What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

N to Eos adapter is it possible

Actually DJ it is your fault--you should have complained as to how poor the conversions were then we could have bought the lenses cheap and gotten quick conversions!!! Later we could have pulled a Mike Nyfong and discovered that we had accidently put the lenses on backwards and that the conversions truly were magnificent???
Another missed opportunity.
z04_computer_haukaputt.gif

Best wishes,
Jack
 
OK, OK, I'm busted
z04_schlaumeier.gif
! Seriously this waiting for the lenses to get through shipping to Bo-Ming is causing me severe mental stress since the USPS will only insure $675!
 
DJ Garcia (Djg) wrote on June 16:

' 2007 - 11:49 pm,I am interested to see the reaction of our members as to these converted lenses. Of course, I am somewhat interested to my see my own reaction. '
Click to expand...


USPS will insure up to $5000. I have insured two 17-35mm N mount lenses (as well as a couple of more expensive lenses) and they will cover each for up to $5000.

As far as reaction from members - The only reaction you will have is one of pleasure. I have owned the Canon 16-35L and the 24-105L as well as the 24-70L. The 24-85 converted N mount and the 17-35mm f2.8 N mount blow any canon lens in that focal range/zoom away. The 16-35L feels like a toy compared to the 17-35mm N mount. Of course, Contax Info forum members already know what their 17-35 N is capable of.

I have been using my converted lenses for almost a year now - was one of the first conversions Conurus probably did. Once I got my N's converted, ended up selling my 24-70L, 16-35L, and 35mm f1.4L. The 35L is quite good, but I just did not see the point of keeping it if the 17-35N never came off my 1Ds
happy.gif


All 3 of my converted lenses perform as expected, I am now considering getting rid of my canon primes. The wait to get the 50mm f1.4 converted is getting to me. As soon as that conversion happens, my Canon 50mm f1.2L is on it's way out.
 
Pascal,

I didn't write the "I am interested to see ..." quote, I believe that was Jack. As for insurance, USPS will not insure more than $675 to Canada, which is where Bo-Ming resides. Domestic shipments are another story.

Cheers,

DJ
 
Now I'm curious how did the quote ended up that way. You're right, that was Jack. Something to do with how it got quoted.

As for the insurance, I did mean USPS shipment to Canada. After all, no one other than Bo-Ming does the conversion. Based on the 6 lens shipments I have sent up there - from USA to Canada, USPS does insure up to $5000. Maybe it depends on if you send it by standard international airmail versus Global Express Mail or whatever they call the faster service.
 
Good to see those N lenses being put to good use.

Some time ago I optically tested the N17-35/2.8 against the Canon 16-35/2.8L and posted it here. The Zeiss lens was visibly better in the corners but slightly (slightly) behind the Canon in the center. The Zeiss was much better corrected for distortion. This was not the new Canon 16-35/2.8L MKII which I now use, which is sharper in the corners compared to my older version, The new version has a 82mm filter ring, is better corrected for distortion (by a hair), is slightly lighter, and is noticeably faster focusing than the previous one (no small issue for the work I do).

Of course, the Zeiss lens produced better color in that Zeiss T* manner that we all love.

I sold all my N gear because it was just to slow for the work I do, and that included the 17-35 ... which isn't marginally slower focusing, it's a lot slower. But if lightening fast focus isn't the criteria, Zeiss is a way to go.

DJ, IMO the Zeiss 50/1.4 was the only dog in the N line up with the worst Bokeh of any 50mm I ever used, and I used 3 different Zeiss N 50s before giving up on it. The $250. Canon 50/1.4 is optically better IMO as well as in the opinion of quite a few other photographers I know. My old Leica 50/2 murders both the Zeiss and Canon 50s. The Jury is still out on the new Canon 50/1.2L. IMO, it has to much aberration at f/1.2 ... so much so, that I thought the first one I got was defective and I sent it back for a replacement ... which was better, but not by much. Canon color is improving with these newer lenses ... I think they are improving their coatings, but still a far cry from Zeiss T*.
 
Marc, for me that makes interesting reading, as I have just got a 5D, and trying to work what ultra wide to go for... Have you any comment on how the 17-40L compares with the Contax and 16-35's

Focus speed doesn't bother me, colour will get "manipulated" on the PC anyway, so distortion and colour abberation, and a lack of sharpness through the range and frame are my points of interest.
Thanks
 
Simple answer Stephen ... if focus speed and weight aren't the issues (thery are for me) ... then no Canon wide angle lens is the equal to the Zeiss N 16-35/2.8 ... probably even including their primes. The only good semi-wide zoom Canon ever made was the discontinued 35-70/2.8L which Irakly owns but won't sell to me ... Grrrrr : -(

Optically, my Leica R 21-35 can stand toe-to-toe with the best Zeiss wide zoom, but it isn't AF.

With digital applications, and the latest version of Lightroom, color is no longer a driving issue ... but distortion and aberrations are.

Even that is being addressed in some digital software applications. I use a Hasselbald H3D/39 and H3D/31 ... with lenses like the H/C 28/4 and 35/3.5, and 50/3,5 Hasselblad has addressed any distortion, aberration and vignetting issue with their amazing DAC function in Flexcolor. This is not a gimmick, it really works ... mind boggling actually.

Broader application of this approach for other integrated systems like Canon and Nikon can't be that far off.
 
Pascal, I researched this on the USPS web site and you are right, it's a restriction on International Priority Mail but not for Global Express, and those nincompoops at USPS did not tell me, even though I expressed concern at not being able to insure it properly. Now I'm really upset ...

Marc, others have also observed that slight drop in resolution in some of the mid-areas of the 17-35 N, and like you I'll take it with the overall improvements elsewhere.

Now let's hope they get there ...
 
Woo-hoo! I just heard from Bo-Ming that he received both my lenses. He mentioned he's running behind because he's been tracking down a bug that affected AF accuracy, but he's found and corrected the problem in the new firmware that started shipping today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top