just like pentax, nikon has some crippled newer bodies but unlike pentax they at least still offer higher level SLR/DSLR bodies that arent crippled and offer the highest level of compatibility that is still technically possible with the older nikkor lenses. jco
-----Original Message----- From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 2:37 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Nikon lens on M42 body??????? That's not necessarily the case, many of the 'newer' Nikon bodies will not meter with non-CPU lenses, while we should get at least stop-down metering with them adapted to K mount (With the exception of a couple crippled bodies, the MZ-60 and MZ-50). And the Nikon bodies are typically pricier for what you get. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: >I wasn't implying that there werent any nice desireable >nikkor lenses, I was just stating I don't think its >worth the effort to try to use them on Pentax K bodies >when there are so many nice new and used SLR/DSLR nikon bodies to >easily use them with....especially since Nikon didn't change the mount >when they went AF so even the latest bodies can at least use the oldest >nikkor lenses to the same extent as any pentax body w adapter would >ever be able to and much easier... >jco > >-----Original Message----- >From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 2:14 PM >To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >Subject: RE: Nikon lens on M42 body??????? > > >I have several rather nice Nikon lenses, that's why >I bought the FM, to have something to use them on. >Just for grins I just held a NIKKOR-P 105/2.5 in place >on an ME Super body. >Compared the relatively small/dim finder on the FM >the view was amazing. Actually: >T'was a beautiful thing! >The modification would be relatively simple, and >reversible. A K mount ring, a spacer and a few holes >to match the ones in the lens. >Hey, it's been a cold, dark, rainy winter. >I'm getting cabin fever! ;-) > >Don > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:53 PM >>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >>Subject: RE: Nikon lens on M42 body??????? >> >> >>Why would you ever want to use nikon glass on k bodies? there are >>plenty of really nice nikon bodies both film and digital to even >>entertain the thought....now using k (or screw) lenses on nikon >>bodies, that would be nice ( but impossible) because there is nowhere >>near as many nice pentax bodies to use especially digital to choose >>from with your pentax glass....ala Cotty jco >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 1:38 PM >>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >>Subject: RE: Nikon lens on M42 body??????? >> >> >>You're right, I just measured an FM at ~46.53 and an ME at ~45.5. >>Silly me had assumed that the M42 to Nikon adapter allowed infinity >>focus with M42 lenses. It only focuses out to about 8 feet! ;-( I've >>had the adapter for over a year and just now realised it doesn't work. >>This DOES however make adapting Nikon lenses to K bodies a >>possibility. With a little "Cottying", of course. ;-) >> >>Anyone know the register on Canon and Minolta bodies??? <vvbg> >> >>Don >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 10:29 AM >>>To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net >>>Subject: Re: Nikon lens on M42 body??????? >>> >>> >>>Register for the Nikon mount is IIRC 1mm longer than M42 (46.5mm vs >>>45.5mm), but there's no way this adaptor maintains infinity focus, >>>it's way too thick. >>> >>>-Adam >>> >>> >>>Don Sanderson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7575287348 >>>> >>>>Anyone see how this could possibly focus to infinity on an M42 >>>>body? Seems to me the register distance is already 'shorter' on >>>>Nikon lenses. My Nikon body to M42 lens adapter spaces the lens >>>>about 3-4mm farther out from the body, it seems the one above would >>>>act as an extension tube as well as an adapter. I'll probably buy >>>>one anyway 'cause of the 'wierdness factor' but I don't see how it >>>>could actually work. ;-) >>>> >>>>Don >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>
