11-07-2010, 07:30 AM
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1288921628' post='3966']
Sony's flange distance is 44.5mm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount#...ens_mounts[/quote]
You are right. I mistakenly referred to the old Minolta MF mount (MD) instead of the newer AF mount. That said, it is still shorter than Nikon's.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1288921628' post='3966']
If your lens is a new PC-E type lens, then you can't adapt it to any mount because the aperture control is electronic.[/quote]
That's exactly why I opted for the PC version rather than the PC-E one.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1288921628' post='3966']
And I'm pretty sure even the previous iteration of this lens had the same electronic aperture control. The aperture ring on the lens is an electronically coupled one, just like it is with the Contax 645 lenses.[/quote]
Nope.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1288921628' post='3966']
Also why did you get a Nikon 85 when Canon has an excellent TS-E 90 2.8 without any of these problems? [/quote]
Because the PC is better for macro.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1288921628' post='3966']
The Canon also has the advantage of being home-adjustable for tilt vs. shift orientation whereas the Nikon needs to be sent to a Nikon service center due to the way the electronics are fitted inside.[/quote]
[url="http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WaiF"]My experience with TS[/url] tought me that 1) I never tilt and shift and 2) I mostly tilt. Thus, it is a non-issue for me. See [url="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/889229/"]here[/url].
Sony's flange distance is 44.5mm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount#...ens_mounts[/quote]
You are right. I mistakenly referred to the old Minolta MF mount (MD) instead of the newer AF mount. That said, it is still shorter than Nikon's.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1288921628' post='3966']
If your lens is a new PC-E type lens, then you can't adapt it to any mount because the aperture control is electronic.[/quote]
That's exactly why I opted for the PC version rather than the PC-E one.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1288921628' post='3966']
And I'm pretty sure even the previous iteration of this lens had the same electronic aperture control. The aperture ring on the lens is an electronically coupled one, just like it is with the Contax 645 lenses.[/quote]
Nope.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1288921628' post='3966']
Also why did you get a Nikon 85 when Canon has an excellent TS-E 90 2.8 without any of these problems? [/quote]
Because the PC is better for macro.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1288921628' post='3966']
The Canon also has the advantage of being home-adjustable for tilt vs. shift orientation whereas the Nikon needs to be sent to a Nikon service center due to the way the electronics are fitted inside.[/quote]
[url="http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WaiF"]My experience with TS[/url] tought me that 1) I never tilt and shift and 2) I mostly tilt. Thus, it is a non-issue for me. See [url="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/889229/"]here[/url].