I just dont see any apeal of buying legacy lens. With adapters you are still not getting small size, you lose autofocus, flexibility of a zoom. And please prove me wrong by showing compared photos, but i havent seen any noticeable quality improvement (we are talking sub 150-200USD, 1855 price on ebay) from the popular legacy glass i see every day on this forum. Sure, you get wider apertures, but 18-55 has OSS, which gives 4 stops...
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
legacy lenses apeal vs kit 1855?
- Thread starter kwedaras
- Start date
It's not always about getting a fast shutter speed. A good and fast lens will give you better bokeh and those sometimes desirable shallow DoF.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lng0004/
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lng0004/
Charlie Lab
Forum Enthusiast
I like shooting with shallow DOF with legacy fast glass, but there is also a geeky joy in shooting a futuristic 24MP rocket like the NEX7 with a solid piece of 1969 piece of glass in front.
Les Hall
Veteran Member
There's lots of factors IMHO. Close focus for example, some legacy lenses allow you to get almost macro shots. Speed is another with f1.4 50mm being available pretty cheap. Some like the look of a certain lens, not just in the image but how it looks on the body! And as another poster mentioned its just fun finding life, and great quality, in these old lenses.
Lots of people don't like zoom lenses. I tend to prefer a prime but have nothing against zooms per se other than the slow apertures available currently. OSS IS great though, but is it really four stops benefit??
Les
--
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five."
Groucho Marx
http://www.leshall.com
Lots of people don't like zoom lenses. I tend to prefer a prime but have nothing against zooms per se other than the slow apertures available currently. OSS IS great though, but is it really four stops benefit??
Les
--
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five."
Groucho Marx
http://www.leshall.com
John Bean (UK)
Veteran Member
Nonsense. That all depends on the lens and the camera it came from.
Not all adapted lenses are large on the NEX. Random examples:
--
John Bean [GMT]
tomslaptop
Well-known member
The only sony E lens I use is the Zeiss 24mm F1.8. The auto focus works pretty good but took some getting used to and not any faster then a manual lens really. I like the colors better on the zeiss lens but for iq I don't think the zeiss is any better then some of my older lens I use. Heres a example of a $35.00 50mm f1.7 on sony nex 5 with manual focus. Also, I don't use a zoom lens much I prefer to use a prime lens.
I bought my first serious digital camera (a DSLR) 3 years ago. However, I was getting bored of the way I was taking photos. It was too easy and I was not thinking enough while taking the photos. Modern technology provides me with functions like fast and accurate AF, VR (Nikon term), big zoom lenses etc.
I was realising last year that I needed to slow down the process of taking photos first. The only way to slow down is having a camera with a few manual prime lenses. Then I saw NEX 5n. I then acquired few lenses such Contax G and Takumar. The most used lens will be Contax G 28. It is smaller than the kit lens and sharper. The combo is much smaller than my DSLR. If necessary, I will take a few others with me. I am quite happy so far.
--
Tim
I was realising last year that I needed to slow down the process of taking photos first. The only way to slow down is having a camera with a few manual prime lenses. Then I saw NEX 5n. I then acquired few lenses such Contax G and Takumar. The most used lens will be Contax G 28. It is smaller than the kit lens and sharper. The combo is much smaller than my DSLR. If necessary, I will take a few others with me. I am quite happy so far.
--
Tim
I have no interest in legacy lenses either (except possibly using some of my extensive Canon EF kit with the new NEX from time to time). But many people get great benefit or enjoyment from investigating them, whether just out of the thrill of the chase and enjoyment of messing with the system more deeply than the average joe, or because they can (or at least believe they can) gain an advantage or increased capability over the very limited selection of manufacturer lenses that are out so far.
I have a pact with those people....I don't criticize them or make snark at their expense, and they don't make fun of me crawling over anthills and taking pictures of ants.
Put less frivolously, there are a lot of ways to enjoy and benefit from photography, and each of us can and should find his or her own way to do it, without badmouthing or laughing at people who are pursuing their own path. Though I do go off by myself where nobody is around every once in awhile and laugh myself silly over the people doing pinhole photography! (just kidding)
I have a pact with those people....I don't criticize them or make snark at their expense, and they don't make fun of me crawling over anthills and taking pictures of ants.
Put less frivolously, there are a lot of ways to enjoy and benefit from photography, and each of us can and should find his or her own way to do it, without badmouthing or laughing at people who are pursuing their own path. Though I do go off by myself where nobody is around every once in awhile and laugh myself silly over the people doing pinhole photography! (just kidding)
Smiert Spionam
Leading Member
It's not an either/or thing. I really like the kit zoom -- it's excellent for the price, and I can't recall a similar kit zoom from another manufacturer being nearly as good. But there are also circumstances where it's just not the right choice -- when you want smaller size, more speed, different focal lengths, etc.
Vinter
Forum Enthusiast
I'm looking into legacy glass simply because it is more affordable. I'm a noob with all this stuff but there are some things my two kit lenses can't reach, and as of right now I can't really afford much out of the E-Mount line 
--
Sony Nex-5
18-55mm & 16mm kit lenses
--
Sony Nex-5
18-55mm & 16mm kit lenses
Sean_Jayhawk
Veteran Member
I have a series of Canon FD and FDn lenses from 28 to 100 (the FDn 50/1.4 is overall favorite lens), but I can't wait for the SEL50/1.8 because there are often times when I need autofocus. But when I am having fun I love manual focus. I never desired manual focus when I bought my 5N. It was only after reading about people seeming to enjoy it here that I even considered it. Now I get it. It feels more like photography if that makes any sense. But sometimes with kids I just need quickness that comes from AF. I hope the SEL50/1.8 produces good image quality.
viking79
Veteran Member
Depends on the Adapter. Leica M, L39, and Pen F all are very small adapters.
Who says you can't get a manual focus zoom? Granted, the quality of the modern zoom is likely better. Autofocus isn't important for many shots. I can focus manually quickly, and for slowly moving subjects or static subjects you just don't need AF.
Say it really gives you 2 stops, it doesn't give you faster shutter speed which you often need. The only thing it helps is that you don't have to carry a tripod for those situations. If you are photographing a person you still usually need a faster shutter speed so OSS isn't that helpful in those situations.
The main benefit is aperture. This 42mm f/1.2 lens I am playing with has about 4 f/stop advantage over the kit lens at the same aperture, and that is 4 f/stops faster shutter speed so you can stop motion, etc, or get very shallow depth of field. The kit lens can't have that option. The OSS is nice, but again, doesn't give you shallower depth of field or faster shutter speeds.
The 50mm f/1.8 and 24mm f/1.8 are AF lenses for those that want the experience of large apertures, but still maintain AF. If you shoot at f/5.6 you aren't going to see that much different between the lenses. The issue with the primes is they are relatively expensive. An old manual 50mm f/1.8 with adapter is about 1/6 the price of the new 50mm f/1.8 OSS and won't perform that much better. If you don't need the AF the old manual lens is nice. Size wise the adapted 50mm probably isn't that much different in size than the new 50mm f/1.8, that thing is pretty huge.
Eric
--
I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)
See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)
The only appeal to me is not size or reputation. It's necessity until Sony comes out with some dedicated primes. My Nikon 50 2 (my favorite Nikon 50) will make a decent portrait lens. My Vivitar 28 2.8 which is a gem on my D200 will make a fine reasonably fast walk around lens.
Personally speaking, the main advantage of fast legacy lenses in comparison to the fairly slow kit lens is DOF. I would not want to lose the shallow DOF which my fast Nikkors (50mm/1.2, 85mm/1.4 and 135mm/2.0) allow. Even a "slow" 50mm lens such as the Pentax-M 50mm/2.0 SMC offers much better DOF control than the kit lens can.
cosmicpop
Active member
As a beginner, one of the reasons why I initially liked legacy lenses is that I can actually see what's going on with the lens. For example I can see the leaves moving and reducing the amount of light getting through the my Zuiko 50mm f1.4
This helped me greatly in getting to understand a lot of the terminology around photography. With just the 18-55 lens I'm not sure this would've happened as quickly.
This helped me greatly in getting to understand a lot of the terminology around photography. With just the 18-55 lens I'm not sure this would've happened as quickly.
Jabberwockt
Well-known member
- Messages
- 120
- Reaction score
- 0
Here's a catch 22 situation. If you've never owned and used legacy glass, how are you going to make the comparison?
Thats where we are all different and have a choice. I don't shoot with anything under 300mm, so what choice do I have ??
Interesting huh
Danny.
...........................
m4/3 macro
http://www.macrophotos.com/g2macro
m4/3 feathered flying gadgets
http://www.macrophotos.com/avian/avian.html
Worry about the image that comes out of the box, rather than the box itself.
ProfHankD
Veteran Member
In favor of the excellent 18-55mm kit zoom:
- Really great IQ, especially at wide focal lengths compared to most legacy lenses
- Autofocus
- OSS (only in a few E-mount lenses; body SSS would have helped everything)
- Decent close focus (and good bokeh at close focus)
- Can shoot one-handed and without thinking
- Auto aperture control (I can't remember when I last used this)
- Huge range of lens options -- more than nearly any other camera has ever had
- Shockingly low cost (my average is under $30/lens)
- With peaking, can focus faster and more reliably than autofocus
- Many old lenses have bokeh-enhancing fast apertures (more bokeh, not always better bokeh)
- Build quality far better than autofocus lenses (partly due to lack of motor drive constraints)
- Forces thinking before you click, which tends to result in better photos
Another difference is that most of the old glass was designed for full-frame 135, which makes it even harder for an old wide to compete with a modern wide designed to cover only APS-C. On the other hand, there's a "sweet spot advantage" in that image quality near the center is often superior, and that's all an APS-C sensor sees for these old lenses. On the other hand, sensors are more reflective than film and stray light can bounce around a lot with old lenses. That's three hands... so I think it's time for me to stop listing things....
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum