/p/ - Photography » Thread #3096363

[235 / 58 / ?]

Vintage Lenses

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 13:37:45 No.3096363 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3096372 >>3096433 >>3096435 >>3096452 >>3096668 >>3097217 >>3098052 >>3098383 >>3099997 >>3100001 >>3103953 >>3110152 >>3113086 >>3117662 >>3121519 >>3123448

What are some good vintage lenses to buy /p/?

Post recommendations.

So far I have a Helios 44-2 58mm 1.7 and a Minolta Md 50mm 1.7.

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2 Fri 16 Jun 2017 13:52:34 No.3096372 Report

Quoted By: >>3096382 >>3097217 >>3097848 >>3099701

>>3096363

>jacking up the prices on my cheap vintage native glass just so you mft fags can have lenses because the ones made for your system cost too much

reeeeeeeee

any old Nikkor glass is good to go. The Helios isn't bad because muh bokeh.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 14:03:12 No.3096382 Report

Quoted By: >>3096383 >>3096454 >>3096651 >>3097322

>>3096372
Trying to track down a Nikon ais 50mm F1.4 at the moment.

I stay away from ebay and amazon because people jack the prices up. Vintage camera shops and charity shops are where all the good deals are at.

Swirly bokeh from the Helios is bretty good though.

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2 Fri 16 Jun 2017 14:04:33 No.3096383 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096382

That 50 isn't bad. It's almost optically identical to the AF-D version. Find a 105 2.5 as well.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2017021161.jpg, 1MiB, 1440x1080

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 15:00:52 No.3096433 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096363
My MFT experiences so far:
2.8/28 MD Rokkor is decent for a poorfag standard lens on MFT. Doesn't fuck up the corners like most adapted 28mm's do.
1.4/57 Hexanon is the sharpest motherfucker I've adapted to MFT so far, but the length is an issue.
3.5/50 Macro-Hexanon is good for close ups of bugs on flowers to get laughed out of /rpt/.
2/135 FD is great for tele work, sharp as a razor and fast. But it's also expensive as hell. Pic related taken with this one.
For super tele meme shots of the moon, look no further than the 5.6/300 MC Rokkor.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2017012153.jpg, 630KiB, 1440x1080

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 15:03:01 No.3096435 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096363
My MFT experiences so far:
2.8/28 MD Rokkor is decent for a poorfag standard lens on MFT. Doesn't fuck up the corners like most adapted 28mm's do.
1.4/57 Hexanon is the sharpest motherfucker I've adapted to MFT so far, but the length is an issue.
3.5/50 Macro-Hexanon is good for close ups of bugs on flowers to get laughed out of /rpt/.
2/135 FD is great for tele work, sharp and fast. But it's also expensive as hell. Pic related taken with this one.
For super tele meme shots of the moon, look no further than the 5.6/300 MC Rokkor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 15:35:06 No.3096452 Report

Quoted By: >>3098001

>>3096363
Basically all the Minolta APO G

Yes, they're not cheap, but they're also not crap.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 15:40:04 No.3096454 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096382
The 50 f2 ais is all you need if you want muh bokeh get a 1.2

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG-20170616-WA0008.jpg, 432KiB, 1280x962

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 15:43:53 No.3096456 Report

Quoted By:

Just got a exacta 2.8/28mm FD
It's kinda crap but I can 15cm Close so I guess I'll take shots of flowers and maybe "dreamy Portraits"

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO unnamed.jpg, 28KiB, 400x300

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 16:57:45 No.3096510 Report

Quoted By: >>3097452 >>3099719

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 18:23:51 No.3096563 Report

Quoted By:

2.5 105mm nikkor or 135 2.8.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 20:11:26 No.3096632 Report

Quoted By: >>3096642 >>3109861

Olympus OM 50 1.4 or 1.2 and Olympus OM 100 2.8
Fujian 36 1.7 C Mount
Fujinon 50 1.4 C Mount

I'm looking for an old macro lens with M42/OM/C/M39 mount
Any ideas ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 20:24:06 No.3096641 Report

Quoted By:

Just ordered the CZ T* (C/Y) 135f2.8, 85f2.8, 50f1.4 and 35f.2.4 after 8 hours of research and reconsideration. Did I just meme'd myself to the T*? Going to use them with >Sony A7

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 20:26:33 No.3096642 Report

Quoted By: >>3096679 >>3098014 >>3110053

>>3096632
CZ Flektogon 35f2.4

It's cheap and great, 0.18m focus range is basically 1:2 macro.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 20:41:40 No.3096649 Report

Quoted By: >>3097188 >>3099702 >>3110145

What is a good wide angled vintage lens? I want something wide but sharp for landscapes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 20:42:22 No.3096651 Report

Quoted By: >>3096666

>>3096382
I picked one of those up last year when I was buying an FE body, it also came with a105 Micro. The guy did not know what the lenses were, I got it for $100. That was a Craig s buy, I still browse the hell out of it everyday, even though most of the time it is a wasteland.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 21:16:00 No.3096666 Report

Quoted By: >>3096669

>>3096651
I got my 50 1.4 non-ai with my F3 for 100 bucks too. I think the guy didn't know it wasn't a normal 50mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 21:20:20 No.3096668 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096363
Any and pretty much all C/Y Zeiss lenses, 35 /2.8, 50 /1.7, 50 /1.4, 25 /2.8 (this one's awesome, the best price/performance you'll find in wide angles) 85 /2.8, 135 /2.8, 100 /2.0 and so on. They're all good and they're all much cheaper than their modern counterparts at 80% of the performance. Especially some of the medium teles, the 100 /2.0 is pin sharp and has no CA for example.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 21:21:02 No.3096669 Report

Quoted By: >>3096718

>>3096666
>non-ai

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 21:34:04 No.3096679 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096642
>CZ Flektogon 35f2.4
Nice thank you anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 22:58:54 No.3096718 Report

Quoted By: >>3098277

>>3096669
what's wrong with the non-ai version? Is the same fucking optical formula and its better than todays f1.4s.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 16 Jun 2017 23:22:01 No.3096729 Report

Quoted By: >>3099703

well I'm a poor fag with an a6000 so I have a bit of experience with vintage lenses.

Have a 50mm 1.8, and 1.4 Canon FD lens, they're great lenses

Also have a Pentax K 50mm 1.2, fantastic lens, massive lens flare (which is good or bad depending on your preferences). The aberrations are bad though. They're magenta and aqua/blue when wide upon, and you're gonna get them no matter what. The FD lenses didn't have this problem nearly as much. They're great though, they're cheap and have fantastic performance. Hell, collectively on all of them I've spent $10 lmao. Way better than blowing 400, 1000, or 1500$ on a similar native lens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMGP1598.jpg, 274KiB, 1000x664

Anonymous Sat 17 Jun 2017 01:09:24 No.3096769 Report

Quoted By: >>3096791

If you want unique bokeh in the 50mm range then Cosina 55mm 1.2

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO autistic sonygger.jpg, 177KiB, 1333x1333

Anonymous Sat 17 Jun 2017 03:03:36 No.3096791 Report

Quoted By: >>3096798 >>3096802

>>3096769
Yeah, that's great.
Where's the photography? gearfag.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Jun 2017 03:27:23 No.3096798 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096791
thats a pretty good looking lad. of course isi would go nuts over him.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Jun 2017 03:32:24 No.3096802 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096791
OP asked for gear, not photography.
If you want photography, go to the library and get some books for it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Jun 2017 17:45:22 No.3097188 Report

Quoted By: >>3097192

Bump

Please respond >>3096649

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Jun 2017 17:59:42 No.3097192 Report

Quoted By:

>>3097188
Nothing, just get a Samsung wide angle

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Jun 2017 18:59:37 No.3097217 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096363
>>3096372
This, vivitar is good for the price if your looking for really cheap vintage glass

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 17 Jun 2017 23:58:19 No.3097322 Report

Quoted By: >>3097470

>>3096382
just get the non ai and do some surgery

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Jun 2017 06:55:29 No.3097452 Report

Quoted By: >>3097968

>>3096510
I need it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Jun 2017 07:44:34 No.3097470 Report

Quoted By:

>>3097322
It's almost the same price anyways.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO m42-mount-carl-zeiss-jena-tessar (...).jpg, 87KiB, 667x500

Anonymous Sun 18 Jun 2017 11:18:53 No.3097521 Report

Quoted By: >>3097524 >>3097794

Just bought pic related for 20 britbongs.

I wanted the original silver version which is weighs just 118 grams, but it meant having to buy another adaptor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Jun 2017 11:28:21 No.3097524 Report

Quoted By:

>>3097521
Looks like i'm going to get some nice results from it on my A6000.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gelinmabogi/sets/72157644281560230/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 18 Jun 2017 23:29:17 No.3097794 Report

Quoted By: >>3097980

>>3097521
m42?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 01:10:26 No.3097845 Report

Quoted By: >>3097981 >>3099719

How do you use a vintage lens with a m43 camera?

Like technically it isn't a vintage lens, but I just ordered a 17.5 f0.95 lens for my pen f. Do I just set it to allow peaking then set the camera on aperture priority and I am good to go?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 01:11:27 No.3097848 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096372
Mft lenses are expensive? I didn't think they were any more expensive than the cannon lenses I used to buy

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 05:36:39 No.3097968 Report

Quoted By:

>>3097452
I brought one last night on a drunken whim. Should come here next week.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 06:08:34 No.3097980 Report

Quoted By:

>>3097794
That version is M42 but there are also ones with EX mounts.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 06:10:14 No.3097981 Report

Quoted By: >>3099719

>>3097845
You enable peaking and use manual mode. You have to manually set everything othwr than shutter speed.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 6e20b6aff1df273515f621d5f04e631b.jpg, 141KiB, 640x480

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 07:40:24 No.3098001 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096452

I am hoping to catch a g limited one day.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC04930-02.jpg, 495KiB, 726x1080

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 08:10:34 No.3098010 Report

Quoted By:

How is the CZ Flektogon 35mm/2.4 compared to CZ Distagon T* 35mm/2.8? I didn't find a lot of comparison between the two of them and the T* is almost double price.

Unrelated note my friend got a CZ T* 35mm 1.4 for $150, I'm so fucking jelly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 08:10:45 No.3098011 Report

Quoted By:

I've got the Tamron 01A. It's a meme, but a sharp one at least.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 34416070075_8f63be5090_b.jpg, 219KiB, 683x1024

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 08:15:44 No.3098014 Report

Quoted By: >>3099717

>>3096642
this, probably the coolest vintage 35 you can get

also fujinon 50/1.4, ive got one of the "newer" versions, using it with a speedbooster on my old-ish x-e1 and man, its unbelieveable - pic related.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 08:17:53 No.3098015 Report

Quoted By: >>3098017 >>3099715

what are the benefits to spending the money on a speedbooster instead of using a $10 adapter?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 08:20:11 No.3098017 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098015
well since i use crop - i get a bit more light, a bit more sharpness in the center, and dof + fov almost equivalent to fullframe..

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 08:42:58 No.3098021 Report

Quoted By: >>3098025 >>3099713 >>3123930

There is no benefit to adapting lenses in my opinion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 08:56:46 No.3098025 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098021
You mean apart from saving hundreds of $?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC02968.jpg, 436KiB, 667x1000

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 10:13:34 No.3098052 Report

Quoted By: >>3099704

>>3096363
Probably my most used lens is the FD 50/1.4 SSC, images just seem to come out really well from it. I prefer it over my SMC Takumar 50/1.4

I own a nikkor 20/3.5 that is alright, but I typically don't need anything that wide, 28/2 is my go to wide right now.

I have the second version of Tamron 90/2.5 macro, I have heard some versions are sharp wide open, mine isn't, though around f4 its decent.

Tokina made Vivitar 100/2.8 that's surprisingly good. (pic related)

Less used; Yashika 50/2 which feels really nice, and the images are decent aswell. Vivitar 55/2.8 macro, which is pretty good, and I used it alot before I got the FD 50/1.4.

All used on the meme dream a7.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 13:46:40 No.3098145 Report

Quoted By: >>3098152

I've never purchased a vintage before but I think I'm about to take the plunge, I was looking around ebay and noticed a few Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AI's for around $70-$100, it's something that I want - but aside from the standard Ken Rockwell page on it I don't know other resources to research - and I'm scarred I'll buy a bad year batch or wrong factory version.

Any thoughts on this? Am I overthinking?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 13:57:36 No.3098152 Report

Quoted By: >>3098154

>>3098145
>a bad year batch
There isn't one as far as i know, if there is i'm sure google will tell you. The Nikon Nikkor AI are god tier lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 13:59:42 No.3098154 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098152
Rad, I figured I would've noticed something in the google search but you never know.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC03504[1].jpg, 39KiB, 640x640

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 14:41:00 No.3098165 Report

Quoted By: >>3098300 >>3098304 >>3121521

I bought a Super Tak 35mm f2 lens and I want to use it on my Pentax MX body. I'm planning to buy an (official Pentax) adapter to achieve this.

do you think I can get good results with this combination? what are some issues I might run into?

I've been trying to read about stop-down metering for a start, but I'm having trouble grasping the concept.

so far I understand that in normal use with a K-mount lens, the MX body will meter accurately for your selected f-stop without actually stopping down the aperture blades until just before the moment the shutter fires. in this way, the viewfinder will be well-lit, because the aperture blades remain wide open until the last moment. this is made possible by the feature called an automatic diaphragm.

I also understand that the use of an adapter and a non-K mount lens will not allow the diaphragm to do its job. this means that as I stop down, the viewfinder will grow dim.

so, to stop-down meter, you

>set the Super Tak's switch to 'manual'
>open the aperture to its widest stop
>set the desired shutter speed
>look through the viewfinder
>focus on your subject
>half-depress the shutter and stop down until the camera meters the correct exposure (the viewfinder will be too dim now to focus effectively)
>depress the shutter

is that it? so all you have to do is remember to revert to wide open if you need to meter. to be honest I mostly guess & shoot for overexposure anyway. I'm not sure how much I trust the MX's meter in anything except ideal light. so what's the big deal? why do I keep hearing about this 'disadvantage'?

also, if I flick the Tak's switch to 'automatic', it seems to go to the widest aperture. will this switch function the same way once the lens is mounted? if so, that is pretty handy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 17:48:29 No.3098277 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096718
It is not usable on bodies with interal focusing motors unless they have been modified. They do not damage the motor, but the indexing tab on the mount.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 18:43:00 No.3098300 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098165
The question you should be asking is to yourself as to why the hell didn't you just buy a K-mount lens instead of dicking around with contraptions like the one you just described.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 18:48:12 No.3098304 Report

Quoted By: >>3121521

>>3098165
Auto aperture will not function with a M42 on a K-mount body. The body will meter correctly at any given aperture but as you at least realized, focusing becomes a pain in the ass when stopped down. When switched to automatic, the lens will remain wide open and will not stop down when you shoot.

Just buy a K-mount lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 21:59:58 No.3098383 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096363
Kit lenses that came with very expensive cameras years ago. People think just because it's a kit lens it is automatically shit, but when a camera costs thousands of dollars on its own the kit lens is expected to be sharp enough to take advantage.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 22:00:59 No.3098384 Report

Quoted By: >>3098394 >>3121522

For MFT video, what vintage manual system is best to invest in for a speedbooster?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 19 Jun 2017 22:13:30 No.3098394 Report

Quoted By: >>3099712

>>3098384
If you get a Canon EOS mount speedbooster you can use another adapter to adapt pretty much any other lens system with a longer flange distance, so you don't lock yourself to a specific mount.
Not a MFT or video user but it's the reason I got an EOS speedbooster, don't even own Canon lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 20 Jun 2017 15:58:44 No.3098763 Report

Quoted By: >>3098808 >>3098814 >>3099709

I just got a CZ T* 135mm/2.8, using it on the A7. I have some experience with MF lens but I can't seem to get the focus right with this lens even at f5.6 and 300+ shutter. The focusing looks perfect through the liveview/EVR but after shot taken it become a little blurry. I've taken care not to shake the camera too much when pressing the trigger.

Is it possible that there's some fault with the lens?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 20 Jun 2017 16:47:41 No.3098808 Report

Quoted By: >>3098817

>>3098763
focus with 2.8 and then switch to the aperture you want to shoot with. More precise focusing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 20 Jun 2017 16:59:51 No.3098814 Report

Quoted By: >>3098817

>>3098763
Can't you zoom on the liveview screen?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 20 Jun 2017 17:11:12 No.3098817 Report

Quoted By: >>3098819

>>3098814
>>3098808
What I'm saying is I zoomed in and focused as I do with other MF lens, through the liveview/evr the image appeared very sharp but after the shot was taken the image is a little blurry even at high shutter speed. I have never encountered this kind of problem even on a 210mm MF lense.

I'm wondering if there is some fault with the lens but then again the preview image when I was focusing looked sharp enough so that can't be the case right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 20 Jun 2017 17:12:00 No.3098818 Report

Quoted By:

How's the Canon 55mm f1.2?

Is it a good lens for the buck?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 20 Jun 2017 17:14:30 No.3098819 Report

Quoted By: >>3098822

>>3098817
Are you perhaps touching the focusing ring while pressing the shutter?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 20 Jun 2017 17:16:59 No.3098822 Report

Quoted By: >>3098823 >>3099711

>>3098819
No, I've also taken extra care to stabilize the camera when pressing the trigger but the image still come out blurry compared to focusing preview.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 20 Jun 2017 17:18:25 No.3098823 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098822
your last hope is trying with a tripod. Can you post samples?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 20 Jun 2017 21:14:34 No.3098920 Report

Quoted By: >>3099635 >>3099706 >>3121523

Thinking about getting a Zhongyi Lens turbo II for my A6000.

They do one with a M42 mount and a MD mount. At the moment I have one MD lens which is a Minolta MD 50mm 1.7 and two M42 lenses which are a Helios 44-2 55mm 1.7 and a Carl Zeiss Jena 50mm 2.8.

Which mount has the most lenses? M42 or MD? I plan on getting one for each mount eventually but for now I can only get one so I want to go with the mount that supports the most amount of lenses.

They also do Canon, Nikon and Pentax mounts but I don't have any of those lenses yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 00:47:24 No.3099635 Report

Quoted By: >>3099706

>>3098920
Between those two M42 has the most lenses and many of them are great.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO tmp_15530-IMG_20170621_222049-20 (...).jpg, 1MiB, 2448x3264

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:22:27 No.3099699 Report

Quoted By: >>3099714 >>3099716 >>3100946 >>3121525

Just bought this lot today for $30. How does the Nikon compare to my Canon 50 1.4 SSC?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:25:48 No.3099701 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096372
Im a Sony a7s and I almost exclusively shoot vintage glass...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:28:54 No.3099702 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096649
How wide? I like my Canon FD 28mm f2.8. I think their 24mm 2.8 is also good.

What I would like to know, is what a good fast wide lens; like 24-28mm, at least f2. Or maybe a 35mm faster than f2. I also generally have a budget of $100-$200 usd

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:30:42 No.3099703 Report

Quoted By: >>3103950 >>3103955 >>3105380

>>3096729
>Have a 50mm 1.8, and 1.4 Canon FD lens, they're great lenses

I have a Canon FD 50mm 1.4 SSC and 2 50mm 1.8s; is there any reason for me to keep a 1.8? Like, do they do anything at all better than the 1.4?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:32:28 No.3099704 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098052
>28/2 is my go to wide right now.
which exact model?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:35:11 No.3099706 Report

Quoted By: >>3099775

>>3099635
>>3098920
you could get the MD version and use an M42-MD adapter for now

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:40:24 No.3099709 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098763
shake the lens; do you hear anything that is possibly a loose element?

Is this a first gen A7 or 2nd? If 2nd, try turning on or off the in-body stabilization

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:41:56 No.3099711 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098822
try using a tripod and also either using a remote release or at least a 2 second timed release. there is several free phone apps that allow your phone to act as a wireless remote trigger

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:44:50 No.3099712 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098394
Also, the EOS mount is an absolute pleasure to use. However, its flange focal distance is a bit longer than some, notably, its longer than Canon FD. Meaning you would not be able to adapt FD lenses to that setup. It might make more sense to get a FD or perhaps another mount. I, however, hate dealing with the FD mounting setup

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:49:52 No.3099713 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098021
I prefer old lenses to new ones. I think they are built better. I like everything about the manual apertures better. I like the manual focus setup better. Focus throws on AF lenses are way too short. You can argue this is not an issue with fully electric (no focus cam) AF systems like Sony is using a lot, but Im not sure I like those either

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:51:10 No.3099714 Report

Quoted By: >>3099725

>>3099699
mm, fungusy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:51:36 No.3099715 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098015
Well you get a couple extra stops of light for one. But perhaps the most obvious benefit is you get approximately the full wide angle of your lenses

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:53:47 No.3099716 Report

Quoted By: >>3099728

>>3099699
Is that rikenon F-mount?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:53:52 No.3099717 Report

Quoted By: >>3099721 >>3100486

>>3098014
>fujinon 50/1.4
nice I wasnt really aware of this lens. what mount is it? Its designed for full frame (35mm) right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 02:59:51 No.3099719 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096510
what is it?

>>3097981
I assume you can do auto-ISO as well

>>3097845
>Do I just set it to allow peaking then set the camera on aperture priority and I am good to go?
That should work. You should be able to set ISO to whatever you want or auto. You can also try not using peaking, and just using the focus zoom function and eye-balling it. This is often actually more accurate than focus-peaking. I suggest you try both and see what you get better results with, as well as whats easier to shoot. I prefer focus peaking off personally, but thats just a preference

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 03:02:23 No.3099721 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099717
>Its designed for full frame (35mm) right?
No it was designed to APS film.

>what mount is it?
M42

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 03:05:13 No.3099723 Report

Quoted By:

Can someone tell me some vintage lenses they recommend for astro-photography? Maybe something I missed in my google searches. Definitely open to recommendations for Mirror lenses. Also wondering if theres any apo-chromatic lenses that are somewhat cheap.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 03:12:45 No.3099725 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099714
just checked for fungus; unless im missing something, only one of the pentax 50 f2, and perhaps a tint bit on the canon, had fungus. I bought these off a fellow lens repair technician; these are his test lenses from his film days; i collect old primes.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO tmp_15530-IMG_20170621_231336-42 (...).jpg, 1MiB, 3264x2448

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 03:14:22 No.3099728 Report

Quoted By: >>3099745 >>3099943 >>3100109 >>3100944 >>3121527

>>3099716
can you tell by this pic?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 04:47:52 No.3099745 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099728
Looks K-mount to me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 06:43:42 No.3099775 Report

Quoted By: >>3099918

>>3099706
Didn't think of that. Thanks, that makes it a whole lot easier. I'll get the M42 version and a MD to M42 adapter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 12:49:07 No.3099918 Report

Quoted By: >>3099941

>>3099775
think you got that backwards

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 13:45:46 No.3099941 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099918
Ahh yes, I meant the MD version and a M42 to MD adapter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 14:01:30 No.3099943 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099728
Post the front of the lens

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 15:11:20 No.3099955 Report

Quoted By: >>3099956 >>3099958 >>3100192

I have a few Minolta md lenses from my grandfather and I'm thinking of getting an A7 this year. I can't afford new glass so I was planning on getting an adapter and using the stuff I already have. What adapter should I buy and is this even a good idea? With focus peaking it seems like it would be pretty easy to get sharp shots and ive never owned an af camera (other than phone and other crappy stuff), anyone with experience have any input as far as ease of use on Sony's platform?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 15:13:02 No.3099956 Report

Quoted By: >>3121529

>>3099955
MD to NEX adapter

https://www.amazon.co.uk/MD-NEX-Adapter-Concept%C2%AE-Minolta-E-Mount/dp/B00LECYONM/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1498144367&sr=1-1&keywords=md+to+nex

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 15:14:29 No.3099958 Report

Quoted By: >>3121529

>>3099955
Cheap chinese MD NEX adapter will work. Look on ali.

Yea, its easy to use MF lenses with a focus peaking camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 17:14:01 No.3099997 Report

Quoted By: >>3100477

>>3096363
none of them

for the price of 3 meme lenses you could buy a decent modern lens

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 17:19:54 No.3100001 Report

Quoted By: >>3100614

>>3096363
Recently bought a Canon A1. Proper newfag question, but am I stuck with buying Canon lenses from pre-digital because of it being FD? What lenses would you recommend for a Canon A1? Mine came with a bog standard 50/1.8"

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 22 Jun 2017 21:21:48 No.3100109 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099728
No cannot really tell. Do you have a Nikon read cap? If it fits it is Nikon, if it doesn't its not.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_0302.jpg, 2MiB, 3840x2160

Anonymous Fri 23 Jun 2017 01:25:05 No.3100192 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099955

>https://phillipreeve.net/blog/adapters-manual-lenses-sony-a7-series-guide/

Read this article and the whole site really.

Focus peaking isn't perfect, but it is damn close and there are tricks to make it easier.

Overall, MD lenses work great on the a7 series. You may also want to look at the techart pro adapter. MD lenses can be adapted to it too.

Pic related, my MD mount camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Jun 2017 12:55:56 No.3100477 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099997
>buying 50mm film lenses when they're literally growing from trees in your parents/ grandparents basement.

I have 3 50mm lenses ranging from 1.8,1.4, and 1.2 that I have collectively spent $10 on. All you have to do is look around or ask your relatively for old film cameras.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Jun 2017 13:24:00 No.3100486 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099717
m42 and covers the whole frame, yeah-

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Jun 2017 17:29:10 No.3100614 Report

Quoted By: >>3100920

>>3100001
yes, you're not going to be using any EF lenses. I would pick up either a 28/24 depending on how wide you want to go and a 85/100 for portraits.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Jun 2017 03:07:45 No.3100920 Report

Quoted By: >>3100964

>>3100614
>yes, you're not going to be using any EF lenses
just curious, but why not? an adapter should be possible, but ive noticed there dont really seem to be any, even though they should be easy to make

id venture to say you could probably make a diy adapter

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2 Sat 24 Jun 2017 03:43:08 No.3100944 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099728

Minolta MD mount

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2 Sat 24 Jun 2017 03:46:04 No.3100946 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099699

The Nikon will have better contrast wide open and will be sharper wide open at the expense of moderate CA. Past f/4 they are all sharp as tacks. The SC coating on the Nikon is an early multi-coating designed for color film but the Canon will have better colors and better saturation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Jun 2017 04:41:08 No.3100964 Report

Quoted By: >>3103633

>>3100920
Not that guy, but ef has electronic aperture control, so you'd be stuck with whatever aperture those lenses happen to be at. Just not worth it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Jun 2017 12:58:37 No.3101127 Report

Quoted By:

Contax g. Any. With a $10 adapter to any mirrorless camera. Dont buy them, though, save them for me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Jun 2017 02:45:37 No.3103633 Report

Quoted By:

>>3100964
>not having a dedicated canon body just to preset the aperture on your EF lenses

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Jun 2017 16:15:39 No.3103950 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099703
apparently the 1.8 is sharper than the 1.4? That's what I've been told at least, though they conveniently failed to manetion whether or not they were taking about both lenses wide open, in which case the 1.8 is obviously sharper.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Jun 2017 16:29:49 No.3103953 Report

Quoted By: >>3104391

>>3096363
minolta md > canon fdn > nigon > bentax m > konica > olympus om > smegma > tokina > tampon > 3rd party rebrand

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Jun 2017 16:31:33 No.3103955 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099703
the 1.8 is single coated and only 5 bladed iris.
i had the 50 1.4 fdn. nice bokeh and colours.
sharp starting f2.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 29 Jun 2017 15:36:20 No.3104391 Report

Quoted By:

>>3103953
>minolta and canon over nikon
Fag

More like
nikon>minolta>canon

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Vivitar28mmf25.jpg, 446KiB, 728x1000

Anonymous Sat 01 Jul 2017 02:06:13 No.3105368 Report

Quoted By: >>3105372 >>3106043 >>3107089

Purchased a nice little meme this morning.
Vivitar 28/2.5 in K-mount, $25 strayan.
Wide open the abberations are buck-wild, but stopped down to f/16 it sharpens up nicely.
Big front element so it doesn't even vignette that horribly.
This is wide open.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Vivitar28mmatf16.jpg, 321KiB, 667x1000

Anonymous Sat 01 Jul 2017 02:22:04 No.3105372 Report

Quoted By:

>>3105368
Even at f/16, the final few mm's of the image circle are a little streaky, but nothing that would concern you in a real photo. CA is not too bad at all, and probably less noticeable than it would be on a higher resolution lense, distortion is surprisingly good.
As the based god says in the scriptures, lenses don't make sharp photos, photographers do. Happy with my $25 purchase, might give it to a pentacks shooting qt I know.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 01 Jul 2017 02:42:54 No.3105380 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099703
the 1.8 is lighter, that's it

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jul 2017 07:06:20 No.3106030 Report

Quoted By: >>3106099

What's the top performance 85mm vintage?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20170616-DSC07197.jpg, 364KiB, 1440x810

Anonymous Sun 02 Jul 2017 07:54:12 No.3106043 Report

Quoted By: >>3106099

>>3105368
Fuck, that's bad. You'd better be adapting the canon FD 28mm f2.8, the Oly Zuiko 28mm f2.8 or the Minolta Rokkor 28mm 2.8. Pic related is the Mino.

>but stopped down to f/16 it sharpens up nicely
Who would shoot everything at f/16 anyway? To the trash it goes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jul 2017 12:16:05 No.3106099 Report

Quoted By: >>3106190

>>3106030
The Canon FD 85/1.2L.
Most modern 85mm's are cheaper.
>>3106043
Bruh, I've got a Fuji GSW, Nikkor Ai-s 24 and 28mm's, canon FD 24mm, Hexanon AR 28mm, Mamiya 50mm and 75mm L and a Sigma 30/1.4, I was buying this for fun, not out of necessity.
The effect from this lense wide open is neat.
I'm sorry you can't appreciate any rendering aesthetic besides "sharp" in a lense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jul 2017 15:27:59 No.3106190 Report

Quoted By:

>>3106099
If you want some insanely soft edges, try the Vivitar 28mm f2. Best yet try it on a speed-booster!

I never thought my 28mm f2.5 was soft, but I guess I havent looked closely enough. I like the extremely long focus throw and giant front element

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 06:10:24 No.3106755 Report

Quoted By: >>3106760 >>3106776

What is the best 50mm vintage lense? I want a decent 50mm, I could buy the Samyang 35mm f1.4 for £300 which would give me 52mm on my A6000. Just wondering if there is a good vintage alternative, M42 or MD would be ideal.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 06:47:50 No.3106760 Report

Quoted By: >>3106793

>>3106755

Minolta MC 55mm f/1.7

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _DSC2255-01.jpg, 626KiB, 1198x949

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 07:28:09 No.3106776 Report

Quoted By: >>3106777 >>3106793 >>3107219 >>3121530

>>3106755
>best 50mm
CZ Sonnar T* 50mm f1.4 CY mount. You can get one in mint condition for about $300, MM version (has green max aperture number) is better than AE.

If you want a 35mm to have 52mm on your a6k then get the CZ Flektogon 35mm/2.4 or CZ Distagon T* 35mm/2.8. Both are great but the Flektogon is cheaper and has 18cm minimum focus distance which is great for macro.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 07:29:17 No.3106777 Report

Quoted By:

>>3106776
CZ Plannar* 50mm, not Sonnar, my bad.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC00207.jpg, 384KiB, 1616x1080

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 08:51:22 No.3106793 Report

Quoted By: >>3106800 >>3106804

>>3106760
I have a Minolta MD 50mm 1.7 is the MC version better? Pic is from the MD 50mm 1.7.

>>3106776
I was thinking about the CZ Plannar to be honest. It would probably be best because I want to get an MD mount focal reducer that way I can use MD mount lenses on it and use an adapter to covert M42 ones to MD and use those on it as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 09:02:31 No.3106800 Report

Quoted By: >>3106807

>>3106793

The 55 is.

It is 95% if the E-mount 55mm Zeiss for a fraction of the price.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 09:10:27 No.3106804 Report

Quoted By:

>>3106793
if you have mdiii, it plastic shit.
if you have mdii, nice build.
mc is just older and heavier.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 09:20:40 No.3106807 Report

Quoted By:

>>3106800
no it's not.
is it even planar?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 11:20:46 No.3106848 Report

Quoted By:

800mm Nikkor any good? A serious question. I was thinking you could even use it for video.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2017-07-03 02.40.37 1.jpg, 578KiB, 1190x1587

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 13:43:57 No.3106871 Report

Quoted By: >>3106886 >>3106887 >>3106933 >>3107080 >>3111407

Because I can't afford a Leica

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 14:40:08 No.3106886 Report

Quoted By:

>>3106871
Pay less, get more features

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 4e1a4fde4c1d41d131725f95bd84045e (...).jpg, 59KiB, 736x491

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 14:42:23 No.3106887 Report

Quoted By: >>3106889 >>3120621

>>3106871

Me too anon!

I couldn't even afford it with the real lens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO cb6635b7c2d626d3ffb5cb91899a3522.jpg, 66KiB, 550x413

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 14:44:44 No.3106889 Report

Quoted By:

>>3106887

Ended up getting it with the voigtlander.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 16:07:09 No.3106933 Report

Quoted By: >>3106991

>>3106871
How is it with manual focus lenses? Torn between that and an XT-1

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 18:28:09 No.3106991 Report

Quoted By:

>>3106933
The focus peaking isn't great IMO but the quick zoom in to check focus makes it easy. I tend to just zone focus anyway for street.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 20:49:28 No.3107063 Report

Quoted By: >>3107078

The Pentacon 135 is essentially a cheap Sonnar. Lenses from the GDR can be great finds as they are Zeiss designs taken by the Soviets.

http://vintage-camera-lenses.com/pentacon-135-2-8/

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO CZ135f28 100% crop handheld.jpg, 2MiB, 2560x1440

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 21:08:42 No.3107078 Report

Quoted By: >>3107087

>>3107063
Every 135mm lens are decent to good anyway so anything in that focal length can be a "cheap Sonnar".

But CZ 135mm/f2.8 is cheapest among all the CY mount CZ lenses anyway so you may as well get it for the T* coating and imo much nicer colors.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 21:10:48 No.3107080 Report

Quoted By:

>>3106871
>trying to faux-leica
>not even using rf lenses

what

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jul 2017 21:17:17 No.3107087 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107078
>CZ 135mm/f2.8
I got mine before the price hike. You're right, definitely better to get the real deal nowadays.

lacken

lacken Mon 03 Jul 2017 21:26:04 No.3107089 Report

Quoted By:

>>3105368
I bought it too but in M42 mount.
Doesn't flare as bad as my other lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 00:55:17 No.3107219 Report

Quoted By: >>3107322

>>3106776
i have the cz 50mm 1,4 for C/Y,
thinking to adapt on my xpro1 ( together with fuji xf35mm and 18mm ) so it would be more of a portrait lens

also i activly use the contax g2 with
45mm and recently the 28mm 2,8

which lenses should i adapt on my fuji xpro1
the c/y 50mm 1,4 or the contax g2 lenses

or is this all a waste of time ?
surely i would love to see the quality of the
biogon 45mm f2 on my xpro

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 05:52:15 No.3107322 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107219
Why not both? The adapters are not that expensive. If I had to choose only one, probably the 50f1.4 because Contax G focusing experience through adapter is not that great unless you're using Techart adapter on Sony.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 540x360.jpg, 22KiB, 540x360

Anonymous Tue 04 Jul 2017 22:11:03 No.3107725 Report

Quoted By: >>3108005

I have a bunch of old Schneider-Kreuznach lenses from my great-grandfather's Retina Reflex III. I shot a roll of film with it and, apart from the overall clunkiness and weight, it shot some pretty nice pictures.
Any point in getting a DKL lens adapter for my Nikon SLR?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 05 Jul 2017 12:02:54 No.3108005 Report

Quoted By:

>>3107725
Sure why not, if they're in good condition.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Carl_Zeiss_Jena_135_3_5_Sonnar11.jpg, 71KiB, 750x575

Anonymous Thu 06 Jul 2017 18:50:31 No.3108599 Report

Quoted By: >>3108669 >>3110125

Just bought a Carl Zeiss Sonnar 135mm f3.5, the later MC version.

It is going to be 200mm on my A6000 though :^)

http://vintage-camera-lenses.com/carl-zeiss-sonnar-135-3-5/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Jul 2017 20:08:37 No.3108669 Report

Quoted By:

>>3108599
It's nice for shooting birds with a tripod :^)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 08 Jul 2017 17:25:37 No.3109861 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096632
Oly Zuiko 50mm f3.5 auto-macro is slow, but super cheap and gives good results.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 08 Jul 2017 23:14:23 No.3110053 Report

Quoted By: >>3110280

>>3096642
Is $150 around the average price?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 08 Jul 2017 23:28:26 No.3110060 Report

Quoted By: >>3110253

a little offtop, any good chain charity or 'normal' shop to look for vintage lenses in UK?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 09 Jul 2017 02:04:58 No.3110125 Report

Quoted By: >>3110254

>>3108599
why is it red

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 09 Jul 2017 02:43:49 No.3110145 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096649
I like my Canon FD 14mm

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 09 Jul 2017 02:49:29 No.3110152 Report

Quoted By: >>3110258 >>3110284

>>3096363

Minolta MD 50 f/1.4, 1.7, or 2.

Which is best? Which is worst? I have all but the 1.4 and am wondering if it is worth buying. Seems to have gone up in price lately.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 09 Jul 2017 05:58:27 No.3110253 Report

Quoted By:

>>3110060
Oxfam, but they know their shit about vintage lenses and charge the average going price or slightly less. They have a website, just google 'ixfam vintage lenses'.

I use www.rockycameras.com it seems to take around 4 days to get a lense from them, even though they send them royal mail first class. That has been my experience with them anyway.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 09 Jul 2017 06:00:39 No.3110254 Report

Quoted By:

>>3110125
It is the lens coating, it gives better image quality. You can only see it from an angle, straight on it looks clear.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC00196.jpg, 644KiB, 1616x1080

Anonymous Sun 09 Jul 2017 06:05:53 No.3110258 Report

Quoted By:

>>3110152
I have the 1.7 and it is a good lens. The 1.4 would be better for low light though.

Pic related is the 1.7.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1499580457265142626322.jpg, 3MiB, 4032x3024

Anonymous Sun 09 Jul 2017 06:09:38 No.3110259 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 09 Jul 2017 06:28:21 No.3110280 Report

Quoted By:

>>3110053
$150 is okay if it's in good condition, you may be able to buy it for a little cheaper depending on where you live. Also note that the red version is nearly twice as expensive compared to white one even though the optical quality is the same.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20170413-DSC02498.jpg, 270KiB, 2048x1152

Anonymous Sun 09 Jul 2017 06:34:01 No.3110284 Report

Quoted By:

>>3110152
The 1.7.
The 1.4 is slightly worse at every aperture, get it if you are bokeh and soft picture whoring.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 10 Jul 2017 18:31:05 No.3111407 Report

Quoted By: >>3113059

>>3106871
what adapter is that, my m42 to fx is fuckhuge
Almost doubles the weight of the lens

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 13 Jul 2017 04:38:03 No.3113059 Report

Quoted By:

>>3111407
looks like a speed booster/lens turbo, so probably Mitakon/Zhongyi

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 13 Jul 2017 05:45:13 No.3113086 Report

Quoted By: >>3113109

>>3096363
i thought the helios is 2.0 not 1.7

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 13 Jul 2017 06:49:07 No.3113109 Report

Quoted By:

>>3113086
There are severql versions. I have the 1.7.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 61dt4otdDDL._SL1000_.jpg, 82KiB, 1000x1000

Anonymous Sat 15 Jul 2017 20:43:12 No.3114934 Report

Quoted By: >>3115421

Bought pic related earlier, it is a M42 to MD adapter.

I got it for two reasons

1. it means I only need to worry about carrying one adapter for my M42 and MD lenses.
2. I want to buy a focal reducer and this means I only have to buy one instead of two. They are £120 each so this is a good thing.

Are there adapters like this for canon and nikon etc? I had a look on google but couldn't find anything, just wondering if anyone knows?

If I can get ones that convert canon and nikon to MD it means I only have to buy one MD focal reducer for any lenses I buy.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO D3R_5580-1200.jpg, 212KiB, 1200x1025

Anonymous Sun 16 Jul 2017 01:14:56 No.3115036 Report

Quoted By:

I don't go anywhere without my Nikkor f4 20mm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 16 Jul 2017 20:44:10 No.3115421 Report

Quoted By: >>3115431 >>3115510

>>3114934
There are none for Canikon because of flange focal distance, look it up. There's a reason why vintage lenses are a thing with Sony cameras and M43.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 16 Jul 2017 21:20:29 No.3115431 Report

Quoted By:

>>3115421
Ok, was just wondering as it would have saved me a couple of hundred £.

Oh well, never mind. Thanks anyway.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 00:47:48 No.3115510 Report

Quoted By:

>>3115421
>Sony cameras and M43
Just say mirrorless cameras dude.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 01:56:57 No.3115533 Report

Quoted By: >>3115683

Mmm hey /p/haggots, what is the going rate for a YASHICA AUTO YASHINON 5.5cm F1.8 55mm M42 in (very) good condition?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 07:46:09 No.3115683 Report

Quoted By:

>>3115533
Try looking on ebay.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO pentax-smc-m-28mm-f2.8-prime-wid (...).jpg, 90KiB, 667x500

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 08:41:42 No.3115711 Report

Quoted By: >>3115727 >>3115732 >>3115754 >>3115812 >>3121535

I just bought a Pentax SMC M 28mm f2.8, hasn't arrived yet

now I read on some gearfag forums that it's not sharp and suffers low contrast and I have buyer's remorse

how fucked am I?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 09:08:25 No.3115727 Report

Quoted By:

>>3115711
>now I read on some gearfag forums that it's not sharp and suffers low contrast
You are supposed to read about lenses before you buy them.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMGP2901.jpg, 1MiB, 1054x1400

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 09:25:45 No.3115732 Report

Quoted By:

>>3115711
its a great lens

I'm fairly sure it's the same performance or better than the pentax-a variant which I absolutely adore

I'm guessing you have a k-50 or something

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 10:16:15 No.3115754 Report

Quoted By:

>>3115711

Every lense suffer some kind of flaw, no exceptions.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 282.8.jpg, 733KiB, 1055x814

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 12:42:24 No.3115812 Report

Quoted By:

>>3115711
amazing lens, i've been using it for the last year as my main and it holds up great, sharp from wide open, from 5.6 it's simply amazing. has nice bokeh at closest focus

a bit less sharp than 28 3.5, that's where the mixed opinions come from but imo 2.8 is worth the minimal loss in sharpness

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1040216 TWO.jpg, 1MiB, 1618x1000

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 13:03:42 No.3115825 Report

Quoted By: >>3115829

Since noone posted about any Jupiters yet:
I love my Jupiter 21m (f4/200mm). I alread yhave an FD lens with f3.5/200mm but it is unsharp as fuck. meanwhile, the Jupiter is much sharper, but heavy as fuck. Even with a monopod can't get stable videos with it. maybe if I have camera with IBIS I'll get some.
But the photos are great. It made me want to buy a Jupiter 8 or 3

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1040354 TWO.jpg, 820KiB, 1619x1000

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 13:05:57 No.3115829 Report

Quoted By: >>3115832

>>3115825
It sometimes has contrast problems, because there's a metal plate inside that is covering up the aperture-engagement mechanism and this plate flares into the lens. i coverend it up with some plastic-sponge webbing and it took a great deal of flare away

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1040013 TWOCOMPARED.jpg, 479KiB, 998x1500

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 13:08:53 No.3115832 Report

Quoted By: >>3115833

>>3115829
Here's a test of the lens with and without the modification. It isn't perfect and taking pictures of bright scenes still lowers contrast somewhat, but the bright flare in the center is gone and that's the most important part
maybe one day I'll remove the plastic mesh and replace it with something better, like rubber foam or something, but I'm afraid I'll destroy something in the process, especially since I used superglue.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO P1040060 TWO.jpg, 848KiB, 1618x1000

Anonymous Mon 17 Jul 2017 13:11:26 No.3115833 Report

Quoted By:

>>3115832
I sometimes have problems getting a stable image even at 1/100s shutterspeed, it's that unstable at ~900g. I whish I could find a brace for it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1500490929545.jpg, 688KiB, 1200x800

Anonymous Thu 20 Jul 2017 07:23:03 No.3117656 Report

Quoted By: >>3117657 >>3117668 >>3117691

Just got another Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 50mm f2.8 in perfect condition after the first one I bought had fungus and scratches all over the lens.

It is not the best lens in the world but there is just something about it I really like. The colour rendering is some of the best I have seen, the colours it produces are pretty much spot on to how things are irl.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1500490995435.jpg, 1010KiB, 1200x800

Anonymous Thu 20 Jul 2017 07:24:12 No.3117657 Report

Quoted By: >>3117658 >>3117691

>>3117656

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1500491059794.jpg, 679KiB, 1200x800

Anonymous Thu 20 Jul 2017 07:25:17 No.3117658 Report

Quoted By: >>3117691

>>3117657

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Jul 2017 07:31:30 No.3117662 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096363
The Hexanon AR 40mm f1.8 that comes with the Konica Autoreflex TC is my absolute favorite lens. Don't really know the general opinion on it but it gives me the results that I want.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO FB_IMG_1498804538445.jpg, 229KiB, 2048x1536

Anonymous Thu 20 Jul 2017 07:36:29 No.3117668 Report

Quoted By:

>>3117656
Yeah, there's something about Zeiss rendering that I really like. I don't even want to change much in LR/PS to preserve the colors.

Right now I have Zeiss 35f2.8, 50f1.4, 135f2.8 CY mount but will start collecting contax G mount lenses as well when I can afford A7rii + techart adapter. Focusing experience with other adapter feels like shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Jul 2017 09:19:45 No.3117691 Report

Quoted By:

>>3117656
>>3117657
>>3117658
Sure is great color in these. Yep, it's sony.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170721_115255.jpg, 602KiB, 960x1280

Anonymous Fri 21 Jul 2017 22:54:24 No.3118608 Report

Quoted By: >>3118609 >>3118616

should have posted here first instead of the gear thread. these are going in a charity shop by me, £5 for lens and camera for each. I already have a 50mm 1.8 EF lens and was just wondering if any are worth picking up.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170721_115240.jpg, 425KiB, 960x1280

Anonymous Fri 21 Jul 2017 22:55:43 No.3118609 Report

Quoted By: >>3118611 >>3118616

>>3118608

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170721_115217.jpg, 475KiB, 960x1280

Anonymous Fri 21 Jul 2017 22:56:56 No.3118611 Report

Quoted By: >>3118616

>>3118609

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Jul 2017 23:10:38 No.3118616 Report

Quoted By: >>3118619

>>3118608 >>3118609 >>3118611
Buy both. Zooms of that camera's era were bad (except Zuiko, but it's still a zoom so compared to Zuiko primes it's still bad), and the 50mm f/1.8 is excellent for a film lens. The OM-10 body is auto-only without the manual adapter, but for a fiver it's hard to fuck up here.

OM-system is adaptable to Canon SLRs, yeah. Not worth it compared to modern stuff, but again for a fiver it's next to free plus you get a fancy rear cap. Usable copies of that lens go for 20€ at expert resellers, so you could expect a tenner online.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Jul 2017 23:15:42 No.3118619 Report

Quoted By:

>>3118616
thank you very much for the quick response, I suppose I'll grab a working body and as many lenses that are still available.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 25 Jul 2017 17:59:39 No.3120621 Report

Quoted By:

>>3106887

dayum, dat setup looks sexeh

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO MIR_1W_2,8_-_37mm.jpg, 2MiB, 3214x2411

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 22:36:30 No.3121262 Report

Quoted By: >>3121512

I just bought MIR-1W 2,8/37mm for equivalent of 20USD. Did I done good?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 06:33:23 No.3121512 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121262
Not sure but a lot of people love the old MIR c-mount cine lenses. And ~35mm is pretty hard to badly design.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:25:18 No.3121519 Report

Quoted By:

>>3096363
pentaxforum.com

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:31:51 No.3121521 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098165
what this guy said >>3098304

but just buy a sony a7.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:36:03 No.3121522 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098384
a zhongyi mitakon lens turbo 2.

you can buy 4 mounts instead of 1 metabuns.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:37:20 No.3121523 Report

Quoted By:

>>3098920
get the md and then a md to m42 adapter.
now you can use both lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:39:11 No.3121525 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099699
the bentax and ricoh are junk.
the nigon 1.4 is $150.
the others $30 each.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:40:14 No.3121527 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099728
it's kmount

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:42:39 No.3121529 Report

Quoted By:

>>3099958
>bought fotga
>built quality is meh
>some play at the mounts.
get k&f
>>3099956

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:43:42 No.3121530 Report

Quoted By: >>3121573

>>3106776
the 1.7 is better

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:58:30 No.3121535 Report

Quoted By:

>>3115711
nah, it's pretty good.
they probably have a foggy one.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 09:57:32 No.3121573 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121530
It's not. At f2+ the 1.4 is sharper than 1.7.

>hurr 1.4 is soft at wide open compared to 1.7

no fucking shit

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20170727_211002619.jpg, 3MiB, 2340x4160

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 20:11:37 No.3121820 Report

Quoted By: >>3122071

Just saw this is the store window of a photography studio
Can't find anything on it. I'd adapt it to a G7 for Portraits and video, I already have the Adapter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Jul 2017 05:35:43 No.3122071 Report

Quoted By: >>3122835

>>3121820
It's a great lens for £30.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 29 Jul 2017 09:38:44 No.3122835 Report

Quoted By:

>>3122071
it's 30€ tho.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Jul 2017 05:46:52 No.3123276 Report

Quoted By:

guys don't miss out on this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tamron-70-300mm-1-4-5-6-LD-Tele-Macro-1-2-camera-lens-Canon-zoom-572d/401372285107?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1431.l2649

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Jul 2017 11:56:44 No.3123448 Report

Quoted By: >>3123463 >>3123464 >>3123466 >>3123721 >>3123925

>>3096363
How good are vintage lenses compared to modern manual ones?

Im desperatly looking for an APS-C equivalent of 85mm (theoretically 56,67mm) but there seems to be nothing affordable on the market.

Are lenses like the from OP mentioned Helios 58mm good for shooting portraits (thats the main thing I want to do with it, not macro shooting)?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Jul 2017 12:25:11 No.3123463 Report

Quoted By:

>>3123448
Helios 58mm variants are good, they're not very sharp but have interesting bokeh.

If you prefer sharpness then consider SMC Takumar 55mm/f1.8

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Jul 2017 12:30:43 No.3123464 Report

Quoted By:

>>3123448
Go on flickr and search for a specific vintage lens, see for yourself.

Modern lenses are probably 'technically' better but when you take in to consideration vintage lenses are a lot cheaper and are 90% as good, who cares?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Jul 2017 12:33:51 No.3123466 Report

Quoted By:

>>3123448
Modern lenses are obviously better due to improvement over lens design and coatings but vintage lenses are much cheaper and have unique charm like color rendering/bokeh.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Jul 2017 21:34:12 No.3123721 Report

Quoted By:

>>3123448
especially for portraits you really dont need killer sharpness or contrast, and heavy softness/distortion/vignetting towards the edge is also not a huge deal. 'character' meaning an interesting look and being fast is much more wanted thats why adapting old lenses works good for portraits. also finding something in your focal range should be very easy, you can basically look for your dads nikkor or canon 50mm 1.4/1.8 whatever and get your 'unique' portrait lense for around 50€.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 31 Jul 2017 01:08:49 No.3123816 Report

Quoted By:

Anyone adapt Zeiss lenses to a Fuji body? Looking for a 50-55mm for portraits and have always wanted to use a Zeiss lens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO s-l1600[1].jpg, 94KiB, 1000x669

Anonymous Mon 31 Jul 2017 04:57:50 No.3123925 Report

Quoted By:

>>3123448
>How good are vintage lenses compared to modern manual ones?
If you want to compare the best of the best now to the best of the best then: now wins just about every single time.

However, you can buy a Canon FL mount 55mm f/1.2 for less than $200. Sometimes far less. The EF version of the lens is over $1000. The difference in sharpness between them is subtle. But the difference in price is huge. You could use the $800 different to buy more gear (lol) or actually, you know, go out on the road somewhere and take pictures.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 31 Jul 2017 05:00:56 No.3123930 Report

Quoted By: >>3124395

>>3098021
>buy old lenses from ebay for pennies
>make a youtube video talking about SUPERR AWESOME VINTAGE LENS AMAZGINK BOKAY
>roll in sweet ad dollars as well as resell your lenses for quadruple the price you paid for them.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1318500615267.png, 6KiB, 400x400

Anonymous Mon 31 Jul 2017 20:43:32 No.3124395 Report

Quoted By: >>3124447

>>3123930
Are you that fag that makes 2-3 min videos about lenses adapted to the A6000 shilling K&F adapters?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 31 Jul 2017 22:21:29 No.3124447 Report

Quoted By:

>>3124395
oh god i had one of them in my newfeed once and watched like 12 of them. they are all the exact same with basically no information except the fact that he finds the adapters for about 10 bucks on amazon

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1501538246473.jpg, 2MiB, 2048x2048

Anonymous Mon 31 Jul 2017 23:57:34 No.3124496 Report

Quoted By: >>3124552

Hey guys i need your help with my lens. As you can see somehow the previous owner managed to stuck the upper part of it.

I've been searching for a couple of hours for a way to repair it without needing a professional(or if it can actually be saved.) But i haven't found anything(many of the results are about stuck aperture rings when it's the focus one that is stuck for me.)

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 01 Aug 2017 01:07:12 No.3124552 Report

Quoted By:

>>3124496
disasembly, cleaning and lubrication is necessary.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 01 Aug 2017 03:24:54 No.3124638 Report

Quoted By: >>3124656 >>3124663 >>3124710

Anyone got a good list of M42 lenses? Just picked up the Mitakon Speed booster. Got a Helios 44, any other must haves?

!kurwaRB7YU

!kurwaRB7YU Tue 01 Aug 2017 04:05:14 No.3124656 Report

Quoted By:

>>3124638
Domiplan 2.8 50mm - a must-have classic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 01 Aug 2017 04:19:02 No.3124663 Report

Quoted By:

>>3124638
CZ Flektogon 35f2.8
Pentacon 135f2.8 (the king of bokeh)
Helios 40-2 (somewhat expensive but worth it)

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _C8S9099_.jpg, 946KiB, 1000x667

Anonymous Tue 01 Aug 2017 05:10:49 No.3124699 Report

Quoted By: >>3124795

I guess this Tamron lens counts as a vintage lens since it is about 20 years old now and was designed for SLR cameras. It's a 28-300mm Aspherical LD IF lens. It does not have any kind of image stabilization, and it's pretty soft wide open and at both ends of the focal length. It exhibits focus breathing too.

Still, I am trying to see what I can do with it because it's the only EF mount lens I have at the moment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 01 Aug 2017 05:26:07 No.3124710 Report

Quoted By:

>>3124638

I got a M42 Vivitar 85-210mm F3.8 zoom that's surprisingly okay. It only cost like $25 on ebay

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO LC8S9111.jpg, 1MiB, 1000x667

Anonymous Tue 01 Aug 2017 08:08:06 No.3124795 Report

Quoted By:

>>3124699
And I took this photo with the Olympus F. Zuiko 50mm f/1.8 I have.

The thing is I don't have a lens adapter for this so I just held the lens up in front of the open camera body and then moved it all back and forth to get the image into focus. Pretty clumsy but hey at least I get to see a taste of what the lens can do. I guess I'll go ahead and get an adapter.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO lenses.jpg, 751KiB, 1650x1595

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 21:51:09 No.3125865 Report

Quoted By:

I was very lucky to come across these two lenses today.

>Konica Hexanon 50mm F/1.4 Automatic AR
>Konica Hexanon 21mm F/4

Not sure what I want to do with them. They are brand new in the box with all instructions and original plastic wrapping. I don't think they have ever been used.

They can be mounted to EOS cameras and EF mount. Research...

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 22:55:14 No.3125898 Report

Quoted By:

Apart from being Old (Vintage)
What are the advantages of using lenses like these over the newer ones?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 23:09:22 No.3125907 Report

Quoted By:

>>312589

Bang for your buck. And a lot of primes still look great. Some render colors more pleasantly than some of the most expensive current lenses, but it's very dependent on the lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 23:17:27 No.3125915 Report

Quoted By: >>3125918

Does anyone worry about the radioactivity of some older lenses?

Is the Helios 44-2 radioactive?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 23:19:01 No.3125918 Report

Quoted By:

>>3125915
only gayboys worry about that.

no, that swirling slavic piece of shit aint radioactive.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO LC8S9351_.jpg, 4MiB, 3504x2336

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 23:20:55 No.3125919 Report

Quoted By: >>3125920

I took this photo just now with the 50mm f/1.4 Konica Hexanon lens. I don't have an adapter for my 1d Mark II, so I just held it up in front of the camera body with my fingers (making sure not to push it in too far to cause it to hit the mirror).

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 23:21:49 No.3125920 Report

Quoted By:

>>3125919
nice. Now try to reverse it for Ghetto-Macro.
Though a shorter focal length would be better suitet for that.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO LC8S9345_.jpg, 4MiB, 3504x2336

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 23:23:13 No.3125922 Report

Quoted By: >>3125923

And I also took this one with a Ricoh Rikenon 50mm f/2 lens I found today. Same deal: no adapter. I guess this is a type of tilt-shift photo?

I have not messed with these colors, it's the lens doing it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO LC8S9344_.jpg, 4MiB, 3504x2336

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 23:26:05 No.3125923 Report

Quoted By:

>>3125922
I posted the wrong photo. This is the right one.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 26925972254_ec834d51bd_c.jpg, 68KiB, 800x534

Anonymous Fri 04 Aug 2017 02:22:12 No.3126636 Report

Quoted By: >>3126640

Bought a Fujino 55 1.8 lense for cheap in exitement to find a good portrai lense for my APS-C camera, which is a Nikon D7200. Now i found out it might be impossible to use it on a nikon since with a normal adapter it can only focus in macro or you will have to sacrifice some quality by using one with another build in lense.
Does anyone have experience with screwing M42 lenses onto DX Nikons?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 04 Aug 2017 02:42:04 No.3126640 Report

Quoted By:

>>3126636
You can't because of fringe focal distance. The only way is to mod the lens mount which is a pain in the ass to do, google it.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Vintage Lenses