I was at the Fort Washington, (PA) Camera Show put on by PHOTORAMA yesterday and bought ten (yes) Nikkormats, excellent condition, except for meter, for about $180 total. That is a good price until you consider that the normal lens needed to make those cameras viable are all too rare.
I never thought that I would say that a mainstream, normal lens could be rare but that is what I am saying, without equivocation, here. I did manage to buy one 1.8/50 Series E with stiff focus (will take about 2 hours taking it apart to make it sing) for $10 but that was that. The others were about $50 each, even if "with prong".
Digital 'did it' by allowing the Nikon mount to be adaptable for DSLRS, right? But cannot M42 lenses also be adapted? These are a dime a dozen, for cheap. In fact both M42 and Minolta (PF, MC, MD) are the cheapest lenses around. Are they not also adaptable for digital? Their optical quality is tops.
My frustration with my naked Nikkormats needs to be placated. As a spoiled brat, who suddenly became "entitled" when digital achieved hegemony (and threw its lowly subjects out to pasture) I need to find a cheap, source of marginal Nikon normals that will not scare me away with price. - David Lyga
Clearly it would be better if the digital folks couldn't use these lenses, then most of them would end up in the corners of closets or in the dump. Personally, I've yet to actually see someone using a digital camera with a vintage lens, but someone must be doing it, or they wouldn't be selling those adapters. And they're still pretty cheap compared to new lenses.
You wouldn't believe how many (digital) canon people own a whole collection of Nikon MF lenses.
Don't even get me started on the digital kooks. Yet another thing they're trying to take - all the decent MF lenses. And for what? A bunch of shitty bokeh shots?
Clearly it would be better if the digital folks couldn't use these lenses, then most of them would end up in the corners of closets or in the dump. Personally, I've yet to actually see someone using a digital camera with a vintage lens, but someone must be doing it, or they wouldn't be selling those adapters. And they're still pretty cheap compared to new lenses.
Videographers, mostly. DSLRs can't autofocus worth a damn during live video, so people would rather get the nice MF lenses. I'd know, I use my film lenses for video when they're not being used for film. You wouldn't believe how many (digital) canon people own a whole collection of Nikon MF lenses.
Don't even get me started on the digital kooks. Yet another thing they're trying to take - all the decent MF lenses. And for what? A bunch of shitty bokeh shots?
I recall seeing, in another context, some Canon users complaining they couldn't use their older, pre-EOS lenses with newer Canon gear; not being a Canon user I don't know how true this is. Maybe it is easier to use Nikon stuff?
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?