Digital body to carry "vintage" lenses, which one?

[gobs]

Hi all!

I'm new on this forum. As well I only shoot B&W films with vintage gear.

Sometime I'ld like to shoot color pics with a second hand digital body carrying my old lenses. But I can't decide: too many options and I know nothing about digital. So I'm turning to you...

- My lenses are mainly M42 screw-mount, Leica M39 screw-mount and Leica M-mount.

- I'ld like a viewfinder and a screen. Not a screen alone.

- Full manual is all what I really need, but I don't even know if some digital camera does that.

- Film speed control and in-board light-meter would be nice.

- My computer runs under Windows XP (please, don't laugh! ).

- If I'm not wrong "full frame" means the same frame as 24x36, right?

- Through my search, I feel (but not sure) a bridge body would do the trick, right?

- I don't want to spend a lot of money as it should be a sort of a test at first...

Please, any advice (and even more) will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks to all in advance.

Ray

[FracturedRabbit]

I tried to send you a pm with some suggestions, but got a message saying you could not receive messages. Send me a message and I will reply. Cheers

[chipstack]

Sony a7ii or A7Rii adapts to all lenses at 24 and 42 MP respective.

[gobs]

Thanks for your inputs.

@ FR: message sent...

KR

Ray

[Raven88]

It's old, but a Ricoh GXR M Mount works beautifully with those lenses since the sensor was specifically built for them.

On the Sonys u get issues w color-shift in the corners with wide lenses

[vaultdweller0013]

It's old, but a Ricoh GXR M Mount works beautifully with those lenses since the sensor was specifically built for them.

On the Sonys u get issues w color-shift in the corners with wide lenses

You need to investigate the exact lens/body combination, but this primarily affected the a7r. The a7/a7ii and a7s/a7sii are basically fine. The a7rii still has some issues, but then again the a7r and a7rii are the highest resolution options for Leica lenses.

Additionally, the gxr is an aps-c sensor and 12mp. Even at 24mp, the Sony aps-c e-mount cameras have no issues with the wide angle lenses.

On top of that, the a7ii and a7rii give you in-body stabilization. Plus, with the right adapter you can get AF (with some limitations) for m-mount lenses.

The biggest downside is that the Sony menu system is crap. It can be *usable* once you customize the Fn button menu. I'm also not a fan of the egromonics -- it feels like I have to twist my fingers into pretzels to get them on the right buttons.

[gobs]

it feels like I have to twist my fingers into pretzels to get them on the right buttons.

I do like this

I greatly appreciate all your comments, and thanks to you I'm beginning to dig deeper into 4/3 vs full frame... Well, I mean learning

If I'm not wrong, it appears a 50mm lens on a full frame "plays" like a 100mm on a 4/3, and stop numbers double as well, ie. f/2 becomes f/4, f/4 is f/8 and so on...

1) In this case, one lose the background OOF effect at wide apertures (the famous bokey thing), right?

2) Because of a smaller sensor, the view angle is smaller, so the sensor "sees" through more of the center of the lens, not through the whole diameter, right?

I mean, if a certain full frame lens full open is a bit soft in the corner, one lose this softness in the corner when using this same lens on a 4/3, right?

As these two points would be my main concerns, please, may you tell me if I'm wrong or right about my above statements...

Thanks in advance for your help.

Ray

[vaultdweller0013]

For both (1) and (2), you are generally right, but there are more details.

When comparing against between different sensor sizes

• Focal length and aperture (f-number) do not change -- a 50mm f1/4 lens is a 50mm f1.4 lens regardless of whether it is mounted on a full frame, APS-C, or micro 4/3 sensor. However, ...
• The effect of focal length on field of view is affected by sensor size. To covert to the focal length with the same field of view, you multiply the focal length by the crop factor. APS-C to full frame is 1.5 (or 1.6 if Canon); m43 to full frame is 2. So, a 50mm lens mounted on APS-C would be the same field of view as a 75mm on full frame, or a 50mm on m43 would be the same as a 100mm on full frame.
• Aperture (f-number) is a little more tricky because it is used to determine two different aspects of the picture: depth of field (bokeh) and exposure. When considering depth of field, the aperture IS multiplied by the crop factor, but when considering exposure, the f-number IS NOT multiplied by the crop factor. This is, a 50mm f1.4 lens on APS-C would have the same depth of field as a 75mm f2 lens on full frame or, if on m43, the same as a 100mm f2.8 lens. However, on a heavily overcast day, if I wanted to have a 1/60s shutter speed at ISO 100(*), I would set the lens to f8 on full frame, APS-C and m43.

For your second point, the smaller sensor still "sees" through the entire (front of the) lens. Instead, what it does is crop the center of the image circle. So, if a lens has a sharp center and soft corners on full frame, the soft corners are effective cropped out when using the lens on m43 (no different than cropping in Photoshop or using an enlarger on film), so the lens can appear sharper across the entire frame of a smaller sensor. If you want to have a lens only see through the center of the front of the lens, you increase the f-number.

(*) Many (all) digital camera makers usually overstate the actual ISO -- ISO 6400 is probably in the 5800-6200 range. So you would probably end up with different exposures when moving from one camera to the other, even with the same sensor size.

[FracturedRabbit]

You are correct, you double the effective field of view with 4/3, so a 50mm lens has a field of view of 100mm on full frame.

Partly correct on the aperture. A 50mm F2 lens will still expose as an F2 lens on 4/3; but the DOF is of course of a 50mm F2, not a 100mm F2 as per the field of view. In other words, you get the same exposure advantage, but DOF is wider.

Personally, I have not found this to be an issue. 4/3 lenses are smaller and light and fast primes are available.

The below was taken with a 75mm F1.8 lens (full frame equivalent field of view: 150mm); but I had to stop down to F3.5 to get in all the bits I needed in focus.

OL121666 by Spike Tennyson, on Flickr

Your requirements of course may vary.

[gobs]

Thank you for the detailed explanations, Vaultdweller and FracturedRabbit.

My words were a bit "poor" I confess, but with your detailed answers I better understand now...

At wide aperture, some "vintage" lenses have pleasant "bokeh" I do like when shooting people or portraits. That's why I wanted to well understand the sensor size/aperture relation.

About soft corners, I have the feeling they "push" the center main subject more "in front" of the pic.

As well, shooting a portrait out of center, soft corners give a nice soft touch to the facial features and the hair.

Add to this a big amount of flare (easy with old lenses), and you get something "special" like that:

LeicaM4-2, soviet Jupiter 8 50/2 full open, Orwo N74+ 135 film 400 ASA

Scanned wet print on RC Kentmere paper

4/3 or full frame? Well, I've to think more about this...

And thanks again for your help

Ray

[rhythmworx]

One thing I'd like to add, which might be of some importance to you.

A 100mm lens on 4:3 will not have the same 'lens compression/perspective distortion' as a 200mm on full frame.

[vaultdweller0013]

There really isn't any exposure advantage with smaller sensors. Yes, you can use a lower ISO on a smaller sensor given the same shutter speed, field of view, and aperture (such as 50mm f2 on m43 and 100mm f4 on FF), but the actual image noise will be roughly equivalent. This is because ISO is essentially specifying a density of light (photons/mm2). So, the larger sensor will collect the same total light as a smaller sensor (and if the same MP, the same total light per pixel) when the ISO is higher by a factor of the square of the crop factor (for example, ISO 100 on m43 will have roughly the same noise as ISO 400 (400=(2*2)*100) on a FF camera. For example, if you compare the OMD E-M10 II to the Nikon D4, when you multiply the (real) ISO of the OMD by 4 and compare to the D4, the noise is less than 3% relative difference to the D4 (in fact the OMD comes out ahead).

Where the D4 would be better is in cases where the amount of light is not a limiting factor (such as a studio with artificial lighting). In this case, both the m43 and FF could be shot at the same real ISO (by adding more light when shooting FF in the studio setting), and the FF would then have less noise because it is collecting more total light. From a theoretical perspective, you could always decrease the ISO on the smaller sensor to match the same total light as the larger sensor. However, from a practical perspective, the lowest ISO possible (base ISO) is limited. For example, the lowest ISO on the OMD referenced above is 97 and for the D4 it is 75. Note that everything is based on the real/actual/measured ISO, not the values specified in the camera. For example, for the OMD, the ISO shown in the camera is overstated -- ISO 200 is actually only ISO 97; for the D4 ISO 100 is only ISO 75.

The takeaway here is that for any reasonably large sensor (say m43, APS-C, FF or larger), the image quality is actually quite good across "normal" shooting conditions. Where the larger sensors excel is in more extreme edge cases, such as the a7sii which is a low light beast or the a7rii which manages 42MP with about the same noise as the 16MP D4 (the D4 excels in AF and being rock solid for when you absolutely must get the shot with no second chance). However, you will pay dearly for these advantages -- the E-M10 ii is about USD 500 compared to USD 3000 for either the a7sii or a7rii.

[vaultdweller0013]

^^rhythmworx

My understanding is that perspective distortion is dependent on the distance from camera to subject, not the focal length. So, if you were to use a 100mm lens on m43 and a 200mm lens on FF, and were to shoot from the same location, then the perspective distortion and compression would be the same. As a corollary, if you were to shoot with a 100mm on FF from the same location as well, you would get the same distortion as the 200mm if you cropped the 100mm picture to the same size.

As a reference:

https://photographylife.com/does-focal-length-distort-subjects

[FracturedRabbit]

There really isn't any exposure advantage with smaller sensors. Yes, you can use a lower ISO on a smaller sensor given the same shutter speed, field of view, and aperture (such as 50mm f2 on m43 and 100mm f4 on FF), but the actual image noise will be roughly equivalent. This is because ISO is essentially specifying a density of light (photons/mm2). So, the larger sensor will collect the same total light as a smaller sensor (and if the same MP, the same total light per pixel) when the ISO is higher by a factor of the square of the crop factor (for example, ISO 100 on m43 will have roughly the same noise as ISO 400 (400=(2*2)*100) on a FF camera. For example, if you compare the OMD E-M10 II to the Nikon D4, when you multiply the (real) ISO of the OMD by 4 and compare to the D4, the noise is less than 3% relative difference to the D4 (in fact the OMD comes out ahead).

Where the D4 would be better is in cases where the amount of light is not a limiting factor (such as a studio with artificial lighting). In this case, both the m43 and FF could be shot at the same real ISO (by adding more light when shooting FF in the studio setting), and the FF would then have less noise because it is collecting more total light. From a theoretical perspective, you could always decrease the ISO on the smaller sensor to match the same total light as the larger sensor. However, from a practical perspective, the lowest ISO possible (base ISO) is limited. For example, the lowest ISO on the OMD referenced above is 97 and for the D4 it is 75. Note that everything is based on the real/actual/measured ISO, not the values specified in the camera. For example, for the OMD, the ISO shown in the camera is overstated -- ISO 200 is actually only ISO 97; for the D4 ISO 100 is only ISO 75.

The takeaway here is that for any reasonably large sensor (say m43, APS-C, FF or larger), the image quality is actually quite good across "normal" shooting conditions. Where the larger sensors excel is in more extreme edge cases, such as the a7sii which is a low light beast or the a7rii which manages 42MP with about the same noise as the 16MP D4 (the D4 excels in AF and being rock solid for when you absolutely must get the shot with no second chance). However, you will pay dearly for these advantages -- the E-M10 ii is about USD 500 compared to USD 3000 for either the a7sii or a7rii.

Surely, under given lighting conditions a, say, F2 lens at ISO 100 will require the same shutter speed for correct exposure, irrespective of the size of sensor sat behind the lens? A 50mm F2 lens on 4/3 has the same exposure settings as on full frame; it's just the resulting field of view that is different.

[vaultdweller0013]

^^FR

Yes, for a given set of lighting conditions, there are 3 parameters that go into exposure f-number, shutter speed and ISO. Fix any two of those and the 3rd will be the same regardless of the sensor size or focal length.

However, in order to obtain the same angle of view and depth of field, both focal length and f-number must be adjusted by the crop factor.

That is, if I have a 50mm f2 lens on m43, to obtain the same angle of view and DOF on FF, I would need to use a 100mm lens at f4. If the shutter speed is kept the same in both cases, the required ISO for FF would be 4 times the ISO used for m43. That is, for example, my exposures would be 50mm f2 (1/60s) ISO 100 on m43 and 100mm f4 (1/60s) ISO 400 on FF. Even though the FF is shot at a higher ISO, it will have a similar amount of noise as the lower ISO on m43.

None of this really matters if you are shooting in all one sensor size; it is more if you are looking to compare systems of different sizes. For example, and related to this thread, say I had a vintage FF lens that was 50mm f2. If I needed to decide between a FF or m43 camera, the question would be which is more useful to me a 50mm f2 lens on FF or a 100mm f4 lens, also on FF. If it is the former, I would want to go with a FF camera, if it was the latter, I would want to go with a m43 camera. I could also phase the question as what is more useful, a 50mm f2 lens on m43 or a 25mm f1 lens on m43. In this case, I would go with m43 is the 50mm was more useful and FF if the 25mm was more useful.

[gobs]

Thanks to all for your detailed explainations. I greatly appreciate...

...

For example, and related to this thread, say I had a vintage FF lens that was 50mm f2. If I needed to decide between a FF or m43 camera, the question would be which is more useful to me a 50mm f2 lens on FF or a 100mm f4 lens, also on FF. If it is the former, I would want to go with a FF camera, if it was the latter, I would want to go with a m43 camera. I could also phase the question as what is more useful, a 50mm f2 lens on m43 or a 25mm f1 lens on m43. In this case, I would go with m43 is the 50mm was more useful and FF if the 25mm was more useful.

And thank you especially for your understanding, Vaultdweller, because this is exactly my main concern: I'ld like to keep the full "benefit" of my old lenses.

And once it's clearly stated, as you did, I think I'll have to go with a Full Frame sensor.

Again, I don't need "bells and wistles" as it'ld be for full manual shooting, as a traditional gear.

If possible a viewfinder, and a onboard light-meter (but not auto). And from what I've read, even 16 MP would be OK for me I think...

So now I may narrow my search for a second hand body.

Thanks to you, I've learned a lot and I now understand better, at least the principle.

[Assurancetourix]

Thanks to you, I've learned a lot and I now understand better, at least the principle.

Me too, for " I now understand better " so thank you to you FR and vaultdweller, ;

wanted to buy a Fuji X Pro 2 but his price + minimum two lenses ( 4,000 euros !! ) ...Woufff , I cannot , too much for me .

I will wait the Sony RX10 Mark III will be a little bit less expensive;

I think it has all many of us are looking for;

May I have a dream ?

if in a few months it's at about 40/50,000 baht , I will buy it .

[rhythmworx]

AT you could buy a 2nd hand 10Mp DSLR body for roughly 4000 baht and a 50mm lens to go with it for another 3000.

The quality of photos you would get from that V's the X-Pro would be the same if your in daylight, things will differ at night, focus speed will differ, but it means nothing for general photography.

I notice you don't shoot at night, so save yourself some money, it's not the camera but the person behind it.

I could take a photo with a 300,000 baht body and take the same photo with a 4000 baht body using the same lens (resize it to 1024 wide), the only difference you will see is the 300,000 body has a wider field of view, quality will remain pretty much the same.

[FracturedRabbit]

But the joy of shooting with an X-pro might be much greater. DSLRs can be so boring! And heavy. And you won't get the Fuji colours.

[Assurancetourix]

But the joy of shooting with an X-pro might be much greater. DSLRs can be so boring! And heavy. And you won't get the Fuji colours.

Your last phrase is the most important ( Fuji colors ) ; but it's too much expensive for my purse, so I will have Sony colors .

If I'm waiting for the new Sony RX10 Mark III it's for multiple reasons ; the two first ones are

--for 1,000 grams and 1,600 euros you have a complete set for photographiing ;

with a Reflex and interchangeable lenses maybe 4 or 5 kg and 4 to 5,000 euros ;

second hand lenses , if they have a very good aperture are expensives .

[gobs]

AT you could buy a 2nd hand 10Mp DSLR body for roughly 4000 baht and a 50mm lens to go with it for another 3000.

The quality of photos you would get from that V's the X-Pro would be the same if your in daylight, things will differ at night, focus speed will differ, but it means nothing for general photography.

I notice you don't shoot at night, so save yourself some money, it's not the camera but the person behind it.

I could take a photo with a 300,000 baht body and take the same photo with a 4000 baht body using the same lens (resize it to 1024 wide), the only difference you will see is the 300,000 body has a wider field of view, quality will remain pretty much the same.

Exactly!

The camera doesn't do the pic. It may helps, but only if you do know how it does help...

For 7000-9000 Bahts, you can get a Pana Lumix G 2 or 3 (about 4-5 years old), 14-42 lens kit included.

For 10000-15000, you can get a Sony Nex 5n or Nex 6;

For about 15000 Bahts you can get an Oly OMD E-M5 fully refurbished by Olympus USA.

For example, I just missed a brand new Lumix G 5 in open box for 10000 Bahts on eBay (unsold stock items)

Not the best cameras nowadays, for sure, but very good ones to start and learn...

And you have many other brands as Pentax, Samsung, Canon, and so on...

Choice is vast, and rather "cheap" for some models...

For my part, as I'm a newbie in digital camera, I'll go this second-hand way just to know "how I feel" with that.

No "big money" involved for a "first try". If it really works good for me, I'll later invest in a true FF camera to better enjoy my vintage lenses (Sony 7 or so I think).

I have now to decide MFT (Lumix G3/Oly E-M5) vs aps-c (Nex 6). But that's not a big problem for a first attempt in DP I think...

But I understand everybody sees "midday at its own door" as it's said in France...

Cheers,

Ray

[FracturedRabbit]

Nothing wrong with Sony colours!

Local Sony shops can be slow with new models. I got my RX1004 from AVcamera months before it arrived in Pattaya shops.

[gobs]

Here is a link for who wants to know some specs, handling, performances and some samples about previous and up-to-date digital cameras:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/reviews/

Good overview IMHO...

I agree with FR about AV Camera in BKK: great service, very helpful and trustworhty. I've dealt with M. Mana for film gear, and all has always been perfect.

As well, AV Camera has a second hand gear web-page:

http://www.avcamera.com/index.php/used

@ AssuranceTourix:

As an example, on the link above, AV Camera is selling a second hand Olympus E-M5 with 12-50 lens for 13000 Bahts.

If one is not on the expert/pro side, I think one can really get good and "young" SH digital gear for the price of a midrange smartphone...

Just my opinion...

Cheers,

Ray

Note to moderator: if those links are not allowed, please don't hesitate to delete them, and sory for the inconvenience.

[gobs]

I’ve got it!

And as you helped me so much, I’m happy to show it to you.

After having been close to obsessed by “which one to chose” for my purpose, I decided to go with the second-hand MFT Olympus E-M5 AV-Camera in BKK was selling. For a first attempt it ought to be ok I think…

It just arrived today at home, and at first glance, it’s a very, very nice and clean camera, hardly used, and perfectly working. One more time, AV-Camera has been perfect all through the deal process: hat down M. Mana! I can only recommend this shop…

The lens is the 12-50 mm sold with the camera as a kit. Not the “best” one, from what I’ve read, but at least I’ll be able to learn digital photography with it.

I’m very surprised by the feeling of this camera in hand. Compared to my vintage gear, there is not such a big difference in carrying it at use.

As one can see in the pic above, the E-M5 attached to its kit lens is not very small (I was a bit worried by that): just a bit compared to my usual vintage 135 film cameras. Good…

At first handlings, my hands and fingers fall just where they have to be, and the grip is good. My right eye naturally finds its way to the viewfinder, and though it’s a bit “shinning” it seems to be fully usable as a real finder.

Global build and finish quality is good and strong. Screen is bright and hudge. Viewfinder is bright too with a lot of infos desplayed. Buttons and levers have no play in them, and though plastic is all over the camera and lens, one doesn’t get the “cheap feeling” plastic sometimes gives…

I decided to go for the E-M5 for the magnesium alloy body, weather sealed body and lens, IBIS onboard (good for my vintage lenses), the praised bright viewfinder, the “neo-retro” look (as a vintage gear user)… and the reasonable price, IMHO, AV-Camera put it for sale (13000 Bahts the set as pictured).

Now I’ve to learn how to use it and how to shoot in digital first. Once done in a second time I’ll enjoy my old lenses…

Again, thanks to all here for your help and advices.

Cheers,

Ray

[FracturedRabbit]

Great camera at a great price!

[gobs]

Thanks FT

True, I think I'm going through a "love affair" with this camera.

Today I spent the afternoon browsing through the (still pics only!) menus: there are tons of settings, many I'll never use for sure.

From what I read before, I was a bit concerned by these Olympus menus implementation. But I feel that once one gets the general mapping things seems easier.

A big plus is the Super Contol Panel: all the main settings in one desplay and their controls at finger-tip. Easy and fast...

You know, at first I was looking for the aperture ring on the lens barrel... and sure, couln't find it!

Cheers

[FracturedRabbit]

I shoot in Aperture mode (A) with aperture selection on the front dial and exposure compensation on the rear. Have set one of the function buttons to zoom function to facilitate zooming in for accurate manual focusing.

Of course there are ten thousand alternative ways of setting it up to suit your fancy!

[gobs]

I shoot in Aperture mode (A) with aperture selection on the front dial and exposure compensation on the rear. Have set one of the function buttons to zoom function to facilitate zooming in for accurate manual focusing.

Of course there are ten thousand alternative ways of setting it up to suit your fancy!

It's part of what amazed me in this camera: I couldn't imagine this before...

Today, Sunday, I spent the afternoon playing with my new toy and its kit lens around home. And I'm so surprised it's such a easy camera!

Close-up: a breaze. Portrait: superb. Dogs playing in the garden: you just have to follow in the EVF and clak, clak, clak, all good. Even the Program mode is terrific...

As well, TTL metering is amazing: difficult to put it at fault...

But as you say, FR, it seems the A mode is the closest mode compared to film gear. It's the mode I prefer, for now, though P mode may be interesting for fast point-and-shoot shots with dedicated digital lenses.

To some extent, playing with settings, I've noticed colors films renditions can closely be emulated: Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Fujichrome, Provia, Velvia, and so on. Funny how far digital may go...

The "not so good" though with the 12-50 (f/3.5-6.3) kit lens is the "very poor" OOF rendition. But it has to be expected, so no complaint from my part, just a notice. I suppose my vintage lenses will cure that. Or even a good prime digital lens

Well, all this to say I'm blown out by my first steps into Digital. What a HUDGE difference with my vintage film gear, and what a HUDGE gap between what I was expecting and what I actually find out. Amazing!

However, no-no, for B&W pics, films and my film gear will stick to my heart, that's for sure...

Again, thanks to you FracturedRabbit and to all here...

Cheers,

Ray

[rhythmworx]

Gobs if you have or ever buy photoshop or lightroom, have a look at the Alien Skin Exposure plugin, it has lots of settings to emulate old film types.

The new version can be used as a stand alone editor too

Theres a free trial http://www.alienskin.com/exposure/flexible/

[FracturedRabbit]

Shoot RAW+JPEG. Set the art filters to one of the monochrome options. Your viewfinder gives you a black and white view for composition; and the camera produces a B&W JPEG, plus the usual colour RAW to process as you wish. Best of both worlds!