I,m not liking images taken with non Fuji lenses on my X-Pro 1

[Chaps51]

Hi,

 

Having changed from shooting with a Canon DSLR (Canon 40D), yes I know it's an old model but it is still a cracking camera, IMHO, to a Fuji X-Pro 1 a few months ago I am struggling to come to terms with non Fuji lenses on my Fuji X-Pro 1.

 

I have the adaptors for Canon, Carl Zeiss & Olympus OM but I'm just not liking the image quality as compared to my Fuji 35mm!!

 

What am I doing wrong here, I'm a novice photographer but can take some great pics. quality wise, when shooting with my Canon 40D with a Cano lens.

 

I'm seeing pictures here & on other forums where people are using non Fuji lenses on their X series cameras, so I'm at a loss as to what I might be doing wrong.  

 

Help & advice please no matter how cutting it might be........................I can take it!!!

 

Cheers

[khollister]

I think an example would help - one with the FX35 and the same scene/shot with a legacy lens. 

 

Depending on which Canon or Olympus lenses you are using, that Fuji 35/1.4 is likely to be a better lens. Specifically, what lenses are you trying?

 

Another issue is the quality of the adapter. I have read of folks getting adapters where the mounting surfaces are not absolutely parallel, which will kill IQ. Most of these adapters are cheap numbers from China, I wouldn't have great confidence in the tolerances or QC. Another issue is with film rangefinder lenses of short focal length. These don't tend to translate well to digital bodies due to angle of incidence of the light rays on the sensor. 

 

We need a lot more info on what you are using and doing to help.

[addicted2light]

My guess is that what you're experiencing is that Fuji glass is generally amazing, and the 35 in particularly is a gem. It's a tall order to beat it!

 

I'm slowly switching fo Fuji from Sony (still waiting for the X-T2 for the full switch) and for now I only have an X-T10 with the cheap 16-50 kit zoom.

 

But I have quite a bit of exceptional Minolta M-Rokkor (Leica mount) and Contax Zeiss glass that I'm using on both Sony and Fuji.

 

What surprised me the most is that while said glass is sharper than the 16-50 (as it should! The Contax 100-300 alone used to cost when new around 2.500€ in today's money...) the difference is often not so vast.

 

And this with the cheapest kit lens.

 

During the years I shot with almost all Fuji medium format (film) cameras, and I loved their lenses to death. So it is not a surprise for me that they definitely know their glass!

[Aswald]

The xpro1 may be out resolving your 40D and you may be seeing "artifacts" you may not have noticed before from your adapted lenses.

 

You may have to relearn shooting with your legacy lenses.

[Larry Bolch]

Lenses designed for film may work fine or be a disaster. My f/1.8 105mm Nikkor is great with just an adapter or with the Speed Booster. My 90mm f/2.0 Serenar produces results that are "artistic" if you like soft focus lenses. It has a flat rear element that obviously sets up a feedback loop of reflections. A mass of flare, aberrations, and whatnot. No amount of skill and technique is going to change it. Same results with a 50mm Serenar as well.

 

No bad experiences with other Nikon lenses, however without autofocus and aperture, and with the superb quality and match of Fujinons, I rarely make use of them.