Still looks great to me. I'm not a professional photographer so I don't pixel peep or pay too much attention to fine details. As long as I can produce good quality images, I'm happy. Thanks for the tip and information. You probably just saved me a lot of money.yes, fotasy is one of the good adapters, it should work fine without modifications.
Here's a test shot with NX300 and the old 55mm f1.4, stopped down to f2 or something close. It's a bit soft wide open.
Porst 55mm f1.4 @ f2
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Rokinon/Samyang 85mm f1.4 for Samsung nx300
- Thread starter JQuonDo
- Start date
bancika...I need to pick your brain again. It's kind of hard to find the old school lenses or I just don't know what websites to look at, but I came across a Vintage f/2.8 135mm Prime Tele Lens w/Macro Pentax K by zikkor for $50.00 . Do you have experience with this brand or lens? and would this be equivalent to a 85mm on the nx300?
Thanks,
Haven't heard of it. I usually try to goggle for reviews and forum threads that mention a lens I came across in ads. You can often find a lot of information. When looking for an old lens make sure it's not full of dust, that aperture blades are dry and there are no scratches. All rings should turn smoothly.
Sounds good. Thanks
Unless you are well versed in legacy lens, stay away from unknown brands like Zikkor.
Minolta, Vivitar, Canon FD mount is relatively cheap and good quality.
The only problem with legacy lenses is that they are a bottomless pit, there are literally thousands of them.
Start sensibly, best bets are 50 and 135mm, maybe 35mm. Anything wider is either very expensive or not as good as your kit lens. Zooms also tend to be seriously inferior to modern zooms.
Ebay works, local camera clubs, flea markets,...
Start sensibly, best bets are 50 and 135mm, maybe 35mm. Anything wider is either very expensive or not as good as your kit lens. Zooms also tend to be seriously inferior to modern zooms.
Ebay works, local camera clubs, flea markets,...
SpacemanUA
Senior Member
There are TONS of 135/2.8 lenses. All of them have the same optical scheme and make almost no difference between each other. Almost all of them are pretty good. Check pentaxforums, they have pretty nice legacy lenses database. I used to have a few samples of Sears 135/2.8 with macro zone. It has some kind of controllable soft-effect, pretty interesting but of course not for serious work.
Overall, I dont really like this 135/2.8s. I reccomend you to go for 50/1.4 which are cheap too. I have owned Konica Hexanon 57/1.4 which cost me about 90$ and it was great
Thanks for the tip. I actually decided not to purchase the Zikkor because I'm unfamiliar with legacy lenses. I did find another listing for a Minolta - PF 135mm, but it hasn't received good feedback from my research.
The community has been really helpful and I greatly appreciate it.
Are there any benefits of going with modern lenses over optical, outside of Image stabilization and auto focus? Prices on the legacy lenses seem very affordable, but am I giving anything up going legacy versus modern.
No, the optics are not just as good, but for lenses with simpler designs (e.g. 50mm primes) they are not too bad compared with many more consumer modern lenses, e.g. the Canon 50mm f/1.8 or most makers kit lenses, etc... but they're not going to compare well against something like the new Sigma 50. Old zoom lenses are mostly pretty bad, I would stick to the primes only going that route.
SpacemanUA
Senior Member
The only reason to buy old manual lens is if you dont have any possibility to get modern native lens. New lenses are just way ahead.
1. Autofocus. Its just so nice to have AF in lens that it beats every other argument.
2. Eletronic aperture. Correct metering. And you can look what aperture value was on every shot. You cant do that with manual lens obviously.
3. Optical quality. There are very few old lenses that can be on par with modern ones. And I bet there are no old lenses that can tie with new mirrorless optics. Resolution -> sharpness, CAs, distortion (and its auto-correction) etc. Modern is modern.
4. Size and weight. You just cant find another 30/2 with same quality and size as Samsung's. And all that for 200$ only.
Legacy lenses are tempting, but you will end with native lenses anyway. So I recommend you to not waste your time. Samsung's lenses are so cheap that there is no reason to look at old optics.
Good info. I do have the 30mm pancake and love it, but I was looking at the 85mm for portraits, but it's about $800 here, which was why I was opting to get the Rokinon 85mm Manual. The discussion eventually led to legacy lenses and due to my lack of experience, I was intrigued.
Of all the non nx lenses I have (legacy ones,modern Nikon ones are not that useful due to electronic aperture control) I mostly use following:
I have somewhere Russian 85/2 in m42 mount (jupiter 9) but it's a specialty lens, nice for portraits, but one trick pony.
From time to time 300/4 and other "exotic" glass, but rarer and rarer. They are heavy and no ois.
Fast normal and shorter tele lens have very simple designs and are as good as they get, especially on crop sensor that will hide imperfections around the edges of full frame.
Something on this forum ate my very long message...
TL ;DR : konica 135/3.2, helios 44-2, konica 57/1.2 (that I'm selling), chinon/tomioka 55/1.4 and used to konica 40/1.8 before 30mm nx.
I have somewhere Russian 85/2 in m42 mount (jupiter 9) but it's a specialty lens, nice for portraits, but one trick pony.
From time to time 300/4 and other "exotic" glass, but rarer and rarer. They are heavy and no ois.
Fast normal and shorter tele lens have very simple designs and are as good as they get, especially on crop sensor that will hide imperfections around the edges of full frame.
Something on this forum ate my very long message...
TL ;DR : konica 135/3.2, helios 44-2, konica 57/1.2 (that I'm selling), chinon/tomioka 55/1.4 and used to konica 40/1.8 before 30mm nx.
Last edited:
I have to disagree with you on point 3. In the old days photography is a very expensive hobby, and therefore manufacturer often do not have cost saving in mind they tend to use high quality material for the glass, what is lacking in the old days is computer design and the latest coating technology. But IMO, the glass quality can sometimes made up for it. Modern lens often are design with costing saving in mind and try to balance between quality and cost. Also, in the past there is less restriction in use of material in glass, things that improve optical quality like lead, various rare earth or radioactive material can sometimes be found in legacy lens. Modern lens often plastic lens inside, if you think about the difference in optical quality for plastic lens and glass lens (or even crystal), then you know what I mean.
I am not saying old lens are always better, but some have a unique optical quality that is difficult to be found in lower cost modern lens. And the cost of a modern lens with good optical quality, like the NX 85/f1.4, is very expensive.
I wouldn't say it's the only reason to get legacy glass. You may enjoy the process of shooting with them more. Some may also have a unique quality that you don't get in modern lenses (perhaps bokeh with a certain character, or a particular flare pattern). They may also be more cross compatible, for instance, modern Canon EF lenses have an electronic aperture so using them on other cameras usually means you're stuck using them wide open (probably an exception for the electronic adapter to Sony cameras, but I haven't looked into that). Using lenses designed for manual use alleviates this issue (e.g. Samyang/Rokinon), but also has fewer other advantages over legacy lenses. The situation he refers to can be the case quite often though, the cost between 50 quid for the 135 f/2.8 you found and the 50-150 f/2.8 Samsung lens is huge. The gap in features and quality is also large, but depending on what the main things you're looking for from the purchase are....
SpacemanUA
Senior Member
They always say that. "Good old lenses with glass and metal". Sure. But I can't remember any, say, 50mm lens that is sharper than NX 45/1.8.
This "pure glass" in old lenses makes no sense if it is worse than modern plastic (well, glass-and-plastic sandwich in some elements to be correct).
And if you will look at the cost of old 85/1.8 lenses like Minolta - it costs the same as modern Samyang 85/1.4. Sure, if you need something special like swivel bokeh you will go for Helios-40 85/1.5 (or its "father" Biotar) or cheap Helios-77 (which is a better version of wide-spread even outside of CIS Helios-44 lens) for 50$ or so. I used to have the last one. Nice toy
And this kind of bokeh can be used in some cases, but not all the time. But you really wont use that if you have NX45.
flip 21
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,439
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 173
Hi Tecno.
Can It do focus peaking even with a lens using a dumb adapter. I mean if I use a Samyang EOS mount with an EOS to NX adapter will I be able to do focus peaking, pressing the OK button? What are the disavantages between using a native NX lens, and the same lens using an adapter?
Thanks
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum