M42 to Nikon F correct adapter for Pentacon 135/2.8

<p>As an indulgent photographic folly I wish to experiment with bokeh using a Pentacon 135mm f/2.8 lens on my D810.</p>

<p>Which adapter should I be looking for in the M42 to Nikon F conversion? I have a seemingly 'as new' AF confirm version with contact points available cheaply and locally for me on Fleabay (Australia)<br>

or<br>

should I be looking for a non contact point version and which size as it appears there are several length adapter keeping the lens different distances from the body?</p>

<p>Any experience out there with the Pentacon 'Bokeh Monster' on Nikon bodies?</p>

<p>AFAIK Nikons won't focus to infintity with adapted M42 glass. - If it has to be Pentacon: adapt the MF lenses like the 120mm Biometar or the 180mm f2.8.</p>

<p>M42, as said, won't work on Nikon F.<br>

However the Pentacon 6TL medium format lenses like those mentioned by Jochen can work (see http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00Pqzu )</p>

<p>mmmm.... Ok, back to the drawing board on this one then.</p>

<p>I'm just chasing an inexpensive bokeh fancied lens to play with. Must be other options out there.</p>

<p>Many thanks!</p>

<p>There are adapters that work, they include an extra piece of glass to correct for the flange distance and permit focusing to infinity.</p>

<p>I tried one out, in an attempt to use my nice Pentax M42 lens collection on a Nikon F3. It did work, but with some optical degradation. This was too big a trade-off for me. There's no point using "special" lenses if the results after adaptation don't match what the lenses are capable of.</p>

Cheap secondhand Canon body? You should be able to get something in the 8-10MP range for around $100 these days.

I'm not sure that the

Pentacon 135mm f/2.8 lens is

anything special anyway. It's

a standard design AFAIK.

East German Zeiss lenses were

clearly marked as Zeiss or

CZ, but the cheaper Pentacon

marked lenses were mainly made by

Meyer to a lesser

specification.

 

 

I was always interested to know how the Zeiss Pancolar 50mm f/1.8 lens performed. However I never got around to testing one, and its incompatibility with my Nikon bodies now makes it not worthwhile troubling over.

 

FWIW, I think it would be hard to beat Samyang's 135mm f/2 lens on any parameter, including bokeh.

<p>there's bound to a big list of Nikon options, 135s, 85s + more DCs, I like my 85 1.8 G and an AF 180 2.8 and for real fun Lensbaby 80 Edge.</p>

<p>I've heard a bit about people using 645 and medium format lenses on Nikon FX but have never seen enough results to get interested myself</p>

<p>Samyang 135/2 looks to produce excellent transition bokeh but a tad pricey for a MF lens (not that this has stopped me in the past........)</p>

<p>I also see the Vivitar Series 1 90mm f/3.5 micro lens (then Tokina aka 'Bokina') is popular for it's Bokeh too.......</p>

<p>Thanks for the tip re- infinity glass in adadpters - I don't want fancy first rate bokeh at the cost of dealing with second rate clarity and sharpness. </p>

Matthew, yes the Samyang

135mm is a bit pricey, but

it's as near to optical

perfection as I've seen. And

it has a fully useable f/2

aperture.

 

I got mine a while ago at a

reasonable price. Since then

I think word must have got

around about how good it is,

and the price has got hiked

somewhat.

<p>Many thanks Joe, I have my eye on a close to mint 2nd hand copy that appears to be genuine low use and well maintained....and I know what they retail for brand new so lets see what happens.</p>

<p>If the Samyang does not work out, look around a while for a Nikon 135/2.8. The older ones might need an inexpensive AI conversion, but I find all versions perform well.</p>

<p>For close cropped portraits & bokeh, I find my 180/2.8AF Nikon hard to beat, even when compared to other "bokeh monsters".</p>