The ultimate guide to Vintage Glass

You can always look at Mamiya 645's. Cheap as dirt. Not the 'full' (6x6/6x7) medium format experience though.
 
just got the helios 44-2 58 whats next any suggestions? also whats the filter thread for it i need a step up to 77mm from it
 
im most likley looking at the tokina 17mm rmc f/3.5 and im adapting to canon and collecting the potentially going to m4/3 later on and i need a thread filter for my variable nd
 
Because I'm going to be a dick. Seriously though... Its the first link.

Think short term right now though, the tokina 17mm rmc apparently has good reviews from people and would be a good wide lens. I don't know what kind of adapter is needed, you'd probably need to snag another(?)
 
i know im going to need to get another adapter i plan on doing that with every one of my vintage lenses so that it can sit on that adapter and i can grab and go and have no need to search around for an adapter each time
 
Konica and Minolta didn't merge until 2003, it's also not the 3,5 but the 3,5-4,5

35-70SizeComp.jpg


Zoom-Hexanon AR 35-70 mm / F3.5 (left)

Zoom-Hexanon AR 35-70 mm / F4 (centre)

Zoom-Hexanon AR 35-70 mm / F3.5-4.5 (right)

It has a plastic aspherical front element that scratches more easily then the iPhone 5.

Konica made some excellent glass this just is a bit meh, not bad just meh It's sharp but I wouldn't pay 50 bucks for one but that's me.

For Konica lenses check this site:

http://www.buhla.de/Foto/Konica/eHexanonUebersicht.html
 
you're right, i didn't notice the picture is of the 3.5-4.5. thanks for the info and heads up.

the regular minolta 35-70 3.5 is still pretty good though, correct?
 
Let me get this straight, you want a Minolta A-mount lens?

Konica lenses use the AR-mount and are not related to Minolta.
 
That explains everything, fucking good lens.

If it says anything: Minolta rebadged them to be sold for Leica R camera's as the Leica Vario Elmar R 35-70 f3.5.

 
Pretty stoked I just bought a Minolta MC Rokkor-PG 50 1.4 for $30. Pics weren't too great to tell condition and it doesn't come with caps, but the seller seems to think it's in good working condition.

i've searched around a lot and it might even be mentioned in this thread, but can anyone recommend a MC/MD -> MFT adapter? Should I just go for any of the cheap ones from China on ebay?
 
http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Adapter-Minolta-Olympus-Panasonic/dp/B003EAVULQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382503583&sr=8-1&keywords=md-m43

I have that one and it works just fine. Fits nice and snug and infinity focus seems to be spot on.

Congrats on that lens. I used have a Rokkor 50 1.4, but it got dropped off the side of a cliff while I was filming climbing and exploded into a million pieces. I miss it. It looked better wide open, was built better, and had a nicer color rendition than my Nikon 50.
 
So, i am looking into getting my next lens for my Pentax ME. I have a SMC A 50 f2 and i was thinking about/will probably be getting a SMC 135 f3.5, but that seems like quite a jump. Any ideas for sub $50 85mm lenses?

Also what is the verdict on OM lenses. I am most likely getting a OM1 for my school camera. I have the 50 f1.8 (the Zuiko MC one) that was given to me. I really dont like to spend more than $50 on a single lens so are OM lenses usually pretty well priced? I'm wanting a wide, normal, and tele(like 85 to 135)

I am not too knowledgeable on the OM system yet, so sorry if the answers are right in front of me. Also on mobile so sorry for typos.
 
85mm for sub 50mm isn't an option. 85mm's are always really expensive, don't know why. 150$+ to get something decent.

As far as the OM system goes, it's my favorite system out there. I've got three OM-1's that I use all the time. Lovely camera's.

The glass is cheap, tiny and great quality. Can't go wrong with any of the lenses. The earlier versions of both the 35mm f/2.8 and f/2 suck, but apart from that, all their glass is fucking amazeballs.
 
Just to clarify, is S-M-C the m42 mount and SMC the K mount?

My local camera shop has a Pentax m42 135 f3.5 and I defiantely like the feel of the metal and the aesthetic look of the lens, but they wanted $80 for it and $20 bucks for the m42 to K adapter.

It was this one

PS06010800562.jpg
 
No. Both are M42 mount. The K mount ones are called SMC-Pentax.

And that's a total rip-off. Those should be like 30-40$ and you can get an adapter for 5$ of Amazon/ebay.
 
anybody have and ideas on some vintage zooms? I love my prime setup but there are some situations where i definitely miss some zoom range.
 
I'm also looking to add one tele zoom for my gh2. Nikon 80-200 f4.5 seems to be a popular choice, but does anyone know if the minolta md mount 70-210 f4 is a good option?

I already have the md->m43 adapter so that's why I'm leaning towards the minolta, but if it doesn't compare I'm fine with spending the extra ~25 for a nikon adapter
 
I have a nikon 75-150 f3.5 for my GH3 that is pretty nice and super cheap. Its definitely a little known gem. I think i got it for like 60 bucks on KEH, and its constant aperture and half a stop faster than most vintage tele zooms. Its also really compact for a tele zoom, feels normal on my gh3. I don't think 200mm is that necessary on a 2x crop anyway so the shorter zoom range is fine. For what its worth, heres Ken Rockwell's review:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/75150.htm
 
DIdn't know about the 75-150, definitely sounds nice especially the compact size. I agree that I probably wouldn't need 200mm for most situations, but I'd like to shoot some surf photos/videos so i Think the extra length could help a bit.

Think I might try out the minolta md 70-210 f4 for now. It's only like $55 or so and the adapter and nd filter I already have will fit
 
May be a stupid question but I just got into photography… Are any of these lenses you have mentioned Sony adaptable?

Don't grill me too hard if I'm way off.
 
You can use Minolta lenses on Sony camera's (no adapter needed). Otherwise I don't think they are adaptable to Sony, but don't quote me on that.
 
Depends on the model, SLR's use the A-mount which is basically Minolta's old A-mount so those will be interchangeable.

If the camera is EVIL it will have the NEX-mount, which has a really short focal distance meaning you can pretty much mount almost any lens if the adapter exists, this is a list of lens mounts working with an adapter on NEX:

Alpa mount

Sony A-mount (Sony LA-EA1, LA-EA2, LA-EA3, LA-EA4 and 3rd part adapters with aperture ring)

BNCR mount

C-mount

Canon EF and Canon EF-S

Canon FD-mount

Contax G

Contarex

Contax/Yashica bayonet (adapter variant with tilt available)

Exakta lens mount

Fujica X bayonet

Hasselblad Xpan

Konica AR (bayonet)

Leica M-mount (bayonet)

Leica M39 lens mount (LTM/L39) (screw)

Leica R-mount (adapter variant with tilt available)

M42-mount (screw) (adapter variant with tilt available)

Micro Four Thirds

Minolta SR-mount

Minolta/Konica Minolta A-mount (Minolta/Konica Minolta AF/Alpha/Dynax/Maxxum and Sony Alpha DSLRs) (Sony LA-EA1, LA-EA2 and 3rd party adapters with aperture ring)

Nikon F-mount (adapter variant with aperture ring for G lenses available, adapter variant with tilt available)

Olympus OM-mount

Olympus Pen F

Pentax Auto 110

Pentax K-mount (adapter variant with aperture ring for DA lenses available)

PL mount

Rollei-mount

T2-mount (screw)
 
Sorry if this is a repeat or basic knowledge but I've done some some reading and need clarification/help.

I just got an S-M-C Takumar 50mm 1.4 and an m42 adapter from ebay (linked below). It's very frustrating because I can't get the entire focus range on the t3i. I've read about this issue but wasn't clear about the mechanics until I had it infront of me. Is there a way to fix it without buying another adapter? Is this adapter more suited for a different camera?

And also, the aperature is very difficult to change and makes the lens prone to unscrewing from the adapter. How would I fix this?

Thanks

http://www.ebay.com/itm/370599775771
 
The aperture problem is a result of sticky oil that dried up over time. The only way to solve this is to have it CLA'd (clean, lube, adjust), which is gonna cost you like 100$, give or take 30$ I guess (for that lens).

The focusing problem is something I don't understand. You got the right adapter, so I don't know what the problem is. Did you screw it all the way in? And what part of the focus range don't you get? Infinity or the other end?
 
I can't focus to infinity. When I focus to infinity, I see a part of the lens protrude out and it probably hits something in the camera preventing it from going all the way out for infinity. I thought this infinity problem was on full frame cameras though.
 
The problem you're describing isn't focussing, it's how the mirror on full frame sensors hits the inside of the lens. I would be willing to bet that the issue is actually internal on the lens, as I've had 28mm and 50mm supertaks on my t2i and 7d with no issues.
 
True, it's the lens hitting the inside of the camera as you pull the focus. But that seems to be happening with my t3i also. When the lens isn't attached to the camera the focus ring rotates smoothly with no issues.
 
Anybody have any particularly good luck with 3rd party vintage primes? I have for a few in the past, but I'm just curious what everyone else's seen so far.
 
Anybody have experience with the vivitar 35mm f2.5? I think that's what it's called. Pentax mount, my local shop wants $35 for it
 
13132904:JakeSmith said:
Anybody have experience with the vivitar 35mm f2.5? I think that's what it's called. Pentax mount, my local shop wants $35 for it
Click to expand...

I've never actually even heard of a 35 f2.5, and apparently pentaxforums hasn't either.
 
13132968:DingoSean said:
I've never actually even heard of a 35 f2.5, and apparently pentaxforums hasn't either.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's a prototype lens.

Buy it Jake, and put it on eBay for 10.0000 bucks.
 
I really don't remember, but it was 35 bucks, 3rd party, and sold from a shop that usually sells stuff overpriced. Are vintage 3rd party 35mm's usually at least decent?
 
Can anybody recommend a decent magnification macro lens that I can use on my X-T1 to "scan" negs using a slide copier? I really don't know where to start here... If I could use it for portraits too that'd be cool, maybe too tall of an order though? And help would be dope.
 
13134368:steezysteeze said:
Can anybody recommend a decent magnification macro lens that I can use on my X-T1 to "scan" negs using a slide copier? I really don't know where to start here... If I could use it for portraits too that'd be cool, maybe too tall of an order though? And help would be dope.
Click to expand...

Price range matter, the Fujifilm X-mount has one of the shortest flange focal distances in existence so most lenses will easily fit with an adapter, more choice to you, also for such static work it doesn't matter if they are full manual.

To nudge you in a direction, the Vivitar 55mm F2.8 Macro is sharp as dicks. Maybe a bit on the short side for portraits though despite the crop factor.
 
13134381:omnidata said:
Price range matter, the Fujifilm X-mount has one of the shortest flange focal distances in existence so most lenses will easily fit with an adapter, more choice to you, also for such static work it doesn't matter if they are full manual.

To nudge you in a direction, the Vivitar 55mm F2.8 Macro is sharp as dicks. Maybe a bit on the short side for portraits though despite the crop factor.
Click to expand...

Not bad for price either, but with 30cm being the close focus distance would it be close enough for 35mm?
 
13134550:steezysteeze said:
Not bad for price either, but with 30cm being the close focus distance would it be close enough for 35mm?
Click to expand...

Probably yes, minimum focus distance (if listed properly) is calculated from the film plane (or in this case sensor) so flange focal distance + lens = roughly 15cm, so 30-15= 15cm away from the lens.

But it was merely a suggestion and scanning film with a camera has been much better documented by other people, I don't do it because I have a glorious Plustek, what I have read suggest that it is not easy to get good results.

In addition putting bellows between the camera and lens allows you to get even closer, look into that.

standard.jpg
 
^you can also use this method for 'scanning' negatives with a DSLR, which is a super poorman's way of digitizing negatives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top