m2 adapter

scotman

scotman

Well-known member
i just watched the tuts on how to set up my m2. how long will i have to wait anyways??? anyhooo it seems like i have to be pretty focused in(zoom to 76) like the video. does the m2 only work zoomed out far away, i thought i would be able to record in tight areeas, like in a car and get the same results. which one is true. thanks
 
It's hard to record in tight areas depending on your lenses. You never change the zoom on the stock lens; it is your backfocus and stays around 76 and never changes.
 
so in tight areas, which lens will do best? thanks that answers alot. now im getting it. your 35mm lens is what does the work now. ahhhh haa
 
where are the tuts?

question:

is it possible to use the cavision rod support without any hassel?

thanks
 
I think I used a 28mm f/2.8 in a car scene and that worked out pretty well. If you are looking to get really up close shots you will need a Macro Lens. I remember once not being able to get close enough with my 35mm prime lenses so I ended up having just to go with the stock lens for the shot.
 
DavidChia said:
Hi scotman,

You got your 50mm yet? As for shooting in tight spaces, you have to use a 28mm lens. Get a good one, don't save and get a cheap one. you will use this alot. It is the know as the "Wide angle lens" of prime lenses. Get a F1.4 if possible, yes it cost a bomb, but you will never regret.Check this site for better understand about the F1.4

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/35f14ais.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2814af.htm

david
Click to expand...

David, have you ever used a 14mm to 18mm lens for tight shots? If so how did it workout for you. I know there very exspensive.
 
Hi ,

I haven't had the luxury to try them yet. But they are consider super wide. They might give you some form of distortion. As 28mm is consider as the standard wide angle. if you want to go wider, try putting a cheap W.A lens that has x0.8 to 0.6 in front of the 28mm lens. But you will lose F-stops (light)

And i think that any wider then 24mm, and you will start to see some vignetting.
 
Last edited:
"[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The 28mm f/1.4 is Nikon's most expensive lens short of the f/2.8 300mm and longer super-telephotos. This little jewel is the most expensive lens Nikon makes at about $1,700 at discount back when you could buy it new."[/FONT]
 
DavidChia said:
Hi ,

I haven't had the luxury to try them yet. But they are consider super wide. They might give you some form of distortion. As 28mm is consider as the standard wide angle. if you want to go wider, try putting a cheap W.A lens that has x0.8 to 0.6 in front of the 28mm lens. But you will lose F-stops (light)

And i think that any wider then 24mm, and you will start to see some vignetting.
Click to expand...


Great answer dude. That is exactly what I needed to hear. I have a 28mm canon fd, a 50mm fd, a 28-85mm, and a 75-200mm Bell & Howell made for the CANON FD mount. Am I pretty much covered?

BTW, Should I just stick with the Canon FD lenses, or should I look to go with the very popular Nikon f series.

Also have you ever used the Bell & Howell 75-200 lens designed for the Canon FD mount. If so tell me what you think.
 
Last edited:
all the 28mm 2.8 have been getting pretty expensive on ebay. I'd try your local camera store, see if they have any older used nikon prime lenes. i just got a 35mm 1.8 for $50 and a 28mm 2.8 for $75.
 
ifownlee41nite@mac.com said:
Great answer dude. That is exactly what I needed to hear. I have a 28mm canon fd, a 50mm fd, a 28-85mm, and a 75-200mm Bell & Howell made for the CANON FD mount. Am I pretty much covered?

BTW, Should I just stick with the Canon FD lenses, or should I look to go with the very popular Nikon f series.

Also have you ever used the Bell & Howell 75-200 lens designed for the Canon FD mount. If so tell me what you think.
Click to expand...

Yes you pretty much got it all covered. I use both the nikon and cannon lens. If you have a chance, go and get a nikon mount too. A 28-85 is pretty good already, it covers the inbetweens. When the 28 is too wide or when the 50 mm is not really tight enough. The 75- 200 is really in my opion a waste. Because at that range you can use the DVX stock lens. at full zoom. the dvx give short D.O.F too. And there is no light lose here.

A guy from "Cooke Lens" once told me. " The camera is use as recording tool like a canvas to an atrist, it the lens that creates the mood and look. the lens is like the brush."

An artist should always have many brushes

Just for thoughts:
f1.2 has the best bokeh a 35mm lens can give. You cannot compare the bokeh of a f2.8 or a f1.8 to a f1.2. .So why are people complaining about "Bokeh" in 35mm adapters. It not the adapter. it the lens that you are using.
 
Last edited:
thank you. ive been saying this for months.

Yea my canons have amazing bokeh. especailly my 35mm F2.0. that lens is sick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top