Let's talk adapter weight

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by MarylandUSA, Jul 11, 2013.

  1. MarylandUSA

    MarylandUSA Mu-43 Regular

    186
    Jul 3, 2013
    Poolesville, Maryland
    Paul Franklin Stregevsky
    I just bought my first adapter: A Rainboximaging Minolta MD-to-M43. It feels solid and weighs 78 grams (2.7 ounces). I'll be attaching it to my first adapted lens, a Minolta MD 100/2.5 "Plain MD". This was the last of three versions of the 100/2.5 MD. It weighs just 310g (vs. 380 and 390g) and uses 49mm filters (vs. 55mm).

    Clearly, for an M43 shooter who values light weight, it's important to factor in the adapter weight. Especially for a shooter like me, who will be carrying everything in a belt pouch.

    Which lens mounts use the lightest adapters?

    Within a mount--say, MD-to-M43, or L39-to-M43--how much heavier do the heaviest-brand adapters weigh than the lightest?

    Which brands tend to be the lightest? Most brands claim to be made of aluminum and brass. One or two brands just say "aluminum." I would guess they weigh the least.

    I can see how I'd want an adapter that's heavy and solidly built if I'm adapting a lens that's over 400g, longer than 100mm, or both. But surely if I'm adapting a 300g lens that's only 63mm long, I can get by with a lighter adapter, provided it's built to precise tolerances. Right?
     
  2. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    I understand your concern, but in my experiences I've not noticed meaningful differences in terms of weight among adapters (for the same mount) that I've handled.

    Obviously, the most significant determinants of weight are adapter size and complexity, so the threaded C-mount adapters are likely as light as you are going to find. The examples I've used have all been aluminum (at least as far as I am able to determine -- I'm no metalurgist). I would guess that the Leica screw-mount (M39) adapters would be the next lightest, followed closely by those for the Leica M bayonet, Contax G, Pen F and Pentax 110 since those mounts have registers that are closest to that of :43:. Obviously an adapter for something like a Pentax 6x7 or Pentacon 6 with much longer registers are going to have to be much longer and thus much heavier.

    In short, I really don't see where weight differences among similar adapters would be significant enough to factor into any purchasing decisions for me.
     
  3. MarylandUSA

    MarylandUSA Mu-43 Regular

    186
    Jul 3, 2013
    Poolesville, Maryland
    Paul Franklin Stregevsky
    Thanks, DeeJayK; that's exactly the kind of answer I was looking for.
    Now, if someone could tell me how MUCH lighter an M39 adapter is than an SLR-type adapter, I'd be really happy! Does it weigh less than 31 grams (<1.2 ounces?)
     
  4. MarylandUSA

    MarylandUSA Mu-43 Regular

    186
    Jul 3, 2013
    Poolesville, Maryland
    Paul Franklin Stregevsky
    Some adapter weights

    Now that I have two MD adapters, I can report how their weights compare:

    79g (2.8 ounces) RainbowImaging
    91g (3.2 ounces) Fotga

    The RainbowImaging adapter is supporting my 311g Minolta 100/2.5 so well that I'm not gonna swap it out to test the Fotga, unless someone asks me to.

    I've rolled these two findings (added:) and findings from postings that follow into a short list compiled from weights I've gleaned from the Internet, from lightest to heaviest:

    36g Leica M to m43 from HKperfect168
    44g Nikon F to M43 from Gkitshop
    61g Fotasy Canon FD to m4/3
    72g Canon FD to M43 from Gkitshop
    78g Minolta MD to M43 Rainbowimaging (my measurement)
    90g 43 to M43, brand and model unknown
    91g Fotga MD to M43 (my measurement)
    100g "OM-M4/3" aluminum from eBay ("noticeably heavier than RainbowImaging" equivalent)
    102g Prost C-Y to M43
    103g Viltrox 43 to M43

    So M43 adapters for Canon and Minolta lenses weigh about 25 to 30g more than M43 adapters for Contax-Yashica lenses. Something to consider when comparing legacy lenses.
     
  5. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    851
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA
    I am using Om to m4/3 adapters and just sold a rainbow imaging one. I don't have the weight. I purchased a new cheap one to test a lens and when I received it, it was noticeably heavier than my previous ones. It was heavy enough that I immediately noticed the difference.

    It weighs 100g without any caps.
    Olympus OM Lens to Micro 4 3 M4 3 Adapter E P1 E P2 E P3 E PL2 E PL3 G1 GH2 GF3 | eBay

    My fotasy Canon FD to m4/3 adapter weighs 61g.
     
  6. MarylandUSA

    MarylandUSA Mu-43 Regular

    186
    Jul 3, 2013
    Poolesville, Maryland
    Paul Franklin Stregevsky
    Thanks, nuclearboy. I've rolled your findings into my table above.
     
  7. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    851
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA

    Sorry for the error. I just checked and the fotasy that I weighed on my Ohaus scale at 61g was actually a Canon FD to m4/3 adapter. Sorry for the error.
     
  8. MarylandUSA

    MarylandUSA Mu-43 Regular

    186
    Jul 3, 2013
    Poolesville, Maryland
    Paul Franklin Stregevsky
    No problem; corrected.