Manual Focus Lenses+A7

SLN001 · Jan 26, 2015

There are just too many great, and awful, MF lenses out there. If you are starting out in legacy glass let me recommend the Konica Hexanon lenses. They are well built, sharp, show great colors and good bokeh.

Another plus is the prices for most of these lenses haven't gone through the roof yet. You can get excellent lenses for very little expense.

My three favorites are the 40mm/1.8, 50mm/1.4 and 85mm/1.8.

By coincidence there have been a few recent posts showing Konica lenses at work in another forum I frequent. You may want to check these...

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-zoom-hexanon-35-70-3-5-and-nex-5-t69815.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-hexanon-ar-macro-55mm-f3-5-some-test-shots-t69810.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-hexanon-ar-24mm-f2-8-t69811.html

Lightshow · Jan 26, 2015

SirSeth said:
I see that the participants in this thread are into classy older MF lenses that perform well. I'm buying into mirrorless in a large part for MF glass--especially the long big glass that I'll never afford AF versions of. Been keen on the Nikkor 400mm f3.5 for a while.

In the shorter focal lengths I'm not very well informed. This would be my first foray into FF camera's and lenses. Would you all be so inclined to save me some hassle and tell me what you have tried that just doesn't work well and then what the gems are that really deliver the goods but don't cost what the new AF native glass costs. Although I'd love a 55mm f1.8, it's probably not in the cards for a good while. I'm looking more at the Samyang 24mm for landcape/night sky and the Samyang 85mm f1.4 for portraits.

The Canon nFD 85/1.2 L will be the last 85 you'll need if you can handle its size/weight.

SirSeth said:
I've noticed that a lot of older lenses lack contrast. I don't mind processing, but some older lenses probably do better than others. Is that a matter of glass elements or coatings or design?

I've never been too worried about lower contrast lenses, as contrast is much easier to add than remove in post, coatings do generally improve contrast, so does lens design and shooting conditions.

SirSeth said:
I've read good things about the Canon FDn 50mm f1.4. What about the Canon FDn 28mm f2.8 or 35mm f2?

The 24/2.8 & 24/2 are quite good, 35/2 is also.

SirSeth said:
Leica R lenses also seem to be a good value, but do they deliver the goods expected from Leica?

In a word, yes,

SirSeth said:
The Leica 250mm f4 R and 100mm macro look interesting to me.

The 60 & 100 macro's work wonderfully.

SirSeth said:
Cheers, Seth

--

What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
--
wallygoots.smugmug.com
wallygoots.blogspot.com

Robert Crawford - Wis · Jan 26, 2015

Beautiful images. Thanks for sharing.

babart · Jan 26, 2015

TimHar said:
Takumar 35mm f3,5 that's a gem a small wonder same optical design as SMC Pentax (K) 35mm f3.5. Very sharp with beautiful rendition, go for S-M-C version. I had non S-M-C version and I will buy S-M-C version soon. One of the smallest SLR lenses ever.

Cheers!

SirSeth · Jan 26, 2015

Lightshow said:
SirSeth said:

I see that the participants in this thread are into classy older MF lenses that perform well. I'm buying into mirrorless in a large part for MF glass--especially the long big glass that I'll never afford AF versions of. Been keen on the Nikkor 400mm f3.5 for a while.

In the shorter focal lengths I'm not very well informed. This would be my first foray into FF camera's and lenses. Would you all be so inclined to save me some hassle and tell me what you have tried that just doesn't work well and then what the gems are that really deliver the goods but don't cost what the new AF native glass costs. Although I'd love a 55mm f1.8, it's probably not in the cards for a good while. I'm looking more at the Samyang 24mm for landcape/night sky and the Samyang 85mm f1.4 for portraits.

Click to expand...

The Canon nFD 85/1.2 L will be the last 85 you'll need if you can handle its size/weight.

Lightshow said:

I've noticed that a lot of older lenses lack contrast. I don't mind processing, but some older lenses probably do better than others. Is that a matter of glass elements or coatings or design?

Click to expand...

I've never been too worried about lower contrast lenses, as contrast is much easier to add than remove in post, coatings do generally improve contrast, so does lens design and shooting conditions.

Lightshow said:

I've read good things about the Canon FDn 50mm f1.4. What about the Canon FDn 28mm f2.8 or 35mm f2?

Click to expand...

The 24/2.8 & 24/2 are quite good, 35/2 is also.

Lightshow said:

Leica R lenses also seem to be a good value, but do they deliver the goods expected from Leica?

Click to expand...

In a word, yes,

Lightshow said:

The Leica 250mm f4 R and 100mm macro look interesting to me.

Click to expand...

The 60 & 100 macro's work wonderfully.

Lightshow said:

Cheers, Seth

Click to expand...

Thanks everybody! Exceptional feedback. I'll go shopping for Hexanons, FDns, and Leica Rs and see what turns up. The Canon 85mm f1.2 is looking nice, but still way over the price of the Samyang.

Cheers, Seth

SirSeth · Jan 26, 2015

SLN001 said:
There are just too many great, and awful, MF lenses out there. If you are starting out in legacy glass let me recommend the Konica Hexanon lenses. They are well built, sharp, show great colors and good bokeh.

Another plus is the prices for most of these lenses haven't gone through the roof yet. You can get excellent lenses for very little expense.

My three favorites are the 40mm/1.8, 50mm/1.4 and 85mm/1.8.

By coincidence there have been a few recent posts showing Konica lenses at work in another forum I frequent. You may want to check these...

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-zoom-hexanon-35-70-3-5-and-nex-5-t69815.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-hexanon-ar-macro-55mm-f3-5-some-test-shots-t69810.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-hexanon-ar-24mm-f2-8-t69811.html

The Hexanons look promising. About $50 a pop. Good shots in those threads. For Macro, I'll probably stick with my Tamron 90mm f2.5. Someday I'll pick up a Tokina 90mm f2.5 and Lester Dine 105mm f2.8 though.

The 40mm f1.8 looks very compact. Is the lens adapter for the Hexanon's one of those that has to be large to move the lens away from the sensor quite a bit? That's one great thing about m-mount and probably other rangefinder lenses is that the mount is very shallow and keeps the package small and "natural" looking.

Any Hexanon's to steer away from?

Cheers, Seth

Eugene232 · Jan 26, 2015

SirSeth said:
The 40mm f1.8 looks very compact. Is the lens adapter for the Hexanon's one of those that has to be large to move the lens away from the sensor quite a bit? That's one great thing about m-mount and probably other rangefinder lenses is that the mount is very shallow and keeps the package small and "natural" looking.

Any Hexanon's to steer away from?

Cheers, Seth

--
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
--
wallygoots.smugmug.com
wallygoots.blogspot.com

hi,

couple pics taken by Hexanon 40mm 1.8,

imo cool lens and also cheap and small,

I use a $7 adapter

--
Eugene

Eugene***

Explore Eugene***’s 136 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

SLN001 · Jan 27, 2015

SirSeth said:
SLN001 said:

There are just too many great, and awful, MF lenses out there. If you are starting out in legacy glass let me recommend the Konica Hexanon lenses. They are well built, sharp, show great colors and good bokeh.

Another plus is the prices for most of these lenses haven't gone through the roof yet. You can get excellent lenses for very little expense.

My three favorites are the 40mm/1.8, 50mm/1.4 and 85mm/1.8.

By coincidence there have been a few recent posts showing Konica lenses at work in another forum I frequent. You may want to check these...

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-zoom-hexanon-35-70-3-5-and-nex-5-t69815.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-hexanon-ar-macro-55mm-f3-5-some-test-shots-t69810.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-hexanon-ar-24mm-f2-8-t69811.html

Click to expand...

The Hexanons look promising. About $50 a pop. Good shots in those threads. For Macro, I'll probably stick with my Tamron 90mm f2.5. Someday I'll pick up a Tokina 90mm f2.5 and Lester Dine 105mm f2.8 though.

The 40mm f1.8 looks very compact. Is the lens adapter for the Hexanon's one of those that has to be large to move the lens away from the sensor quite a bit? That's one great thing about m-mount and probably other rangefinder lenses is that the mount is very shallow and keeps the package small and "natural" looking.

Any Hexanon's to steer away from?

Cheers, Seth

--
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
--
wallygoots.smugmug.com
wallygoots.blogspot.com

The Konica adapter extends less than two inches from the camera. Not as small as M mount or L39 but still not bad.

I have both the Samyang/Rokinon 85mm and the Konica. They are both excellent lenses but I like the Konica rendering a little better. Besides, it is both smaller (even with the adapter) and less expensive than the S/R. A sample of the Konica...

Konica 85mm f1.8

I don't know of any 'bad' Konica lenses, although some are better than others of course. I stay away from the zooms, not because of any particular knowledge but because of the weakness of zoom lenses of the period in general.

Here is a good reference f you want to research Konica lenses (or cameras) before spending any money.

http://www.buhla.de/Foto/Konica/eHexanonHaupt.html

SirSeth · Jan 27, 2015

Excellent shots with the Konica lenses. Thanks for that. Some of the shots exhibit vignetting and some don't, is that a matter of stopping down or post processing? Otherwise the sharpness and color looks really good. How much processing to get that color and sharpness?

Best, Seth

SLN001 · Jan 27, 2015

With the exception of my Husky, those aren't my photographs, just some recent posts using Konica lenses that I referenced, so I don't know how the vignetting was processed. All I can say is that the Konica lenses are full frame and do not naturally vignette on the A7.

Rol Lei Nut · Jan 27, 2015

TimHar said:
Distagon 18mm but nothing to worry about and it's easy to correct it in LR.

I also have the 18mm Distagon (Rollei mount, along with many of the other lenses the OP uses - excellent choices), but usually don't bother correcting the vignetting as it isn't much more than when used on a film camera.

SirSeth · Jan 27, 2015

SLN001 said:
With the exception of my Husky, those aren't my photographs, just some recent posts using Konica lenses that I referenced, so I don't know how the vignetting was processed. All I can say is that the Konica lenses are full frame and do not naturally vignette on the A7.

Sweet, thanks.

Rol Lei Nut · Jan 27, 2015

babart said:
I have "full-frame" Pentax lenses in 20, 24-50, 28, 50, 100, 135, and 200mm. The Rokinon 85/1.4 would round that out very nicely, and I'm wondering if a Takumar 35/3.5, a lens considered as sharp as Zeiss lenses in their era wouldn't be a great walk around for the Sony. It's a small lens and I'd need an M42 to Sony E mount, but I like the 35 to 40mm range for a single walkaround lens.

Years ago I had and tested a Pentax 35mm f/3.5 on film : it was just as good as the 35mm Schneider Cutagon which I then considered excellent, as well as having the same "solid" looking rendering. I kept the Curtagon, but when I recently tested it on the A7 it was somewhat disappointing, clearly behind my 35mm references ( Rollei Zeiss Distagon, Leica R & M Summicrons, Leica Elmarit later model) and not as good as in the film test. Sensor compatibility problem? Testing error (probably not, the A7 allows very accurate manual focusing)? Doesn't mean though that the Pentax 3.5 couldn't be excellent...

Rol Lei Nut · Jan 27, 2015

Leica R lenses definitely "deliver the goods". The only real disadvantage is that they're big & Heavy!!

Keep in mind that the 250mm, like many other Leica lenses, came in several not immediately recognizable versions. Usually the newer version is much improved. The "Type II" of the 250mm is optically and ergonomically better than the first.

The 100mm Macro has two models: the older f/4.0 which is good but not outstanding and the f/2.8 APO which is one of the best lenses ever, but $$$

Paul Auclair · Jan 27, 2015

I now have a7II.

i need a bunch of different manual focus adapters quick.

just want to make sure before i buy 10 adapters that don't fit...

when i look at ebay or whatever i see for Sony a vast number of NEX models listed and some very few for the a7"-" mirrorless.

all NEX models are E mount same as all the a7"-" mirrorless' models, correct?

does not matter that some models are APS-c and some are FF, they all have the same "E Mount" correct?

so I can pick any adapter that fits any NEX and it will fit my a7II?

SLN001 · Jan 27, 2015

Paul Auclair said:
I now have a7II.

i need a bunch of different manual focus adapters quick.

just want to make sure before i buy 10 adapters that don't fit...

when i look at ebay or whatever i see for Sony a vast number of NEX models listed and some very few for the a7"-" mirrorless.

all NEX models are E mount same as all the a7"-" mirrorless' models, correct?

does not matter that some models are APS-c and some are FF, they all have the same "E Mount" correct?

so I can pick any adapter that fits any NEX and it will fit my a7II?

babart · Jan 27, 2015

SirSeth said:
SLN001 said:

With the exception of my Husky, those aren't my photographs, just some recent posts using Konica lenses that I referenced, so I don't know how the vignetting was processed. All I can say is that the Konica lenses are full frame and do not naturally vignette on the A7.

Click to expand...

Sweet, thanks.

Wayne Brissette · Jan 27, 2015

I had problems with a very inexpensive Contax adapter. It was not only hard to get the lens on properly, but trying to focus it was nearly impossible. I ended up buying a much more expensive one and can't complain about it. But if I had to buy a bunch of different adapters, I certainly would try to get away with the less expensive versions flooding eBay.

babart · Jan 27, 2015

SLN001 said:
Paul Auclair said:

I now have a7II.

i need a bunch of different manual focus adapters quick.

just want to make sure before i buy 10 adapters that don't fit...

when i look at ebay or whatever i see for Sony a vast number of NEX models listed and some very few for the a7"-" mirrorless.

all NEX models are E mount same as all the a7"-" mirrorless' models, correct?

does not matter that some models are APS-c and some are FF, they all have the same "E Mount" correct?

so I can pick any adapter that fits any NEX and it will fit my a7II?

Click to expand...

Paul Auclair · Jan 27, 2015

and lot's of good vintage mf lenses.

i know/suffered the up/downs of tube adapters, chipped adapters, and FL reducers.

the a7II is my first Sony ILC and i am just a little unsure exactly what the actual adapters i need.

all the E mount adapters i am looking at state they are for all the many different NEX models and few state they are for a7 mirrorless series.

i am guessing that E mount is E mount no matter about APS-C/35mmFF so any adapter that fits on any NEX will fit on my a7II?

i need 8 or 9 adapters for my a7II and did not want to order/have them arrive but not be the right mount.

Manual Focus Lenses+A7

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Paul Auclair

Guest

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Paul Auclair

Guest

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts