M42 conversion ideas?

[Lucius]

Besides being plentiful, m42 lenses have the advantage of being easily adaptable to many other mounts; conversely, there are very few lens mounts (besides T2 and Adaptall, which are a different story anyway) that can be adapted for use on m42 bodies without loss of infinity (I can only think of DKL; m39 needs adjustment to reach infinity). But what's the point, someone might ask, of using non-native lenses on m42 bodies, given there are so many native m42 lenses? The point is that, having tried almost every m42 'fast fifty' lens there is, I'm curious to see what else I can use. So I'm looking for conversion ideas. But why not use the non-m42 lenses on their native bodies? On the one hand, I don't want to start a new system, not yet at least. On the other, there are obsolete systems which never produced a (relatively) advanced camera -- adapting their lenses is more or less the only way to use them (or at least to use them easily). So I probably wouldn't want to convert a Nikon, Canon, Konica, Minolta, Pentax or, say, Contax lens, unless it can be done very easily. I probably don't want to mess with (German) Exakta lenses: they were all produced in the m42 mount as well. (But I am curious about Praktica bayonet and Miranda, both screw and bayonet, lenses.)

So far I've had three (relative) successes and one failure. Number 1 is the Argus-Sekor 58mm f1.7, which optically is somewhat unusual: since only one camera was produced in this mount, converting the lens is the only way to use it with any sort of automation. Number 2 is the Petri 55mm f1.4, which is different from the ubiquitous 'Tomiokas': I've only managed to make it focus as far as about 15 feet. Number 3 is the Topcor 58mm f1.8, which is often claimed to be one of the sharpest fifties of the period: again, it doesn't quite reach infinity, but should be usable except for lanscapes. My failure was the Planar 50mm f1.4 in the QBM mount: the diaphragm simply doesn't work without the mount plate, and making a suitable replacement would require tools and skills far beyond what I posses; I guess I'll have to find a functional QBM body. Speaking of tools, my equipment is more or less limited to sandpaper, a file and a Swiss knife, which I use to tweak the replacement mounts cannibalised from other m42 lenses (such as cheap zooms). Since after conversion the lenses have fully manual aperture control, the handiest way to use them is on a body that supports aperture-priority auto-exposure, and ironically my go-to options in this category are the Contax 139 and the Yashica FX-D.

If you have any ideas or, better, experiences of similar conversions, please share!

 

[xkaes]

Just use LONG NON-M42 lenses for less than infinity shots, or NON-M42 lenses for MACRO work -- but you already know that.

I use LONG Minolta Rokkor lenses on my Maxxum and Sony cameras when I don't need infinity focus -- AND ROKKOR macro lenses all the time!!!

 

[Lucius]

Just use LONG NON-M42 lenses for less than infinity shots, or NON-M42 lenses for MACRO work -- but you already know that.

I use LONG Minolta Rokkor lenses on my Maxxum and Sony cameras when I don't need infinity focus -- AND ROKKOR macro lenses all the time!!!

I still would need a way to adapt/convert them to m42, any suggestions?

But to be honest I don't use long lenses that much, so the m42 ones I have seem more than enough for now.

 

[ags2mikon]

If you get a Miranda body you can use m-42, Exacta / Topcon and Nikkor via their adapters and focus on infinity. They also had interchangeable viewfinders too.

 

[Lucius]

If you get a Miranda body you can use m-42, Exacta / Topcon and Nikkor via their adapters and focus on infinity. They also had interchangeable viewfinders too.

With a Miranda body, non-native lenses can only be used in the manual stop-down mode -- I'd be ok with that, but only if the camera had aperture-priority. I think only one Miranda camera has that -- I tried it once, but wasn't impressed.

 

[xkaes]

I still would need a way to adapt/convert them to m42, any suggestions?

What you need is a list of XXXlens-to-M42 camera adapters. I've never seen that. Maybe over at https://m42lens.com/ there is such a list. You could always make one, but that just adds space between the lens and the camera -- making matters worse.

 

[Lucius]

What you need is a list of XXXlens-to-M42 camera adapters. I've never seen that. Maybe over at https://m42lens.com/ there is such a list. You could always make one, but that just adds space between the lens and the camera -- making matters worse.

This is precisely the reason why there seem to exist few m42-female adapters...

 

[Dan Fromm]

Hmm. OP, here http://web.archive.org/web/20080411084314/http://www.markerink.org/WJM/HTML/mounts.htm is a link to a table of cameras' registers. Pentax/Praktica cameras' register is 45.5 mm. Lenses to fit cameras with longer registers can, in principle, be adapted to fit an M42 camera and still focus to infinity. Shorter, no.

If you need a custom adapter, well, there are machine shops.

 

[Lucius]

Hmm. OP, here http://web.archive.org/web/20080411084314/http://www.markerink.org/WJM/HTML/mounts.htm is a link to a table of cameras' registers. Pentax/Praktica cameras' register is 45.5 mm. Lenses to fit cameras with longer registers can, in principle, be adapted to fit an M42 camera and still focus to infinity. Shorter, no.

If you need a custom adapter, well, there are machine shops.

Yes, but among the major SLR brands, only Nikon (46.5) and Olympus (46mm) have a longer register than m42, but both also have a larger diameter, so they can't be adapted; besides, it would make sense to use their lenses on native bodies.

But Contarex (46mm) might be an option, for conversion if not adapting, somehow it wasn't on my radar, thanks!

 

[Lucius]

Hmm. OP, here http://web.archive.org/web/20080411084314/http://www.markerink.org/WJM/HTML/mounts.htm is a link to a table of cameras' registers. Pentax/Praktica cameras' register is 45.5 mm. Lenses to fit cameras with longer registers can, in principle, be adapted to fit an M42 camera and still focus to infinity. Shorter, no.

If you need a custom adapter, well, there are machine shops.

And the Leica R bayonet should be adaptable...

 

[Trask]

Here's another lens register list that usefully sorts mounts not by name but by the lens register itself -- so once you choose your intended camera of use, you can readily see which mounts you could or could not use (at infinity focus). As easy suggestion is to buy a Konica Autoreflex camera -- take a look. https://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

 

[xkaes]

Uh, the original query is:

"there are very few lens mounts (besides T2 and Adaptall, which are a different story anyway) that can be adapted for use on m42 bodies without loss of infinity"

 

[Dan Fromm]

The point is that, having tried almost every m42 'fast fifty' lens there is, I'm curious to see what else I can use.

Why? They're pretty much peas in a pod. If you think that the brand X Super Ultra Craptar is significantly better than any of your M42 "fast fifties," get one and a brand X body to use it on.

 

[Trask]

Uh, the original query is:

"there are very few lens mounts (besides T2 and Adaptall, which are a different story anyway) that can be adapted for use on m42 bodies without loss of infinity"

I should learn to read….

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Did anyone note that you can fit Leitz Visoflex lenses on a M42 body? But the shortest focal length is the 65mm Elmar-V.

 

[Lucius]

Why? They're pretty much peas in a pod. If you think that the brand X Super Ultra Craptar is significantly better than any of your M42 "fast fifties," get one and a brand X body to use it on.

That's basically what I said when I explained that I didn't want to buy into a new system -- of course this an option.
But for me it's not about one lens being better than another, it's about them being distinct. And about my curiosity.

 

[Lucius]

Did anyone note that you can fit Leitz Visoflex lenses on a M42 body? But the shortest focal length is the 65mm Elmar-V.

I guess that would be an interesting lens to adapt!

 

[Axelwik]

I have an M42 adapter on my Pentax ME Super. Works fine. Be sure to get the one that mounts flush with the camera flange - some of the cheap Chinese one's don't, and you lose infinity.

 

[Lucius]

I have an M42 adapter on my Pentax ME Super. Works fine. Be sure to get the one that mounts flush with the camera flange - some of the cheap Chinese one's don't, and you lose infinity.

I have an m42 adapter on my ME Super too; but the question was about converting (permanently) non-m42 lenses to use on m42 bodies; any advice?

 

[Axelwik]

I have an m42 adapter on my ME Super too; but the question was about converting (permanently) non-m42 lenses to use on m42 bodies; any advice?

Then I would simply use M42 lenses. There are plenty of good ones out there that are not expensive. Sometimes there's a good reason that people don't do something... Trying to make something do what it's not designed to do is usually an exercise in frustration unless there are no other options. Go out, take pictures with what you have, and improve your photography.

 

[xkaes]

In case anyone is wondering what a Mulberry Bush looks like, here it is:

 

[xkaes]

Here's a possible solution -- if you are a "DIY guy". I managed to adapt a Voightlander 12mm f5.6 ULTRA-wide to a Minolta SLR mount.

Your situation is similar to putting my Minolta Rokkor SLR lenses onto my a-mount Maxxum film and Sony digital cameras. There's just not enough space for an adapter to allow the lenses to focus to infinity.

There are, however, Minolta Rokkor to a-mount adapters -- from inexpensive to costly. The cheapest are simply a-mount-to-Rokkor adapters, but they don't allow infinity focusing. I can use these with my LONG Rokkor lens, but I can only focus to a couple of hundred feet -- depending on the lens. I can also use the adapter for close-up work with any lens -- great for macro work.

BUT, there are adapters that have glass conversion elements inside. These are more expensive but allow infinity focusing. They magnify the image from 1.1 - 1.3X (depending an the adapter) and allow infinity focusing.

These are all DUMB adapters, but you could buy one of these conversion adapters for the lenses you want to use, and replace the BACK of the adapter (whatever that happens to be) with an M42 screw thread. You'll need to find an adapter that creates as close as possible the distance that you need -- hopefully a tiny bit shorter -- and disconnect the existing rear mount, and "attach" an M42 mount.

Sounds easy to me -- IF you can live we a slight magnification. EX. a 50mm lens becomes a 60mm lens.

 

[Lucius]

Here's a possible solution -- if you are a "DIY guy". I managed to adapt a Voightlander 12mm f5.6 ULTRA-wide to a Minolta SLR mount.


Your situation is similar to putting my Minolta Rokkor SLR lenses onto my a-mount Maxxum film and Sony digital cameras. There's just not enough space for an adapter to allow the lenses to focus to infinity.

There are, however, Minolta Rokkor to a-mount adapters -- from inexpensive to costly. The cheapest are simply a-mount-to-Rokkor adapters, but they don't allow infinity focusing. I can use these with my LONG Rokkor lens, but I can only focus to a couple of hundred feet -- depending on the lens. I can also use the adapter for close-up work with any lens -- great for macro work.

BUT, there are adapters that have glass conversion elements inside. These are more expensive but allow infinity focusing. They magnify the image from 1.1 - 1.3X (depending an the adapter) and allow infinity focusing.

These are all DUMB adapters, but you could buy one of these conversion adapters for the lenses you want to use, and replace the BACK of the adapter (whatever that happens to be) with an M42 screw thread. You'll need to find an adapter that creates as close as possible the distance that you need -- hopefully a tiny bit shorter -- and disconnect the existing rear mount, and "attach" an M42 mount.

Sounds easy to me -- IF you can live we a slight magnification. EX. a 50mm lens becomes a 60mm lens.

But isn't the Heliar an L39 mount lens? Did you manage to get it focus to infinity?

I've always assumed that adapters with glass elements lower IQ, am I wrong? I once shot the SMC Takumar 105mm with a 2x teleconverter, and the results were abysmal.

All in all, my preference would be to replace the mount on the lens itself -- I can source replacement mounts from cheap lenses or teleconverters, but I need to know that the diaphragm mechanism can work without the original mount plate (which isn't always the case).

 

[Lucius]

Then I would simply use M42 lenses. There are plenty of good ones out there that are not expensive. Sometimes there's a good reason that people don't do something... Trying to make something do what it's not designed to do is usually an exercise in frustration unless there are no other options. Go out, take pictures with what you have, and improve your photography.

That's good advice, and I do have a few m42 lenses I like. But I have also successfully converted some non-m42 lenses, which can do things that the m42 ones can't, and I'm interested to find out more such lenses. It's not something I need, it's something I want.

 

[xkaes]

But isn't the Heliar an L39 mount lens? Did you manage to get it focus to infinity?

I've always assumed that adapters with glass elements lower IQ, am I wrong? I once shot the SMC Takumar 105mm with a 2x teleconverter, and the results were abysmal.

All in all, my preference would be to replace the mount on the lens itself -- I can source replacement mounts from cheap lenses or teleconverters, but I need to know that the diaphragm mechanism can work without the original mount plate (which isn't always the case).

You are correct about the Heliar. but I was able to remove the original lens mount and put a Minolta mount on in it's place. It is NOT a retro-focus lens, so I can only use it on cameras with a mirror lock-up, such as the PANDA in the above photo. That's why there is a separate viewfinder on top of the camera.

But the Heliar is a simple lens with a manual aperture. Most of the lenses you want to adapt will have auto-apertures, and you'll only be able to use them in manual-aperture mode -- assuming you can adapt them.

As to converters, quality depends on the converter, how it is used, and most importantly , the lens to which it is attached -- and how it is used. Lots of people will trash any converter -- but there are lots of people that even trash the use of a UV filter, for Pete's Sake. Minolta, Nikon, Sony, Tokina and lots of other companies made great converters that they felt met their standards. You'll have to decide if they meet yours. I use various converters all the time, and I have no complaints -- but I use them carefully and correctly.

Except for the Heliar, I don't convert my Minolta lenses to fit on other cameras. I use converters of various types to do that, so that my Minolta lenses will still work on my Minolta cameras. The Heliar was different because I was converting it to work on my Minolta cameras -- that's the exact opposite of what I normally do, but it is an appropriate example of what is possible.

I offered you a possible path to accomplish what you want to achieve. The key word is "possible". Just because it works for me and my gear, does not mean it will work for you and your gear.

If you are a Converterphobe then your best approach is to stick to M42 lenses -- as suggested. There are around 2,000 lenses to choose from -- often at giveaway prices. I provided a link to the list in a earlier post.