Old Lenses

Tintin124

Tintin124

Messages
8,826
Name
Bryn
Edit My Images
Yes
Now there appears to be some bargains to be had with old lenses... but how do you find out which are well received or renowned for being great.

I know of some brands like Vivitar, Zuikos etc but know nothing about them.

I'm looking for a decent 24mm/35mm prime just to fill a gap something optically highly rated but cheap as chips.

This will be to reverse and shot occasional portrait or group shots (snap shots) and very rare landscape shots so fully manual is not an issue.

Is there any website that rates these old lenses?

Any advice is appreciated.
 
Last edited:
If you Google you should be able to find your way to plenty of reviews of old lenses and example shots too.

I have Canon FD, Olymus Zuiko and Minolta Rokkor and for me there's nothing in it at some focal lengths but at others (50 and 85mm) the Rokkors are the best. Having said that the Rokkors are only "best" at the widest apertures and when pixel peeping and all of the lenses I have are perfectly useable for whole images and indeed for crops too. I use these on my Sony A7 via Novoflex adapters and on my Panasonic G1 via cheap adapters bought off an auction site.

I have 24mm f2.8 Zuiko and Rokkor and 35mm f1.8 Rokkor. They're all good :D I believe that the Rokkor is very highly regarded with some saying that it's amongst the best 24mm designs ever... quite a claim really... and I think Leica licenced it. Whatever the truth it's a decent lens :D as is the 35mm f1.8. I used to have the 35mm f2.8 and that was good too.

I went for these lenses as they're mass market, cheap to reasonably priced and relatively easy to find and I like using them on my cameras but my cameras are mirrorless and have manual focus aids and I wouldn't fancy using them on a modern DSLR with its standard focus screen. The Zuiko's did work well on my 5D but focusing wasn't easy.
 
Last edited:
Google for reviews, Flickr to see some results taken with a particular lens. Far easier to judge from pictures rather than words.

Zuiko by the way is Olympus' name for lenses. Vivitar was a brand name, the lenses were made by many different people.
 
To add to what Alan said, Zuiko Pentax and Minolta - you won't find a bad lens between them, Pentax just edge it for me with colour rendering but Minolta not far behind. Zuiko best for B&W or low saturation colour work.
 
Thanks all... its knowing the names of the lenses when googling was the major issue for me. I have only stumbled on names previous hence the ones I have heard of above I knew 0 about them.

I have a canon 500d I use a manual lens currently and I love so I do wonder about the focus with the cr@ppy viewfinder on my camera but if the lens is cheap enough not a lot to worry about.

What are the old Pentax lenses name? or they just pentax?

Time to google more :D

Alan Clogwyn said:
Zuiko best for B&W or low saturation colour work.
Click to expand...

Like the sound of that. :D
 
Pentax K mounts will have different designations depending on how old they are - SMC Pentax are the oldest, then SMC Pentax M, SMC Pentax A, SMC Pentax FA. Anything DA is crop only and is modern. FAs are AF lenses so won't feel as nice to use as the focus rings aren't dampened.

You can also have Takumar, SMC Takumar and Super Takumar, mostly on M42 mount, all still Pentax lenses.
 
On a Canon DSLR I personally think you're on a road toward a lot of slightly out of focus pictures :D unless you use live view. What you can do is use hyperfocal, Merklinger method or zone focusing and whilst these techniques may not stand up to scrutiny at 100% they may get you pictures that'll look very nice in whole image form when viewed normally.

When using these old lenses for anything other than macro/close up stuff I use focus peaking now and again but mostly a magnified view through the EVF.
 
It's often worth looking at badly listed old SLRs too, you often get some with a bundle of lenses for very little money.
 
Just had a thought...

Some of these lenses will not give you infinity focus on a Canon so you'd need an adapter with a lens in it. Personally I stayed clear of these and just used lenses which could achieve infinity focus with a dumb metal adapter, basically just a spacer to get the registration distance right.

I know that Canon FD and Minolta Rokkor both need an adapter with a lens in it if you want to use them on Canon, Olympus Zuiko lenses work fine with just a metal adapter.

I don't know about other makes such as Pentax etc... so best make sure what you want and if you're happy to use an adapter with a lens in it or not before buying. If looking at adapters on a well known auction site I'd always look for "allows infinity focus" or words to that effect.
 
Tintin124 said:
@woof woof thanks Alan Infinity focus will be required so will bear that in mind :D
Click to expand...

In your position, with a Canon, I'd take a long hard look at Olympus Zuiko (and any others that'll fit without an extra lens in the adapter :D) but also at any other lenses in Olympus Zuiko (or other) fit.

For example if looking for a 24mm a Zuiko might cost you £80-100 but you might spot something made by someone else in Oly mount for much less. Actually 24mm f2.8's can be relatively expensive when compared to a 28mm f2.8 as you can find those for £15-30.
 
Nikon (Nikkor) lenses will mount and focus to infinity on a Canon body with a simple metal adapter. I use mine on a 30D and the results are generally very good but, as said above, focus can be a challenge on the DSLR VF. To be frank, I've enjoyed playing around with this, but I've just about given up and relegated the Nikkors to their natural home on the F2 and FM!
 
I use a Jupiter 9 (85mm) and Jupiter 11 (135mm) primes with an adaptor on my Fuji XT-1 and the results are great. They are really nice to look and feel, but do add a fair bit of weight. They cost me about £90 for both! Adaptor was a tenner from EBay. I can certainly recommend these lenses.
 
When I was looking for a 28mm lens I used this site to compare models. There is lots of information online but it is all scattered about and you have to search for it.

For manual focus I use magic lantern and focus peaking, this helps a lot with getting nice sharp images, a viewfinder loupe also helps, especially in bright light.
 
On a Canon DSLR it's easiest to stick with m42 mount lenses - the adapters are cheap, you don't need an adapter with a corrective optic and with an APS-C body there should be no problems with mounting the lens or getting infinity focus (note there are definite problems with some lenses and Canon full-frame bodies).

Cheap 24mm lenses with highly rated optics are never cheap as chips, but can be a bargain if you research and hunt around. There are better priced alternatives at 28mm and 35mm.

Bargains are where you find them, I can recommend the Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35mm f/2.4 MC - I lucked out and found one lurking in a charity shop for £5 a couple of years ago. But if you need something right now and can't (or don't want to) invest the time researching and hunting for bargains you will end up paying dealer price for a decent lens.


Google is your friend, there are thousands of blogs, posts and reviews discussing vintage lenses. Here's one to get you started - http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...1-The-quot-Nick-s-lens-comparison-quot-thread
 
Bit of a shameless plug, but I literally put a post in the classifieds forum before the weekend advertising a 28mm Vivitar Nikon lens...
 
Jupiter's are the wrong focal length but will take a look see...

@Alastair will take a look in charity shops as got plenty of time... I have seen loads of old lenses at car boots/jumble sales etc but never knew anything about them etc so steered clear as could end up spending loads for loads of lenses that are useless etc and for the money bought a decent lens.

I will take a look around. :)

@Halfcharged I will take a look. :)
 
Bryn - charity shops will usually put something to one side if you want to look it up before purchase. Or Google it on your phone whilst you're in the shop.

I recommend starting with m42 lenses because I almost never find anything else in charity shops (except the odd recent Minolta AF/Dyxum which as far as I'm aware aren't worth bothering with). Any m42 lens in decent condition is worth a punt at a £5 or less - worst case is that you've got a doorstop but balanced by the warm glow of a charitable donation. Avoid paying too much for the cheap third-party lenses - you'll see a lot of PrinzGalaxy lenses (cheap Dixons' own brand imported by weight rather than quality), Paragons and stuff with German sounding names but "made in Singapore/Japan" stamped on the body. Generally anything m42 and "made in Germany" is worth a try if it's in good condition and under a tenner (Carl Zeiss, Carl Zeiss Jena, Meyer, Pentacon). When things get a bit more pricey you need to be researching the model in a bit more depth.

Watch for lenses with similar descriptions. The devil is in the detai, and the difference between a Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35mm 1:2.4 MC and a Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35mm 1:2.8 MC is a chunk of value for a one character difference. All the manufacturers were producing multiple models in the same focal length - budget, mid-range, premium - and the specifications (and performance) may have varied throughout the period of manufacture. Sometimes just a diamond instead of a triangle for the aperture/focus mark can make all the difference in terms of desirability and price between two otherwise visually identical lenses (thinking of one specific Minolta lens).

Spotting a decent wide vintage lens isn't all that easy as there's not many of them and the better ones are never cheap-as-chips if the seller knows what they've got - the better place to start is with a 50mm or 135mm where there's a far wider range to choose from.
 
You can mount m42, Pentax k, Olympus om, contax/yashica, Nikon, tamron adaptall and even some Exakta lenses on Canon cameras.

I have no issues focusing manual lenses through an ovf, and find it easier to get accurate focus than using peaking. Each to their own :)
 
manualfocus-g said:
You can mount m42, Pentax k, Olympus om, contax/yashica, Nikon, tamron adaptall and even some Exakta lenses on Canon cameras.

I have no issues focusing manual lenses through an ovf, and find it easier to get accurate focus than using peaking. Each to their own :)
Click to expand...

You can add pretty much all medium format lenses to your list. I have around 60 lenses and over 40 of them are manual focus and used on Canon DSLR's with Liveview for macro and the optical viewfinder for almost everything else.

Bob
 
Last edited:
I have the above mentioned CZJ Flektogon 35mm f2.4 and it is fricken awesome. :D

There happens to be a VERY cheap Nikon mount 28mm f2.8 lens in the film section for sale. No idea if it works with a normal adapter or needs one with the glass, but it may be worth a gander.
 
pentaxforums.com has lots of user reviews of old lenses, I bought some of mine based on their reviews
 
Last edited:
Still great information coming through everyone... keep it coming. :D

Alastair said:
All the manufacturers were producing multiple models in the same focal length - budget, mid-range, premium - and the specifications (and performance) may have varied throughout the period of manufacture
Click to expand...

Is it just the aperture difference which tells them apart?
 
Tintin124 said:
S
Is it just the aperture difference which tells them apart?
Click to expand...
It's a lot more involved than simply looking at the aperture. Production techniques were evolving quickly during this time and the quality of glass and the coatings on the optics changed frequently. It's also the case that some versions were considered better than others on film bodies but the reverse may be true on digital bodies.....sensors are more reflective than film and this can cause a reduction in contrast not always seen on the inferior lens.
Another factor playing a part is the distance from the rear element to the focal plane. Lenses for 35mm are typically designed to be around 50mm which accommodated most mount variations and it was only necessary for the manufacturer to pop a different rear end on the lens. Other lenses had rear elements which were 80mm+ from the focal plane so that they could also be used on medium format bodies and the 35mm mounts were quite long to fill in the gap at the cost of some loss of resolution.

Bob
 
Tintin124 said:
Is it just the aperture difference which tells them apart?
Click to expand...
Also be aware some brands were a bit "flexible" with their aperture statements. I've seen some lenses advertised as an F2.5 lens, and another manufacturer list it as F2.8. In fact both lenses were made by the same manufacturer, built exactly the same, just sold (and advertised) under different brand names.

You can often find cheaper versions of certain lenses as they don't carry the more well regarded brand names.
 
OK to answer the 24mm question, you could try the Cosina/Miranda (same lens branded differently) 24/2.8. Also the Hoya 24/2.8 is pretty decent. All should be obtainable in a usable mount for under £30.00. As an alternative, the old Vivitar/Cosina 20-35/3.5-4.5 AF lenses can often be picked up for under £50.00.

The
 
Cause I felt crazy I went for a M42 85-250 enna munchen... anyone have experience was made in Germany :confused:

Also a Takumar 28mm 2.8 ... see how I go with those and a colleague at work says he has a box full of old lenses he doesn't use so will have a look see what he has :D
 
If the Enna's optics are as good as the build quality then it should be fine (for a 1.6Kg walkabout).

Bob
 
Based on the weight don't think it's plasticky! Guess I will find out the description had a link to a flickr shots with lens and they looked good so fingers crossed it's same lens that took them :)
 
I started out like you, I now have over 80 MF lenses! Be carefull, you can become obsessed with them, they are very special and a whole hobby in themselves:).

Get hold of a tamron 35-70 09A or 017A then put them through their paces, its a different world to modern plastic and very addictive.

I love em;)

Steve.
 
I have a range of Minolta lens for my a6000, 28, 50 and 135 primes, a 70-210mm and 35-70mm f4, cost me less than £300, all in excellent condition and fun to use.
 
The Canon FD 35mm f2 is a good lens .......... I have the first version with the silver "ring" ........ not the FD (2)

well built, really good IQ and pleasing :rendering" if that is the correct word
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top