What M42 adapters allowing infinity focusing?

[waynecrider]

Does anyone know what non screw bodies can take M42 lenses thru adapters and have infinity focusing without the use of the incorporated lens. I know Pentax can, are there others?

 

[DBP]

There's a body to lens mount adapter list here: http://cameraquest.com/adaptslr.htm

 

[waynecrider]

Thanks. It seems I might be able to use one on my A1 but not on my FT3.
Btw, B&H has em.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Canon FD and EOS

 

[maarten m]

any M42 and eos.
i use several ...

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

Rolleiflex keeps the "auto-diaphragm" function if present....

 

[Tony-S]

Minolta.

 

[darinwc]

That list looks a little short.
Essentially, any camera body with a film to flange distance less than the screw-mount film-to-flange distance can accept the screw-mount lenses with the proper adapter. Most of these combinations have had an adapter made at some time or another.

Generally, the canon FD and EOS mounts have the shortest flange, so there are adapters available for many different lenses.

However one consideration is that any non-m42 camera will only be able to meter with these lenses in stopped-down mode. So if you will only be shooting wide-open, you will be fine. But if you want to stop-down the lens it will be inconvenient.

Somewhere there is a good website that lists the different film-to-flange measurements of most camera systems.

 

[Andrew Moxom]

I have a Contax 139Q and a Fotodiox M-42 adaptor for my Helios and Jupiter M-42 lenses. Works slick and provides infinty focus.

 

[eSPhotos]

AFAIK Nikon F, Olympus OM and Leica R cannot focus infinity without optical elements in the adapter.

 

[Ralph Javins]

Minolta.

Good morning, Tony;

It may be that any adapter to go from an M-42 lens to the Minolta SR mount will require some glass in the optical path to achieve focus at infinity. Both of the Minolta Adapters for the M-42/Contax/Pentax/UTM lenses and the Leica M-39 lenses are simple machined adapter rings without any glass, and specifically state in the instructions that they are for use in close-up work only, and will not achieve focus at infinity.

The lens registration distance for the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax AF lens mount and the later Sony DSLR AF lens mount is longer than the Minolta SR lens mount, so the same comments will apply there also.

 

[Oren Grad]

There's a nice table here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount

The mount registers of Minolta SR/MC/MD and Minolta AF are both shorter than that for M42. I've used M42 lenses via adapter with infinity focus preserved on a Minolta AF-mount camera.

 

[zk-cessnaguy]

Good morning, Tony;

It may be that any adapter to go from an M-42 lens to the Minolta SR mount will require some glass in the optical path to achieve focus at infinity. Both of the Minolta Adapters for the M-42/Contax/Pentax/UTM lenses and the Leica M-39 lenses are simple machined adapter rings without any glass, and specifically state in the instructions that they are for use in close-up work only, and will not achieve focus at infinity.

The lens registration distance for the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax AF lens mount and the later Sony DSLR AF lens mount is longer than the Minolta SR lens mount, so the same comments will apply there also.

Hmmmmm nope, both the Minolta SR and AF mounts focus to infinity with plain non-glass adapters. I use a large number of Pentax Takumar lenses with both and have no issues.

 

[Pumalite]

I have all kind of adapters for Nikon, Canon and Olympus OM and all focus to infinity without a glass.

 

[Andrew Moxom]

My contax camera has no issues with M42 lenses at infinity.... no glass in the adaptor either.

 

[Ralph Javins]

There's a nice table here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount

The mount registers of Minolta SR/MC/MD and Minolta AF are both shorter than that for M42. I've used M42 lenses via adapter with infinity focus preserved on a Minolta AF-mount camera.

Thank you, Oren and ZK-CessnaGuy;

It is a good thing that you guys are out here keeping me on my toes.

Yes, the M-42 mount registration distance is about 2mm longer than the Minolta SR mount, and it is about 1 mm longer than the Minolta AF mount. The M-42 lenses will go onto a Minolta. This is something that I am really happy to know, because there are some M-42 lenses here that can go onto something other than just my Vivitar 450/SLD camera body. Guys, there are a lot of Minolta SR mount bodies around here, and I do have those adapters. Thanks.

Also, in actually going back into the boxes and finding the literature for the Minolta Camera Company Limited manufactured threaded lens mount adapters for the Pentax and the Leica lenses, yes, the Pentax version does work. The Leica adapter instruction sheet is the one that says that they cannot focus to infinity when a Leica lens is screwed into the adapter.

Well, for a 40 year old memory on this subject, it looks like I was only half right.

Thanks, guys.

Enjoy;

Ralph
Latte Land, Washington

 

[waynecrider]

Are there any at all bodies that can meter without stopping down or is it pretty universal.

 

[Oren Grad]

Are there any at all bodies that can meter without stopping down or is it pretty universal.

Sort of not, but it's complicated. See the section "Evolution and automation" in this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M42_lens_mount

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

Are there any at all bodies that can meter without stopping down or is it pretty universal.

The Rolleiflex SL35-E and SL2000/3000 series will meter and work in automatic *immediately after* you've pressed the Depth Of Field Preview button.
Not really the same thing as FA metering, but can be very fast in practice.

 

[Steaphany]

I know Sigma SLR's with their SA mount can adapt to a M42 Lens and focus to infinity.

 

[Tony-S]

Good morning, Tony;

It may be that any adapter to go from an M-42 lens to the Minolta SR mount will require some glass in the optical path to achieve focus at infinity. Both of the Minolta Adapters for the M-42/Contax/Pentax/UTM lenses and the Leica M-39 lenses are simple machined adapter rings without any glass, and specifically state in the instructions that they are for use in close-up work only, and will not achieve focus at infinity.

I use this adapter with my Minolta X-700 and Pentax Takumar M42 lenses and attain infinity focus with them. No glass required.

 

[Ralph Javins]

I use this adapter with my Minolta X-700 and Pentax Takumar M42 lenses and attain infinity focus with them. No glass required.

Good morning, Tony;

Yes, just about six (6) messages back from yours, I do agree that the M-42 lenses will fully work on both the Minolta SR and AF mounts, but not with the very similar appearing adapter for the Leica or M-39 Screw Thread Mount lenses.

And, the M-42 to Minolta SR Adapter through B&H looks very much like the adapter that I have also, but it is listed as being cheaper than the one that came out of the Minolta box here. Another insult to me, I guess. Oh, well. I have survived many other things in my lifetime.

And, there is a surprise for me in your message: You do not list in your signature line any Minolta cameras. I am surprised to see your comment about using that adapter with your Pentax Takumar lenses on your Minolta X-700.

Also, I still regard the X-700 as being probably the best effort Minolta put out for a "system camera." You can do just about anything you can envision with the "MPS" accessories they made available to work with the X-700. And, for me, the X-700 with the MD-1 Motor Drive really does just fit my hand perfectly. I like that camera. With the MD-1 on it, the shutter release button is right where my finger expects to find it. I just wish they had been as careful with the ergonomics when they came out with the Minolta Maxxum/Dynax 9.

 

[Tony-S]

The X-700 was a freebie to me. It came with a Tamron 35-70mm zoom and I already had a stash of Pentax (and a 135mm f/2.8 Meyer-Pentacon) M42 lenses. So, the adapter was the cheapest way in for me. It is a very nice camera and still does auto shutter speed with my M42 lenses.

There are a lot things I have not in my sig since it would make my sig longer than most of my posts!

 

[Ralph Javins]

. . .

There are a lot things I have not in my sig since it would make my sig longer than most of my posts!

Good morning, Tony;

Please, sir, trust me. I do understand your comment. Perfectly. Conducting an inventory of the photographic equipment around here became an embarrassing task toward the end. Well, actually it is still going on as more things arrive. Some time back when I was asked if I were a collector, I would deny that saying; "Oh, no, I am just a well equipped photographer." Later I had to agree that the label of "collector" really did apply to me. Now I admit that I am actually an addict with almost no control over my life anymore. I really need to find a chapter of Cameras Anonymous.

 

[Tony-S]

Yeah, I'm no collector. If I can't shoot it, then I won't buy it.