Old Lenses on DSLR's?????

bbg404

bbg404

Messages
1,302
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
Thought I'd bring this up .... Probably not the first or last time it's been discussed but anyway

I'm seeing more and more posts from people buying old manual focus lenses which seem to be working excellently on modern cameras especially the primes they seem to be pin sharp!

So my question's ........

How do I go about finding old manual focus lenses that will fit a Nikon body?

Do any of you use old manual focus lenses?? if so which ones??
 
•
If you search for the Nikon Compatibility Chart, it's all in there!
 
Last edited:
You do need to tread a tiny bit carefully with regard to compatibility, particularly using non ai lenses on higher end bodies. Otherwise the world is your lobster.

Check out the 105mm 2.5 and 28mm 2.8 ais for starters. Both superb and relatively affordable.

Which body are you using? Btw.
 
Sadly you are mostly restricted to Nikon mount lenses whereas Canon users can adapt a lot more. Either way, there's some cracking old Nikkors out there!

Personally I have found that lots of older lenses are very capable stopped down a bit. Avoid looking at the corners of images and don't shoot wide open expecting results of today's modern designs :)
 
I used to really like using my old nikkor 28mm f/3.5 AI lens when I had a D610 DSLR - the quality of the lens was so good and focussing was so easy.
Modern AF lenses don't seem to have that same quality feel of the older nikkors
 
The problem with modern DSLR's is focusing as they're not really built for manual focus and judging focus for anything that isn't big in the frame can be difficult although you may have the option of using live view on the back screen, but back screen shooting isn't for me and IMO if you want to use manual lenses a mirrorless camera is the way to go as you get focus aids such as a greatly magnified view and peaking and you can use these through the EVF.

I did briefly try old Olympus Zuiko lenses on my Canon DSLR and apart from the focusing issue they worked well but on my mirrorless cameras they work very well with peaking and the magnified view.
 
Last edited:
You are a bit more restricted with Nikon, I use a Nikon 'E' series 50mm quite often, cracking lens, you can also buy an adaptor for Olympus lenses but it has to be fitted to the lens in place of the original bayonet, focusing is easy if you fit a split focus screen.
 
gad-westy said:
Check out the 105mm 2.5
Click to expand...

My favourite Nikkor lens which usually lives on a Nikon F but also works well on a D3200.

manualfocus-g said:
Personally I have found that lots of older lenses are very capable stopped down a bit. Avoid looking at the corners of images and don't shoot wide open expecting results of today's modern designs
Click to expand...

In a lot of cases they will be superior to modern lenses.

Steve.
 
Last edited:
Steve Smith said:
In a lot of cases they will be superior to modern lenses.
Click to expand...

I think that instances of older lenses being superior to modern lenses might be few and far between.

I like my old lenses and they have their own look but technically, with things like across the frame sharpness, sharpness at wide apertures and control of optical nasties the best modern lenses are really good and maybe few older lenses will be able to live with them.
 
At the top end of the range, I doubt there is much difference. At the mid and entry level end, things are built down to a price more now than they used to be.

e.g. The Pentax 50mm f1.7 which was the standard kit lens with the ME Super or MX is a great lens and is likely to be much better than most kit lenses offered today.


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
At the top end of the range, I doubt there is much difference. At the mid and entry level end, things are built down to a price more now than they used to be.

e.g. The Pentax 50mm f1.7 which was the standard kit lens with the ME Super or MX is a great lens and is likely to be much better than most kit lenses offered today.


Steve.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure. IMO there were some pretty ho hum lenses in the past in both build and image quality. Comparing the image quality of old primes with new kit zooms gives the older kit a better chance but all I can say is that the "kit" lenses I have at the moment, Sony FE 28-70mm and Panasonic 14-42mm, are both easily better than the old manual primes I have but things get difficult here as with modern kit there is often some in camera magic going on but whatever the reason things like across frame sharpness and control of CA etc seem to be better these days and I think you'd have to compare a good lens of the past to a real dog of today to see the older lens winning.

I've compared the image quality provided by my old Minolta Rokkor, Olympus Zuiko and Canon FD primes against my more modern lenses and to be honest the modern lenses are pretty good in comparison, even the zooms, and the better more modern lenses I've had simply crush the older ones. All the new exotic lens and coating materials, computer designs and better manufacturing processes must add up to something.
 
woof woof said:
I'm not so sure. IMO there were some pretty ho hum lenses in the past in both build and image quality. Comparing the image quality of old primes with new kit zooms gives the older kit a better chance but all I can say is that the "kit" lenses I have at the moment, Sony FE 28-70mm and Panasonic 14-42mm, are both easily better than the old manual primes I have but things get difficult here as with modern kit there is often some in camera magic going on but whatever the reason things like across frame sharpness and control of CA etc seem to be better these days and I think you'd have to compare a good lens of the past to a real dog of today to see the older lens winning.

I've compared the image quality provided by my old Minolta Rokkor, Olympus Zuiko and Canon FD primes against my more modern lenses and to be honest the modern lenses are pretty good in comparison, even the zooms, and the better more modern lenses I've had simply crush the older ones. All the new exotic lens and coating materials, computer designs and better manufacturing processes must add up to something.
Click to expand...
If this is the case I wonder why people still buy Zeiss and leitz optics, they must be doing something rightI had an f2 Summicron, that was far better than any of my Panny lenses on my GX7.
 
IME, a lens designed for digital will be better in demanding situations. Sensors are more critical of things like CA than film was. But, if you avoid/mitigate those situations it's not an issue. I've also heard of many older lenses typically needing significant AFMA... also not an issue with a MF lens.
 
dizidav said:
If this is the case I wonder why people still buy Zeiss and leitz optics, they must be doing something rightI had an f2 Summicron, that was far better than any of my Panny lenses on my GX7.
Click to expand...
I have a Zeiss (85/1.4). Technically, the Nikon equivalents equal/beat it (for equal/less money)... but that's not why I have it.
 
sk66 said:
I have a Zeiss (85/1.4). Technically, the Nikon equivalents equal/beat it (for equal/less money)... but that's not why I have it.
Click to expand...

Me too. In the centre of the frame, it is astonishing from f/2.8 onwards. Edges are a different story though, and it's quite simply thrashed by more modern designs e.g. Fujinon 56/1.2. But...the Planar has "that" look which is difficult to replicate elsewhere. Same with the majority of the Zeiss Contax/Yashica lenses and subsequent Z series models (some of which are based on the same designs).

Whilst I'm rambling, the Zeiss lenses of that era were optimised for infinity shooting, and are very sharp across the frame in those tests :)

Also, they are lovely to use in the hand, as are many manual lenses.
 
Last edited:
I use my old Nikkor lenses on a 30D with an adapter, and they give excellent results. Not sure they're really any better than my modern lenses, but I do prefer their build quality and the way they handle.

There's something you need to consider before embarking on this journey though. These lenses were designed for film SLRs which had big, bright, viewfinders and various focus aids (split image, microprisms etc), and Nikon offered a wide choice of focus screens for some of their models. Crop DSLRs have tiny/dim viewfinders, which makes manual focus a pain, although you can use live view if your camera has it. If you want to explore this, I'd just buy one lens and see how you get on before spending any more.

Sources for these lenses? There are a number of dealers who sell them, and a lot of people on the forums seem to find bargains at car boot sales and in charity shops, but I've never had any luck with these. No car boot sales within 20 miles, and the local charity shops have a very exaggerated idea of what old 'camera stuff' is worth. £30 for a battered Instamatic because 'collectors look for these you know'...yeah, sure!
 
I've got four old manual lenses that I use on a 550D & Panasonic mirror less cameras, they all have characteristics & looks I really like but in demanding situations flare & lack of contrast can be a big problem.

I've swapped an old fast manual prime for the Panasonic kit lens more than once because of extreme lens flare that ruins an image. The old lenses don't have the same coatings that make modern lenses so resistant to those problems.
 
dizidav said:
If this is the case I wonder why people still buy Zeiss and leitz optics, they must be doing something rightI had an f2 Summicron, that was far better than any of my Panny lenses on my GX7.
Click to expand...

What Panny lenses are you thinking about?

The lenses you're describing will have been amongst the very best in their day and if so they'll possibly stand up quite well against even an average lens of today but put them up against one of the very best lenses of today and maybe they'll struggle?

For example I had a MFT Voigtlander 25mm f0.95 and it was stunningly sharp across the frame when stopped down a bit and I've never used a FF lens that's as good and I'd expect that the better Panasonic MFT lenses will be equally good if not a bit better. Some MFT lenses are very very good indeed and if you could scale them up and keep the quality they'd be some of the very best lenses on sale.... technically, as I said, some lenses have a really nice look... for example I'm pretty sure that my Minolta Rokkor 50mm f1.2 is pretty awful by todays standards :D but some of the pictures it produces still look nice :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top