Alex Souvorov
New member
Well, it is only 10mm difference:ROTFL:I think you mean 90/2.8, tho.
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Contax G to MFT adapter - anyone?
- Thread starter slau
- Start date
Robert,I really like the 35/2 Planar.
I, too, like the Planar 35/2 very much. I think it has similar if not identical optical formula as the Summicron-M 35/2 pre-ASPH.
I look forward to ordering the adaptor from you. When do you think they will become available? Thanks,
Kind regards,
D
dazedproductions
Guest
I am also interested in this, looking forward to hearing more on the eta and cost. I also vote for including a rear cap.
T
tonyjuliano
Guest
Got impatient, my "ring type" adapter just arrived from Hong Kong this morning...
Wish I had waited, the focusing has a decidedly "ratchety" feel.
I'm definitely looking to try Monza's solution.
Wish I had waited, the focusing has a decidedly "ratchety" feel.
I'm definitely looking to try Monza's solution.
As I said earlier, the Monza adapter looks great. Less than a full turn of the wheel to go between MFD and infinity sounds a little little but I would love to try it out.
tonyjuliano, or anyone; I have now used the lens-workshop for some time, not every day but of course more than back when I posted about my first impressions.
I contacted the seller about the gritty feeling of the focusing ring and they said this is normal for the first time, that it becomes better after running it in, that i could return the adapter and they would "run it in" for me. I kept the adapter here and exercised it myself as a Zen moment of contemplation an evening. I decided not to treat it with any oil.
Now the focusing is still not perfect, but it is much better. Maybe I should have posted about this earlier. (OTOH I prefer my Voigtländer 75/2.5 to the Sonnar 90/2.8 so I still don't know what to do with the adapter really. But that's another matter.)
tonyjuliano, or anyone; I have now used the lens-workshop for some time, not every day but of course more than back when I posted about my first impressions.
I contacted the seller about the gritty feeling of the focusing ring and they said this is normal for the first time, that it becomes better after running it in, that i could return the adapter and they would "run it in" for me. I kept the adapter here and exercised it myself as a Zen moment of contemplation an evening. I decided not to treat it with any oil.
Now the focusing is still not perfect, but it is much better. Maybe I should have posted about this earlier. (OTOH I prefer my Voigtländer 75/2.5 to the Sonnar 90/2.8 so I still don't know what to do with the adapter really. But that's another matter.)
I worked with my lens-workshop adapter this week in Washington DC. I agree it is a little rough, but I feel that it is much better than the other adapter I have (Photodiox). I am interested in the Monza adapter, it should be interesting to see how the action is on this. One major improvement in the lens-workshop adapter over the Photodiox one is how easy it is to get on and off the lens. Three times I have had to release the lens by using a jewler's screwdriver inside the adapter to release the tap that locks the adapter to the lens when the button would not do it. Weird. At this point the photodiox is on the 45mm and the lens-workshop is on the 90mm.
One thing I noted on Monza's adapter was how he matched the shape of the black plastic portion of the mount that sticks out from the lens barrel. Nicely done! That certainly must cost more to CNC machine versus machine on a CNC lathe, but it looks really nice with the lens mounted.
One thing I noted on Monza's adapter was how he matched the shape of the black plastic portion of the mount that sticks out from the lens barrel. Nicely done! That certainly must cost more to CNC machine versus machine on a CNC lathe, but it looks really nice with the lens mounted.
Last edited:
I decided to take apart my Lens-Workshop Contax G to m4/3 adapter to see why it feels so rough. The result was that it was not too great a surprise why. The big ring that focuses things is on the inside a big gear. The roughness comes from the fact that it rubs directly against a the metal hub, and one has metal gear teeth scraping against the metal hub.
Additionally, the smaller gear connected to the drive pin also just turns in a metal pin. There are no bearings anywhere. This is cheap construction for what they are charging, in my opinion. It was a good idea, but bad implementation. They failed to even putt a bushing of something like Delrin between the moving metal parts. That would have improved things dramatically. I also do not believe that this will "wear in" and become dramatically better. I am debating about putting a little grease in this to improve things.
Additionally, the smaller gear connected to the drive pin also just turns in a metal pin. There are no bearings anywhere. This is cheap construction for what they are charging, in my opinion. It was a good idea, but bad implementation. They failed to even putt a bushing of something like Delrin between the moving metal parts. That would have improved things dramatically. I also do not believe that this will "wear in" and become dramatically better. I am debating about putting a little grease in this to improve things.
Last edited:
It is rough because the outside gear teeth are not properly designed. For gear to mesh properly, there are both straight and curved surfaces on the gear teeth. They have taken an off the shelf pinion and machined one end to fashion the drive screw, but those outside gears on the ring are not really gears. Refer to the earlier post with the gear design video: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showpost.php?p=199062&postcount=382
There are very few specialty manufacturers that can machine gears to the high tolerances required, those that can do so, charge accordingly....$$$$.
My first design was similar to this, I'll post some drawings. It would have been a $500 adapter, if not more.
Grease isn't going to help...
There are very few specialty manufacturers that can machine gears to the high tolerances required, those that can do so, charge accordingly....$$$$.
My first design was similar to this, I'll post some drawings. It would have been a $500 adapter, if not more.
Grease isn't going to help...
Last edited:
Monza, I did read your post, and yes, I do understand the surfaces that are required to have two gears intermesh. I would need to bring this into work to use a microscope to see if the "gear teeth" in the ring are actually "gear teeth" or something else. So, some of the problem may be due to inappropriate teeth design like you are saying. However, even with the pinion gear removed, it still feels rough when the ring is rotated. What you did not see was the wear marks in the anodization of the aluminum hub where the teeth are wearing into the hub. I am thinking there are burs from machining the ring that they did not remove adequately.
You are right, lubricants will not help.
F
FaradayCage
Guest
Have any of you had the experience of using a manual focus lens on both the GF1 and any of the Olympus micro 4/3rds bodies? The choice is driving me crazy, and I will be using nothing but Contax G lenses, hopefully with monza's adapter. Olympus IBIS on the one hand vs. way better LCD resolution on the GF1, for example. I've also read conflicting reports of how MF assist by way of magnification on the LCDs differs on the different cameras. The choice between GF1, E-P2 and E-PL1 seems a very tough decision.
In any event, what will be fantastic is the opportunity to preset the aperture, preset the focus on a G lens and go hyperfocal for grab shots.
In any event, what will be fantastic is the opportunity to preset the aperture, preset the focus on a G lens and go hyperfocal for grab shots.
N
nxlutz
Guest
Thank you CPWarner!!! This is a great shot and explanation of what is going on with this item. I think that maybe the people selling this have realized this as it is now selling for US$149.00 but through a different seller. Boy am I glad I did not jump into buyinh one of these.I decided to take apart my Lens-Workshop Contax G to m4/3 adapter to see why it feels so rough. The result was that it was not too great a surprise why. The big ring that focuses things is on the inside a big gear. The roughness comes from the fact that it rubs directly against a the metal hub, and one has metal gear teeth scraping against the metal hub.
Additionally, the smaller gear connected to the drive pin also just turns in a metal pin. There are no bearings anywhere. This is cheap construction for what they are charging, in my opinion. It was a good idea, but bad implementation. They failed to even putt a bushing of something like Delrin between the moving metal parts. That would have improved things dramatically. I also do not believe that this will "wear in" and become dramatically better. I am debating about putting a little grease in this to improve things.
Cheers,
F
FaradayCage
Guest
Yes, thanks CPWarner, for saving us trouble and expense!
Your welcome, save your $ for Monza's adapter...
I do need to add that while the feel is less that I would like for what I paid, it is a more natural motion than the wheel on the Fotodiox adapter that I have. I will wait to see the reviews.
On another note, Lens-workshop is still selling these on ebay for $220, but there is another seller, Ria-store that is selling them for $149. The photos look identical.
Last edited:
I use three manual focus lenses on my GF1, a Contax G 45mm F2.0, Contax G 90mm F2.8, and a Canon 135mm F2.8. The Canon is the most challenging and I only found it to work for me when I used the live viewfinder on the GF1. The effective focal length is very long using the LCD. The 45mm is great as well as the 90mm.
Cliff
From what I can see, they look like shark's teeth.
If you do put it under a scope, let us know what you find.A few shots I took today using the 35/2 Planar. This is my new favorite adapted lens.
Texas wildflowers are out for Easter.
These were all shot with a GF1, the first time I've had the chance to use one. The viewfinder unfortunately is too tiny for me, I much prefer the G1/GH1 EVF.
Texas wildflowers are out for Easter.
These were all shot with a GF1, the first time I've had the chance to use one. The viewfinder unfortunately is too tiny for me, I much prefer the G1/GH1 EVF.
It's good to see the 35mm lens performing that well. Better bokeh than usual from Zeiss, but still very much a Zeiss! There is some (and then I mean "some" as in little) swirl effect though. Interesting!A few shots I took today using the 35/2 Planar. This is my new favorite adapted lens.
N
nxlutz
Guest
Really looking forward to getting this adapter.
