Ever heard of these?
- Thread starter JayD
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,008
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Adapters only a few quid on eBay, manual focus so have some fun
- Messages
- 1,818
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- No
Wow that nam takes me back. Prinzflex was pretty much a name only and was used on equipment sold exclusively by Dixons high street stores. The lens could have been made by various manufacturers I suppose depending on who they were purchasing from at the time.
There were a lot of budget lenses knocking around at the time, names like soligor,chinon,jenaflex,paragon to name but a few. It could be Japanese or East German to be honest, is there any info on the lens barrel ?
There were a lot of budget lenses knocking around at the time, names like soligor,chinon,jenaflex,paragon to name but a few. It could be Japanese or East German to be honest, is there any info on the lens barrel ?
Nothing whatsoever, lol. On the Prinzflex there is a "quality control" sticker, but it's so faded it's unreadable.
The Westron feels like a quality piece of kit, quite weighty and very smooth, but of course that doesn't mean the optics are any good.
- Messages
- 1,818
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- No
JayD said:
Gold oval sticker? Probably Japanese version.
The Weston is made by Isco and is German.
http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Isco
Lots of examples taken with this lens on Flickr an som other forums just search Flickr and google.
Oh wow, thanks so much for the info.
So when my Af M42 adaptor arrives, I should have 3 lenses that are far superior to any Canon kit lenses. I'm fair chuffed with that. How many people, I wonder, have a dslr camera and use the older lenses from the film SLR's? And why are the older lenses so cheap and yet seem to be optically far superior?
- Messages
- 1,818
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- No
Well you are right to a degree. There are a lot of optically excellent lenses from the past but only some are better than modern lenses and I would be a bit skeptical that yours are in this category regardless of what you have read. They are both fixed focal length primes which generally gives an optical edge over zooms and from the little I have read the westron would appear to be the better of the two. However you will have to remember that with the adaptor these lenses will be difficult to use instead of your kit lens. No autofocus or full metering confirmation, you will have to focus with the lens open for practical reasons and to get a brighter vf image then stop down to take the shot and lets not forget that a lot of older glass was not made with the computer measured tolerances or the excellent multicoating employed on all lenses now. So expect flare and other aberrations with some shots.
By all means have fun with them and I am sure they will be capable of some excellent results but the above caveats should be remembered and taken in to account. Don't believe that all older lenses are optically superior, you have not stumbled on some unknown secret that other photographers are unaware of,lol.
By all means have fun with them and I am sure they will be capable of some excellent results but the above caveats should be remembered and taken in to account. Don't believe that all older lenses are optically superior, you have not stumbled on some unknown secret that other photographers are unaware of,lol.
Last edited:
Lol, oh I'm well aware of that. I'm also aware of the snobbery that exists in everyday life. The "one upmanship" if you like. A mate of mine once boasted that he had the Canon SX40 with the longest zoom of any bridge or compact. Well woop-de-doop, I was so excited for him I nearly walked closer to my subject! Lol.
In another post I mentioned the 3rd lens I inherited. It is a 55mm F2 Super Takumar. Now while the other two lenses are, I admit, pretty run of the mill, everything I have read about the Super Tak are screaming INCEDIBLE, FANTASTIC, WOW! etcetc. So for that lens alone I'm very excited.
In another post I mentioned the 3rd lens I inherited. It is a 55mm F2 Super Takumar. Now while the other two lenses are, I admit, pretty run of the mill, everything I have read about the Super Tak are screaming INCEDIBLE, FANTASTIC, WOW! etcetc. So for that lens alone I'm very excited.
- Messages
- 1,818
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- No
You got that right the takumar (Pentax) lens is a cracker. Had one of these on my first SLR, a Practika MTL 3 so, so long ago 
(damn! I feel old). Should be good fun using these old fellas. You've made me all nostalgic with this post, off to the boot sales methinks, lol.
(damn! I feel old). Should be good fun using these old fellas. You've made me all nostalgic with this post, off to the boot sales methinks, lol.Lol. The Praktica BX-20 was my first SLR. With kit lenses it was adequate. Thank god digital cameras came along, I was running out of patience with spending a fortune on developing costs and getting perhaps 2 good photos from a 36 roll.
I think I'm pretty lucky though, I inherited a whole kit from my wifes grandad. A rather nice Pentax, the 3 lenses, flash, light metre, some filters etc, and it includes the Super Tak. Happy days.
(psst, know anyone who want a Pentax film camera?) Lolol.
I think I'm pretty lucky though, I inherited a whole kit from my wifes grandad. A rather nice Pentax, the 3 lenses, flash, light metre, some filters etc, and it includes the Super Tak. Happy days.
(psst, know anyone who want a Pentax film camera?) Lolol.