Do you think I will have the problem with this piece?http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTc2WDEwMjQ=/z/RrkAAOSwuTxV-~Ox/$_20.JPG
I take it's a AI-S Series E?
When referring to a knock, are you referring to a sound that one can hear? Would it shift in a way that will become visible if not treated afterwards? If not, I might be interested.
Timothy, are you proposing to get a Nikon mount in order to use it with a speed booster?
Is there any Nikon lens type I can confidently pass over?
I just came across this 20mm lens: http://www.ebay.de/itm/Nikon-Nikkor-20mm-f2-8-D-Wie-Neu-mit-Zubehor-/351...
Together with the speed booster it will probably come very close to a native wide lens like the Rokinon/Walimex..
Sorry,I'm afraid Voigtlaender is totally out of my budget of at the most 300€.
Guy: do you have any experience with nikon lenses wider than 28 like the 24 or 20mm? They are quite expensive but in a way, that's the field of view I was looking for..
That's interesting. Just today, I saw that post on dpreview on the different focal reducers and was really impressed by the Mitakon quality (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3627547).
I forgot to add that I do have a m42 adapter, so I'm using these lenses already. In terms of image quality, I like them both but I really do need the wider field of view (and maybe slightly more sharpness compared to the Porst 28mm).
However, I'm not sure whether the upgrade from those m42 lenses to the Nikon lenses will produce the big difference that, for me, compensates the hassle of changing everything around, selling my current lenses etc.
So I'm still torn between
a) keeping the m42 lenses (which I like) and adding the focal reducer
b) selling everything and buying the Mitakon + Nikon lens
(and maybe still c) swapping the M.Zuiko with the Pana 20mm 1.7)
Is there a substantial argument that goes against spending roughly 150€ for a m42 adapter? I guess I somehow developed the idea that m42 equals poor / average quality (after seeing a pvc box full of m42 lenses at a local dealer, sellling each of them for 5€) and/or that I will have more trouble finding good primes <30mm for m42. Is that rubbish?
>>> The electronic MFT lenses are electronically sharpened, which might not be a good thing when you don't want it.
Can you counter that by lowering sharpness to -5 or is it something one has to accept when buying MFT lenses?
Is this what people mostly refer to when they compare "digital lenses" to vintage lenses (in terms of image quality)?
I'm asking because I'm wondering whether one of the above-mentioned MFT lenses will produce any substantial difference ("look") to my M.Zuiko?
When I bought the GH3 I got two m42 lenses as well:
- Porst Super Weitwinkel 28mm 1:2.8
- Auto Rikenon 50mm 1:2
I don't know if that's a bit silly to ask, but how would you compare these two lenses with some of the Nikons?
I found out that RJ sells focal reducers for M42. Is there a good reason not to go the "m42 line"?