peterm1
Mentor
I have recently stumbled on an idea which (surprisingly for my ideas) works quite nicely at least for me.
I am presently using 3 different mirrorless camera systems - Sony E mount, Micro 4/3 and Fujifilm. I have not bought an m4/3 camera in years but I still quite like the format and, as I would get but a pittance should I sell it, I keep using it at least from time to time. The other two cameras get used interchangeably depending on my plans for the day. But what this means is that I am "running" 3 main camera systems contemporaneously.
I also love exploring old vintage glass and unless I am forgetting something, I presently have the following: M42, Pentax K mount, Nikon F mount, Nikon RF, Canon FL/FD, Exacta, Leica M, Leica LTM. I also have a couple of 3rd party lenses in Canon EOS mount which unlike most EOS lenses do not need electrical contacts and so operate with a "dumb adapter". Knowing me more might well follow in future. So far, though, that is a total of 9 different lens mount types. Should I wish to mount each of these on each of the camera types I have that would require a total of 27 different adapters. What I have begun experimenting with is using Leica M as the common mount for all of these lenses and body types. This means I only need 3 adapters for the 3 bodies I use (effectively converting each of them to a Leica M mount body - well sort of), plus one for each lens type thereby converting them to Leica M mount too. That makes a total of only 12 adapters to buy and cope with.
Fortunately, due to the advent of AF lens adapters in recent years, (which also use Leica M as their standard mount type) adapting to Leica M from a wide variety of lens mounts is now entirely possible as such adapters are widely purveyed for use on such AF adapters). Although I already have some dedicated lens adapters for the lens types and body types that I own, I have recently been using this system as an alternative to a dedicated adapter when I find the need to buy another adapter for some reason.
Of course, it means stacking adapters which some may be averse to, but I have not found that to be problematic. This "system" is quite discrete and small (notwithstanding the need to have two adapters in play for each lens/camera combination) as most dedicated lens adapters are more large and bulky than this option in most cases. I also like how it looks - a kind of "wasp waist" effect which produces more naturally flowing lines at the camera to Leica M - Leica M to lens junction. See photo below which has an old Zeiss lens mounted on a Sony body. I do not like for example the look of a skinny lens mounted on a fat/ large diameter adapter which makes it look like it is sitting on a plinth. (A personal foible, I grant you). This method looks more elegant to my eye.
Finally, it simplifies shooting - if you are going out for a day with a camera with say, 3 lenses - each with a different mount, it's simply a matter of converting each of those with a (small and light) Leica M adapter first. This tends to reduce bulk and weight in the camera bag.
Just a thought for those willing to experiment.
I am presently using 3 different mirrorless camera systems - Sony E mount, Micro 4/3 and Fujifilm. I have not bought an m4/3 camera in years but I still quite like the format and, as I would get but a pittance should I sell it, I keep using it at least from time to time. The other two cameras get used interchangeably depending on my plans for the day. But what this means is that I am "running" 3 main camera systems contemporaneously.
I also love exploring old vintage glass and unless I am forgetting something, I presently have the following: M42, Pentax K mount, Nikon F mount, Nikon RF, Canon FL/FD, Exacta, Leica M, Leica LTM. I also have a couple of 3rd party lenses in Canon EOS mount which unlike most EOS lenses do not need electrical contacts and so operate with a "dumb adapter". Knowing me more might well follow in future. So far, though, that is a total of 9 different lens mount types. Should I wish to mount each of these on each of the camera types I have that would require a total of 27 different adapters. What I have begun experimenting with is using Leica M as the common mount for all of these lenses and body types. This means I only need 3 adapters for the 3 bodies I use (effectively converting each of them to a Leica M mount body - well sort of), plus one for each lens type thereby converting them to Leica M mount too. That makes a total of only 12 adapters to buy and cope with.
Fortunately, due to the advent of AF lens adapters in recent years, (which also use Leica M as their standard mount type) adapting to Leica M from a wide variety of lens mounts is now entirely possible as such adapters are widely purveyed for use on such AF adapters). Although I already have some dedicated lens adapters for the lens types and body types that I own, I have recently been using this system as an alternative to a dedicated adapter when I find the need to buy another adapter for some reason.
Of course, it means stacking adapters which some may be averse to, but I have not found that to be problematic. This "system" is quite discrete and small (notwithstanding the need to have two adapters in play for each lens/camera combination) as most dedicated lens adapters are more large and bulky than this option in most cases. I also like how it looks - a kind of "wasp waist" effect which produces more naturally flowing lines at the camera to Leica M - Leica M to lens junction. See photo below which has an old Zeiss lens mounted on a Sony body. I do not like for example the look of a skinny lens mounted on a fat/ large diameter adapter which makes it look like it is sitting on a plinth. (A personal foible, I grant you). This method looks more elegant to my eye.
Finally, it simplifies shooting - if you are going out for a day with a camera with say, 3 lenses - each with a different mount, it's simply a matter of converting each of those with a (small and light) Leica M adapter first. This tends to reduce bulk and weight in the camera bag.
Just a thought for those willing to experiment.
Last edited:
I've never used multiple mirrorless systems at the same time as is your situation, but for those who switch systems, taking all your adapted lenses along is quite easy...just get a single new adapter.
Also, re: using M adapters as the 'base adapter': close focusing adapters for M bayonet lenses are common, so this enables every adapted lens to have closer focus capabilities. Which is nice because most 'regular' adapters, for example Contax/Yashica to Sony E mount, are not available with close focus helicals.
This is helpful for example with the Contax 50/1.7 Planar, which focuses only to 0.6m, which is pretty mediocre. With a close focusing helical this can be reduced to 0.3m or less.
Also, re: using M adapters as the 'base adapter': close focusing adapters for M bayonet lenses are common, so this enables every adapted lens to have closer focus capabilities. Which is nice because most 'regular' adapters, for example Contax/Yashica to Sony E mount, are not available with close focus helicals.
This is helpful for example with the Contax 50/1.7 Planar, which focuses only to 0.6m, which is pretty mediocre. With a close focusing helical this can be reduced to 0.3m or less.
shawn
Mentor
Yes, this can work pretty well and does reduce some clutter.
The main downside is that IME many/most adapters are intentionally thinner than they should be which means lenses with a hard infinity stop are now focusing beyond infinity with that adapter. With zooms or lenses with floating elements this throws off their calibration and reduces performance though. For example, my Pentax 645 zooms *mostly* keep focus when zooming, when the adapters are too short there is a lot more focus change when zooming.
Stacking multiple adapters that are a little too thin will make this worse. I've recently been shimming my adapters to restore infinity being at proper at the lock.
The main downside is that IME many/most adapters are intentionally thinner than they should be which means lenses with a hard infinity stop are now focusing beyond infinity with that adapter. With zooms or lenses with floating elements this throws off their calibration and reduces performance though. For example, my Pentax 645 zooms *mostly* keep focus when zooming, when the adapters are too short there is a lot more focus change when zooming.
Stacking multiple adapters that are a little too thin will make this worse. I've recently been shimming my adapters to restore infinity being at proper at the lock.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
What if I don't have Leica M?
Why can't I buy direct adapter?
Why can't I buy direct adapter?
shawn
Mentor
Of course you can. Doing what Peter suggested just makes changing mirrorless systems with a number of adapted lenses in various mounts cheaper.
For example if you had Nikon, Pentax, Olympus OM and M42 lenses and a Sony mirrorless camera and a Fuji mirrorless camera you could buy 10 adapters. One each for the original mount to the mirrorless mount. Or you could by 5 adapters, one for the original mount to Leica M and then a Leica M to the mirrorless mount for each system of mirrorless you want to support. Cheaper and a little leas bulky that way. The downside is potential tolerance issues around the flange focal length, sometimes more rotational play with the multiple adapters and maybe more internal reflections. I usually add flocking to the adapters which would be a little harder with two smaller adapters instead of one longer one.
For example if you had Nikon, Pentax, Olympus OM and M42 lenses and a Sony mirrorless camera and a Fuji mirrorless camera you could buy 10 adapters. One each for the original mount to the mirrorless mount. Or you could by 5 adapters, one for the original mount to Leica M and then a Leica M to the mirrorless mount for each system of mirrorless you want to support. Cheaper and a little leas bulky that way. The downside is potential tolerance issues around the flange focal length, sometimes more rotational play with the multiple adapters and maybe more internal reflections. I usually add flocking to the adapters which would be a little harder with two smaller adapters instead of one longer one.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
So, buying some bayonet adapter to m adapter, plus m adapter to some other bayonet adapter is cheaper than buying some bayonet to some bayonet adapter.
How come?
Pentax K to Leica M
Leica M to Fuji X mount (close focusing adapter)
Leica M to Fuji X mount (close focusing adapter)
peterm1
Mentor
If you only have one camera system and only use one lens system obviously it is not cheaper. But if you use several different lens systems on a couple or more camera bodies then suddenly it does becomes cheaper overall. My example given in my post was that I have 3 different mirrorless bodies (each of course with different mounts and therefore requiring different adapters. I also use up to 9 different vintage lens mount systems. If I buy one adapter for each combination of vintage lens and mirrorless camera, I need 3x9=27 different adapters. If instead, I do as I suggested and use the now nearly ubiquitous mirrorless to M mount adapters combined with vintage lens to M mount adapters, I need just 3 adapters (for the bodies) and a further 9 in total for the lenses - I therefore need a total of 12 adapters instead of 27.
As to the concerns over adapter tolerances, yes I agree there is that potential but the simple fact is as I said in my original post I do not believe I have ever had a problem or experienced it....at least not to the extent that I have become cognizant of it. Perhaps it's partly my style of working..........I do not rely on infinity hard stops and never have. If shooting at a long distance I either stop well down and use hyperfocal distance (estimated) or I use focus peaking. No problem!
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
So.
The goal is to have different bayonet lenses to be interchangeable with different bayonet cameras?
If we put on all cameras M adapter (convert them to M bayonet), they will accept all lenses with M adapter on them.
Correct ?
peterm1
Mentor
Yes that is so.
peterm1
Mentor
Looks good.
pvdhaar
Peter
My personal experience with adapters and tubes varies, even without stacking them. Biggest disappointment was with a single Kipon Nikon-F to Sony-E adapter; on both sides the mount would sit loose. Completely unworkable. On the other hand, I've got a no-brand M to Sony-E adapter that sits perfectly.
By the way, how is the availability of vintage lens to M adapters? I'd assume that there was little incentive for adapting uncommon-mount SLR lenses because of loss of RF focus coupling.
By the way, how is the availability of vintage lens to M adapters? I'd assume that there was little incentive for adapting uncommon-mount SLR lenses because of loss of RF focus coupling.
mapgraphs
Established
I settled on the M mount as base through a convoluted process of adapting a variety of mounts to 4/3 then to m4/3. That led to E and finally Z. Mostly as a way to use LTM on mirrorless. One of the more extreme stacks of adapters was something like an Exata mount 100mm portrait lens to 4/3, then to m4/3, then to M, then to E close focus and finally to Z ...
peterm1
Mentor
The adapter brand I have been using most often over the past few years have been the K&F Concept brand ones which are a good compromise between price and quality. Having said this many of the vintage lens to M mount ones I have found online recently are "no-name" ones. Most of these are fine in terms of function - I have one specific M mount adapter which is a little loose when one or two other adapters are stacked on it though others lock on tightly. Even this one is not an issue as the looseness is not in the back and forward direction - it is circumferential so it is more of an inconvenience than a limit on accuracy.
So far I have been able to find the vintage to Leica M adapters for: Nikon F mount, M42 mount, Pentax K mount, Minolta mount, Konica mount, Canon FL/FD mount etc. The reason that such adapters have become relatively easy to find is I believe, because there are now a few different Leica M AF adapters by firms such as Techart and these are known to work OK when stacked in this manner so as to turn other brands of lens into AF lenses when mounted on mirrorless.
I had an early production Techart AF adapter, ordered in Feb. 2016. Hard to believe it has been that long. Had the Contax G AF adapter prior to that. And yes, the Techart system of adapting everything to M is what prompted me to use the two-adapter system, although manually, after selling off my Sony.
Pretty much everything can be adapted to M now, due to later digital M models having live view, no need for a focus cam.
I have been happy with K&F as well,
Pretty much everything can be adapted to M now, due to later digital M models having live view, no need for a focus cam.
I have been happy with K&F as well,
bcostin
Well-known
I've been doing the same to easily swap around my lens collection between Sony and M43 bodies. I've accumulated quite a set. It's pretty handy!