Nikon to Canon adaptor

[Babu]

Can anyone assist with information about an adaptor that would allow me to fit a Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 G ED lens to a Canon 5D II body whilst still retaining full communication between the two?

Reviews I've read from several sources suggest that this lens is amazing wde open throughout its whole focal range.

I was interested in the Sigma 12-24mm/ II but have read too many reviews that pan it for its soft focus.

[MarkChap]

Doesn't exist

Best you will get is a "dumb" adaptor, that will allow the Nikkor Lens to mount to the Canon body, no AF and no aperture control

[ricktas]

Yep, cannot get. You can only buy an adaptor ring that is plastic/metal and you need to do everything manually.

[jjphoto]

There is a G>EF adapter which allows manual control of the aperture from a lever on the adapter. I've never used it but it does exist. Google NIkon G to Canon EF and you'll find all you need about it. Here's just one link.

http://www.16-9.net/nikon_g/

No one make an adapter with full communication, AF etc.

JJ

[Babu]

Thank you all for your helpful responses.
That linked site was very informative JJ. Other Canon users should find it mighty interesting too.
David

[Kyle72]

Excuse me if im wrong here, and i dont want to offend, but why would you want to use another camera brand lens on a brand camera and vise versa. Why not just buy the camera to match that lens?

kyle

[jjphoto]

Excuse me if im wrong here, and i dont want to offend, but why would you want to use another camera brand lens on a brand camera and vise versa. Why not just buy the camera to match that lens?

kyle

Here are a few reasons.

Industar (Russian job) on 5d2
http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/Industar_502/ind_011_400.jpg

Contax on 5d2, also Zuiko (Olympus) and Leica R
http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/General/g_025_400.jpg

Leica R on 5d2
http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/General/g_026_400.jpg

Nikon on 5d2
http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/General/tilt_pb4.gif

Mamiya on 5d2
http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/General/g_003_400.jpg

Long story short, Canon/Nikon etc all make excellent lenses but so do other makers and in fact for about the last 100 years. If you have a suitable camera then you can potentially use a very large range of lenses. Some times it's not a great idea but other times a particular lens might have a look or quality that you can't get from the manufacturer of the camera.

More info here if your interested in that kind of thing (http://photocornucopia.com/1027.html).

http://johnjovic.com/temp/AX/AX_IMG_2438_1000_wm.jpg
JJ

[arthurking83]

Excuse me if im wrong here, and i dont want to offend, but why would you want to use another camera brand lens on a brand camera and vise versa. Why not just buy the camera to match that lens?

kyle

I can't understand why you wouldn't!!

Many great lenses exist out there in the wild that are not first party manufacturer branded, and all they need is an adapter.
That's why adapters were invented in the first place, and if you look on ebay, you will see such a massive variety of brand to brand adapter types .. it boggles the mind.

In saying all that, if the OIP already has the 14-24 then it makes sense to now look for an adapter to suit.
But, if the OP is looking to purchase the Nikon lens due to it's apparent ability, as it has a bit of a reputation, I think I read a rumour that Canon is also working on their own super ultra wide 'competitor' lens.

This not only seems plausible, but if anything almost to be a dead cert at some point in the future.
It seems to be a very popular adapter which then implies that many Canon folks must surely be transposing this Nikon lens onto their Canon bodies.

Canon would be nuts not to offer an equivalent .. so if anything, I'd be inclined to wait just a while and see what Canon announces.

[Babu]

Thanks JJ & Arthur.

I've just started checking out my old posts after returning from cruising the Kimberley coast and am very appreciative of your responses.

So far, all my digital bodies & lenses are Canon; however, Canon aren't sponsoring me yet and I can't see why I wouldn't use some highly regarded lenses from other makers if I gain access to them and can obtain (relatively) cheap adaptors. I am acquainted with manual focus with macro and TSE lenses and am prepared to forego AF etc depending on what needs to be done to capture the images sharply. Am I deluded in thinking that the body just records what the lens "sees" ?

That said, Arthur, I would have liked to try out the Sigma 12-24 for some Kimberley coastline, Mitchell Plateau, King George River and Bungle Bungle shots. I squibbed on it because of many reports of its softness and made do with 17-40 (a bit mushy in corners), 24-105 and stitch shots. A great many shots were captured on land. However, even if I had the Nikon 14-24 + adaptor, I don't know how I would have got on while shooting MF & exposure guessing from a boat or hovering (doorless) helicopter. So, hopefully, if I'm patient and you're right about a Canon equivalent/improvement on the Nikon 14-24, I'll be able to get sharp results on an UWA zoom (provided that I do my part) whilst having full communication between lens and body.

[Redfox]

Thanks JJ & Arthur.

Am I deluded in thinking that the body just records what the lens "sees" ?



In the world of Digital I prefer to say the camera records what the sensor sees, some sensors are better than others :-)

[I @ M]

In the world of Digital I prefer to say the camera records what the sensor sees, some sensors are better than others :-)

:lol:

A sensor alone cannot "see" anything.

Guess that almost proves the theory that there are none so blind as those who can't won't see.

They all need some form of optics in front of them and this is what the thread was all about in the first place.
From the varied educated responses, there are many ways to enable non OEM glass to fit a camera.

[Redfox]

Yes what I was trying to say is that the same lens on different bodies may give different results because the sensors have different abilites (ie crop, full frame, Mega pixels) An amazing lens for my 5D MkIII would not give the same results when used on my 350D as the sensor is inferior and will not detect/see the same. Anyway it's a little off topic which is why I only posted a small comment above :)

The sensor itself can actually record something without optics infront of it, pinhole cameras work this way and has a devoted following for artistic types :)

But I agree that yes you can get different types of adapters for the purpose of using different branded bodies

[I @ M]

RF, do a simple test, walk outside in a few hours time when it is daylight with your 5D Mk111 and make an exposure without a lens on the camera then start a new thread to show us the results of what your sensor alone "sees".
Somehow I don't think the result will set the photography world on fire but then again you never know ---

Reread the original thread and postings, it is all about whether an adaptor to fit a Nikkor lens on a 5D Mk11 is a good thing, not about pinholes, button holes or any other kind of holes and sensors.

[Tommo1965]

Excuse me if im wrong here, and i dont want to offend, but why would you want to use another camera brand lens on a brand camera and vise versa. Why not just buy the camera to match that lens?

kyle


Nah..Im with Kyle..I only went to Nikon cause I wanted access to their 70-200VRII...so for me its a case of looking at the lenses before I looked at the body...when I first went to pentax I did exactly the opposite and that turned out to be a right balls up..LOL

I was gonna suggest to the OP to buy a inexpensive Nikon body to go with the 14-24 , like the new 3200 24 megapixel..but its a crop body so I doubt that would do ?

also I wouldnt want to be messing about with MF and metering for anything other than tripod landscape images...where what's in front of you wont move for a million years or so ...:lol2:

[Redfox]

RF, do a simple test, walk outside in a few hours time when it is daylight with your 5D Mk111 and make an exposure without a lens on the camera then start a new thread to show us the results of what your sensor alone "sees".
Somehow I don't think the result will set the photography world on fire but then again you never know ---



I'm not interested in doing such things, there are plenty of photos of such things on the net for you to look up. I originally simply posted a small remark but you've decided to comment further, complete with laughing smileys. I don't wish to comment further on this