[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkpowder /img/forum/go_quote.gif Are any of the Leica lens compatible with Nikon?

Probably not, since they use different mounts. There may be an adapter that allows a switch between one (extension), but people seem to find adapters reduce image quality. I know you can use nikon lenses on canon's with an adapter, but you can't use canon lenses on a nikon. Most people won't do this though, because an adapter is needed which people claim reduces the image quality of the lens.

Leica lenses are bloody expensive to boot!

 

[stuartr]

Leica lenses will not fit on Nikon mount with a glassless adapter. The problem is that Leica M lenses (the rangefinder lenses) are designed to be about 27.75mm from the flange to the film/sensor. Nikon F mount flance to film/sensor distance is 46.5mm, so you could put a Nikon lens on a Leica, but not a Leica lens on a Nikon. If you did, you would only be able to focus extremely close up. Leica SLR lenses work on Canon, but not on Nikon. The reason is that Leica SLR's film to flange distance is 47mm, which is too close to Nikon to machine a durable adapter...it would have to be .5mm thick. Canon film to flange is 44.0mm, which is enough to machine an adapter.

Assuming it is properly made (this can be difficult...they need to be highly precise), the adapters have no effect on optical quality. You will have to use stop-down metering though, since the adapters are generally simple mechanical couplings that cannot stop down the lens or control the iris. This also limits you to using only lenses that have an aperture ring (all Leica lenses do, luckily).

Anyway...that's why you can't use Leica lenses on Nikon (unless you rip the mount out of your Nikon camera and put in a Leica R mount...something people have done before.)

 

[M0T0XGUY]

I wasn't aware that you could use Nikon's lenses in a Canon mount, even with an adapter. Do they retain any electronic coupling after they've been modified?

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY /img/forum/go_quote.gif I wasn't aware that you could use Nikon's lenses in a Canon mount, even with an adapter. Do they retain any electronic coupling after they've been modified?

A place to start reading:
Roxsen Nikon - Canon Lens Converter

 

[milkpowder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Leica lenses are bloody expensive to boot!

Wow I had no idea they were so expensive! $6k for a 50mm f/1 with an average price of around $3-4k

Geez. At least Zeiss lens are relatively affordable...

Quote:

Originally Posted by stuartr /img/forum/go_quote.gif Leica lenses will not fit on Nikon mount with a glassless adapter. The problem is that Leica M lenses (the rangefinder lenses) are designed to be about 27.75mm from the flange to the film/sensor. Nikon F mount flance to film/sensor distance is 46.5mm, so you could put a Nikon lens on a Leica, but not a Leica lens on a Nikon. If you did, you would only be able to focus extremely close up. Leica SLR lenses work on Canon, but not on Nikon. The reason is that Leica SLR's film to flange distance is 47mm, which is too close to Nikon to machine a durable adapter...it would have to be .5mm thick. Canon film to flange is 44.0mm, which is enough to machine an adapter. Assuming it is properly made (this can be difficult...they need to be highly precise), the adapters have no effect on optical quality. You will have to use stop-down metering though, since the adapters are generally simple mechanical couplings that cannot stop down the lens or control the iris. This also limits you to using only lenses that have an aperture ring (all Leica lenses do, luckily). Anyway...that's why you can't use Leica lenses on Nikon (unless you rip the mount out of your Nikon camera and put in a Leica R mount...something people have done before.)

Thank you very much for the technical explanation.

 

[stuartr]

Much of it is the euro versus dollar exchange rate. A lot of these cameras and lenses were dramatically cheaper before Bush took office. Since then, the dollar has collapsed and with it the price of european goods has skyrocketed. In 2001, the 50mm f/1 was 3500 or so (it was cheaper than Canon's 50mm f/1), and they could be found on the used market for 1500 dollars or so. Now used ones are 5000, since they are discontinued. The other lenses used to between 1000-2000, but now they are usually between 3000 and 4000. The lenses themselves have made a pretty good investment if you bought them awhile ago. I bought most of my Leica kit in 2002-2003, and it is all worth a lot more now than when I bought it, even taking in consideration that I bought some new stuff that is now used.

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stuartr /img/forum/go_quote.gif I bought most of my Leica kit in 2002-2003, and it is all worth a lot more now than when I bought it, even taking in consideration that I bought some new stuff that is now used.

The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. Yay!

 

[milkpowder]

I certainly wouldn't be in the position to buy any Leica lens/cameras then, at least not for another decade (or three!). I'll be content with a healthy stable of Zeiss ZF (in particular the 2/35, 1.4/50, 2/50 Makro, 1.4/85) and a few Nikon AF/AI(-S) primes

Stuart, you have some great gear. Which do you use the most often?

I'm using my 50/1.8 AI more than my 18-70 and the 70-300VR is collecting dust. I've clicked the shutter button about 4500 times and it seems like I need a few fast lens in the 18-50mm range more than anything else. I've never ever been in the situation where I wanted more zoom than 50mm, but have more than once found it too long! I envision a few fast primes replacing my 18-70 in the forseeable future.

I'm also pleased to say I'm really getting better at manually focussing. However, the viewfinder of the D300 really isn't the greatest for MF, eg too small and not quite bright/clear enough; and the focus indicator is not all that useful, eg sometimes flashes like mad or unpredictably in low light and at other times remains on even after the focus ring has been turned thus falsely indicating a range of in-focus pictures. I can get around this by focus bracketing, ie taking photos from when the focus indicator light turns on and stopping at the point where it turns off. Sure, I don't have to rely on the focus indicator light but it sure helps in low-light.

Long story cut short, some have recommended I get something called a Cateyez. I have been on their website and am not to confident about installing it myself (being UK-based, sending my camera to the US would be a silly proposition). I'm also not too enthusiastic about the "modification" tampering with my light meter's accuracy for lens slower than F2.8 when put into spot metering. Guess I'll just have to make do... or get a D700 or D3(x). [size=xx-small]only joking

[/size]

 

[RYCeT]

Milkpowder, if you love the 50 1.8, get 35 2.0
35mm is the best range for D300. When I use my 50mm, I have to step back, w/ 35mm I don't need to do that which make it perfect to work indoor. It's sharp, fast and have a good bokeh. I use it more than my tamron 17-50

 

[Towert7]

The 35mm F/2 AF-D is a great little lens! A must have on a budget.
Speaking of which, I think from the small collection of lenses that I have, I will try and use my 35mm when I try 'shooting from the hip'. Frame may be a little tight on a 1.5x, but I'll still give it a shot. Should prove to be fun.

 

[M0T0XGUY]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkpowder /img/forum/go_quote.gif I certainly wouldn't be in the position to buy any Leica lens/cameras then, at least not for another decade (or three!). I'll be content with a healthy stable of Zeiss ZF (in particular the 2/35, 1.4/50, 2/50 Makro, 1.4/85) and a few Nikon AF/AI(-S) primes Stuart, you have some great gear. Which do you use the most often? I'm using my 50/1.8 AI more than my 18-70 and the 70-300VR is collecting dust. I've clicked the shutter button about 4500 times and it seems like I need a few fast lens in the 18-50mm range more than anything else. I've never ever been in the situation where I wanted more zoom than 50mm, but have more than once found it too long! I envision a few fast primes replacing my 18-70 in the forseeable future. I'm also pleased to say I'm really getting better at manually focussing. However, the viewfinder of the D300 really isn't the greatest for MF, eg too small and not quite bright/clear enough; and the focus indicator is not all that useful, eg sometimes flashes like mad or unpredictably in low light and at other times remains on even after the focus ring has been turned thus falsely indicating a range of in-focus pictures. I can get around this by focus bracketing, ie taking photos from when the focus indicator light turns on and stopping at the point where it turns off. Sure, I don't have to rely on the focus indicator light but it sure helps in low-light. Long story cut short, some have recommended I get something called a Cateyez. I have been on their website and am not to confident about installing it myself (being UK-based, sending my camera to the US would be a silly proposition). I'm also not too enthusiastic about the "modification" tampering with my light meter's accuracy for lens slower than F2.8 when put into spot metering. Guess I'll just have to make do... or get a D700 or D3(x). [size=xx-small]only joking [/size]

It's too bad that you find the D300's viewfinder small for MF, as its among the biggest and brightest of DX size DSLR's. Any reason why you don't use live view with zoom to manually focus?

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's too bad that you find the D300's viewfinder small for MF, as its among the biggest and brightest of DX size DSLR's. Any reason why you don't use live view with zoom to manually focus?

The D3 viewfinder is a dream! It's just that milkpowder has very high expectations and requirements. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[ozz]

Is there anything to be concerned about doing a firmware update using
osx 10.5.4 on the D-80.

 

[milkpowder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M0T0XGUY /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's too bad that you find the D300's viewfinder small for MF, as its among the biggest and brightest of DX size DSLR's. Any reason why you don't use live view with zoom to manually focus?

I hold the camera most steadily with it braced against my face. I guess I could use Live View if I was shooting at high shutter speeds.

Oh, the D300's viewfinder really isn't that terrible

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The D3 viewfinder is a dream! It's just that milkpowder has very high expectations and requirements. Nothing wrong with that.

Well I've never used a D3 so I wouldn't know

I don't want to know either. Ignorance is bliss

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The 35mm F/2 AF-D is a great little lens! A must have on a budget. Speaking of which, I think from the small collection of lenses that I have, I will try and use my 35mm when I try 'shooting from the hip'. Frame may be a little tight on a 1.5x, but I'll still give it a shot. Should prove to be fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RYCeT /img/forum/go_quote.gif Milkpowder, if you love the 50 1.8, get 35 2.0 35mm is the best range for D300. When I use my 50mm, I have to step back, w/ 35mm I don't need to do that which make it perfect to work indoor. It's sharp, fast and have a good bokeh. I use it more than my tamron 17-50

I will get a 32/2 AF-D when I'm back in Hong Kong.

I must also find out where the second hand camera stores are. The ones in the UK charge a hefty premium for relatively cheap and common-place AI(-S) lenses like the 50s and 35s. It would be nice if I could grab the 50/1.4 AI-S and 35/2 AI-S... They're at least $300 each in one camera store in Edinburgh. I could almost get a Zeiss 1.4/50 for that kinda money.

 

[stuartr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. Yay!

This is not the case for me, I assure you. The Leica stuff going up is small consolation for the past 8 disastrous years. The collapse of the dollar has hit me a lot harder than most because I make most of my money in the US, but live most of the year in Europe. Anyway, I was just trying to make the point that Leica gear (and other European camera gear) is artificially expensive at the moment due to the state of the dollar, certainly not to rub anyone's face in it or the fact that I am lucky enough to afford nice camera equipment.

Also, for what it's worth, you can get a nice Leica and lens for a lot less than the cost of a D300. They have made Leicas for 80 years, and the present M7 is extremely close to the M3 which came out in 1954...lots of people still use M3's every day.

Quote:

Stuart, you have some great gear. Which do you use the most often?

For technically difficult work (i.e. dodgy lighting, fast moving people/objects), I use the D3 most. For travel and landscape photography, I mostly use a Mamiya 7II. I use the Leica for daily carry, street photography and everything else. I mix it up a lot.