Compatible lenses

I'm buying a digital SLR camera for my girlfriend. She currently owns a
Nikon optical SLR (AF 8008?) with a few lenses (Nikon, Canon and Sigma). I
want her to be able to use her current lenses on the digital camera I buy -
does this place restrictions on the manufacturer I can choose ? or are all
lenses pretty much standard in terms of compatibility ?

"Jez" writes:

I'm buying a digital SLR camera for my girlfriend. She currently owns a
Nikon optical SLR (AF 8008?) with a few lenses (Nikon, Canon and Sigma). I
want her to be able to use her current lenses on the digital camera I buy -
does this place restrictions on the manufacturer I can choose ? or are all
lenses pretty much standard in terms of compatibility ?

Lenses are pretty much all proprietary. Nikon AF lenses will work on
the Nikon digital cameras, and also the Fuji S2/S3. Kodak is out of
that business now, but for a while they made a DSLR line that used
Nikon lenses (and a few that used Canon).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/ Much of which is still down

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
"Jez" writes:

I'm buying a digital SLR camera for my girlfriend. She currently owns a
Nikon optical SLR (AF 8008?) with a few lenses (Nikon, Canon and Sigma).
I
want her to be able to use her current lenses on the digital camera I
buy -
does this place restrictions on the manufacturer I can choose ? or are
all
lenses pretty much standard in terms of compatibility ?

Lenses are pretty much all proprietary. Nikon AF lenses will work on
the Nikon digital cameras, and also the Fuji S2/S3. Kodak is out of
that business now, but for a while they made a DSLR line that used
Nikon lenses (and a few that used Canon).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/ Much of which is still
down

Also of note, SOME third party lenses have had problems working on newer
bodies. From
what I've heard on here, the distributor has taken such lenses back and done
a firmware upgrade
on them. You should have no problem with any Nikon AF lenses that work on
the 8008(s) working
on a Nikon dslr. In fact, an N8008 was MY newest 35mm AF body before buying
a D70...I even
use my old Nikon manual focus lenses on my D70 (the only downside is they
don't meter with the
body).

In article ,
Jez wrote:
I'm buying a digital SLR camera for my girlfriend. She currently owns a
Nikon optical SLR (AF 8008?) with a few lenses (Nikon, Canon and Sigma).

Are you *sure* about that last one? Nikon lenses would work on
Nikon cameras, of course. Sigma is a third-party manufacturer who makes
lenses with mounts for a couple of the big makers (Nikon and Cannon), as
well as their own mounts, but I would be amazed to know that a Cannon
lens was being used on a Nikon body without some major (and creative)
surgery. (Unless it is a short-mount lens in an appropriate adaptor, in
which case it would need a similar adaptor to work on a Cannon camera as
well.)

I
want her to be able to use her current lenses on the digital camera I buy -
does this place restrictions on the manufacturer I can choose ?

It does. You can use Nikon cameras (current range in the
digital world is from the entry model (the D50), through the D70/D70s
(which is what I have), up to the D2X -- the current high-end camera.

There are some other cameras made to use Nikon lenses, but with
the Cannon cameras you should expect to need special adaptors, and to
probably lose some of the automation.

or are all
lenses pretty much standard in terms of compatibility ?

Well ... the *glass* is pretty much standard, though the final
shape of it, and the mechanisms surrounding it will vary from maker to
maker.

I would suggest that you stick with one of the Nikon line
cameras, as it will probably feel better to her than one of the other
cameras which accept the Nikon mount -- since she is already accustomed
to using a Nikon camera.

Note that older lenses, which don't have the autofocus feature,
will proably only work on the D70 or D50 with a separate hand-held
exposure meter.

I, personally, would skip the D50, unless money is a significant
problem. They have left out some of the features which I use on the
D70. That said, it can do most of what the D70 can do.

The D70 I feel quite comfortable with.

I would *love* to be able to afford a D2x, but that is out of
reach for me at the moment, and for the foreseeable future.

While we are about it -- you can buy the D70(s) or D50 in "body
only" form, I would suggest that you buy the "kit" D70s, which will
include a very nice 18-70mm zoom. I bought mine body only about a year
ago, and finally decided to get the kit lens about a month ago -- and
it took most of that month for the store to get one in stock. The
reason for this is that *all* of the Nikon digital cameras, (and most
from other makers, with the exception of the most expensive Cannon),
have what is called a "crop factor". That is -- the sensor is smaller
than the film in a normal 35mm camera. The Nikon ones have a crop
factor of 1.5, and most of the Cannon ones have a crop factor of 1.6.
The effect of this is to make the field of view in the photos equivalent
to a lens with a longer focal length by the crop factor. That is, (on
the Nikon), a 50mm lens would take a photo equivalent to that with a
75mm lens on a normal 35mm film camera. This is a benefit if you shoot
mostly telephoto shots (my 28-105mm zoom was equivalent to a 42-157.5mm
zoom on a film camera), but if you need to shoot wide angle shots
(indoors in restricted space, or covering landscapes and large buildings
outdoors), you will discover that you don't have as wide a lens as you
thought you had. The 18-70mm zoom covers that need rather well (unless
you get into extreme needs), as it is equivalent to a 27-105mm lens on a
35mm (almost the lens which I was already using -- if I had been
shooting on film. :-)

Good Luck,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

Are you *sure* about that last one? Nikon lenses would work on
Nikon cameras, of course. Sigma is a third-party manufacturer who makes
lenses with mounts for a couple of the big makers (Nikon and Cannon), as
well as their own mounts, but I would be amazed to know that a Cannon
lens was being used on a Nikon body without some major (and creative)
surgery. (Unless it is a short-mount lens in an appropriate adaptor, in
which case it would need a similar adaptor to work on a Cannon camera as
well.)
DoN.

http://www.camerahacker.com/Novoflex/EOSNIK.html

Talks about putting Nikon lenses on Canon bodies with an adaptor costing
$200

I dunno about mounting Canon onto a Nikon though

Toa

In article 1123733700.779875428ce36336894c87ec5b79ac0e@teran ews,
Toa wrote:
Are you *sure* about that last one? Nikon lenses would work on
Nikon cameras, of course. Sigma is a third-party manufacturer who makes
lenses with mounts for a couple of the big makers (Nikon and Cannon), as
well as their own mounts, but I would be amazed to know that a Cannon
lens was being used on a Nikon body without some major (and creative)
surgery. (Unless it is a short-mount lens in an appropriate adaptor, in
which case it would need a similar adaptor to work on a Cannon camera as
well.)
DoN.

http://www.camerahacker.com/Novoflex/EOSNIK.html

Talks about putting Nikon lenses on Canon bodies with an adaptor costing
$200

Yes -- that is possible (with limited functionality) going in
that direction, because the lens-mount to film (or sensor) plane
distance is less on the Cannon than on the Nikon. At one time the
camera which I used (back then), the Miranda F and later models, had the
thinnest mount to film-plane distance, maximizing the number of other
lenses which could be adapted to the body. (Also, it was an
interesting mount, as it had both a bayonet external mount, and a
threaded internal mount -- your choice of which to use.)

An interesting bit from the web page says:

"Mounting the Novoflex adapter to a Nikon lens is relative simple and
effort-less . . . as long as you realize to rotate the lens
counter-clockwise. Nikon's non-conformance to industrial standards
created by other manufacturers had always baffled me. The lens
counter-clockwise rotation is just one of the many nit-picks that Nikon
had tried very hard to be different from other camera manufactures.
Perhaps Nikon felt that they had to compete with others on all levels.
But it is really the users, or their customers, that lose in this
competition."

And I have to say that Nikon did not originate that lens mount
direction. Their first cameras were clones of the Zeiss Contax. I have
an example of that (along with an example of a Russian made Contax, by
Kiev), and the lens mount direction is the same as on the Nikon cameras,
so it is reasonable to assume that they carried on that direction when
they started their SLR line.

And Cannon, FWIW, also started by making clones of Leicas, so
they presumably took their lens mount direction from the Leica -- which,
IIRC, was a screw thread, not a bayonet, so CW to mount the lens is more
reasonable.

I dunno about mounting Canon onto a Nikon though

Because the lens mount plane to focal plane distance on the
Nikon is greater than that of the Cannon, while such an adaptor could be
made, it would be limited to photographing things much closer than
infinity. Depending on the focal length of the lens. With a 50mm lens,
I would guess that (even assuming a zero thickness adaptor, which is not
reasonable), the greatest focus distance would be something like about
eight feet.

Interesting that they used the Novoflex name for this adaptor,
as that was the name of a short-mount lens assembly for the Leica, IIRC.
It put a SLR viewing/focusing system in front of the Leica body, and
turned it into a clumsy SLR, at least for lenses with sufficient back
focal distance.

Another quote from the web site:

"Unlike Canon EF lens, Nikon lens has an aperture ring on the
lens. The aperture ring can be set to any f-stop supported by
the lens any time, permanently. It is like having an automatic
depth-of-field preview button. Since there is no electronic
communication, the Nikon lens can only be used in manual focus
mode. It would be wise to turn the aperture ring to the
wide-open setting for focusing, then stopping down for exposure
metering and then the final shot."

This says to me that it is rather a kluge, and is done mostly for the
purpose of saying "I can use Nikon lenses on my Cannon", not for ease of
use. I strongly suspect that anyone who uses these lenses in this way
would quit fairly quickly, just based on the inconvenience factor. And
none of the lenses even have a "preset" ring, unlike some of the early
SLR lenses, before automatic diaphragms. Actually, the addition of a
lever to the adaptor should make it possible to switch between wide open
and stopped down.

And -- since it *requires* an aperture ring (for anything other
than minimum aperture), this excludes the 'G' series Nikon lenses,
including the "kit" lens for the D70, D70s, and those for the D50.
(Though I'm not sure whether anyone would *want* to use those for the
D50. :-)

Anyway -- this adaptor qualifies under at least "minor and creative
surgery", if not "major", in the construction of the adaptor. :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

This says to me that it is rather a kluge, and is done mostly for the
purpose of saying "I can use Nikon lenses on my Cannon", not for ease of
use. I strongly suspect that anyone who uses these lenses in this way
would quit fairly quickly, just based on the inconvenience factor.

The reason I bought an adapter to fit Olympus OM mount lenses on my 20D
were because:
1) I owned the OM lens already, and it would cost me a fortune to buy
the same lens today in the Canon EF mount
2) I own faster maximum aperture lenses in the OM mount and don't want
to reinvest again for the EOS mount equivalent

In the case of my OM 'special purpose' 24mm f/3.5 perspective control
lens, on the OM mount it was a preset aperture lens, and it remains so
on my 20D. Plus I normally use an incident handheld light meter to
meter around architectural shots, so I lose no features, compared to
buying the EOS 24mm PC and (even better) I don't lose any money out of
my wallet!

In the case of my OM 50mm 1.4, and OM 24mm f/2 lens, I gain a whole lot
of speed compared to my Canon zooms. While IS may 'add' 2 f/stops for
handheld shots in low light, IS does NOTHING in terms of making my
electronic flash 'reach' farther distances...f/5.6 only allows a flash
to get out to a certain distance, and then you're toast. Having an
f/1.2 or f/2 lens easily gets you much farther...assuming GN=100, f/5.6
only reaches 18 feet, but f/2 reaches 50 feet. Since you're shooting
wide open or one f/stop down, the fact that the previously auto
diaphram is not available is a non-issue!. And there are enough
circumstances that autofocus does not do a good job and requires manual
adjustment, so focusing a lens full time is a non-issue for me, too.



--Wilt

In article om,
wilt wrote:
This says to me that it is rather a kluge, and is done mostly for the
purpose of saying "I can use Nikon lenses on my Cannon", not for ease of
use. I strongly suspect that anyone who uses these lenses in this way
would quit fairly quickly, just based on the inconvenience factor.

The reason I bought an adapter to fit Olympus OM mount lenses on my 20D
were because:
1) I owned the OM lens already, and it would cost me a fortune to buy
the same lens today in the Canon EF mount
2) I own faster maximum aperture lenses in the OM mount and don't want
to reinvest again for the EOS mount equivalent

O.K.

In the case of my OM 'special purpose' 24mm f/3.5 perspective control
lens, on the OM mount it was a preset aperture lens, and it remains so
on my 20D. Plus I normally use an incident handheld light meter to
meter around architectural shots, so I lose no features, compared to
buying the EOS 24mm PC and (even better) I don't lose any money out of
my wallet!

I agree that with that shooting practice, it does make sense to
use this adaptor.

In the case of my OM 50mm 1.4, and OM 24mm f/2 lens, I gain a whole lot
of speed compared to my Canon zooms. While IS may 'add' 2 f/stops for
handheld shots in low light, IS does NOTHING in terms of making my
electronic flash 'reach' farther distances...f/5.6 only allows a flash
to get out to a certain distance, and then you're toast. Having an
f/1.2 or f/2 lens easily gets you much farther...assuming GN=100, f/5.6
only reaches 18 feet, but f/2 reaches 50 feet. Since you're shooting
wide open or one f/stop down, the fact that the previously auto
diaphram is not available is a non-issue!. And there are enough
circumstances that autofocus does not do a good job and requires manual
adjustment, so focusing a lens full time is a non-issue for me, too.

O.K. For my D70, I picked up a used Nikkor 50mm f1.4 with AF
for a quite reasonable price at a local store. With the D70, all
exposure automation, and even TTL metering goes away unless the lens has
a CPU (in which case it would also likely have AF as well). When I'm
using the 50mm f1.4, I am usually shooting in conditions where the light
is sufficiently variable and the subjects are changing so rapidly so
using a hand-held meter (which I do still have) would mean missed shots.

Obviously, if your shots are of stationary subjects, and you
have plenty of time to do a setup, your needs are different from mine.

I understand that the Cannon will do TTL metering at least, if
not aperture control, with older (or adapted) lenses.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---