Reading mode: Light Dark

Cheap manual focus SLR lens with good resolution at f2 on the CX sensor

  • Thread starter Thread starter rich_cx139
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
Some quick sample shots of the Contax G 2/45 planar on a V3. When I get a moment, I will try and get some decent ones

The Bokeh of the Planar is known to be not wonderful until you stop it down to f4 or so.

Generally, these seem to be better than I expected. Should get the C/Y adapter in a few days to try.

I also read that the Minoltas 50 MC/MD are worth trying.

My observation so far is that the planar is much better at f2 on the CX than either of the 1.8/35 G DX or the 1.8/50G at 1.8.

Bergonia Firecracker a bit worse for wear now in the autumn. At f2 not much is actually in focus
Bergonia Firecracker a bit worse for wear now in the autumn. At f2 not much is actually in focus

The wall shot
The wall shot
 
Last edited:
rich_cx139 said:
Some quick sample shots of the Contax G 2/45 planar on a V3. When I get a moment, I will try and get some decent ones

The Bokeh of the Planar is known to be not wonderful until you stop it down to f4 or so.

Generally, these seem to be better than I expected. Should get the C/Y adapter in a few days to try.

I also read that the Minoltas 50 MC/MD are worth trying.

My observation so far is that the planar is much better at f2 on the CX than either of the 1.8/35 G DX or the 1.8/50G at 1.8.

Bergonia Firecracker a bit worse for wear now in the autumn. At f2 not much is actually in focus
Bergonia Firecracker a bit worse for wear now in the autumn. At f2 not much is actually in focus

The wall shot
The wall shot
Click to expand...
Looks very inspiring!

--
tordseriksson (at) gmail.....
Owner of a handful of Nikon cameras. And a few lenses.
WSSA #456
 
Sorry for late post, but how about the Takumar 55mm f2? It measures very well at f2 (and above):

Loading…

www.ephotozine.com
 
rich_cx139 said:
Futax said:
Sorry for late post, but how about the Takumar 55mm f2? It measures very well at f2 (and above):

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/asahi-super-takumar-55mm-f-2-0-m42-vintage-lens-review-32105
Click to expand...
Thanks Keith - that is just the sort of lens I am looking for and it’s cheap so I can try it on a n1 and resell if nec. The ephotozone review is very good and I tend to trust them more than others.

I presume this is the later model, with the thorated glass, to get this sort of performance.

Never looked properly at the m42 Super Takumars or the SMC ones - might see about getting some and trying them on full frame as well .

Just about to try some C/Y lenses ( which have been my main MF lenses for ever ) having got hold of a cheap N1 £10 adapter which is actually quite good surprisingly.

cheers

richard
Click to expand...
Well, the one to go for would be the later Super-Multi-Coated version, as its flare resistance and contrast will be superior. I'm not sure about which would be thoriated.

The Takumars are beautifully made lenses which focus like silk. I have a 135/4, and that's very sharp wide open as well.

Have fun!
 
Thanks for all your help here!

I have transferred my search over to the adapted lens forum since I now seem to have veered off towards 50mm ish "legacy" glass for full frame.

Just to summarise, if any one is interested:

At about 50 mm for cheaper older glass, the best for N1 I have found so far seems to be the 2/45 Planar from the contax g system. Other candidates include the canon nFD 1.4/50, the canon FD 1.2/55 SSC. There are plenty of more expensive / "collectors" lenses. Most, if not all, of these are variants on the double Gauss.

A good resource that someone pointed me to is here

Note: Bokeh is a secondary consideration for my application - that of the 2/45 planar is not wonderful for example.

Neither of the cheaper standard Nikons which I can MF on N1 are sharp enough: the 1.8/50G FX and the 1.8/35G DX ( unless I have bad copies ).

There are obviously plenty of more expensive lenses that would work fine, the Voigtlander SL's among the cheapest (used ) of these and the next probably being the ART 1.4/50. The best of the cheaper ones seems to be the Nikkor 1.2/50 ai-s from tests/reviews.

Looks like the 1.8/85 AF-D or AF-S G might work well ( thanks Paul ) - the only 85 I have is the C/Y 1.4/85 Planar doesn't - again not enough resolution at f2. Might get the 85 af-s for general use since they are getting cheaper now used.

richard
 
Last edited:
Futax said:
rich_cx139 said:
Futax said:
Sorry for late post, but how about the Takumar 55mm f2? It measures very well at f2 (and above):

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/asahi-super-takumar-55mm-f-2-0-m42-vintage-lens-review-32105
Click to expand...
Thanks Keith - that is just the sort of lens I am looking for and it’s cheap so I can try it on a n1 and resell if nec. The ephotozone review is very good and I tend to trust them more than others.

I presume this is the later model, with the thorated glass, to get this sort of performance.

Never looked properly at the m42 Super Takumars or the SMC ones - might see about getting some and trying them on full frame as well .

Just about to try some C/Y lenses ( which have been my main MF lenses for ever ) having got hold of a cheap N1 £10 adapter which is actually quite good surprisingly.

cheers

richard
Click to expand...
Well, the one to go for would be the later Super-Multi-Coated version, as its flare resistance and contrast will be superior. I'm not sure about which would be thoriated.

The Takumars are beautifully made lenses which focus like silk. I have a 135/4, and that's very sharp wide open as well.

Have fun!
Click to expand...
Thanks Keith.

I actually picked up a super tak 2/55 ( thoriated ) for £15 so I am just trying that out on a full frame camera. Seems a nice lens - so far it looks near to the C/Y 1.7/55 on FF.
 
rich_cx139 said:
Thanks for all your help here!

I have transferred my search over to the adapted lens forum since I now seem to have veered off towards 50mm ish "legacy" glass for full frame.

Just to summarise, if any one is interested:

At about 50 mm for cheaper older glass, the best for N1 I have found so far seems to be the 2/45 Planar from the contax g system. Other candidates include the canon nFD 1.4/50, the canon FD 1.2/55 SSC. There are plenty of more expensive / "collectors" lenses. Most, if not all, of these are variants on the double Gauss.

A good resource that someone pointed me to is here

Note: Bokeh is a secondary consideration for my application - that of the 2/45 planar is not wonderful for example.

Neither of the cheaper standard Nikons which I can MF on N1 are sharp enough: the 1.8/50G FX and the 1.8/35G DX ( unless I have bad copies ).
Click to expand...
The Nikon 40/2.8 Micro is amazingly sharp, if not as fast as the 35 you considered.
Member said:
There are obviously plenty of more expensive lenses that would work fine, the Voigtlander SL's among the cheapest (used ) of these and the next probably being the ART 1.4/50. The best of the cheaper ones seems to be the Nikkor 1.2/50 ai-s from tests/reviews.
Click to expand...
The Voigtlanders are indeed nice (the 20 being helped by the crop!).
Member said:
Looks like the 1.8/85 AF-D or AF-S G might work well ( thanks Paul ) - the only 85 I have is the C/Y 1.4/85 Planar doesn't - again not enough resolution at f2. Might get the 85 af-s for general use since they are getting cheaper now used.
Click to expand...
I had the 85/1.8 G but switched to the 85/3.5 VR Micro. which I prefer (if not as fast).
Member said:
richard
Click to expand...
Tord
 
Hey Rich, did you ever do a post with the C/Y adapter and your lenses? I am curious how the Zeiss lenses worked.
 
Paul Pasco said:
Hey Rich, did you ever do a post with the C/Y adapter and your lenses? I am curious how the Zeiss lenses worked.
Click to expand...
Hi Paul - no I haven’t and thanks for reminding me. I actually ordered a chipped gfoto adapter from russia - should be here early november. It is canon ef to N1 so I can use c/y and m42 to ef then to Nikon 1.

I haven’t found any 50 ish planar type better at f2 than the contax g 2/45. The nikon 2/50 ais is better but is too expensive
 
Last edited:
rich_cx139 said:
Paul Pasco said:
Hey Rich, did you ever do a post with the C/Y adapter and your lenses? I am curious how the Zeiss lenses worked.
Click to expand...
Hi Paul - no I haven’t and thanks for reminding me. I actually ordered a chipped gfoto adapter from russia - should be here early november. It is canon ef to N1 so I can use c/y and m42 to ef then to Nikon 1.

I haven’t found any 50 ish planar type better at f2 than the contax g 2/45. The nikon 2/50 ais is better but is too expensive
Click to expand...
Won't the EF to N1 take up all the space and adding the others make it act like an extension tube?
 
Hello Paul

its ok - I am just looking to adapt c/y and pentax m42. Both have flange distances larger than eos. In fact I used the same method adapting to m43 via ef for a focal reducers. I already have the (thin) c/y and m42 to ef eos.
 
Last edited:
rich_cx139 said:
Hello Paul

its ok - I am just looking to adapt c/y and pentax m42. Both have flange distances larger than eos. In fact I used the same method adapting to m43 via ef for a focal reducers. I already have the (thin) c/y and m42 to ef eos.
Click to expand...
My point was that if the EF to N1 adapter is a normal one, meaning that it provides infinity focus, then adding either of the other two adapters, even if they are thin, will limit the focus range, but maybe that is not a concern in your use.
 
Paul Pasco said:
rich_cx139 said:
Hello Paul

its ok - I am just looking to adapt c/y and pentax m42. Both have flange distances larger than eos. In fact I used the same method adapting to m43 via ef for a focal reducers. I already have the (thin) c/y and m42 to ef eos.
Click to expand...
My point was that if the EF to N1 adapter is a normal one, meaning that it provides infinity focus, then adding either of the other two adapters, even if they are thin, will limit the focus range, but maybe that is not a concern in your use.
Click to expand...
That's incorrect.

His adapter for using Pentax (or C/Y) lenses on Canon cameras creates the correct registration distance for Canon cameras. The adapter for Canon lenses to N1 cameras then adds the correct distance for N1 cameras.

I have a chipped adapter for my A-mount lenses, and I also use T-mount lenses in a similar way: T-mount lens > T to A adapter > A to N1 adapter.
 
Last edited:
sybersitizen said:
Paul Pasco said:
rich_cx139 said:
Hello Paul

its ok - I am just looking to adapt c/y and pentax m42. Both have flange distances larger than eos. In fact I used the same method adapting to m43 via ef for a focal reducers. I already have the (thin) c/y and m42 to ef eos.
Click to expand...
My point was that if the EF to N1 adapter is a normal one, meaning that it provides infinity focus, then adding either of the other two adapters, even if they are thin, will limit the focus range, but maybe that is not a concern in your use.
Click to expand...
That's incorrect.

His adapter for using Pentax (or C/Y) lenses on Canon cameras creates the correct registration distance for Canon cameras. The adapter for Canon lenses to N1 cameras then adds the correct distance for N1 cameras.

I have a chipped adapter for my A-mount lenses, and I also use T-mount lenses in a similar way: T-mount lens > T to A adapter > A to N1 adapter.
Click to expand...
Exactly - thanks sybersitizen - a clear explanation unlike mine.
 
rich_cx139 said:
sybersitizen said:
Paul Pasco said:
rich_cx139 said:
Hello Paul

its ok - I am just looking to adapt c/y and pentax m42. Both have flange distances larger than eos. In fact I used the same method adapting to m43 via ef for a focal reducers. I already have the (thin) c/y and m42 to ef eos.
Click to expand...
My point was that if the EF to N1 adapter is a normal one, meaning that it provides infinity focus, then adding either of the other two adapters, even if they are thin, will limit the focus range, but maybe that is not a concern in your use.
Click to expand...
That's incorrect.

His adapter for using Pentax (or C/Y) lenses on Canon cameras creates the correct registration distance for Canon cameras. The adapter for Canon lenses to N1 cameras then adds the correct distance for N1 cameras.

I have a chipped adapter for my A-mount lenses, and I also use T-mount lenses in a similar way: T-mount lens > T to A adapter > A to N1 adapter.
Click to expand...
Exactly - thanks sybersitizen - a clear explanation unlike mine.
Click to expand...
Ok! I get it now, thanks for taking the time to explain. Without seeing hardware in front of me I was thinking about this all wrong.
 
Thanks for all your suggestions.

NOTE: this is not about Bokeh or lens rendition / character but purely about lens resolution at f2 on the CX sensor.

After a limited amount of testing and some research, my conclusions so far are:

Among the traditional double Gauss 'legacy' 50's, at f2:

the best is the Nikon1.2/50 ai-s ( at f2 ) - by some margin.

there are a few others below this including the nFD 1.4/50 and a Topcon.

the 2/45 planar is also quite good.

most of the 1.4's do not regain resolution until f2.8 or f4. This includes the C/Y and Zeiss 'Classic' planars as well as the Voigts and the ai-s/AF-D/AF-S Nikkors ( and also the 1.4/50 ART ).

More modern lens designs, not optimised for f4-f5.6, such as the Milvus/Otus Distagons and the Nikon Z are much much better fully open than the traditional double Gauss derivatives as expected.

Moving on to the ( less expemsive ) 85's: As far as I can see, the 1.4's suffer the same as the 1.4 50's which is low contrast AND resolution fully open - picking up in centre resolution at 2.8 or higher f no.

It would appear that the Nikkor 85 1.8 AF-D ( thanks Paul ) is about the sharpest at F2 both at centre field and at the edges of the older Nikkors and planars. The AF-S G version seems weaker. A useful resource is the Optical Limits site.

Therefore - no 'cheap' options for what I was looking for. I already have the 2/45 planar but that is not quite crisp enough.

The 1.2/50 ai-s is still over £500 used.

The best option would seem to be the 1.8/85 AF-D which, at about £250, used is what I am going for - when I have the funds.

This all presumes that good performance on FX/DX indicates good performance on CX - we shall see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
p
Previous
w
Next unread
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top