C.R. Loc: United States of Confusion

i use several lenses made during the 80's, of course they are multi coated. they are sharp to my old eyes and that's all that counts, i do this for enjoyment, i'm never going to make a cent from my cameras. when an electronic sensor is built that has a bajillion pixels i suspect they still won't be as sharp as kodak was in it's day

billwassmann Loc: Emerson, NJ

Buy some film and use the lenses! (Or, make them the start of a collection.)

terrild53 Loc: Now in The Villages, FL

Hi, Welcome to the Forum! I too asked the question about using FD lenses on my DSLR ( Canon). I have often gotten some very nice shots using the 3 FD lenses I have and had to research a bit to find the right adapters. B&H people were quite helpful in giving me the info I needed. And I like shooting in Manual mode so these old lenses are fun!

royden Loc: Decatur, GA

They sure can. Like most here say, it will be all manual. Are you shooting with a Pentax DSLR? If so, check out pentaxforums.com. Lots of info there. Good luck.

wideangle Loc: Wisconsin

Than you for the reply, dsmeltz, but your comments help me how?

davidheald1942 Loc: Mars (the planet)

I agree with speters, at least for the most
part. I don't know about better than, but
I do know as good as.
seeya
ronny

n3eg Loc: West coast USA

Another advantage of using old FF lenses with micro four thirds is that corner sharpness is much less of an issue, since your corners are essentially cropped by the smaller sensor.

john901 Loc: Lancaster, PA

A company that makes Pentax screw lens adapters to fit just about any camera brand is Fotodiox. Their adapters are very well made and reasonable in price.

Look at their website, and you can find the exact model for the camera on which you wish to mount your Pentax lenses.

John S.

wideangle Loc: Wisconsin

I'm not quite up on some lingo..what is micro four thirds and FF?

mechengvic Loc: SoCalo

FF means full frame. Full frame sensors are the same size as 35mm film frames.

Micro four thirds is a camera format designed by Olympus and used by several companies. It is based on a sensor that has a 4/3 aspect ratio. The micro part is the name for the smaller flange mount size that Olympus incorporated when they shifted from DSLR cameras to mirrorless cameras. The older, larger flange mount size is referred to as standard four thirds. You will see m4/3 and 4/3 and that will be the difference. Older 4/3 lenses can mount to new m4/3 bodies via a 4/3 to m4/3 adapter but the opposite is not possible. M4/3 is an extremely flexible design because the mounting flange is so close to the sensor that you can use adapters that won't create too much space between lens and sensor, in fact some adapters have to be made purposely thick in order to work. M4/3 cameras can effectively use nearly every single lens that has ever been made for interchangeable lens cameras with the correct, usually inexpensive, adapter. The M4/3 sensor is smaller then full frame sensors so you will also hear about the "crop factor", which is a whole other ball of wax!

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

I am able to use my Super Takumar lenses on my Nikon digital bodies, with either no glass adaptor (close-up work only) , or German Optic glass adaptor, which will give infinity focussing. Of course, manual focus, exposure setting, but the optics are still good.

dkguill Loc: Elkhart, IN

I have not seen anyone's comments on old lenses that address this issue. It is my understanding that "Optimized for Digital" lenses have a number of design changes from the old film lenses. The issue that I find most concerning has to do with the fact that, because digital sensors have layers that deal with the RGB design, they require that the light strikes the sensor at 90° to the sensor plane. This is apparently more of an issue as you employ wider angled lenses and wider apertures. If, as with older lenses, the light strikes the sensor at a more severe or oblique angle, it negatively affects the sharpness and light dispersion of the resulting image. Digitally optimized lenses address this issue. Admittedly, different manufacturers use proprietary techniques in their optimization design, but the basic issue is the angle of attack of the light to the sensor.

Another issue is reflection from the highly polished sensor cover surface back to the rear element of the lens. To combat resulting flare and ghosting, important coatings have been applied to the newer digitally optimized lenses.

My comments here do not address all of the ways in which the digitally optimized lens is different from older film lenses, but it is true that specific issues related to the digital sensor and lens design have been addressed with the newer lenses. For that reason, I lean toward the use of newer lenses in the interest of creating the best quality images that they potentially can create.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

*********************************************
Apochromat lenses were designed for film cameras to overcome the effect of colour light rays not coming to focus at the same point . Films had layers in the emulsion to reproduce certain colours. Just as you quote that Sensors have layers.

mechengvic Loc: SoCalo

Very interesting comment. I believe the concerns you express are the very same ones that digital technologies developers are wrestling with even as we speak. Sony just announced the development of a curved sensor, apparently to address the issue of light rays striking the sensor at less than otimal angles. Optics geometry hasn't changed much, but coating and glass composition tech has, by a lot. And just like you, given the choice, I would use the newer lens.

dkguill Loc: Elkhart, IN

You are, of course, correct. The difference apparently is that the layers on film are extremely thin while the layers on the typical digital sensor are much deeper or thicker. Thus, the light striking film at an oblique angle is not creating the focus problem to the degree that it does with the deeper digital sensor. When I questioned the use of older lenses that were indeed designed to function with film, I was observing that those same lenses don't have the advantage of having the light finally directed at 90 ° to the sensor plane. We therefore see that digitally optimized lenses do work well with film, but the opposite is less true. As a result, I'm inclined to recommend that digital camera users use digitally optimized lenses. I would be interested to hear from a more authoritative source than I as to the accuracy of my assumption.