Favorite adapted/vintage lenses with A7 series?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 4,723
Re: Favorite adapted/vintage lenses with A7 series?
1

I'm recycling some of my old posts about "Legendary" and "Favorite Adapted Landscape Lenses with a Wow Look" here:

These are some of my favorite landscape lenses.

My own requirement is that they have very nice rendering, as well as sharp extreme corners at least by by f/8.0. I rarely use f/11 and f/16 practically never.

Rollei/CY Zeiss 18 4.0 (best at medium distances)

Olympus OM 18 3.5 (great at infinity, but heavy vignetting - correction useful).

Rollei Zeiss 35 2.8 (different optics from CY versions - tiny!)

Rollei Zeiss 85 2.8 (different optics from CY versions - tiny!)

Leica WATE 16-18-21

Leica Tele-Elmar 135 4.0

Leica R 35 2.8 Mk III

CY Zeiss 35-70 (great rendering, but didn't keep it because of limited range)

Leica R 60 2.8 Macro

Leica R 21-35 (currently my most used lens, usually matched with an 85/90/100).

Zeiss ZM 85 4.0

Olympus OM 90 2.0 Macro

Tokina 90 2.5 ('Bokina')

CY Zeiss 100 3.5

CY Zeiss 100 2.8 Macro

CY Zeiss 100-300

Pentax K 28 3.5

Maybe not "Wow", but tiny and relatively inexpensive 'take everywhere' lenses:

Olympus OM 21 3.5 MC

Olympus OM 24 2.8 MC

Olympus OM 28 3.5

'Wow' rendering, but tendentially heavy for carrying around for landscapes:

Canon EF 135 2.0 L

Canon EF 200 2.8 L II

Rollei/CY Zeiss 35 1.4

Not adapted, but the Zeiss Loxias make great landscape lenses, complete with special rendering...

These were the "Legandary" ones, some overlapping but more detailed comments.

-CY/Rollei Zeiss 50 1.4. My favorite 50 (not that I'm a great 50mm fan).

-CY Zeiss 85 2.8. Had it, sold it. Good, but I like some other 85/90s better.

- Voigtlander 180 4.0 SL Apo. Have it. Good. Specs/weight on paper are great. In practice, I don't use it much.

-Nikon 55 2.8 Macro AIs. Good. Find it flattens the image a bit in non-macro use. Prefer the Leica R 60 2.8 Macro.

-Nikon 105 2.5 AIs. Nice. Again, there are some 85/90/100mm lenses I like even better. AI version is pretty big & heavy.

-Nikon 180 2.8 ED AIs. Good lens, but legendary? Very bulky.

- Pentax 28 3.5 K. Very nice. But the Loxia 25 is hogging the 24-28 FLs for me.

-Canon TS-E 24 3.5 II. Lovely lens, but huge & heavy. Sold because I never used it.

-Leica M Summicron 35 2.0 Mk. IV ("Bokeh King"). Maybe not really a Bokeh King, but a very nice, tiny and light lens. The R Summicron 35 2.0 version is great with film.

-Rollei & CY Zeiss 35 1.4. Very nice rendering. My Desert Island lens. In the real world, it's a bit large and heavy.

-CY Zeiss 35 2.8 MM. Very flat field for a 35mm, though with a slight dip 2/3 of the way out. Still one of the best for landscapes, architecture & reproductions.

-Rollei Zeiss 35 2.8. Optically different from the above. Field isn't as flat as the CY version (though in practice things are fine by about f/5.6 or so), but it has more character (and is smaller/lighter).

-CY Zeiss 35-70. Very nice. One of those lenses which can make the dullest light look almost decent. Sold it because I found the zoom range too limiting considering its size & weight.

-Leica R 60 Macro. Simply does everything extremely well.

-Nikkor 200mm 4.0 AI/S. Probably the best non-APO 200mm, decently light as well.

-Olympus OM 90mm 2.0 Macro. Takes portraits as well as a 90mm Summicron, landscapes as well as the CY 85 2.8 and 1:2 Macros as well. What not to like? (o.k., weight could be lower...)

-Tokina 90 2.5 Macro ("Bokina"). Very sharp at all distances. Bokeh: yes. Weight: lighter than the Olympus 90 2.0. Flare: can be present (only real drawback).

-Zeiss ZM 85 4.0. Does everything well in a small package.

-CY Zeiss 100 3.5. As far as pure sharpness across the field at medium/long distances goes, probably my best 85/90/100mm lens. A great landscape choice. Maybe a bit less "character" and atmosphere than some others.

-Canon FD 80-200 4.0 L. Very. very nice. Not impressed by its build quality, decided to keep the CY Zeiss version instead.

-CY Zeiss 80-200 4.0. Canon FD version might have a few points over it optically, but I didn't enjoy using it. The Zeiss feels more like a reliable workhorse.

-Canon EF 70-200 4.0 L (both IS & non-IS). Great user.

-CY Zeiss 100-300. Her Majesty... Sharpeness, contrast, colors - nearly perfect. Only drawback is that lack of AF and OIS can make itself felt.

Should be "Legendary" but less known, expensive or injustly overshadowed by others...

-Leica WATE 16-18-21 4.0. The Loxia 21 is a better 21mm, but the WATE is smaller, lighter and offers FLs down to 16mm...

-Leica R 21-35. Not perfect, but a very good user with great rendering. Gets the best out of dull light.

-Leica R 35 2.8 Mk. III. Very nice & contrasty. Avoid the optically different versions I & II.

-Minolta M-Rokkor 28mm 2.8. Have white spot problem, but tiny and sharp. Works well with Sony FF sensors!

-Canon TS-E 90 2.8 Mk. I. Nicely sharp for landscapes. Tilting can be useful.

-Canon EF 100 2,8 Macro USM. Very nice. Big & heavy for carrying around, but delivers.

-Leica R 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt. Great for longer distances.

-Olympus OM 21 3.5 MC. Life for UWAs is hard in the age of the Loxia 21, but the Oly is light, tiny and works well under the motto "f/8.0 and be there".

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow