Haoda adapter on Zeiss 100-300 mm problem

Just got a 5D mkII for my collection of Zeiss glass. The Haoda professional adapter works well with most lenses (F-Distagon 16 mm, Distagons 21, 28, Tessar 50/1.4, makroplanar 100. However, on the two teles I have, Sonnar 180/2.8 and Variosonnar 100-300mm, there is a prong on the lens that interferes with the ledge of the Haoda adapter carrying the electronic contacts.
Haoda suggested I could file down the prong on the lens, something I don't really fancy. I rather consider filing down the ledge with the electronic contacts. Has anyone done that? Problems? I would have to file it down maybe 0.2 mm, over a length of approximately 10 mm, so I don't think it should be a problem. If there is a known problem doing that, I'd rather avoid tossing a rather pricy adapter in the garbage, hence, this post.

The other option is of course buying some Canon teles. I'm thinking about a 300/2.8, to be used with extension rings and/or 1.4x for reptiles [the ones without feathers]. Still pondering the pros and cons of getting the new IS version, or an old non-IS or even MF version. I don't really need IS, as I shoot almost exclusively from tripod, but the glass in the IS seems to be better than in the older versions. The older versions can be obtained for much cheaper, of course. Any thoughts, experiences? Particularly chromatic aberration and lateral color at close focus?

There are other brands of adapters. Not all will have this issue. Hate to see someone who proclaims to be a Zeiss fan give up and talk about getting a Canon lens.

ZeissLensFan wrote in post #9400442
Just got a 5D mkII for my collection of Zeiss glass. The Haoda professional adapter works well with most lenses (F-Distagon 16 mm, Distagons 21, 28, Tessar 50/1.4, makroplanar 100. However, on the two teles I have, Sonnar 180/2.8 and Variosonnar 100-300mm, there is a prong on the lens that interferes with the ledge of the Haoda adapter carrying the electronic contacts.
Haoda suggested I could file down the prong on the lens, something I don't really fancy. I rather consider filing down the ledge with the electronic contacts. Has anyone done that? Problems? I would have to file it down maybe 0.2 mm, over a length of approximately 10 mm, so I don't think it should be a problem. If there is a known problem doing that, I'd rather avoid tossing a rather pricy adapter in the garbage, hence, this post.

The other option is of course buying some Canon teles. I'm thinking about a 300/2.8, to be used with extension rings and/or 1.4x for reptiles [the ones without feathers]. Still pondering the pros and cons of getting the new IS version, or an old non-IS or even MF version. I don't really need IS, as I shoot almost exclusively from tripod, but the glass in the IS seems to be better than in the older versions. The older versions can be obtained for much cheaper, of course. Any thoughts, experiences? Particularly chromatic aberration and lateral color at close focus?

I'm assuming all those Contax Zeiss lenses are RTS (aka C/Y Mount) lenses. As far as the pin, are you talking about the aperture flange? I wouldn't remove the aperture flange on my C/Y lenses. If you ever chose to sell the lens its market value will suffer dramatically because it will no longer work as a wide-open metering lens on a C/Y mount body. Furthermore, the HOADA adaptors are a RIP-OFF. Honestly, I use ebay adaptors that cost $15 and they work flawlessly. If I were you I'd either return the HOADA and get like 10 cheap adaptors to hack up. Or hack up the HOADA, but I wouldn't file down the flanges. Either lens is worth at least 2x what the adaptor is worth, so you can see where my reluctance to "spare" the adaptor comes from.

As for the Canon tele's consideration. I can tell you that the Canon Tele's are better in many ways than their Zeiss counterparts... the 180/2.8 Sonnar is a lens with a 70 year-old pedigree sure, but the Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS for example is a lens with no equal. The non-IS is a fine lens as well... but the last thing you list the MF lens is something I feel I need to educate you on, because you may be a bit confused. Canon's tele's have NEVER come in MF for EF-mount. So you are likely thinking of the Canon FD 300mm f/2.8L - be aware that this lens is NOT for an EOS camera, and converting it (notice I didn't say adapting) is a difficult and tedious task (and unless you're capable of and brave enough to do it yourself - its an expensive task to boot). You're much better off with hacking up that fancy-overpriced adaptor of yours there.

gasrocks wrote in post #9401018
There are other brands of adapters. Not all will have this issue. Hate to see someone who proclaims to be a Zeiss fan give up and talk about getting a Canon lens.

I hear you. Any specific adapter for that lens in mind? I chose Haoda, because it is one of the Zeiss recommended ones. I do trust their assessment (see also below). I particularly don't want to mess up the fisheye, priced about the same as the Canon 300/2.8 IS.

Nureality: Re the 180, yes that is a VERY old design, and haven't used it much. May soon give it away.
I have not seen an Apoteletessar 300/2.8 on the market in a long time (there is one for Hassies floating around on ebay for ~30K, a bit steep even for Zeisses). A zoom (zeiss not withstanding) is an optical compromise, so getting a canon prime may be better than using a Zeiss zoom, certainly brighter. I know, almost heresy. Note that all my other lenses are primes. The 100-300 zoom is one of the latest Contax/Zeiss designs, so actually has better data than the 300/f4 prime (or the 180/2.8 ).

Thanks for the clarification on the FD lenses. So the choice will be more between non-IS and IS AF lenses. Just found (http://www.sportsshoot​er.com/message_display​.html?tid=7) that the IS-lens focuses closer by 50 cm, a crucial factor for me. So I guess I start thinking about coughing up 4.5K. (The ATT was around 10 or 15K). IS may permit me to be more lax with mirror lock-up (though could put the 5D into live-view mode). Ahh, lots to ponder

I am a vertically integrated Zeiss user from birding binoculars (10x56) through dissectingscope (DV12 with 2 planapos) to compound (Axioskop II with set of planapos and Axiocam HRc) to SEM (EVO 40XVP). Great instruments throughout. Just on LF I use more contemporary designs (Sinar, Schneider, Rodenstock, Nikon).

Anyway, thanks for the feedback.

ZeissLensFan wrote in post #9400442
Just got a 5D mkII for my collection of Zeiss glass. The Haoda professional adapter works well with most lenses (F-Distagon 16 mm, Distagons 21, 28, Tessar 50/1.4, makroplanar 100. However, on the two teles I have, Sonnar 180/2.8 and Variosonnar 100-300mm, there is a prong on the lens that interferes with the ledge of the Haoda adapter carrying the electronic contacts.
Haoda suggested I could file down the prong on the lens, something I don't really fancy. I rather consider filing down the ledge with the electronic contacts. Has anyone done that? Problems? I would have to file it down maybe 0.2 mm, over a length of approximately 10 mm, so I don't think it should be a problem. If there is a known problem doing that, I'd rather avoid tossing a rather pricy adapter in the garbage, hence, this post.
Any thoughts, experiences? Particularly chromatic aberration and lateral color at close focus?

I'm not an expert on Zeiss/Canon adapters, thats why I am purchasing Zeiss ZE. I suggest posting this request on Fred Miranda Alternate Gear and Lenses forum. These types of questions are much more common there.
Mike K

Mike K wrote in post #9402212
I'm not an expert on Zeiss/Canon adapters, thats why I am purchasing Zeiss ZE. I suggest posting this request on Fred Miranda Alternate Gear and Lenses forum. These types of questions are much more common there.
Mike K

Thanks for the pointer to the other portals. Will have to check that out. I will get the 100 mm MP in ZE once it's out (still not on B&H, preorder only on adorama), working aperture in macro is a pain. Wide angles are much easier.

Some of the lenses are available in ZE, but eg. the F-Distagon 16 mm is not. So old with adaptor, or not Zeiss. I use it surprisingly often for such a specialized lens. It does not seem Zeiss is going to significantly expand the SLR lens line-up.

For some of them, I may eventually get the ZE version as well, though a good tele is higher on my list.