help! m42 on d3200!

B

backwoodsamerican

Senior Member
so what i want to do is buy a super takumar 50mm lense and mount it on my d3200. what i have run into is no good info on what adapter to use, other than you need one with the extra lens to achive infinity focus.
what i have is a 50mm yashica 1.7 and a cheep adapter with the extra lens in it to get infinity focus.
the problem i have run into. when shooting a picture the focus is set all the way to the smallest number and is clear but not sharp. when you try to focus far away the image will not come into focus and the back of the lense bottoms out on the adapter way before it gets too its longest setting.

any ideas? anyone use old m42s on there d3200?
thanks!
 
D

Don Kuykendall_RIP

RIP :(
backwoodsamerican said:
​do you have any suggestions around the $100 range?
Click to expand...

You spend good money for a Great little camera and if you put a cheap lens on it you are just going to degrade the quality. Look on EBay. Remember AF will not auto focus but will work in manual on your camera. AF-s will auto focus on your camera. You might also want to chack around at your local pawn shops for bargains. The non auto focus should go pretty reasonable and you can check them out on your camera
 
B

backwoodsamerican

Senior Member
Tracsoft - Don Kuykendall said:
You spend good money for a Great little camera and if you put a cheap lens on it you are just going to degrade the quality. Look on EBay. Remember AF will not auto focus but will work in manual on your camera. AF-s will auto focus on your camera. You might also want to chack around at your local pawn shops for bargains. The non auto focus should go pretty reasonable and you can check them out on your camera
Click to expand...

i agree with what you are saying but everything i have read on the super takumar has been very good. just going with what i read. i dont have a tone of money to just throw out there. trying to get the most bang for my buck thats all.
 
D

Don Kuykendall_RIP

RIP :(
backwoodsamerican said:
i agree with what you are saying but everything i have read on the super takumar has been very good. just going with what i read. i dont have a tone of money to just throw out there. trying to get the most bang for my buck thats all.
Click to expand...

But in your OP you said you would have to add a cheap adapter with extra glass in it to get the correct focus. That is where you lose it.

Let's start over. You should have gotten the 18-55 with the camera when you bought it. Not why do you want a 50mm lens?
 
C

crashton

Senior Member
I've also read that the super takumar lens is very good. For what it's worth I'd buy the Nikon 50 F1.8 D. It is one of Nikon's sharpest lenses & a real bargain. They can be had for $100 or there about.
 
B

backwoodsamerican

Senior Member
Tracsoft - Don Kuykendall said:
But in your OP you said you would have to add a cheap adapter with extra glass in it to get the correct focus. That is where you lose it.

Let's start over. You should have gotten the 18-55 with the camera when you bought it. Not why do you want a 50mm lens?
Click to expand...

thats why i was asking if there was a good adapter.

i like to shoot in low light, camping pictures, at night around the camp fire. most of the pictures i take i seem to always be on the 50-55mm end of my current lens. just feels good to me i guess? from what i understand the lower f number, f1.4 on the super t, the better for low light? higher iso makes fuzzy pictures?
now i guess a 1.8 would work just fine for this and i have even got some really good pictures with my 18-55 but it wont go any lower than f5 at 55mm.

maybe im wrong, im new to all this and have a vision of what i want to see when i take a picture. havent got that with my current lens.

also the cool factor for a vintage lens!!! no? lol
 
D

Don Kuykendall_RIP

RIP :(
The sticking point is the adapter. Whatever you have to add is going to take away something. When you shoot in low light what ISO have you tried. The new cameras do a much better job at higher ISO now.
You are not going to see any difference in 1.4 and 1.8 . Stick with Nikon and NO adapter. You will be much happier.
 
D

Don Kuykendall_RIP

RIP :(
backwoodsamerican said:
im not on my home laptop so i dont have the original. this was off my photobucket. ill look at the properties when i get home and get back to ya.
Click to expand...


If you make it a practice to resize to 1000ps it will preserve the EXIF data so we can see what you shot at and be able to assist you better. For great photos it helps you to be able to see how they were shot. Win/Win for everyone.

But I really don't see a problem with the shot you uploaded. the fire is overexposed and the rest underexposed which is what you would expect of a fire.
 
B

backwoodsamerican

Senior Member
Tracsoft - Don Kuykendall said:
If you make it a practice to resize to 1000ps it will preserve the EXIF data so we can see what you shot at and be able to assist you better. For great photos it helps you to be able to see how they were shot. Win/Win for everyone.

But I really don't see a problem with the shot you uploaded. the fire is overexposed and the rest underexposed which is what you would expect of a fire.
Click to expand...

i will have to learn about resizing photos, will that still work if i use photobucket or shutterfly to share?
 
Top