Bronica Lens on Canon EOS 5D

[knobspinner]

I bought an adapter on ebay and these are my first tries. lens is a Zenzanon 150mm MC f3.5. There is no auto focus (I don't miss because I don't use anyway). And these pics are full open. I have found a velcro strap can be used to hold down the preview lever for stopping down the lens. What do you think?

[Wirefox]

Jim

It performs very much like my Zuiko 50mm on my 40D. You will find that the focus blur is less frizzy if you do not use the lens wide open. I have not yet found a way to avoid the clipping of blocks of colour although the darker colours seen to work out ok. In fact loss of detail in areas of solid bright colour is my only gripe with the set up.

[inkista]

Nice, although I'm with Steve that the bokeh on #1's a bit busy. I really like #3. I'm surprised that you have to hold the DoF preview lever down, though. I mean, if you're shooting wide open.

[shreds]

I think you would need to hold down the DoF button to get the metering correct if you are using anything less than wide open, as the camera body cannot control aperture.

Beautiful lenses, shame as I sold my MF kit a few years ago.

[knobspinner]

Jim

It performs very much like my Zuiko 50mm on my 40D. You will find that the focus blur is less frizzy if you do not use the lens wide open. I have not yet found a way to avoid the clipping of blocks of colour although the darker colours seen to work out ok. In fact loss of detail in areas of solid bright colour is my only gripe with the set up.

That's a nice looking picture tho'.

[knobspinner]

I meant, you could stop down the lens if you wanted, these shots were wide open however.

[inkista]

I was joking a little, but what I really meant was that I was surprised the adapter ring doesn't take care of that for you. My Olympus OM->EOS adapter does it with a simple pin/screw to hold the DoF preview lever in place, so the lens is always closed down to the aperture I've set on the ring.



I'm guessing the Bronica mount design doesn't make a simple mechanical solution like this possible?

[Wirefox]

I think it depends on the mount converter. I got mine on e-bay and it didn't have the screw so I simply pushed a folded sliver of plastic card into the slot (leaving some protruding so you can remove later with tweezers). This allows you to use the aperture ring on the lens itself. The camera actually does a fair job of metering - there is no reason why it shouldn't I suppose.

[knobspinner]

The Bronica lenses have an electronic shutter built in, so I think it would take an electrical sig to stop down the lens. There is a preview lever that manually stops down the lens that I will try using. I tried to hold it, but I shook too much. I will try a velcro strap.

[inkista]

The OM adapter is using the mechanical linkage from the DoF preview lever, though. If your Bronica has a DoF preview lever/button, then there is a mechanical way to tell the lens to stop down. Whether or not it can be accessed from the adapter ring is the issue. Looking at the Fotodiox Bronica rings, I just assumed that the flange at one end was doing the same thing, but it might be for the wrong mount.

This is their Bronica ETR ring:


You can see that tab sticking out. I just assumed that would be for stopping down the lens. The Bronica SQ ring, though, doesn't seem to have one.

[alfimage]

hi all.
just a quick note about manually stopping down bronica lenses. the bronica guide book warns against activating the DoF preview button while changing settings on the aperture ring as it can damage the aperture mechanism. only activate DoF preview once aperture selection has been made.

Stoked to read these posts though, i have a large kit of bronica etr lenses both mc and pe, all are excellent and i'm very happy to learn i can now buy a bronica to eos adaptor Hooray!!!

Another point about sharpness; the etrs models suffered from harsh mirror vibration, a good 'sturdy' (read heavy)tripod fully locked off and a cable release are essential below 125th (my opinion only of course). The Etrsi with mirror lock up is just fantastic and really improves image sharpness with these lenses.

Alf.

[HollyG]

Hello, I have read through this and the "old glass" forum here is my question:

I have Zeiss C/Y and Bronica ETRs glass and cannot afford much, what older EOS model could you recommend that would accommodate both--with adapters of course.

I want to have the shots printed to at least 30x40"...what pixel size would accommodate this?

thanks in advance 8-)

[inkista]

No idea on megapixel count, but I'd say go for a full-frame Canon if the budget allows, and your lenses will clear the mirror, simply so that your lenses will behave more closely to what you expect. I've used C/Y Zeiss on crop and on full-frame, and it just feels better (and you actually go wide) on full-frame. A 6D or 5DMkIII would be the current models to look at, but a 5DMkII or 5D ("classic") might fit the budget better.

If you want rock-solid adapting for heavy lenses, the Leitax kits are probably the best--no play at all when you screw to the lens mount vs. using a ring. The things to look for in adapter rings are the tolerance and whether or not you're able to focus to infinity, at infinity, or past infinity. Generally, the more you pay, the better the tolerance. But I've used cheap rings and done pretty well.


5DMkII + C/Y CZ Planar 100/2, with chipped adapter ring off eBay (seller: big_is).

However, if you use wider lenses, vs. longer ones, there's the issue of mirror clearance if you go with a 5D/6D. My Distagon 28/2.8 (AE version) is problematic on my 5DMkII, as the mirror hits the back of the lens when it's focused to infinity. Usable, if I keep the focus range within mirror clearance, though.


5DMkII + C/Y CZ Distagon 28mm f/2.8.

Some folks report that they have no issues (no idea if it's AE vs. MM, though). Some folks ground down their mirror [shudder]. This is typically a problem with wider lenses. There's a database on C/Y mirror clearance on the 5D at pebbleplace.com. If you desperately need to use lenses that aren't marked as usable on that database, then consider a crop-body or 1Ds/1DX instead, or do some more intensive research on the specific lens/body combo you want, as that database is old.

The two boards that probably have the largest knowledge bases about putting old lenses on new digital cameras would be mflenses and the Fred Miranda alt. gear board.

[GrahamS]

Hello, I have read through this and the "old glass" forum here is my question:

I have Zeiss C/Y and Bronica ETRs glass and cannot afford much, what older EOS model could you recommend that would accommodate both--with adapters of course.

I want to have the shots printed to at least 30x40"...what pixel size would accommodate this?

thanks in advance 8-)

Holly, standard practice is to print at a resolution of 300 dpi (dots per inch) but for purposes of this discussion you may read that as ppi (pixels per inch). Very large prints may be printed at a lower resolution, depending on the viewing distance. If, for example, you were to print your 30"X40" prints at a resolution of 220 ppi you would require a file size of 6600 X 8800 pixels. That equates to just over 58 mpx (million pixels). It would be quite possible to increase the size of an image file from a camera such as a Canon 5D III, which is 22 mpx by applying interpolation in editing software, or even better, from a Nikon 800D which is 36 mpx, but the image quality of the original file would have to be really excellent to begin with. I doubt that you will achieve the necessary quality when using heritage lenses with adaptor rings. (Read this for more info: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013...-lens-adapters

You may find a commercial lab such as Costco, who will gladly make you a 30"X40" print from any size image file that you provide, but remember, you will get what you pay for. I suggest that you consider starting off with a good quality, high resolution camera body such as a refurbished Nikon D610 or Canon Eos 6D with the best glass that you can afford, and take it from there. Unfortunately, it's not as simple as you think.

[Colin Southern]

Hello, I have read through this and the "old glass" forum here is my question:

I have Zeiss C/Y and Bronica ETRs glass and cannot afford much, what older EOS model could you recommend that would accommodate both--with adapters of course.

I want to have the shots printed to at least 30x40"...what pixel size would accommodate this?

thanks in advance 8-)

Hi Holly,

Pixel count doesn't limit the size of a print that you can make -- what it DOES do however is dictate the minimum viewing distance that image degradation becomes detectable. If you're going to print something 30 x 40 inches and then view it from 50 inches away then even a 100 ppi file (12MP) will be fine; on the other hand, if you want to be able to view it "up-close and personal" then that will require a LOT more resolution.

As Graham points out, 300DPI is commonly used throughout the industry, but in my opinion, it's crazy over-kill most of the time; in most cases you'd need a magnifying glass to be able to resolve the (up to) 140 tone changes per square millimeter. Additionally, if you want to print 30 x 40" @ 300 PPI without artificially up-sampling the file then you'll need a 108MP camera. In comparison, consider that most monitors are "only" 100 ppi (and look plenty sharp enough for me).

[inkista]

... I doubt that you will achieve the necessary quality when using heritage lenses with adaptor rings. (Read this for more info: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013...-lens-adapters)

Which is why I mentioned the Leitax kits. Leitax kits basically screw directly onto the mount of the lens (with the Canon kits, you unscrew the rear lens mount ring, then use longer screws provided in the kit to attach the adapter ring on top of the rear lens mount ring, or in place of it). The accuracy and manufacturing tolerances on them are probably the best known to the Fred Miranda alt. gear crew. And there is absolutely no play at all. Adapter rings, by their very nature are going to be a little loose and why there can be play on one side. And again, remember that those lensrentals graphs aren't really charting a drop to 0--they've programmed their software to go to 0 when there's a gain in vignetting or focus change so it's easier for them to spot a faulty lens with a shifted element--the actual sharpness loss is much smaller, and vignetting can be corrected in post. While it's not perfect, it's also not intolerably bad. Roger Cicala actually was one of the Fred Miranda alt. gear nuts who adapted lenses all the time. It's why he's so surprised at the test results, and also why he mentions "so I guess I’m going to have to order those expensive lens mounts after all" in the article.