Improving the contrast when using 3rd party lenses on m4/3

<p>I've had one of the early RJ Camera Nikon F to micro 4/3 adapters and one thing that has nagged me is that I've felt that the images do not have the same bite as they have on my Nikon. Last fall I shot a bit more and started thinking that one problem is stray light in the adapter reducing contrast. Recently, I read about flocking material for telescopes and decided to order that, since the adapter is quite shiny. Received the ProtoStar material I ordered today and proceeded to flock the insides of the adapter. It came out reasonably well and I shot some test pics.<br>

I didn't really have any great ideas about setting up a test pic, only that I wanted it to be completely repeatable, so I put up some flashes and found some random items. I shot the test pics both with a Nikkor 50/1.8 AI-S and a Zeiss 50/2, the result was pretty much the same. so I'm only posting a crop of the Nikkor picture here. BTW, this lens is a compact and economical short tele for m4/3 users as myself. Both looking at the pic and the histogram, it's clear that the shadow area gained some depth.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>And the shot after the operation on the adapter... now I only wish my adapter would have some sort of tripod mount.</p><div></div>

<p>Interesting. Caused me to look inside my 2 M43 adapters. The (very) expensive Novoflex for Nikon has beautiful grooves around it and is matte black, very unreflective. The cheap probably chinese Pentax adapter is rather poorly finished and quite reflective inside. A. you get what you pay for (or perhaps not quite!); B. might be trying to calm the relections in the Pentax adapter (though so far haven't noticed a major problem).</p>

<p>Looks like you reduced a veiling glare that affected the first shot. Quite an improvement and a very good idea. I second the idea of tripod collar on the adapter. It would be removable and fully rotating to be ideal.</p>