Anyone know a way to adapt these old lenses to a modern DSLR

[AntiTrust]

Hi I have no experience doing this. Is it possible to adapt these old minolta lenses to my nikon d3400 dslr? In your guys opinion is it even worth trying? The 50mm lenses look promising 

[imbrock]

There are adapters, they are usually specific to the brand of lens and camera but they do exist.

 

https://www.shutterbug.com/content/how-mount-vintage-slr-lens-dslr-simple-guide

 

For more info.

[Ankerson]

14 minutes ago, AntiTrust said:

Hi I have no experience doing this. Is it possible to adapt these old minolta lenses to my nikon d3400 dslr? In your guys opinion is it even worth trying? The 50mm lenses look promising 

 

In theory this is, but no it not worth it.

 

And I doubt that they would work anyway, it's very possible the camera won't even read the lens even with an adaptor.

 

Even with old Nikkor lenses it would be iffy and not work.

 

https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3400.htm

 

The D3400 does not work well with manual focus lenses or any AF lens with an aperture ring. If a lens has an aperture ring, the D3400 will not be able to autofocus (turn the focus ring manually and look for the green OK dot on the lower left of the finder), and it will not be able to meter or set exposure (use Manual exposure and pray).

[Teradore]

unfortunately dslrs usually don't work well with vintage lenses. from what i understand the distance between the lens and sensor is too far away. vintage lenses work fantastically with mirror-less cameras though as i use a few of them with my a6300.

[AntiTrust]

6 minutes ago, Ankerson said:

In theory this is, but no it not worth it

Thats too bad but thank you very much for the advice. 

[cc143]

Those look like manual lenses so they would have no AF or electronic aperture control to lose. However there is another element to it, that is flange distance. You can adapt nikon glass to Canon bodies because the distance between the sensor and the lens is shorter for Canon than Nikon. You could fix the lens in front of the camera but the focus would be all wrong if at all useable. With mirrorless cameras that is possible because the lack of a mirror means they have much less distance between the sensor and lens rear element. 

 

I am not sure about this whatsoever, but if I were to hazzard a guess, given Nikon's F mount is of the ones that have a larger flange distance, I doubt you could adapt anything to it. 

[AntiTrust]

5 hours ago, cc143 said:

-

that makes sense to me, too bad about the lenses. So what I gather is that mounting them is one thing, but actually being able to look through them and capture what you see is a whole other ballgame. It seems like adapting lenses isn't as straightforward as I might have believe. 

I think I will just try and purchase a used 35 or 50mm modern nikon lense for my camera instead. to do portrait shots I have been using my telephoto lens to get the right blurred background effect but it is not always practical. 

[cc143]

15 hours ago, AntiTrust said:

that makes sense to me, too bad about the lenses. So what I gather is that mounting them is one thing, but actually being able to look through them and capture what you see is a whole other ballgame. It seems like adapting lenses isn't as straightforward as I might have believe. 

I think I will just try and purchase a used 35 or 50mm modern nikon lense for my camera instead. to do portrait shots I have been using my telephoto lens to get the right blurred background effect but it is not always practical. 

A 50mm prime lens should give you better results for portraiture. A 35mm is a bit too wide and will result in distortion of the face's proportions etc. (Nose will appear bigger, face fatter etc. ) depending on where you are standing in relation to the subject. The best thing would probably be an 85mm, but at that point you might run into issues with getting the required framing given the effect of the camera's crop factor on the FOV. 

 

Be advised, while older D series lenses are great and will be much cheaper, you will have no AF functionality on your d3400 due to its lack of an in body AF motor.

[AntiTrust]

1 hour ago, cc143 said:

-

yeah I was watching a few youtube videos last night and I agree about the 50mm I think a 50mm prime lens would work better for my use. They also have the added benefit of being very common and affordableish in the used market. Ill make sure to get and afs or afp one, becuase I do want autofocus capability thanks for your advice

 

 

[bowrilla]

There are adapters for Minolta MD/MC to Nikon F - but they are manual only. Modern DSLRs aren't made for manual focus, there usually isn't any split image screen to help you and except for some models often enough also no focus peeking. Next issue: if your lens doesn't offer a manual aperture ring you're most likely screwed because most adaptors will only adapt on a very physical level - no camera auto functions, no dialing in the arpeture with a dial on the back. There are a handful of "intelligent" adaptors but they cost quite a lot. 

 

It is true, that not every lens can be adapted to every mount - some flange distances are just incompatible and yes, mirrorless usually doesn't pose any problems due to the shorter flange since there's no mirror box. You'd still be confronted with most of the issues stated above. As I've said, there are "intelligent" adaptors but most of those won't come with AF support so you're still going to have issues.

 

And then there's another thing: that Minolta 50 f/2.0 isn't a particularly good lens. It used to be an affordable kit lens. Getting a good, "intelligent" adaptor isn't worth it at all.

 

And concerning your portrait photography: you can do portraits with basically any lens, some will add in some distortion but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Since the D3400 has a crop sensor, the classic portrait lens would be something around 50mm (equating to ~85mm on FF). There's nothing wrong doing portraits with the equivalent of a 50mm lens on FF or even a 35mm one on FF - distortions are minimal. 

[AntiTrust]

4 hours ago, bowrilla said:

And then there's another thing: that Minolta 50 f/2.0 isn't a particularly good lens. It used to be an affordable kit lens. Getting a good, "intelligent" adaptor isn't worth it at all.

Thanks for your post friend, it makes alot of sense that these are old kit lenses. My parents had two of them in an old camera bag in the closet and they really weren't ever professional photographers, much like me   I am planning on getting a modern AF-S 50mm prime lens at some point here, I have been scouring the used market for a good, lightly used one to pick up. I've been watching lots of DigitalRev videos on youtube for advice on which size to pick and I think the 50mm would work great for me. 

[Ankerson]

On 5/26/2019 at 9:13 PM, AntiTrust said:

Thanks for your post friend, it makes alot of sense that these are old kit lenses. My parents had two of them in an old camera bag in the closet and they really weren't ever professional photographers, much like me   I am planning on getting a modern AF-S 50mm prime lens at some point here, I have been scouring the used market for a good, lightly used one to pick up. I've been watching lots of DigitalRev videos on youtube for advice on which size to pick and I think the 50mm would work great for me. 

 

 

What if any good lenses do you have now for the D3400?

 

A 50mm Lens is pretty much a waste of time on a DX body as it's equal to a 75mm lens on a FX body.

 

Nikon makes a nice 35mm prime lens for the DX if you want to go that way for some reason.

 

For MOST things it is better to get a good variable lens, there are some excellent variable lenses for the DX bodies now.

 

Not sure what your budget is, but since you are looking for used lenses and have a D3400 I am guessing it isn't much and that will keep you out of the GOOD LENS range NEW.

 

GOOD glass is not cheap for a reason, it really is better.

 

However look for the Nikkor 16-85mm DX VR used, excellent lens and priced well used, will cover just about anything you would need, like 99%.

 

This is a $650 lens NEW...

 

https://www.keh.com/shop/nikon-16-85mm-f-3-5-5-6g-ed-vr-af-s-dx-nikkor-zoom-lens.html

 

 

Or an Nikkor 18-200mm DX VR II, about the same price when NEW, used price is about the same.

 

Also excellent, but with more zoom.

 

 

https://www.keh.com/shop/nikon-af-s-dx-nikkor-18-200mm-f-3-5-5-6g-ed-vr-ii-zoom-lens.html

 

KEH is great for getting used parts, but do NOT get the BGN lenses, stay in the EX or above range when buying.

 

 

 

 

I have 2 prime lenses, a Nikkor 105mm f2.8 MICRO and a Nikkor 50mm f1.8 that I hardly ever use anymore (Never really used it much as I think 50mm is a waste)

 

I keep my Nikkor 16-80mm f2.8 DX VR on my D7500 all the time as that covers 99.9% of what I need. (It is a Pro Level Lens for the DX frame)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bowrilla]

1 hour ago, Ankerson said:

A 50mm Lens is pretty much a waste of time on a DX body as it's equal to a 75mm lens on a FX body

Since he wants to do portraits a 50mm on a crop sensor is pretty great. The classic portrait lens is an 85mm lens on FF. That equates to roughly 55mm. Not that you can't make portraits with other focal lengths but a classic FF-85mm is mostly the first choice. And for shallow DoF on crop sensors, you want a fast lens, so a zoom lens with f/4-ish in the tele range isn't of that much use.

[Ankerson]

4 hours ago, bowrilla said:

Since he wants to do portraits a 50mm on a crop sensor is pretty great. The classic portrait lens is an 85mm lens on FF. That equates to roughly 55mm. Not that you can't make portraits with other focal lengths but a classic FF-85mm is mostly the first choice. And for shallow DoF on crop sensors, you want a fast lens, so a zoom lens with f/4-ish in the tele range isn't of that much use.

 

But then we are back to GOOD LENSES again.

 

They are over $1,000 USED.... f1.4 Primes.... The good ones anyways.

 

There is a cheap ($450) Nikkor F1.4G AFS, not exactly the best lens in world as the Good one costs $1,500.. 58mm AF-S 1.4G.

 

Neither one is a VR Lens however so the use would be limited to tripod mainly. 

 

Like I said before good glass is not cheap.

 

It comes down to budget, actual real use and how serious they really are. Shooting Human Portraits or something like food products etc.

 

One can take excellent Portraits with a Pro Level f2.8 VR Zoom and it would a much more versatile lens all the way around.

 

But then we are back to higher cost obviously.

[bowrilla]

11 minutes ago, Ankerson said:

 

But then we are back to GOOD LENSES again.

 

They are over $1,000 USED.... f1.4 Primes.... The good ones anyways.

 

There is a cheap ($450) Nikkor F1.4G AFS, not exactly the best lens in world as the Good one costs $1,500.. 55mm AF-S 1.4G.

 

Neither one is a VR Lens however so the use would be limited to tripod mainly. 

 

Like I said before good glass is not cheap.

I'm not arguing against the fact that good glass comes at a price, though I'm extremely irritated about those used market prices. Not even my EF 85/1.2 L is traded for that much used. Since we're talking about a crop camera, a fast lens of something between 1.4 and 2.0 should be available for half of that at max. Heck, even a new Fujinon 56/1.2 isn't that expensive. I have no idea about Nikon glass but there has to be a sensible lens available. There's a Sigma full frame lens for 1000 new, so I estimate a use priced of ~500-600. 

[Ankerson]

12 minutes ago, bowrilla said:

I'm not arguing against the fact that good glass comes at a price, though I'm extremely irritated about those used market prices. Not even my EF 85/1.2 L is traded for that much used. Since we're talking about a crop camera, a fast lens of something between 1.4 and 2.0 should be available for half of that at max. Heck, even a new Fujinon 56/1.2 isn't that expensive. I have no idea about Nikon glass but there has to be a sensible lens available. There's a Sigma full frame lens for 1000 new, so I estimate a use priced of ~500-600. 

Nikkor lenses are not cheap.

 

The Newer DX frames don't do well with FX lenses normally, and the one he has isn't exactly a great model in the 1st place.

 

It's on the low end, budget model, he would be pretty limited in the lens options. It's more of a back yard barbecue, beach camera. 

 

Now if he had a D500 or D7200 or better an FX Body then it would be different.

[AntiTrust]

On 6/2/2019 at 11:31 AM, Ankerson said:

What if any good lenses do you have now for the D3400?

I have two lenses, I bought a lightly used d3400 kit with two lenses a bag and two batteries (it was a boxed kit from nikon they had for a bit) Im not sure how good they are but they are nikkor lenses and Im pretty happy with the pictures they take so far, especially like taking the 55-200mm on walks to take nature pics. Im looking for a lens to take portrait or shots up my subject where I can get a properly blurry background effect - from what I understand you want as large of an aperature as you can get to get this effect. Looks like this

 

these are the two lenses I have 

AF-P DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR

AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED VR II

 

I am looking at getting this one, I see them selling for around $140-$160 canadian dollars on the used market

 

AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G

 

thanks for your guys responses by the way, what do you think about this lens above? Im just getting into this hobby so Im not ready to spend that much (ive only spent about $550 so far on everything thanks

 

[Ankerson]

7 hours ago, AntiTrust said:

I have two lenses, I bought a lightly used d3400 kit with two lenses a bag and two batteries (it was a boxed kit from nikon they had for a bit) Im not sure how good they are but they are nikkor lenses and Im pretty happy with the pictures they take so far, especially like taking the 55-200mm on walks to take nature pics. Im looking for a lens to take portrait or shots up my subject where I can get a properly blurry background effect - from what I understand you want as large of an aperature as you can get to get this effect. Looks like this

 

these are the two lenses I have 

AF-P DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR

AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED VR II

 

I am looking at getting this one, I see them selling for around $140-$160 canadian dollars on the used market

 

AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G

 

thanks for your guys responses by the way, what do you think about this lens above? Im just getting into this hobby so Im not ready to spend that much (ive only spent about $550 so far on everything thanks

 

 

 

I have the two Zooms you have, older versions. Those lenses are really just a replacement for a lens cap. I got those in a kit that came with my D60 a long time ago, they don't get much use these days however, nor does the D60 or my D90. Got the D60 as a beater camera and the D90 as the more serious user body.

 

Replaced the 18-55mm VR with the Nikkor 18-70mm and Replaced the 55-200mm VR with the Nikkor 70-300 VR way back.

 

I have the AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D since my cameras have the built in focus motor. (D90 and D7500) The D90 is the backup body now.

 

Don't know about the new AF-S version other than it has a lot more distortion than the old one that you can't use with the D3400 since it doesn't have the focus motor.

 

My advice would be to use what you have now and learn to use that before buying anything else.

 

That way you would know more and what you will really need.

 

You will also learn the limitations of the camera you have now and that will point you in the right direction in the future.

 

Buying equipment can be an endless pit if you aren't careful what you buy, get what you NEED and buy good stuff the 1st time or you will just end up buying MORE to replace the mistakes.

 

You will actually need a better camera body than what you have, the D7200 or D7500 (best option) would be the min for the body.

 

And then GOOD Lenses, start with one GOOD lens and again learn how to use that and the camera body.

 

Then expand as NEEDED.

 

You really only NEED 3 GOOD lenses, 2 good zooms and one GOOD Prime for portraits.

 

Or one good zoom if you don't need more than 80mm and then a good Prime.

 

Or say something like the Nikkor 18-200mm VR II to cover the range.