Wich mount for thinnest combo?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by swede, Dec 12, 2014.

  1. swede

    swede Mu-43 Veteran

    277
    Oct 25, 2014
    I fairly new to mirrorless and m4/3 but i would now like to explore the possibilites of old manual lenses.

    What I'm thinking, i would like to have the thinnest option possible.
    Looking at adaptors for SLR mounts (and DSLR) they are all very thick to match the distance required.

    So... what type of mounts exist that has a shorter flange distance (i think that is the name for it) and thus will require a thin adaptor.
     
  2. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    shallowest is probably leica M mount or other older screw mount rangefinder lenses (M39)

    Leicas are expensive, but there are russian m39 lenses which some people like

    K
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    Kevin's suggestion is a great one. You might also want to look at using pancake lens options from other camera makers as well. That will help nullify the size issues you see with the normal legacy lenses and the required adapter tubes.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    Looking at the list Brian posted, then Olympus Pen F lenses might be another avenue to follow

    the 38/1.8 i probably reasonably priced... I inherited mine from my father

    8719263795_44a44082d6_b. P5080023 by kevinparis, on Flickr

    6240434459_5885785a94_b. across the years #2 by kevinparis, on Flickr

    K
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. HarryS

    HarryS Mu-43 Top Veteran

    921
    Jun 23, 2012
    Midwest, USA
    It''s hard to pick by adapter unless you go with Leica. Here's the lengths of some 50mm lens with matching adapter.
    71mm Canon f1.8 SC
    65mm Miranda f1.8
    61mm Olympus f1.8
    61mm Konica AR f1.8

    Konica AR and Olympus OM lenses are among the smaller SLR lens families.

    You're likely better off buying a lens first in any mount, looking for the best deal. Then buy the matching adapter. Nothing wrong with different lenses with different mounts. Adapters can be had cheaply, unless you.feel a correspondingly expensive adapter is needed for an expensive lens.

    Some of us also like to have a separate adapter for lenses that get used often. It minimizes leaving home with the lens, but forgetting to pack the adapter. You can use the same rear lens cap on all your lenses. It does make it easier to change between two lenses with the same mount. You don't want to be standing in a dark room trying to switch between two FD lenses with one adapter. Both will wind up on the floor.

    ,
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Along the same lines is the Contax G mount ...

    Maybe the C-mount too...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    I agree with most of what is said here. However Pentax 110 has been neglected.

    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2013/10/keeping-my-compact-camera-compact.html

    Personally my searching has found that for focal lengths less than 35mm the native lenses are the most compact and high quality and cost effective (for instance the Pana 14 and 20mm). However in focal lengths longer lenses like the Pentax 110 are nice.

    4330790876_8caef3e279_z.

    4330835126_74d8441d43_z.

    Of course the 110 lenses do not have an aperture control but if you are needing to stop down then the characteristics of the lens merge into uniformity to a kit zoom with each stop down towards 5.6 and smaller.

    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2013/09/autumn-lenses.html

    The 50 is my favorite but the little 24 has pulled some really nice images too.

    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com.au/2010/02/penta-110-24mm.html

    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com.au/2010/02/pentax-110-g1.html

    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/newer-bigger-better-faster.html

    This post has an example of a shot taken with the 70mm

    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/gearing-towads-photographic-vision.html


    Enjoy your camera :)
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. swede

    swede Mu-43 Veteran

    277
    Oct 25, 2014
    Thanks everyone for your input...

    Im looking at m39 and m42 mounts a bit, and it seems interesting. Olympus OM has come to mind to, being one of the smaller legacy options (compared to other mounts)

    As i said before. The reason i was asking is that i feel most adaptors (mostly SLR film mounts) are to deep for my liking, i want to keep it small.
    So the M screw mounts and possibly Pen-F seems like good options
     
  9. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    the pentax 110 lenes are an option... but depending on your style of shooting, the limitation of aperture control and their extreme small form factor might not offer an ideal/practical solution.

    I have no experience of using these lenses... I have no doubt they are optically good... but its my opinion that their only real benefit is their size. To me they are very limited in scope, availability and usabiilty.

    Just my opinion

    your needs may be different :)
     
  10. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Hi

    Good summary (especially given you have not used them).

    Satisfactory would be my appraisal. For instance I think my Panasonic 20mm f1.7 is optically good.

    I think the above sentiment is about spot on. I would say the same for all non native lenses in shorter focal lengths , and suggest that the scope is a little more specific with the 110 lenses. I mentioned them because unlike the c-mount lenses they do fully cover the sensor and fill a role of compactness which nothing else does and compact was the criteria of the OP.

    For a small investment (under 100$ I was able to experiment in the early days when there was little other options and find that they still fill a role. After getting the 20mm f1.7 though it is only the 50 (and to a lesser degree the 70) that I use anymore.

    My experience with the leica m series is the optics cost so much that you may as well go native. Unless you are (as mentioned above) wishing for focal lengths above 35mm... I think that the Oly 45 is a good example of that. The contax 45mm seems to equal it but exceed its price and not provide any automation (face detect is not to be underestimated on a mid tele)

    The 24 for instance works very well in coupling my GF to my binoculars ...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Sorry about continuing to edit that post Kevin, but I just always fear my mobile will crash in a longer post and I will loose what I typed :)
     
  12. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
  13. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
  14. RnR

    RnR Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Hasse
    Yeah, SLR options will never be a small package. The smallest SLR would probably be a focal reducer of some kind with pancake lenses. I think most of the major old mounts have a pancake in the 40'ish range. Voigtlander produces pancakes in other focal ranges as well, ie 20mm, and 28mm. With a focal reducer you would then have 28mm, 40mm and 58mm effective from the 3 Voigtlander lenses. But you are also looking at $1200-$2000 depending on how lucky you get with prices and which focal reducer you buy.

    Small size, good quality, cheap price. Pick any two :biggrin:
     
  15. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    I think we're splitting hairs here. This looks pretty darn thin. :wink:

    2wp8qhi.
     
  16. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Hi

    I was responding to your "thinnest" ... competitions are often won by small margins, and this margin is 25%

    gf-50.


    your pick gives an aperture control and is cheap mine is more slim ... you pick the winner

    ;-)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    well just while I've got my razor out, here are some images (and its a rainy day here ... and my 4wd is in getting repaired ... )

    50mm
    15822328349_8a3f906179_z.

    15821073920_9fdcc344d0_z.

    so that chinese cheapie gets line honors for sure, but for winner ... I'll call the Pentax 110 24mm. Its a pikelet lens (smaller than a pancake)
    pikeletLens.

    15820939198_2969bae772_z.

    15822582327_2673c0baab_z.

    I'll be interested to see if anyone has a slimmer lens which fully covers the 43 frame and makes reasonable pictures to boot ...
    10018371755_22bd6550b9_b.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    842
    Feb 20, 2013
    You might want to buy a thinnish pancake lens and instead of buying an adapter buy an off-brand focal reducer for $100. My Pentax focal reducer is a good centimeter shorter than the glass-less adapter.

    Konica's AR mount, which they still haven't made a focal reducer for, is quite a bit shorter than Pentax, Nikon, Canon FD, or OM. And the 40/1.8 is a VERY sharp lens (from 2.8 up, that is, tolerable at 2.2, useless at 1.8) and under $50. Here it is on a few different cameras. The PM2 is on the right with the adapter and lens and now I realize you can't see the length but it's very short and the combo is under $50 (the adapter on the Pentax Q needs to be a lot longer because the sensor is not as deep set as with m4/3s; and you can see on the native 35mm camera that the 40/1.8 is indeed a pancake).

    14088339461_1e2ef4b77a_c.
    40mm f1.8 times 3 by tjdean01, on Flickr
     
  19. edwardconde

    edwardconde Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 8, 2012
    Los Angeles, CA
    I gotta agree with Jonathan if you want the slimmest then its the CMounts… I have used the 110s and the Pentax K mount in the past and for the thinnest its the CMounts.. Probably the next one would be the m42 mount… I have seen combo adapters for Cmount & m42…

    I recently bought 3 of the APS-C C-mount lenses that are being sold on ebay.