Was ist Eure Motivation Altglas zu adaptieren?

[hofsethpaul]

Further to the comment above ad internal lens elements: the Contaflex designed for Kodaks badly designed film carrier does not have the unremovable basic lens where add-ons like the pro-xx had to be used with the built in lens to function. The 126 version did have some parts fixed to the camera body, such as the aperture control and the focussing helix. However the aperture itself is in the usual place and can be operated by any correctly placed pin. Thus the Chinese adapter "only" needs the correct size and distance bayonets , a helicoid , plus a correctly placed pin. No optical components. I hope that it turns out to have Novoflex precision more hppenstance engineering is not fair to the precision of the optics. Just like the original instamatic cassettes were a mismatch.

p

[Rob70]

Further to the comment above ad internal lens elements: the Contaflex designed for Kodaks badly designed film carrier does not have the unremovable basic lens where add-ons like the pro-xx had to be used with the built in lens to function. The 126 version did have some parts fixed to the camera body, such as the aperture control and the focussing helix. However the aperture itself is in the usual place and can be operated by any correctly placed pin. Thus the Chinese adapter "only" needs the correct size and distance bayonets , a helicoid , plus a correctly placed pin. No optical components. I hope that it turns out to have Novoflex precision more hppenstance engineering is not fair to the precision of the optics. Just like the original instamatic cassettes were a mismatch.

p

Very interesting, thanks for the Info.

[hofsethpaul]

I did try the zeiss glass and found it adequate, but not quite as sharp and contrasty as I had hoped.

I have noted the wishes for examples. My usual attitude to photo examples is that they remain more informative of aesthetic ability than of thechnical capacities especially in the small versions allowed , and making comparable blowups of center and corners and uploading (!) is too labour intensive and very much dependent on how curves and sharpness is massaged. Hence, I refrain.

---------------

I do have another comment on manual focus glass, however. Learnt from unhappy experience.

I am among those photographers who rarely use the buttons and viewfinder display distractions. Only when I need to set the anti-shake mechanism of my Nikon Z do I dive into the menu. A few days ago (before the cat decided to chew on my Novioflex to camera cable and destroy it), i had set the anti shake to handle a very long lens. Yesterday, new snow gave a chance to picture my neighbourhood with my excellent manual 18mm, so I went out without bothering to fiddle with settings.


Not only was the pernicious, unlockable and easily turned exposure correction wheel acccidentally turned to underexpose by 3 stops , but when i got indoors again to a pre-Christmas party, slow exposure times were totally blurred by the stabilizer jiggling. The outdoors snap enclosed was rescued since the exposure was too short for the jiggler to interfere and photoshop could fix the exposure.

conclusion; manual focus optics are excellent, but modern cameras must be closely watched when using them with manual lenses-

p.

0sne.jpg