Adapters to A-Mount

[bitsnpieces]

I discovered adapters when looking into the NEX series and how with an adapter, you can get vintage lenses on them, or like A to E mounts, etc.

So it's got me thinking, are there any adapters from other branded cameras, to Sony? I currently have an 18-250mm, but I want to get one which has a fixed aperture of at least f2.8 - I guess 3.5 or so isn't going to kill me, but f2.8's nice right?

Anyways, what's the cheapest available, and is there an adapter for it? *fingers crossed*

[arthurking83]

Not too long ago, and me being a confirmed Nikonaholic .. I actually had a mental breakdown in the form of delusional ideas that an A7 would have been a great camera for this exact reason.
Playing with really old obscure stuff on modern stuff. There's probably something inherently wrong with me in thinking this sounds really cool!(and I'm not in any way steampunk inclined!!)



.....

Anyways, what's the cheapest available, and is there an adapter for it? *fingers crossed*

Always a good recipe for disaster!

I've looked a bit into adapters.
Minolta are pretty good in terms of adapters.
That is, you can mount many well known branded lenses to your cameras and an adapter should be available quite easily.(Canon DSLRs are best at this trick tho!)

You normally need to watch a few things, like, does the rear of the lens protrude too deeply into the camera and damage the mirror. much less of a problem(if at all!!) with Sony SLT cameras.

Anyhow, any old M42 lenses(basically Pentax), Pentax, Nikon, Olympus(cheap!!) Contax(can get expensive) lenses will work well via an adapter.

FWIW: Canon lenses wont focus to infinity. I don't know if an adapter can be found to fit them anyhow, but if one exists, it'll need an element to allow it to focus to infinity.
All those others won't need an optical element as they can all focus to infinity on an appropriate adapter.



Adapters can be cheap on ebay.

Lenses .. start off searching both ebay and KEH for old Minolta lenses first.
Something like the 50/1.7 may be a good cheap way to start off(if price is important).

Do you care if it's manual focus only?

And what do you want it for?
There's no point in directing to a 200mm f/1.8 lens if you want a wide angle, and vice versa.


And FWIW: (because I'm not sure what you do and don't know) .. but the adapter scene for Sony NEX(and now FE mount), Fuji X and Olympus m4/3rds is large because of one major reason.
This is to do with the flange back focal distance. On those cameras it's extremely short, and that means so many more lenses of obscure origins can be mounted to the camera.

Start looking at Minolta 50mm's and see where that take 'ya!

[bitsnpieces]

Hi Arthur,

Thank you for the tips.

I guess to be more specific, my bad - it'd be that I'm looking for a replacement for my current Sony DT 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3, with a telephoto lens that has a constant aperture value. Sony's 70-200 f/2.8 fits the bill, but it's $3500... (Of course, buy online and it's cheaper, but still too much for me :()
I have a 28-75mm f/2.8 which I like, so I'm not worried about the wide angle part. It'd be unfortunate as I love my 18-250mm (no need to constantly switch lenses), but I wish I had a constant aperture version of it, which of course would cost me an arm and leg.

So now, looking for alternatives to the Sony (though I'd prefer to have a Sony to keep everything Sony - sacrifices...), I've noticed a lot of telephoto lenses that go from 70/80-200/250mm in focal length. A lot already designed for Sony, like Minolta, Sigma, Tamron, but they're still around the $1000 range... Yeah... let's just say I'm broke - forgot about that part.

Canon and Nikon, from what I can understand, also range on similar prices.
I know there are many high quality 3rd party lenses and there too, but with my lack of knowledge of what are available, I guess I'm posting that hopefully someone else has gone down this path before and may have some pointers, or know where to go. Like the Minolta 50mm f/1.7 you suggested, I didn't know about that and I was thinking of getting the Sony 50mm f/1.8. Minolta is a little cheaper, quality-wise, again, user experience input would be awesome. :)

So that's about the aim of my post I guess. The option of using adapters (for lenses that need them), is it viable?

Regarding auto focus, do I need it? Not necessarily, but it'd be nice to have that option. If the price to get AF available is around the similar price, I'd get the AF version. I enjoy manual focus, and definitely when trying to get a perfect shot, manual's the way to go. But having auto for the casual days where I'm out and want a quick snap does come in handy.

I had a look on eBay and a few sites but the adapters are simply confusing for me, all these E's, A's, IS, or whatever - I could only make presumptions that this would fit in a certain way, but dare not try, so hoping can get some ideas from here if anyone else has had experience.

So pretty much, looking to get a good f2.8 telephoto lens, one that's cheap, and can be adapted to the Sony a65. I understand that maybe a feature or two from the lens may be lost through adaption, or the quality isn't as good, or the Sony a65 may not be able to make the full use of it, but as long as it can still provide quality photos (and that will come back down to me also), constant f/2.8 (at least, or faster if viable), and is telephoto - something that will help me in weddings and such when I'll need to be a distance away, but need a nice depth of field. Who knows, it may be just as good.

And any other suggestions on lenses is welcomed too - my current wishlist is the Sony 50mm f/1.8 (for portraits - any other alternatives/solutions?) and Sony 35mm f/1.8 macro (because it was cheap... Again, any other suggestions?).

Hopefully not too much of a read here... lol

Thanks again Arthur :)

[MattNQ]

I have minolta rokkorX 50/1.4 for my Oly epl1. Very nice - I have a thread in the olympus section here with some pics. The konica hexanons can also be good. Nikon 80-200/2.8 is great bang for your buck for aroubd $500 if you want a 2.8 zoom. Almost all my sports shots used it. No lightweight though. Manual focus only on my Nikon but the older push pull version is very fast to zoom & focus in a single movement

sent from earth via tapatalk

[arthurking83]

Matt makes a good point re the old Nikkor 80-200/2.8.
But an almost better bet, in terms of price as well as IQ is the older proper manual 180mm/2.8 ais.

At f/2.8 it's way sharper than the 80-200, and the 20mm difference isn't noticeable. More easily manageable too.

Another great Nikon lens (remember I'm a Nikonaholic here!) is the old 75-150mm f/3.5 zoom. Everyone that's got/had one raves about it at f/3.5.
I've been trying to get one for cheap, and missed one only because I forgot to place a bid before I went to bed.(still looking, but price is my key point).

I vaguely remember reading something about a Minolta 'beercan'.
Remembering that I know nothing to totally nothing about Minolta, apparently it was a pretty good old banger in it's day.. and can be had relatively cheap.

For somewhere between $50 and $150 I doubt you could do all that much better.

FWIW: Nikon 180/2.8's now regularly go for about $300-400(but can sometimes be found cheap with patience)
.......... Nikon 75-150/3.5 regularly seen for about $70-$150, but I missed mine at $35(it sold for) and I would have placed $50 on it. (again patience is a must).


But I have mentioned KEH.
US based, sometimes have some good prices, but take into account the freight costs when you do your sums!(plus peace of mind .. KEH have a very good recommendation :th3)
Had a quick squizz and they have about 6 or 7 70-200 beercans for about $70-150 in various states of condition. Like I said read the condition of the lenses carefully too if you buy one.

[bitsnpieces]

Thank you for the suggestions - the Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED I found is just perfect (price-wise - looking up reviews now), so what would be the adapter I need to get that to work on my Sony a65?

Next lens would be a portrait/macro lens.
I hear people say you can use macro for portraits because they are high quality, little distortion, and you can easily get close as required.
So, I'm thinking a 50mm minimum? 100mm max... just because of price...
What are my options out there?

I had a look at the Konica Hexanon lenses, my head is starting to cave in with all these lenses out there lol

[arthurking83]

the adapter you need for a Nikon lens would be something like a Nikon F to Sony/Minolta adapter(don't search for Sony Alpha alone as it will show you nex adapters of which there are millions).

For portraiture, your 28-75/2.8 is ideal! :th3:

[bitsnpieces]

Sweet, so the Nikon AF 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED needs for F to A adapter aye? Awesome - Thank you :)

Yeah, I bought the 28-75/2.8 for that reason, big blow in my pocket :(

Guess now I just need a macro and I should be covered for almost everything, since if I really need a decent wide angle, my old 18-250/3.5-6.3 should be enough (we generally want smaller F for landscape right?) XD

[arthurking83]

18mm for landscape is OK. framing becomes a bit more important.

Don't start thinking about UWA's!! If you think the blowout in your pocket from the 28-75 was hard .. a good UWA can turn that nuclear! :D

[bitsnpieces]

Well noted :D

One day I'll get there, for now, just need the basics to cover a wide spectrum :)

[bitsnpieces]

Well, I found a Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 non VR for Nikon selling for cheap, so what would be the adapter for this guy to get him converted onto the A Mount Sony? o.O