Hack a Takumar 50mm to Nikon F3?

declark said:

Richard did you chose the Takumar for cost or other reason as Contax should have a stellar 50 f1.4?

Click to expand...

Nah, it was just for fun. The 50/1.4 Takumar is so well-reputed I just wanted to try it, and it is indeed a fine performer, but really, what 50mm isn't? I also just love playing with lenses and the M-42 mount has a lot of wonderful, classic and CHEAP lenses. Now I can mount any and all on my Contax bodies. As for difference, nope, nothing significant. I do not own the 50/1.4 Planar anymore, like the 50/1.7 Planar just as much so I sold it. That said my favorite 50's are the 50/2 Nikkor-S for SLR and the 50/2 Summicron-DR for RF.

Makes me wonder, do they make M-42 to Nikon SLR adapters? If so the OP should get the M-42 version of the Tak' and ones of those adapters to mount on his Nikon.

Hi there

if you want modifying nikon f mount body to m42 mount

h ttp://www.din.or.jp/~yamato-c/nikonm42-2.html

check this

i saw this adapter and im sure somewhere in this thread it might have been mentioned but im going to post it anyway....


https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/co...iJvnmtQCFdqNswod5EMDOQ&is=REG&m=Y&sku=1238903

Um, Paul,

infinity focus is limited based on the specific lens in use

Click to expand...

Pentax thread mount register is 45.46 mm, the adapter's flange has positive thickness, and Nikon F register is 46.50 mm. No M42 lens mounted on that adapter will focus to infinity on a Nikon.

Not to be a complete idiot, but what good is that?

ummm... so you mean all his shots were intended to be at infinity wide open?

hahahhaahahhaha come on, DOF makes up the difference.

Not quite all, but given the range of lenses in F mount I don't see much reason to do the adaptation. Against this, long lenses are usually made to focus through infinity to allow for thermal expansion so there might be some lonh M-42 lenses that will make infinity on the Photodiox adapter on a Nikon.

I ran the link in post #42 above through Google Translate. That product replaces an M-42 lens' male mount (that screws into an M-42 body's female mount, and we'll have no, repeat no, sniggering here) with a Nikon F mount. It isn't an adapter with a male F mount on one end and a female M-42 on the other. I have no idea how thick an M-42 lens' male mount's flange is, but if it has 1.04 mm to spare its seller's claims could well be correct.

declark said:

Yeah the 50mm f1.2 would be my first choice but don't want to drop 5 Benjamins for one. i have had a long nose 50mm f1.8 and it's bokeh was horrible. Hated the backgrounds. I have the 105 2.5 so I know a nice background when I see it. The f2 is a bit better than the 1.8, but I have just read so much good about Takumar f1.4 it's got me curious and I kind of like a challenge. Not that it matters but the older Tak is such a cool looking lens to boot.

Click to expand...

You might not like the Taks... A $15 Spotmatic body is cheaper than adapting a Takumar to a Nikon, and you didn't mention what you would do about the auto diaphragm, either. The Spotmatic F has open aperture metering with the correct lenses. You could buy a Pentax with lens for $25, try it, and resell it if you don't like the lens.
I like the 50 f2 Nikkor H so much that I have four, one for each body.