If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
Well DJ, that sounds like the answer to your chromatic aberration issue. I know the Ziess 21/2.8 is a killer lens.
I think I'm going to look into this option myself.
The other one I am interested in is a Hasselblad to EOS adapter. I have a 110/2F that is nothing short of amazing on the Contax 645 and N cameras ... on the Canon 1DsMKII it should be more than amazing ; -)
I'll mention this in passing because it was something I didn't know about until I bought a couple of the adapters: you lose E-TTL flash metering when you use these gadgets. I don't know why this should be, the camera could quite correctly meter the flash without knowing the aperture setting, but it appears that Canon have crippled it for some reason.
That's because there is no data-bus communication between the lens and the camera to provide camera to subject distance info. I suspect it'll still provide TTL control, but the flash may have to be set as such.
Sorry for the long gap, but I've been offline during the holiday season (needed a break from keyboards). Happy New Year to you and everyone else reading, now I'm back!
Returning to our little discussion, you've got me confused. Chuck W states the following in the link:
"E-TTL II weights and averages the flash metering for the subject and all other objects at the same distance as the subject"
Now obviously this is specific to E-TTL II. I don't have a camera equipped with anything more recent than regular E-TTL, but what I do know is that the flash metering fails dismally if I mount a lens without a data bus. What were you trying to say, that E-TTL II *will* work without the data bus (which would seem unlikely given the info quoted above) but original E-TTL won't (which my experience certainly confirms), or what?
Well, I am currently being tempted by the Leica 21-35 zoom on a Novoflex adapter, pending my trying to get Canon to do something about the horrible resolution of my EF 17-40/4 at the corners. It's in my B&H cart but I need to send the zoom to Canon first and see what they will do ...
Ended up finding a Contax MM 35-70/3.4 and an MM 25/2.8 at Central Camera. They should be here Tuesday according to UPS. Let's hope the adapters get here around the same time - no idea if they shipped yet.
I am wondering if it would be possible to replace the bayonet flange on an N lens with an EOS compatible one, in other words not an adapter but an outright replacement, since the problem is there's no space available for an add-on. Of course that would mean the lens could not be used on an N body, but I wouldn't mind at this point.
Anybody know a machine shop (that probably makes adapters) that would do such a job?
The author of the article I read at the link you originally posted prefers cameraquest. It stands to reason that the design engineering would be more valuable than a talented machinist considering the close tolerances of camera systems.
Indeed - the engineering blueprint would be the intellectual property that gives the product its unique value, not the execution of the machining, which could be outsourced to any number of shops. Such a quandary
Trevor, if you read carefully (I probably wasn't too clear) what I'm proposing here is not a normal lens to camera adapter, which cannot be made for the Contax N lens and EOS mount, but a replacement bayonet which would require removing the current mount on the lens and replacing it with the new one.
Since you lose use as a Contax lens, at least until you replace them again, there's not a big market. Just daydreaming here until my CZ lenses and adapters arrive