Nikon d3100 w/ Voigtländer 28mm/f2.8 - good combo?

[jcartwright]

<p>Hello everyone,</p>

<p>I currently own a film rangefinder - a <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtBR2.htm">Voigtlander Bessa R2</a> with a 35mm/f2.5 lens. It works brilliantly, but I can no longer afford to use film, so I am planning to sell it and switch to a DSLR.</p>

<p>My plan is to buy a relatively inexpensive DSLR to go with a small, fixed focal-length, manual-focus lens - namely the <a href="http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/lenses/voigtlander-28mm-f2-8-color-skopar-sl-ii-n-lens-nikon-ais.html">Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8</a> pancake. Although I will be using a modern DSLR with autofocus/exposure, etc, I'd like to stick with focusing and setting aperture manually for now. Also, I have had good experience with the quality of Voigtlander lenses.</p>

<p>The question is which DSLR to pair it with. I've been thinking of a (new or secondhand) D3100. It's cheap, very small (not much bigger than a rangefinder!), and - according to the man in the camera shop - basically the same image quality as higher priced Nikons, like the D7000. Yes, it doesn't have so many features - but I figure that, since I'm coming from the prehistoric era of rangefinders, that won't really matter.</p>

<p>My question is - am I making the right choice? Or should I be looking at another model - a secondhand D90, perhaps?</p>

<p>The most important factor for me is image quality (aside from price, obv). Is it true that the D3100 will have similar image quality to a model more than twice the cost?</p>

<p>Would be great to hear what you lot think.</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

<p>Jon</p>

[harveysteeves]

<p>how do you intend to determine your exposures with your combo?</p>

[jcartwright]

<p>I figured the camera would meter through the lens, and change the shutter speed accordingly? The Voigtlander lenses have a CPU to fit Nikons, so I think the f-number info would be communicated to the body…</p>

[ShunCheung]

The viewfinders on those inexpensive DSLRs are not designed for manual focus. Try before you buy.

[songtsen]

<p>Have you considered a 'mirrorless' camera? Manual focus is probably easier on a Sony NEX than a D3100.</p>

[jcartwright]

<p>@Shun Cheung - A good point re. the viewfinder. Hadn't thought of that. Would the D5100 be any better, do you think? Or maybe the D90 would be better if this is taken into account?</p>

<p>@Songsten Kampo - Yes, I have considered mirrorless systems. Trouble is that they more expensive in general, and there's no similar selection of Voigtlander lenses. For now I just want to spend the money on a good lens and get the cheapest body that will do it justice.</p>

[jcartwright]

<p>OK, an addendum - just been doing some research. Turns out my assumption that you could manual focus on any old DSLR was optimistic, to say the least.</p>

<p>Perhaps my question should be: is there any decent (new or secondhand) DSLR out there that would be suitable for manual-only focussing that's less than £400 ($600) or so?</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Viewfinder on a D90 (and D80 before that) is leaps better than the D3x00 and D5x00 models; but those are also much larger bodies.<br /> One other thing to verify with the lens: I think if you use it with any of these bodies, you'll have to set the aperture using the command wheel on the body, not the ring on the lens. On the higher-end bodies (D200, D300 etc.), you can enable to use the aperture ring instead.<br /> And just to be sure: if you're currently used to a 35mm lens, you may find that 28mm on APS-C is quite a bit less wide; ideally you'd need a 24mm, though I do not know of a pancake 24mm - though the Nikon 24mm f/2.8 is not a very large lens either.</p>

<p>[EDIT]: see your second post now. That would be the D200, if you really want to use the aperture ring; the D80 or D90 if you can do without. The D90 is a big step up when it comes to the sensor, well worth the extra it'll cost.</p>

[jcartwright]

<p>I would really like to be able to use the aperture ring. Be too fiddly otherwise.</p>

<p>So that leaves the D200 or D300. Shame about the size, but they still come in at under £400 on eBay I think. Presumably the D300 would be comparable quality to modern DSLRs? Has a CMOS sensor, which the man in the shop said was better quality…?</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Some prefer the look of CCD, some prefer CMOS - I never saw much difference. But the newer cameras do have much better performance at higher ISO values. In this respect, the D300 is a tiny step behind on the newest DLSRs (such as the D7000), the D200 a more considerable step. In many other respects (AF, build quality) the D300 is still one of the best APS-C sensor cameras out there. But it's not small, nor light, and if you find one for 400 UK pounds, it's going to be quite well used. So make sure to have a good return policy.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>the d3100 has a higher-res sensor (14mp) than the d90 (12) btw. the d90 doesn't actually give you much more advantage here, for the reasons wouter pointed out. for the OP, the best bet would be a used d300 or d7000; a d200 would also work, but it's not as good in dim light and noisy above 800 ISO.</p>

[robert_bouknight1]

<p>The D7000 has the capability to provide metering with non CPU manual focus lenses, as does the D300(s). This enables these cameras to be used more effectively with a huge assortment of older (relatively inexpensive manual focus) Nikon system lenses. I did enjoy the D90 I had, but the manual lens input feature of the D7000 or D300 would be worth a decent price differential. I have not used the Voigtlander 28 (have read that it is good), but the 28/2.8 AIS Nikon manual focus lens is outstanding as well about 1/3-1/2 the cost used.</p>

<p>Thus, I am thinking that a used D7000 or D300 + 28/2.8 AIS (or 24mm) Nikon lens would cost about the same as a 3100+ VL28, but would add a lot of flexibility for operation and for future lenses. </p>

[jcartwright]

<p>@Wouter - thanks. Seems like there isn't an ideal option! I did feel the weight of a D2/300 once, and it was <em>heavy</em>. Very different to a rangefinder, and it'd take a lot of getting used to.</p>

<p>Hmm. Maybe I ought to give up on manual focusing. Seems odd to me that such a feature is only really doable on the most expensive DSLRs, but there we go.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>If the idea of a DSLR was to save money, once you're looking at a D7000 or D300, that's probably gone out of the window - though I agree that something like a D3100 is cheaper. Are you <i>sure</i> you wouldn't be happier with, say, a NEX5 series? You can always adapt lenses from other systems, including Leica M mount lenses. The same is true of micro 4/3, though the crop factor is greater. (It's, annoyingly, <i>not</i> true of Samsung's NX range.)<br />

<br />

If you want an optical finder, a DSLR may still be your friend - more so if you want fast autofocus (which it sounds like you don't). But if you want the closest and cheapest relation to your R2, I'd look at NEX. (With more money, the NEX6 or even 7, or the Fujifilm cameras are an option; or the M9 if you want full frame, of course.) Not that I've ever tried to mount the LSM lenses from my original Bessa R on my GF2, but I know I could do it if I ever inherited a Noctilux...<br />

<br />

You can manual focus on a cheap Nikon (there's even a digital rangefinder that's arguably better than what the high end cameras offer, and you can resort to live view), it's just that a lens without electronics won't meter automatically. Canon have the opposite problem - they'll meter, but if you have a lens without electrical contacts the autofocus sensors won't activate. This is the kind of situation that makes me bang my head against a wall.</p>

[jcartwright]

<p>Oops, my reply came in before I'd seen these other responses.</p>

<p>@Robert - Yes, I guess you're right there. Ditching the Voigtlander might be the only way to make manual focus + DSLR work. Only those old Nikons (as Andrew points out) don't have electrical contacts, so it's back to setting aperture on the body.</p>

<p>@Andrew - I'm not familiar with the NEX, but it seems first off to go against my main priority - which is to be able to control aperture and focussing manually, easily, like on an old film camera.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Coming from a rangefinder and apparently wanting only a single lens, I would have a serious look at the Fuji 100XS with the fixed 23/2 lens (about the same FOV as the 35mm on film). Camera is announced to ship around the end of March for $1300. No clue how well manual focus works - but quite often at least I prefer AF anyway.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>As Dieter says, the Fuji's are by all reports very nice to use, but they're not cheap.<br />

<br />

Jon: If you put a fully manual lens (no electrical connection) on a NEX (or, for that matter, a Nikon) you control the aperture with the aperture ring on the lens; the camera controls shutter speed, either automatically (though not with a cheap Nikon because the meter doesn't know what it's doing) or through a dial on the camera. If you want <i>automatic</i> aperture control - either setting the aperture yourself in the camera or letting the camera's metering control the aperture for you - you need the camera to know how it's connected to the lens, which means electronics (even though it shouldn't - a Nikon F4 could control the aperture of an AI lens perfectly well without electrical connections...)<br />

<br />

Both Leica/Voigtlander and Nikon lenses can control the aperture via the aperture ring on the lens. Most Nikkor lenses have the option to compose with the aperture wide open (there's a little lever that holds the aperture open and drops to the setting on the aperture ring when the exposure happens - the iris is spring loaded and tries to close itself) but if you don't hold the aperture open, it goes to the setting you select. Because M-mount lenses aren't used for composition, the aperture control is entirely manual anyway.<br />

<br />

Incidentally, the NEX series offers focus peaking (indicating which parts of the image contain a sharp edge), which is useful in manual focus.<br />

<br />

I hope that helps. Disclaimer: I don't own a NEX, I just think it's the closest match to an R2... If you're after a new experience, however, welcome to the Nikon side!<br />

<br />

Incidentally, my Bessa R almost never gets used: it was supposed to be a camera I could leave in bad weather, which was small and light. It's not - even with a 35mm colour-skopar, it's heavier than my Eos 500 plastic Canon SLR with a 50mm f/1.8 on it (though my DSLRs are admittedly heavier). The R2 is probably nicer. There's a lot to be said for a decent cell phone, of course.</p>

[jcartwright]

<p>@Andrew - Now I'm confused! Are you saying that if you stick an old Nikon lens on (say) a new D7000, it will be be able to set the correct shutter speed for whatever aperture you select on the ring? Or does this aperture need to be communicated to the body somehow…</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Jon, manual focusing on any aps-sized sensor nikon dslr is a pain, a very big pain, say, w/o katzeye. A nex with peaking/magnifier is much easier. </p>

<p>FWIW, I have used leica rf, aps-c nikon, ff nikon, nex, m4/3rd etc...oh, and I have a d200 w/katzeye if you want to negotiate. Frankly, the nex is better than a d200 w/katzeye, if you don't need an OVF. </p>

 

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>The viewfinders on those inexpensive DSLRs are not designed for manual focus. Try before you buy.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />I have a D3200 and I can focus my pre AI lenses with no problem. However, the advice to try it first is good as we are not all the same.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>The viewfinders on those inexpensive DSLRs are not designed for manual focus. Try before you buy.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />I have a D3200 and I can focus my pre AI lenses with no problem. However, the advice to try it first is good as we are not all the same.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>Incidentally, the NEX series offers focus peaking (indicating which parts of the image contain a sharp edge), which is useful in manual focus.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>right. this is one of the big advantages of the NEX series, as it essentially turns MF lenses into semi-AF lenses. of course, if you'd rather do it the hard way, others have laid out the options fairly well here.</p>

[jim_mcdermott1]

<p>Jon, another thought ...<br>

I've used manual focus lenses on the Pentax K7 very happily. The K30 can be bought quite cheaply, has a proper pentaprism like the K7 AND focus peaking, and if you can live without the Voigtlander, 28mm f2.8 Pentax Ms or As can be found for far less than the V is selling for.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<blockquote>@Andrew - Now I'm confused! Are you saying that if you stick an old Nikon lens on (say) a new D7000, it will be be able to set the correct shutter speed for whatever aperture you select on the ring? Or does this aperture need to be communicated to the body somehow…</blockquote>

 

<p>Oops, sorry, went home and only just had the chance to check back.<br />

<br />

Yes: If you have an AI-modified (or adapted) lens, you can manually tell a D7000 (or above) what its maximum aperture is (so that it knows what aperture it's metering at). You can then move the aperture ring on the lens, which controls where the lens will stop down to once the camera releases the pressure on the aperture lever. The higher-end Nikon DSLRs have a ring around the lens which detects where the aperture ring has been set, so they know how many stops of light they think they're going to lose when the lens stops down. This means they can use the meter and set the shutter speed and/or ISO accordingly if you so wish.<br />

<br />

The lower-end Nikon DSLRs don't have a mechanism for detecting the movement of the aperture ring, so they can't tell what will happen when the aperture lever is moved - hence the meter won't work on a lens without electronics. Nikkor lenses <i>with</i> electronics communicate their maximum aperture to the camera, and the camera can control how far the aperture lever moves (all autofocus lenses are AI-s, meaning that the relationship between aperture lever movement and selected aperture is fixed), so on low-end DSLRs you can use these lenses by letting the camera control the aperture (by meter or by you telling the camera the aperture that you want) instead. There are AI-s lenses that don't have electronic contacts, but no modern Nikon has a way to detect this, so they rely on the lens's aperture ring or nothing at all.<br />

<br />

Some lenses don't have a lever to allow the aperture to be stopped down automatically. For these, you may want to focus wide open, then stop down manually before metering. Many such lenses (at least two that I own) have a mechanism that lets you toggle between wide open and a pre-set aperture manually. I don't believe there's an adaptor for NEX that includes an aperture lever, so you'll have to focus stopped down (or toggle the aperture ring yourself) if you want to use a Nikkor lens on a NEX, but obviously this isn't an issue if you want to use M-mount lenses because they don't have an aperture lever (or equivalent) anyway.<br />

<br />

The objection to using manual focus lenses on the ground glass of a low-end DSLR is that they tend to be small (because they match the area of the crop sensor) and dim (because they tend to save weight and money with a pentamirror instead of a - more efficient - pentaprism). However, all modern DSLRs can do live view - using the LCD screen - for which the quality of the optical viewfinder is irrelevant, and you can use the electronics of the autofocus system on Nikon DSLRs to tell you whether you're in focus even using the viewfinder. If you actually want to use the finder itself to see whether you've hit focus, the suggested microprism replacement screens might be useful, though they tend only to be able to help you focus in the centre of the image, whereas the autofocus systems have multiple selectable focus points.<br />

<br />

I hope all that helps!</p>

[jcartwright]

<p>Thanks everyone for all this advice (particularly Andrew, for the textbook explanation!). I think I need to ponder awhile. Probably I need to ditch the idea of manual focussing all the time on a digital camera, and only use it, for example, in special portraits. I've been looking into mirrorless systems such as Sony's, and while they seem good, they seem (a) very expensive and (b) unpredictable, in terms of where the technology/standards are going. At least SLRs have been around a good long time - I know what I'm getting into there. But we'll see!</p>