-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
your top 2 non-m42 mount vintage lenses
- Thread starter bfrische
- Start date
simple-joy
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,143
- Reaction score
- 1,666
Okay - getting it down to two is actually REALLY hard... I finally decided to go with two lesser known ones, because in my opinion it's always worth it to take lenses into consideration which aren't already on every vintage lens group's favorite lists:
1.) The Okaya Optic Highkor 40 mm f/1.8:
Got this tip from Toby Marshall's website. (https://toby-marshall.com/ ) He has got some seriously great images there and lots of rare or underappreciated lens recommendations. Absolutely worth it to check out.
Anyway the lens is really interesting in my opinion because it has quite a unique character combined with a nice (somewhat unusual) focal length. In addition it's fairly fast and given that it has a 25x0.5 mm thread (which is a common one among enlarging lenses) not hard to adapt to M42 via a single step ring.
LonelyFence
C what I did there?
Center of attention
Glee-tar
2.) The Steinheil Optronic 57 mm f/2.8
Unfortunately there's almost no information about this lens on the internet. It was used in some kind of Polaroid Oscillo-Camera and it is a simple Triplet (thus the similar bokeh-bubble rendering than the famous Meyer Trioplan). I think this one got a 42x0.75 thread (also known as T2) so it's also not hard to adapt. While not easy to find it's an example of industrial lenses being quite interesting choices for adapting, because many are almost completely unknown and yet often very well made and interesting when used outside of their intended application.
Molecular cooking
Already wearing the fall collection?
https://flic.kr/p/2p3UKpr
Wide open
https://flic.kr/p/2otTDBV
Running this thing into the ground
https://flic.kr/p/2oYRMQK
I obviously left out a lot of stuff and these two for sure aren't my favorite non-M42 lenses of all time, there's just too much variety (at least for me) to say that for sure. But they are unique and represent the kind of lenses I think could be interesting for a lot of people.
If you want to have some more examples I can share some of course, but it would be interesting to hear, what your main application would be, because that has a lot of influence. I personally also have a particular soft spot for enlarging lenses and recently a couple of cine- and projection lenses which could also fit the description, but while the former are on the slower side overall for the most part, the latter two groups often require quite a bit more time and material in terms of adapting.
--
Experimenting manual lens enthusiast.
sensiblename99
Leading Member
- Messages
- 858
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 566
Simple light, affordable, and works really well. Not going to get much air-play on this forum though ....
. They are more "old hat" than genuine "vintage".The entry level Canon EF 50/1.8 STM version used currently on a Panasonic G9II M4/3 camera body with PDAF and adapted focal reduced by Metabones Ultra firmware V4.10.
This lens can be electronically adapted to most ML mounts and is very well behaved in general AF terms. Giving me a cropped focal reduced capability of 75mm f1.3.
There are others to make up my EF adapted wonders. The EF 70-200/4.0L IS comes to mind as a pretty well perfect adapted wonder. But I could as easily also say 40/2.8 Pancake, 100/2.8L IS Macro, 35/1.4 MkII .... the list goes on - not all EF lenses are sweet electronically adapted but those that make the cut are very pleasant lenses to use.
Diacyclops81
Leading Member
- Messages
- 887
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 571
With apologies to those with much more exotic choices, from my too big collection of the usual lens makers, my two faves are the older 55mm f3.5 Auto MicroNikkor and the 25mm f4 for the Pen FT. Lots of others out perform these I know, so these are favorites, not necessarily “best” in any category.
Rico Tudor
Senior Member
Too many lenses on my shelf, but I can select two for interest value. First is a dual-scale Leitz Elmar 90 4-element circa 1959 which, being Visoflex capable, can be mounted on a Canon DSLR with an adapter after the head is unscrewed and a focussing barrel OUAGO is interposed. Below, I added two OTQNO extension tubes for closeup fun, wide open:
Second is the 1969 Canon FL-F 300/5.6 that exhibits extreme color correction with its pair of fluorite elements:
Wide open on a Sony A7ii.
--
Canon, Nikon, Contax RTS, Leica M, Sony, Profoto
Travis Butler
Senior Member
All apologies to more exotic lenses, but I have to go with what I use the most. <sheepish look> Also going to limit it by dropping third-party lenses available in multiple mounts including M42.
First one is easy - Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 Macro. I've used it for longer than just about any other adapted lens, with multiple cameras, and it's one I keep coming back to after experimenting with other lenses. It's earned a place in my kit bag.
Second one is harder.
The Hexanon 40/1.8 is another one I've used off and on for a long time, and it's currently the default walk around lens on my Sigma fp; but while I've taken many pics I've loved with it, it's also let me down more than once, and it doesn't have the same hold on me.
I think, since my first pick is a great all-arounder, I'll go with a specialty lens for the second, and make it a macro. The OM Zuiko 50/2 is a great macro, with very nice bokeh and great rendering... but I think I'll go for the OM 50/3.5 instead. It can't match the look of the 50/2, but it's no IQ slouch itself - and it's both relatively inexpensive, and the best-handling macro lens I've ever used. Smaller and lighter than most fast 50s, wonderful mechanical build with smooth focusing and well-chosen focusing ratio. (A macro needs precise focus, so you can't have focus shift too much too fast; but at the same time, it moves fast enough that it's not a huge chore to rack from one end to the other.) The size makes it an easy fit in any camera bag, when most macros need a lot more space.
--
Flickr at https://www.flickr.com/photos/the_prof67/ Warning: Heavy Learning in progress.
First one is easy - Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 Macro. I've used it for longer than just about any other adapted lens, with multiple cameras, and it's one I keep coming back to after experimenting with other lenses. It's earned a place in my kit bag.
Second one is harder.
The Hexanon 40/1.8 is another one I've used off and on for a long time, and it's currently the default walk around lens on my Sigma fp; but while I've taken many pics I've loved with it, it's also let me down more than once, and it doesn't have the same hold on me.
I think, since my first pick is a great all-arounder, I'll go with a specialty lens for the second, and make it a macro. The OM Zuiko 50/2 is a great macro, with very nice bokeh and great rendering... but I think I'll go for the OM 50/3.5 instead. It can't match the look of the 50/2, but it's no IQ slouch itself - and it's both relatively inexpensive, and the best-handling macro lens I've ever used. Smaller and lighter than most fast 50s, wonderful mechanical build with smooth focusing and well-chosen focusing ratio. (A macro needs precise focus, so you can't have focus shift too much too fast; but at the same time, it moves fast enough that it's not a huge chore to rack from one end to the other.) The size makes it an easy fit in any camera bag, when most macros need a lot more space.
--
Flickr at https://www.flickr.com/photos/the_prof67/ Warning: Heavy Learning in progress.
Last edited:
Le Camerique
Active member
- Messages
- 89
- Reaction score
- 61
Just one but - Canon LTM 100mm f/3.5
Mine has haze as many do - I've cleaned it but it comes back unfortunately. But even with the haze it is sharp at all f stops, has great bokeh, good close focus for a rangefinder lens and is only about 8.5oz WITH the adapter.
It's even sharp all the way through f/22 on an a7, and the center is sharp and CA free enough to look great on micro four thirds.
Mine has haze as many do - I've cleaned it but it comes back unfortunately. But even with the haze it is sharp at all f stops, has great bokeh, good close focus for a rangefinder lens and is only about 8.5oz WITH the adapter.
It's even sharp all the way through f/22 on an a7, and the center is sharp and CA free enough to look great on micro four thirds.
backsidewalkaround
Leading Member
It's an impossible task to do, but I will try anyways, knowing very well that my decision might be different tomorrow, in a week, month, year.
One lens that is among my most used lenses with consistently excellent results and thus will likely always make this list:
Contax Vario-Sonnar 4.5-5.6/100-300.
I use it as a very versatile landscape lens that is big and heavy, but not in a way a modern 100-300 zoom lens would be. I love the colors that are a little less modern, but still contrasty and bold and very saturated. I had been looking for a smaller alternative, taking some lighter 200mm prime lenses, but I've come to the conclusion that a little less weight, similar quality can in no way make up for loosing the range from 100-300mm. I usually combine it with the 2.8/28 Distagon (and sometimes also the 1.4/50 Planar).
Here is a recent sample:
It can also be used for flowers (if you crop a little ...), portraits, ... .
The other lens that I find very, very special (although I haven't used it much lately, but will again) is the Rollei (or Contax) Distagon 1.4/35.
Portraits are rendered very delicately, sufficiently sharp, with a light glow, very, very beautifully. I just can't provide a sample, because I don't have too many and they're all family photos.
Another quality the D1.4/35 offers is quite a bit of 3D pop. Stopped down it's very bold and contrasty. The borders need f/11, though. I'll let this 2-shot panorama speak for itself.
Here's an indoor shot:
--
Flickr
TheOtherSideOfBokeh
One lens that is among my most used lenses with consistently excellent results and thus will likely always make this list:
Contax Vario-Sonnar 4.5-5.6/100-300.
I use it as a very versatile landscape lens that is big and heavy, but not in a way a modern 100-300 zoom lens would be. I love the colors that are a little less modern, but still contrasty and bold and very saturated. I had been looking for a smaller alternative, taking some lighter 200mm prime lenses, but I've come to the conclusion that a little less weight, similar quality can in no way make up for loosing the range from 100-300mm. I usually combine it with the 2.8/28 Distagon (and sometimes also the 1.4/50 Planar).
Here is a recent sample:
It can also be used for flowers (if you crop a little ...), portraits, ... .
The other lens that I find very, very special (although I haven't used it much lately, but will again) is the Rollei (or Contax) Distagon 1.4/35.
Portraits are rendered very delicately, sufficiently sharp, with a light glow, very, very beautifully. I just can't provide a sample, because I don't have too many and they're all family photos.
Another quality the D1.4/35 offers is quite a bit of 3D pop. Stopped down it's very bold and contrasty. The borders need f/11, though. I'll let this 2-shot panorama speak for itself.
Here's an indoor shot:
--
Flickr
TheOtherSideOfBokeh
I like these!It can also be used for flowers (if you crop a little ...), portraits, ... .
The other lens that I find very, very special (although I haven't used it much lately, but will again) is the Rollei (or Contax) Distagon 1.4/35.
Portraits are rendered very delicately, sufficiently sharp, with a light glow, very, very beautifully. I just can't provide a sample, because I don't have too many and they're all family photos.
Another quality the D1.4/35 offers is quite a bit of 3D pop. Stopped down it's very bold and contrasty. The borders need f/11, though. I'll let this 2-shot panorama speak for itself.
Here's an indoor shot:
--
See my work at https://billfrische.com
1. Nikon Nikkor 105mm f2.5 P.C
The "P.C" version is my favorite, but the the later K and AI versions with the same lens formula as the P.C are equally good. I prefer all three of those to the last AI-s version that has a shorter focus throw and therefore is a little less precise for critical manual focusing. I also think the earlier versions are a little better built and more robust than the AI-s version, although the latter has better coatings, especially the last production versions with SIC coating (although I have never noticed a real-world difference and have owned all versions at one time or another). The earlier Sonnar formula "P" version is great as well and is preferred by some for portraits because of the smoother falloff and slightly softer appearance (very slightly in my experience).
2. Zeiss Contax 100mm f3.5 Sonnar
Simply gorgeous from wide open (which of course is more understandable given taht wide open is an f3.5 maximum aperture). Small, sharp, contrasty and vivid color. The Zeiss Contax 85mm f2.8 offers very similar attributes if you prefer that focal length.
The "P.C" version is my favorite, but the the later K and AI versions with the same lens formula as the P.C are equally good. I prefer all three of those to the last AI-s version that has a shorter focus throw and therefore is a little less precise for critical manual focusing. I also think the earlier versions are a little better built and more robust than the AI-s version, although the latter has better coatings, especially the last production versions with SIC coating (although I have never noticed a real-world difference and have owned all versions at one time or another). The earlier Sonnar formula "P" version is great as well and is preferred by some for portraits because of the smoother falloff and slightly softer appearance (very slightly in my experience).
2. Zeiss Contax 100mm f3.5 Sonnar
Simply gorgeous from wide open (which of course is more understandable given taht wide open is an f3.5 maximum aperture). Small, sharp, contrasty and vivid color. The Zeiss Contax 85mm f2.8 offers very similar attributes if you prefer that focal length.
Last edited:
backsidewalkaround
Leading Member
Thanks. Like I said: It's a very special lens (not because of sharpness, though), but very expensive nowadays.I like these!It can also be used for flowers (if you crop a little ...), portraits, ... .
The other lens that I find very, very special (although I haven't used it much lately, but will again) is the Rollei (or Contax) Distagon 1.4/35.
Portraits are rendered very delicately, sufficiently sharp, with a light glow, very, very beautifully. I just can't provide a sample, because I don't have too many and they're all family photos.
Another quality the D1.4/35 offers is quite a bit of 3D pop. Stopped down it's very bold and contrasty. The borders need f/11, though. I'll let this 2-shot panorama speak for itself.
Here's an indoor shot:
--
Flickr
TheOtherSideOfBokeh
backsidewalkaround
Leading Member
Via Lactea
Forum Enthusiast
Hi all,
there are so many depending what you do with a lens for me personal :
Visual part of the spectrum
1. Nikkor AIS 180 mm f2.8 ED (close up, landscape and for astro )
2. Tokina ATX 90 mm f2.5 Macro ( close up, landscape , portret, and astro (at f2.8)
UV-photography:
- Nikkor AF/D or AI, E series 50 mm f1.8
- Funjinon 55 mm f2.2 , dirt cheap, close up, oh and soap bubble bokeh
IR-photography
- 24 mm f2.8 Nikkor / Canon FD
- AIS 55 mm f3.5 micro Nikkor
there are so many depending what you do with a lens for me personal :
Visual part of the spectrum
1. Nikkor AIS 180 mm f2.8 ED (close up, landscape and for astro )
2. Tokina ATX 90 mm f2.5 Macro ( close up, landscape , portret, and astro (at f2.8)
UV-photography:
- Nikkor AF/D or AI, E series 50 mm f1.8
- Funjinon 55 mm f2.2 , dirt cheap, close up, oh and soap bubble bokeh
IR-photography
- 24 mm f2.8 Nikkor / Canon FD
- AIS 55 mm f3.5 micro Nikkor
fuji_phil_e
Leading Member
- Messages
- 627
- Reaction score
- 1,119
SMC Pentax-M* 300mm f4
Minolta MD 100mm f2.5
The Pentax
And again
Minolta
Same
Minolta MD 100mm f2.5
The Pentax
And again
Minolta
Same
have you seen a compare of this to the
S-M-C/Super Takumar 300mm F4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Telephoto Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
S-M-C/Super Takumar 300mm F4 lens reviews and specifications. The S-M-C / Super Takumar 300 mm f/4 is a classic telephoto prime lens for M42 screw-mount cameras, produced by Asahi Optical Co. between 1965 and 197
www.pentaxforums.com
? the link above came with my takumar set
-b
UncleVanya
Senior Member
My favorite of all time is the Pentax A* 85/1.4 - the lens is quite sharp and has great bokeh but honestly I loved how it felt in the hand and how smooth the focusing was.
I sold my pristine copy before I got into mirrorless because my ability to focus it was getting poor due to eyesight. I like the FA 31 and FA 77 I replaced it with - but they don’t feel the same in hand.
I sold my pristine copy before I got into mirrorless because my ability to focus it was getting poor due to eyesight. I like the FA 31 and FA 77 I replaced it with - but they don’t feel the same in hand.
wheresrunnicles
Leading Member
- Messages
- 592
- Reaction score
- 572
My OM 50/1.8 (late model) will always have a special place in my heart. It was my first vintage lens and my go to portrait lens when I was shooting MFT. Now I’m on FF I prefer my CZJ 50/1.8 pancolar, but the old OM can still deliver.
OM 50/1.8 (stopped down, didn’t record the exact aperture but F4 or F8)
I have a few OM lenses. My 500/F8 mirror lens is handy if I want to shoot the moon
OM 500/F8 mirror lens
Probably my most used these days is my OM 135/3.5, until someone makes a compact modern 135 for e-mount…
OM 135/F3.5 (late model which some people say has better coatings). Probably at F8.
I just picked up a CZJ Biotar 58/F2, but I haven’t shot it enough yet to form an opinion.
OM 50/1.8 (stopped down, didn’t record the exact aperture but F4 or F8)
I have a few OM lenses. My 500/F8 mirror lens is handy if I want to shoot the moon
OM 500/F8 mirror lens
Probably my most used these days is my OM 135/3.5, until someone makes a compact modern 135 for e-mount…
OM 135/F3.5 (late model which some people say has better coatings). Probably at F8.
I just picked up a CZJ Biotar 58/F2, but I haven’t shot it enough yet to form an opinion.
Similar threads
- Question
- Crazy Micro Four Thirds Dude
- Adapted Lens Talk
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum