Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?

Started Jan 29, 2013 | Discussions
Kevdog
Kevdog Senior Member • Posts: 1,412
Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?

I don't shoot portraits enough (or... at all really) to justify the 45mm or 75mm.  But I'd like to play with a legacy lens in that range.

I've found many on the local craigslist listings.

Any hints for telling the good, the bad and the ugly apart?  There are many many varied choices and I'm trying to find the right one.

Also, if the person isn't sure what mount it is for, is there any way to tell?

I found these so far:

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/pho/3543647141.html

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/nph/pho/3574176640.html

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/pho/3567006066.html

Thanks!

 Kevdog's gear list:Kevdog's gear list
Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH
Domagoj Batinic Contributing Member • Posts: 534
Re: Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?
1

Kevdog wrote:

I don't shoot portraits enough (or... at all really) to justify the 45mm or 75mm. But I'd like to play with a legacy lens in that range.

I've found many on the local craigslist listings.

Any hints for telling the good, the bad and the ugly apart? There are many many varied choices and I'm trying to find the right one.

Also, if the person isn't sure what mount it is for, is there any way to tell?

I found these so far:

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/pho/3543647141.html

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/nph/pho/3574176640.html

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/pho/3567006066.html

Thanks!

first link - nikkor and 2 vivitars are good lenses especially for that price, those 3 lenses on ebay go for about 350$. 90mm vivitar is nice macro lens. you'll need nikon f to m43 adapter

second link - om zuiko 50mm/1.8 is a nice lens , small , price is so-so, on ebay you can get it for few bucks less

third link - is useless because it's rangefinder with lens that is not removable from the camera

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

 Domagoj Batinic's gear list:Domagoj Batinic's gear list
Olympus D-620L Olympus C-2000 Zoom Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Olympus SP-550 UZ Olympus SP-560 UZ +11 more
tedolf
tedolf Forum Pro • Posts: 26,480
Re: Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?
2

Kevdog wrote:

I don't shoot portraits enough (or... at all really) to justify the 45mm or 75mm. But I'd like to play with a legacy lens in that range.

I've found many on the local craigslist listings.

Any hints for telling the good, the bad and the ugly apart? There are many many varied choices and I'm trying to find the right one.

Also, if the person isn't sure what mount it is for, is there any way to tell?

I found these so far:

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/pho/3543647141.html

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/nph/pho/3574176640.html

http://phoenix.craigslist.org/evl/pho/3567006066.html

Thanks!

If you stick to the major brands, with not too wide an aperture (probably not wider than f/1.7) it would be hard to go wrong as long as the lens is in good shape.

Registration distance varied between makes. Konica I think had the shortest, Nikon the longest so that effects the lenght of the adapter, and the extent to which the lens had to be a retro-focus design. I think that is why the Konica lenses are so popular here-shortest registration distance thus designed more like a ragefindere lens.

That is also something to think about. 40mm is a good portrait lenght on a 4/3 sensor. Rangefinder lenses in that focal lenght (LTM/M39 or M mount) are very compact, and the adapter is only about 9mm long making for an extemely compact package.

If that doesn't matter to you, look for a longish SLR 50mm lens, e.g. 52-57mm and you will get a little more depth compresion in tighter head shots.

Tedolph

 tedolf's gear list:tedolf's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT +8 more
ju_ju
ju_ju Senior Member • Posts: 1,077
Re: Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?

Kev. I don't shoot portrait much at all. I do have both the 75 and 45. I use them both for landscape as they are sharp. Enough of that and back to legacy. I have a pile of different lenses. Several OM, Ziess,Jupiter, induster, canon fd and more. All picked up from junk and charity shops. It is a good starting point if you have access to these types of shops. Old Fed cameras have the industers, Zenith have the Hellios and so on.Cheap as chips , which allows for a few mistakes. The problem with old lenses that can be an issue is the dreaded fungi. A lot of old lenses do have it. Luckily the old simple lenses such as the jupiter's, induster's, Helios are really easy to take apart and clean. They are mostly  plain glass and no coating for the fungi to ruin.

food for thought hope it helps in anyway.  

 ju_ju's gear list:ju_ju's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 30D +25 more
Domagoj Batinic Contributing Member • Posts: 534
Re: Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?

tedolf wrote:

Registration distance varied between makes. Konica I think had the shortest, Nikon the longest so that effects the lenght of the adapter, and the extent to which the lens had to be a retro-focus design. I think that is why the Konica lenses are so popular here-shortest registration distance thus designed more like a ragefindere lens.

Konica AR mount has about 2mm longer registration distance than 4/3 registration distance. Nikon f has about 6mm longer registration distance than Konica.

Konica rangefinder lenses have much shorter registration distance (like all RF lenses), but those lenses are also pricey

http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

 Domagoj Batinic's gear list:Domagoj Batinic's gear list
Olympus D-620L Olympus C-2000 Zoom Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Olympus SP-550 UZ Olympus SP-560 UZ +11 more
tedolf
tedolf Forum Pro • Posts: 26,480
My recolection is.....
1

Domagoj Batinic wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Registration distance varied between makes. Konica I think had the shortest, Nikon the longest so that effects the lenght of the adapter, and the extent to which the lens had to be a retro-focus design. I think that is why the Konica lenses are so popular here-shortest registration distance thus designed more like a ragefindere lens.

Konica AR mount has about 2mm longer registration distance than 4/3 registration distance. Nikon f has about 6mm longer registration distance than Konica.

that if the focal length is shorter than the registration distance the lens has to be a retrofocus design.  I think the Nikon registation distance was very close to 50mm so the standard Nikon lens might have been slightly retro-focus  or close to it.

The Konica mount was shorter as you say so a standard 50mm AR lens would not have to be a retro-focus design.

Konica rangefinder lenses have much shorter registration distance (like all RF lenses), but those lenses are also pricey

Yes, the standard M39 or Leica M mount was about 26mm as I remember so any focal leght significantly above that would not need to be a retro-focus design. That is part of the mysique about moderate wide angle and standard focal lenght rangefinder lenses-they had an inherent design advantage over SLR lenses.

http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

TEdolph

 tedolf's gear list:tedolf's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT +8 more
mgibbs Regular Member • Posts: 393
Re: Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?

funny you should mention it....

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50745343

 mgibbs's gear list:mgibbs's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 14-140mm F4-5.8 OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +11 more
Domagoj Batinic Contributing Member • Posts: 534
Re: My recolection is.....

tedolf wrote:


that if the focal length is shorter than the registration distance the lens has to be a retrofocus design. I think the Nikon registation distance was very close to 50mm so the standard Nikon lens might have been slightly retro-focus or close to it.

The Konica mount was shorter as you say so a standard 50mm AR lens would not have to be a retro-focus design.

Konica rangefinder lenses have much shorter registration distance (like all RF lenses), but those lenses are also pricey

Yes, the standard M39 or Leica M mount was about 26mm as I remember so any focal leght significantly above that would not need to be a retro-focus design. That is part of the mysique about moderate wide angle and standard focal lenght rangefinder lenses-they had an inherent

question of retrofocus design of the lenses is only pertinent for wide angle lenses and most of slr manual wide angles are retrofocus because if they weren't they would hit the mirror on the cameras they were made for. so using them on mirrorless digital camera with adapter is no problem. Rangefinder wide angle lenses, on the other hand, because of no mirror in rangefinder cameras, didn't have to use retrofocus design, so wide angle lenses have protruding rear elements that are very close to film plane and might be problematic for use on mirrorless.

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

 Domagoj Batinic's gear list:Domagoj Batinic's gear list
Olympus D-620L Olympus C-2000 Zoom Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Olympus SP-550 UZ Olympus SP-560 UZ +11 more
tedolf
tedolf Forum Pro • Posts: 26,480
Missing my point?

Domagoj Batinic wrote:

tedolf wrote:


that if the focal length is shorter than the registration distance the lens has to be a retrofocus design. I think the Nikon registation distance was very close to 50mm so the standard Nikon lens might have been slightly retro-focus or close to it.

The Konica mount was shorter as you say so a standard 50mm AR lens would not have to be a retro-focus design.

Konica rangefinder lenses have much shorter registration distance (like all RF lenses), but those lenses are also pricey

Yes, the standard M39 or Leica M mount was about 26mm as I remember so any focal leght significantly above that would not need to be a retro-focus design. That is part of the mysique about moderate wide angle and standard focal lenght rangefinder lenses-they had an inherent

question of retrofocus design of the lenses is only pertinent for wide angle lenses and most of slr manual wide angles are retrofocus because if they weren't they would hit the mirror on the cameras they were made for. so using them on mirrorless digital camera with adapter is no problem. Rangefinder wide angle lenses, on the other hand, because of no mirror in rangefinder cameras, didn't have to use retrofocus design, so wide angle lenses have protruding rear elements that are very close to film plane and might be problematic for use on mirrorless.

I think you are missing my point.  Regardless of how the lens is mounted, retrofocus designs are inherently inferior to non-retrofocus designs.  The retrofocus designs need more elements, stronger refractive index, etc.

Thus, in the standard and wide angle regimes, rangefinder lenses have an inherent advantage over SLR lenses from mounts with longish registration distances.

All irrelevant for telephoto lenses, obviously

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

Tedolph

 tedolf's gear list:tedolf's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT +8 more
Kevdog
OP Kevdog Senior Member • Posts: 1,412
Re: Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?

Domagoj Batinic wrote:


first link - nikkor and 2 vivitars are good lenses especially for that price, those 3 lenses on ebay go for about 350$. 90mm vivitar is nice macro lens. you'll need nikon f to m43 adapter

second link - om zuiko 50mm/1.8 is a nice lens , small , price is so-so, on ebay you can get it for few bucks less

third link - is useless because it's rangefinder with lens that is not removable from the camera

Good to know about the third link.  Liked the look of it though!

I'm trying to get the guy with the first link to respond.  He might have sold them already.  It'd be a great set for me though... would like both the 50 and the 90mm and the zoom I could give to a friend of mine who can't yet afford a native zoom.

Also I just realized, I have the old Pentax camera my Dad gave me when I was 8.  It has a 55mm f2 Super-Takumar that's in decent shape with a m42 mount.  I also have a 135mm f2.8 that seems to have some dirt inside the lens, but I might give it a go too.  It looks like I could take it apart to clean it if needed.  The adapter is only $15.... now just have to wait for it to arrive!



Would be nice to use them again.  I haven't shot film in them in over 20 years!

Thanks everyone for all the information... digesting and looking around!

 Kevdog's gear list:Kevdog's gear list
Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH
tedolf
tedolf Forum Pro • Posts: 26,480
Stop the Presses!
1

Kevdog wrote:

Domagoj Batinic wrote:


first link - nikkor and 2 vivitars are good lenses especially for that price, those 3 lenses on ebay go for about 350$. 90mm vivitar is nice macro lens. you'll need nikon f to m43 adapter

second link - om zuiko 50mm/1.8 is a nice lens , small , price is so-so, on ebay you can get it for few bucks less

third link - is useless because it's rangefinder with lens that is not removable from the camera

Good to know about the third link. Liked the look of it though!

I'm trying to get the guy with the first link to respond. He might have sold them already. It'd be a great set for me though... would like both the 50 and the 90mm and the zoom I could give to a friend of mine who can't yet afford a native zoom.

Also I just realized, I have the old Pentax camera my Dad gave me when I was 8. It has a 55mm f2 Super-Takumar that's in decent shape with a m42 mount.

that lens is a super lens!

I have that exact lens and used it for a performance photo shoot for a relatively famous musician.

I don't have a model release so I can't post the images but they came out great.

This is the same f/1.8 model except they "throttled down" the maximum aperture to make it a "cheaper" kit lens but it is great wide open.

On a u 4/3 camera, it is a fabulous 110mm equivalent portrait lens with an f/2.0 aperture (for exposure purposes).  A great existing light portrait lens.

I also have a 135mm f2.8 that seems to have some dirt inside the lens, but I might give it a go too.

The dust might compromise contrast a bit but you can pump that up in PP.

That too is a great lens.

It looks like I could take it apart to clean it if needed. The adapter is only $15.... now just have to wait for it to arrive!

Get it! Get it! Get it!

Got it?



Would be nice to use them again. I haven't shot film in them in over 20 years!

Thanks everyone for all the information... digesting and looking around!

get a decent tripod and a remote release too.

The 135 makes a great nature/wildlife lens on 4/3.

Tedolph

 tedolf's gear list:tedolf's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT +8 more
Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 3,646
Re: Missing my point?
tedolf wrote:
Thus, in the standard and wide angle regimes, rangefinder lenses have an inherent advantage over SLR lenses from mounts with longish registration distances.

All irrelevant for telephoto lenses, obviously

Often, but not always true: my 35mm R-Summicron II (for SLR) is definitely a better lens than my 35mm M-Summicron IV (rangefinder) from the same era.

I also have other wide-angle lenses for film SLRs which are better than their rangefinder similars, though the theory is still valid.

Rules exist to be broken...

P.S. The above comments referred to their performance on film. On sensors, things can vary greatly, though retrofocus wides often tend to do better on sensors than non-retrofocus ones. The sensor used can make a great difference.

Domagoj Batinic Contributing Member • Posts: 534
Re: Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?

Kevdog wrote:

Also I just realized, I have the old Pentax camera my Dad gave me when I was 8. It has a 55mm f2 Super-Takumar that's in decent shape with a m42 mount. I also have a 135mm f2.8 that seems to have some dirt inside the lens, but I might give it a go too. It looks like I could take it apart to clean it if needed. The adapter is only $15.... now just have to wait for it to arrive!

be sure to get adapter for m42 lenses that has incorporated flange that presses the aperture pin. it will make your life a whole lot easier while using m42 lenses, because you won't have to care if the lens is fully automatic, or if it has A/M switch. if you buy adapter without that flange and use it with lens that is fully automatic, you won't be able to stop it down and you'll have to use it wide open all the time, or find the way to get that aperture pin stuck somehow (like bending that pin and pressing it in, gluing it in or using a piece of straw to stuck it in the lens)

get adapter like this one:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/M42-lens-to-Micro-4-3-M42-M4-3-adapter-EP1-EP2-GF1-GH2-/250821961296?pt=US_Lens_Adapters_Mounts_Tubes&hash=item3a66276650

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

 Domagoj Batinic's gear list:Domagoj Batinic's gear list
Olympus D-620L Olympus C-2000 Zoom Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Olympus SP-550 UZ Olympus SP-560 UZ +11 more
Domagoj Batinic Contributing Member • Posts: 534
Re: Missing my point?

tedolf wrote:

I think you are missing my point. Regardless of how the lens is mounted, retrofocus designs are inherently inferior to non-retrofocus designs. The retrofocus designs need more elements, stronger refractive index, etc.

Thus, in the standard and wide angle regimes, rangefinder lenses have an inherent advantage over SLR lenses from mounts with longish registration distances.

yes , retrofocus design needs more elements, that's why SLR (and dSLR) wide angle lenses are so bigger than normal lenses and more complex, but you can't really generalise about inferiority of retrofocus to non-retrofocus, all designs have their gems and their rotten apples

anyway,for reference about retrofocus design:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/03/the-development-of-wide-angle-lenses

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

 Domagoj Batinic's gear list:Domagoj Batinic's gear list
Olympus D-620L Olympus C-2000 Zoom Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Olympus SP-550 UZ Olympus SP-560 UZ +11 more
pcb_dpr Contributing Member • Posts: 838
Re: Missing my point?

Or not, there is no "inherently inferior" or superior. Symmetrical designs tend to have less linear distortion but more vignetting and softer corners. Retrofocus designs have more linear distortion but less light falloff and sharper corners. Symmetrical designs tend to do poorly on digital sensors compared to retrofocus designs, even when the sensors have corner microlenses like Leica. Few symmetrical designs are made any more, while modern retrofocus designs can take advantage of the latest design/materials/coating/assembly techniques.

It all depends what you're trying to do and what you're forming the image on.

tedolf wrote:

I think you are missing my point. Regardless of how the lens is mounted, retrofocus designs are inherently inferior to non-retrofocus designs. The retrofocus designs need more elements, stronger refractive index, etc.

Thus, in the standard and wide angle regimes, rangefinder lenses have an inherent advantage over SLR lenses from mounts with longish registration distances.


tedolf
tedolf Forum Pro • Posts: 26,480
No, get the other adapter......
1

Domagoj Batinic wrote:

Kevdog wrote:

Also I just realized, I have the old Pentax camera my Dad gave me when I was 8. It has a 55mm f2 Super-Takumar that's in decent shape with a m42 mount. I also have a 135mm f2.8 that seems to have some dirt inside the lens, but I might give it a go too. It looks like I could take it apart to clean it if needed. The adapter is only $15.... now just have to wait for it to arrive!

be sure to get adapter for m42 lenses that has incorporated flange that presses the aperture pin. it will make your life a whole lot easier while using m42 lenses, because you won't have to care if the lens is fully automatic, or if it has A/M switch. if you buy adapter without that flange and use it with lens that is fully automatic, you won't be able to stop it down and you'll have to use it wide open all the time, or find the way to get that aperture pin stuck somehow (like bending that pin and pressing it in, gluing it in or using a piece of straw to stuck it in the lens)

without the flange, I wish I had done that.

The Takumar lenses he has have the diaphram switch so he can focus wide open (if he wants to) and then move the lever to stop down to shooting aperture.

This is actually a very neat feature which is defeated by the stop down flange on the adapter.

Fotodiox makes both models, with and without flange so you can have your pick.

get adapter like this one:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/M42-lens-to-Micro-4-3-M42-M4-3-adapter-EP1-EP2-GF1-GH2-/250821961296?pt=US_Lens_Adapters_Mounts_Tubes&hash=item3a66276650

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

Tedolph

 tedolf's gear list:tedolf's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT +8 more
Kevdog
OP Kevdog Senior Member • Posts: 1,412
Re: Stop the Presses!

tedolf wrote:

e zoom I could give to a friend of mine who can't yet afford a native zoom.

Also I just realized, I have the old Pentax camera my Dad gave me when I was 8. It has a 55mm f2 Super-Takumar that's in decent shape with a m42 mount.

that lens is a super lens!

I have that exact lens and used it for a performance photo shoot for a relatively famous musician.

I don't have a model release so I can't post the images but they came out great.

This is the same f/1.8 model except they "throttled down" the maximum aperture to make it a "cheaper" kit lens but it is great wide open.

On a u 4/3 camera, it is a fabulous 110mm equivalent portrait lens with an f/2.0 aperture (for exposure purposes). A great existing light portrait lens.

I was hoping it was a pretty good lens.  The 55mm looks clean enough and should work quite well.

Adapter with aperture holding plate already on the way.  Won't be here til next week though.  Guess I've waited 25 years to use this lens again.... I can wait another week!

I also have a 135mm f2.8 that seems to have some dirt inside the lens, but I might give it a go too.

The dust might compromise contrast a bit but you can pump that up in PP.

That too is a great lens.


It looks simple enough to take apart.  If it's too bad I can probably disassemble and clean it.  I have the Pany 100-300, so the 135 isn't as much of a score, but the aperture gain may still be handy!

Regardless it'll be nice to use the lenses Dad gave me.  I think of him already whenever I take photos with my silver E-M5, which looks remarkably like my Pentax!  It'll mean even more to use those old lenses.

I'm excited!

 Kevdog's gear list:Kevdog's gear list
Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH
will1384 New Member • Posts: 12
Re: Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?
1

I have been playing around with legacy lenses on my Panasonic G3, the lenses I have tried have all been Canon FD type using a RainbowImaging Canon FD to M4/3 Adapter, the two I like are the Canon FD 50mm 1.8 and the Vivitar FD 28mm 2.8, there are better versions of both lenses, like the Canon FD 50mm 1.4, and the Vivitar FD 28mm close focus lens, but they are more costly and harder to find, I got both of my lenses for about $60, they both looked almost new.

From what I understand, legacy lenses on a Micro 4/3 camera double the MM, so my 50mm lens becomes a 100mm equivalent on a Micro 4/3 camera, and 28mm becomes a 56mm equivalent, I was unaware of that when I first got the lenses, but after some time plating with them the 56mm and 100mm seemed perfect.

I will say it's not been all roses, as I still have some trouble going full manual, but when I get it all correct, the images are outstanding.

 will1384's gear list:will1384's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN Sigma 19mm F2.8 EX DN +5 more
will1384 New Member • Posts: 12
Re: Legacy Lenses - the good... the bad... the ugly?

I have been playing around with legacy lenses on my Panasonic G3, the lenses I have tried have all been Canon FD type using a RainbowImaging Canon FD to M4/3 Adapter, the two I like are the Canon FD 50mm 1.8 and the Vivitar FD 28mm 2.8, there are better versions of both lenses, like the Canon FD 50mm 1.4, and the Vivitar FD 28mm close focus lens, but they are more costly and harder to find, I got both of my lenses for about $60, they both looked almost new.

From what I understand, legacy lenses on a Micro 4/3 camera double the MM, so my 50mm lens becomes a 100mm equivalent on a Micro 4/3 camera, and 28mm becomes a 56mm equivalent, I was unaware of that when I first got the lenses, but after some time plating with them the 56mm and 100mm seemed perfect.

I will say it's not been all roses, as I still have some trouble going full manual, but when I get it all correct, the images are outstanding.

 will1384's gear list:will1384's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN Sigma 19mm F2.8 EX DN +5 more
tedolf
tedolf Forum Pro • Posts: 26,480
Re: Stop the Presses!

Kevdog wrote:


tedolf wrote:

e zoom I could give to a friend of mine who can't yet afford a native zoom.

Also I just realized, I have the old Pentax camera my Dad gave me when I was 8. It has a 55mm f2 Super-Takumar that's in decent shape with a m42 mount.

that lens is a super lens!

I have that exact lens and used it for a performance photo shoot for a relatively famous musician.

I don't have a model release so I can't post the images but they came out great.

This is the same f/1.8 model except they "throttled down" the maximum aperture to make it a "cheaper" kit lens but it is great wide open.

On a u 4/3 camera, it is a fabulous 110mm equivalent portrait lens with an f/2.0 aperture (for exposure purposes). A great existing light portrait lens.

I was hoping it was a pretty good lens. The 55mm looks clean enough and should work quite well.

Adapter with aperture holding plate already on the way. Won't be here til next week though. Guess I've waited 25 years to use this lens again.... I can wait another week!

I also have a 135mm f2.8 that seems to have some dirt inside the lens, but I might give it a go too.

The dust might compromise contrast a bit but you can pump that up in PP.

That too is a great lens.


It looks simple enough to take apart. If it's too bad I can probably disassemble and clean it.

I'm not sure I would do that without an optical bench.  It isn't too hard to get the lens re-assemble with an element off center or out of alignment.

There is a guy in Idaho I thing who will take it apart, clean it, re-assemble it and test it for $75.00 if it really needs that.

I have the Pany 100-300, so the 135 isn't as much of a score, but the aperture gain may still be handy!

Regardless it'll be nice to use the lenses Dad gave me. I think of him already whenever I take photos with my silver E-M5, which looks remarkably like my Pentax! It'll mean even more to use those old lenses.

I'm excited!

TEdolph

 tedolf's gear list:tedolf's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT +8 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads