." And maybe a 135 instead of a 105. I always prefer wider angles for most things.

hallo, yesterday I bought those: canon fd 24mm f2.8; 50mm f1.4; 85mm f1.8 (better than 100mm f2.8!), 135mm f2.5; now i'm stying to use that with 35mm adapter. I think that my lense kit could be various and complet, or not...
thanks by Luca

Bill Pryor · September 27th, 2007, 01:55 PM

That's a good range. With the 85, the 135 is a better longer lens. I read someplace years ago somebody shot an entire feature with an 85mm lens. I find that hard to believe, buy who knows. I don't know about Canon but Nikon used to have a relatively cheap 2X telextender you could but between any lens and the camera, with no obvious degradation of quality, though it ate a lot of light.

I've been thinking about a 35mm adapter, but I'm not sure I want to go that route yet. I have lots of old Nikkor lenses, but all of them are the slower (and sharper) lenses. I always went for sharp over fast in my still photog days.

Alvise Tedesco · September 27th, 2007, 02:13 PM

Luca, bought SGPro?
I have an M2. Usually on DVX, but from tomorrow on an XH-A1.

Se ti capita di passare da Milano vediamoci (o se passo io da Torino).
Per quanto riguarda le lenti, devono essere molto veloci e soprattutto lavorare bene a diaframmi molto aperti. Io uso i vecchi Nikkor e finisco per tenere su il 50 quasi sempre, perchè è un 1,4 e a 2 è nitidissimo. Per i Canon FD, se non lo conoscessi, questo è un buon riferimento: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...nses/index.htm

Luca Ghione · September 27th, 2007, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alvise Tedesco

Luca, bought SGPro?
I have an M2. Usually on DVX, but from tomorrow on an XH-A1.

Se ti capita di passare da Milano vediamoci (o se passo io da Torino).
Per quanto riguarda le lenti, devono essere molto veloci e soprattutto lavorare bene a diaframmi molto aperti. Io uso i vecchi Nikkor e finisco per tenere su il 50 quasi sempre, perchè è un 1,4 e a 2 è nitidissimo. Per i Canon FD, se non lo conoscessi, questo è un buon riferimento: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...nses/index.htm

Grazie per i tuoi consigli ed il link; appena mi arriva il sgpro (previsto per il 15/12) inizio a testarlo. Volentieri, se abbiamo l'occasione sarebbe interessante vederci per scambiare opinioni a riguardo. Io ho acquistato Sgpro per girare principalmente corti e mediometraggi. a Presto

Will Schryver · September 28th, 2007, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luca Ghione

hallo, yesterday I bought those: canon fd 24mm f2.8; 50mm f1.4; 85mm f1.8 (better than 100mm f2.8!), 135mm f2.5; now i'm stying to use that with 35mm adapter. I think that my lense kit could be various and complet, or not...
thanks by Luca

Luca,

Perche hai scelto i lenti Canon invece dei lenti Nikon?

Anche io voglio comprare il LetusExtreme, e non so quali lenti di scegliere. Credo che Canon sia piu prezioso di Nikon, ma non sono sicuro. Probabilmente comprero tutti “used”.

Perdonami se il mio italiano non sia perfetto. Ormai mi sono dimenticato di quasi tutto. Abitassi in Italia per due anni – ma era piu di 25 anni fa. (1979 – 81).

Grazie per tutto.

Luca Ghione · October 1st, 2007, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will Schryver

Luca,

Perche hai scelto i lenti Canon invece dei lenti Nikon?

Anche io voglio comprare il LetusExtreme, e non so quali lenti di scegliere. Credo che Canon sia piu prezioso di Nikon, ma non sono sicuro. Probabilmente comprero tutti “used”.

Perdonami se il mio italiano non sia perfetto. Ormai mi sono dimenticato di quasi tutto. Abitassi in Italia per due anni – ma era piu di 25 anni fa. (1979 – 81).

Grazie per tutto.

Complimenti per il tuo italiano! Ho comprato tutte lenti Canon "used" perchè vari fotografi mi hanno detto che sono meglio di Nikon (soprattutto se degli anni '70-'80) e ho comprato canon fd 24mm f2.8; 50mm f1.4; 85mm f1.8 (better than 100mm f2.8!), 135mm f2.5; Io ho comprato Sgpro ma devo ancora usarlo. Saluti

September 25th, 2007, 05:23 PM	#1
Luca Ghione Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Turin ITALY Posts: 32	A1 + adapter 35 mm, what lenses? I would buy a 35mm adapter (i think sgpro), but I have some doubts about the lenses to use. What lenses is better to use? I saw some: es- canon fd: 24 mm 2.8, 28mm 2.8; 35 mm 2.0; 50 mm 1.4 or 1.8; 85 mm 1.8; 100mm 2.8; 135 mm 2.5. thanks for your help. Last edited by Luca Ghione; September 25th, 2007 at 05:24 PM. Reason: interesting

September 25th, 2007, 05:38 PM	#2
Steven Dempsey Disjecta Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Seattle, Washington Posts: 937	I use a 28mm f2.8, a 50mm f1.8, a 100mm f2.8 and a 200mm f4 and I find that to be adequate for most applications. A 24mm or 20mm would be nice but not necessary for me. __________________ Try my Digital Therapy: http://www.pinelakefilms.com/digital_therapy.html Films on ExposureRoom: http://exposureroom.com/members/disjecta.aspx/videos/

September 25th, 2007, 06:03 PM	#4
David W. Jones Trustee Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Little Rock Posts: 1,383	As an example...The 28mm lens might give you an angular field of around 75º, while the 24mm might give you around 83º.

September 25th, 2007, 09:26 PM	#5
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	In 35mm still photography I always used a 24mm, a 35, and a 105 as my basic lenses. With those three I could do about anything I needed to do. Later on I got a 50mm micro, a 200mm and a 135. All Nikkor lenses. If you use a 28mm as your widest angle, then you probably should get a 50 instead of a 35mm for your "normal." And maybe a 135 instead of a 105. I always prefer wider angles for most things.

September 27th, 2007, 10:23 AM	#6
Tiago Melo New Boot Join Date: May 2007 Location: Florianopolis (Brasil) Posts: 13	I'm not trying to hijack this thread, so don't get me wrong... I've been reading about using 35mm adapters with the A1 for a few months now, but I still can't seem to come to a conclusion of what lenses would be necessary for shooting macro with the A1 + 35mm adapter... I'm a dentist and my macro shots (speaking of photography here) are done with a Nikon D70 + 105mm Nikkor lens + flash... Would I be able to use the same 105 lens with the A1 + a 35mm adapter??? In case it is possible, would I get a comparable framing capability??? Again, I'm realy sorry for asking my own questions in Luca's thread, but I believe the answers will probably be of interest to some other members... Peace,

September 27th, 2007, 12:20 PM	#7
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	Short answer is yes, that's the purpose of the adapters--so a 105mm lens looks like a 105mm lens. But if you want macro shots, why not try something like a +1 diopter, which should allow you to zoom in all the way and get much closer to focus.

September 27th, 2007, 12:25 PM	#8
Tiago Melo New Boot Join Date: May 2007 Location: Florianopolis (Brasil) Posts: 13	Thanks Bill... I have just created a thread and posted some pictures of what I intend to capture, so that more people can make suggestions: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...d=1#post750963 Thanks and I apologize again to Luca for anything... Peace...

September 27th, 2007, 12:31 PM	#9
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	The problem you might have with an adapter is light. I don't know how bright the dentist's lights are, since I'm always on the receiving end at such times. Anyway, a diopter, maybe even a stronger one than +1 might do what you want a lot cheaper (like under 50 bucks or so).

September 27th, 2007, 01:55 PM	#11
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	That's a good range. With the 85, the 135 is a better longer lens. I read someplace years ago somebody shot an entire feature with an 85mm lens. I find that hard to believe, buy who knows. I don't know about Canon but Nikon used to have a relatively cheap 2X telextender you could but between any lens and the camera, with no obvious degradation of quality, though it ate a lot of light. I've been thinking about a 35mm adapter, but I'm not sure I want to go that route yet. I have lots of old Nikkor lenses, but all of them are the slower (and sharper) lenses. I always went for sharp over fast in my still photog days.

September 27th, 2007, 02:13 PM	#12
Alvise Tedesco Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Milan/Italy Posts: 63	Luca, bought SGPro? I have an M2. Usually on DVX, but from tomorrow on an XH-A1. Se ti capita di passare da Milano vediamoci (o se passo io da Torino). Per quanto riguarda le lenti, devono essere molto veloci e soprattutto lavorare bene a diaframmi molto aperti. Io uso i vecchi Nikkor e finisco per tenere su il 50 quasi sempre, perchè è un 1,4 e a 2 è nitidissimo. Per i Canon FD, se non lo conoscessi, questo è un buon riferimento: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...nses/index.htm