can i mix manual lens with auto matic camera

[brian_mennear]

hi im having problems with my manual camera at the moment and

thinking of getting rid of it and buying a automatic but im wondering

if i can use my lens (monolta md fit) with a monolta automatic? i

would rather keep my lenses if possible can any one help please?

thank u.

[keith_bogle]

I don't think that you can. I believe that Minolta changed the lens mount when they introduced the Maxxum line. The only 35 mm system that I know of that will allow that kind of compatability is Nikon. Sorry.

[stephen hazelton]

Actually, I think Pentax also has that kind of compatibility, not that it helps you with the Minolta.

[andrew_hall1]

By "automatic" I assume you mean auto-focus.

 

Pentax offers even more backward compatibility than Nikon, though in this respect both are actively cutting it down for their late-to-latest cameras.

 

There is a 1.4x teleconverter for MD to Dynax/Maxxum mount, not very useful because your lens loses 1 stop and angular coverage is also reduced.

[christian deichert]

You can. I had always thought that the adapters for MD lens -> Maxxum body all had a 1.3x teleconverter effect, but I recently learned that there are a few that retain 1:1, one made by Soligor (labeled 7000/9000, I hear).

[andrew_hall1]

Any MD to Dynax/Maxxum adapter that does not contain any optical element will, more than likely, not allow infinity focus, as the MD lens has a shorter back focus than the AF lens - unless the adapter allows the MD lens to sit further into the mirror box than an AF lens would.

 

Such intrusion, however, would probably interfere with the mirror and/or other bits in the mirror box.

[fmueller]

If I remember this correctly, the guy who recently talked about the 1:1 adapter wasn't exactly sure that it is 1:1 - and what does 1:1 mean in this context anyhow? I have only ever seen the 1:1 notation used with respect to magnification ratios, and here we are talking about a teleconverter effect or no teleconverter effect.

 

Be that as it may, I understand that if the register of the lens system is smaller, or equal (less than 1mm difference) than the camera system, the adaptor requires an optical element to make infinity focussing possible. This is the case if you want to use MD lenses on AF cameras, because the MD register is 43.5mm and the AF register is 44.5mm.

 

If there was no glass in the adaptor, it would act as an extension tube, putting the lens further away from the body than designed, and resulting in the loss of infinity focus that everybody has experienced who has ever used an extension tube.

 

I am no lens design expert, but I believe that the optical elements needed to retain infinity focus are necessarily acting as a teleconverter. Of course you can put glass elements in an adapter that cancel each other out and have no teleconverter effect, but such an adapter would act as an extension tube even though there was glass in it. This is what the proponent of the "1:1 adapter" is refuting, but I have a hard time to believe it. Frankly, you can't trick the laws of physics, and this adapter seems as real to me as a perpetuum mobile.

 

The following site provides some background and data on camera mounts and registers:

 

http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm

[andrew_hall1]

>Frankly, you can't trick the laws of physics, and this adapter seems as real to me as a perpetuum mobile.

 

Well Frank, I said the same thing but was trying to be polite about it. ;-)

[fmueller]

Oops, I didn't mean to be rude, but I can be a bit blunt at times ;-)

[christian deichert]

OK. Change "I learned" to "I heard." The issue is still up in the air, obviously.