B&H still sells new A7 but they sell it for the same price as the A7 II. However, I think an old one would be fairly inexpensive.I'm a big nikon fan but... I think the first gen Sony A7 is the right camera for this. For what you described, a mirrorless makes a lot of sense, these are fairly cheap and work great for mounting all kinds of oddball stuff on. There are a zillion types of cheap E-mount adapters + they have a really good sensor. I have one I use for this and highly recommend it. If the full frame A7 is outside of your budget, the APSC models would also be a good option, just would obviously be limited by their smaller sensor, which for closeup work might not be an issue.
If you're deciding between the Canon and Nikon, go with Canon. The reason being is that Nikon has a longer flange distance than any of the other major companies when it comes to DSLR's. This means that Nikon lenses are a lot easier to use on other brand's bodies with simple adapters, but other brand's lenses won't work on Nikon bodies without using an adapter with a corrective focal element (and still allow you to focus far off). Since these adapters have additional lenses in them, they are both more expensive, and degrade the image quality.helpful answers, but I think my direction is more like Kino's idea post #2
No modern lenses here, few legacy Canon and Nikon ones for film bodies, which is why I need any old DSLR body to graft whatever I may fancy.
This is a tinker about project.
EDIT: Ah the Sony idea has potential!
Bear in mind Canon manual lenses cannot be used on Canon DSLR bodies*. Frankly, old lenses are easier to use on mirrorless bodies because of the readout and mount flexibility, though old DSLRs are often less expensive.If you're deciding between the Canon and Nikon, go with Canon.
By this, I assume blockend means that the older Canon FD or FL mount lenses cannot be used on Canon DSLR bodies.Bear in mind Canon manual lenses cannot be used on Canon DSLR bodies*
Correct. The flange distance is slightly shorter than others. Minolta MD is another SLR mount that doesn't readily fit DSLRs without an optical adapter. From memory pretty much everything else is adaptable. Some people use cheap glass adapters, but I've never been impressed by the results. There is the original Canon FD to EOS adapter that sells for silly money, but the world is awash with film era glass so it isn't necessary. If I had a collection of FD or FL lenses I would go the mirrorless camera route.By this, I assume blockend means that the older Canon FD or FL mount lenses cannot be used on Canon DSLR bodies.
Absolutely. Manufacturers like Kern Paillard and Angenieux produced exquisite C-mount lenses that were more or less redundant since the demise of 16mm movie cameras. These could be bought cheaply a few years ago, usually attached to a Bolex camera and are still very reasonable. Also Olympus half frame lenses.Something like the Panasonic Lumix will give you a very short flange focal distance which you might find useful, and it has a very small sensor, which can also be an issue with some makeshift lenses that won't cover a full sized frame. That's especially useful for things like 16mm movie projector lenses, which won't work at all in a DSLR.
Which is an upside if you are into bird photography or anything else that benefits from longer lenses/narrower fields of view.The downside of M4/3 is focal lengths have to be doubled,
Kind of. I'm not sure about the Pentax, but I bet you're right there. I haven't heard of any complaints there.Pentax and Nikon did not change their basic design of their lens mounts, any K mount will work on a Pentax DSLR and any F lens with mount on a Nikon DSLR, but lens did evolve in terms of how the lens electronics and how the aperture is set. Some DSLR bodies will work with all lens, others are crippled and will only work with newer AF lens. Canon and Minolta changed mounts and flange distance with their AF bodies. Olympus developed a new mount for it's DSLR cameras as well. My guess is in terms of a DSLR a Pentax body will be more adaptable as you can use F and M42 lens. But nowhere the range of adapters available for a Sony E body.
True. Honestly, I've found the cheapest M4/3 kit zoom outperforms any of my old glass for sharpness and resolution. The benefit of heritage glass is for portraits, long telephoto work and video where absolute resolution is not an issue at 4k/8mp. Depending on the digital format old lenses can also fill an expensive focal length gap, for example a 75mm APS-C or 100mm M4/3 lens can be "made" from a vanilla 50mm f1.4.Which is an upside if you are into bird photography or anything else that benefits from longer lenses/narrower fields of view.
Being a fan of lenses tending to wider fields of view, I'm slightly disadvantaged by my M 4/3 choice, but I persevere.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?