1. Carl Hall

    Carl Hall

    Messages:
    2,982
    Name:
    Carl
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I don't have an X-T2 yet, but after I buy that an an M adaptor (soon!) the first lens I'm going to put on it is my Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4 Nokton. I use it all the time on my Bessa R3a film rangefinder and I absolutely love it, so I'm looking forward to using it on a digital system too
     
    ChrisR and Cagey75 like this.
  2. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    A little more testing on the Vivitar 200 3.5. I was struggling with it shooting through the window facing harsh sky behind the trees, so went into the garden and shot the feeder from the other side. Here's examples at f/3.5, F4 and f/5.6. You can see it significantly improves. 3.5 isn't suitable for this type of shot, but might well be interesting for more artsy images :)

    f/3.5, 1/500th ISO 800
    [​IMG]3.5 by K G, on Flickr

    F4, 1/500 ISO 1250
    [​IMG]4 by K G, on Flickr

    F5.6, 1/250, ISO 640
    [​IMG]f5.6 by K G, on Flickr

    I was just messing about with crops on the last, but you get the idea - 5.6 is a lot sharper for this kind of thing, and you still get nice soft backdrop because of the FL, and I got close as I could without scaring the bird away. The settings are not the same either, these just happened to be the samples I chose - or more so the ones where the bird was facing this way, it hid behind the other side of the feeder mostly - anyone who's ever shot garden birds will know that one :D
     
    Fraser Euan White and wardy07 like this.
  3. MartynK

    MartynK Opting Out.

    Messages:
    4,664
    Name:
    Martyn
    Edit My Images:
    No
    There used to be a thread like this on Fred Miranda, but I haven't looked in there for years. I sometimes use my old, manual, Nikkor lenses on my 30D with adapters and they give excellent results, but focusing is a pain with the dim little viewfinder, and I always get the sense that they feel they're slumming it...:D
     
  4. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    There's a whole section dedicated to Adapted lenses in general on another popular forum, where I got the idea in a way. Haven't been to FM forums in years here either, completely forgot about it

    ML cameras make manual focusing easier than ever, bright and clear evf, focus peaking, multi-level zoom focus etc
     
  5. wardy07

    wardy07

    Messages:
    1,897
    Name:
    chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I think you (and the lens) did well with these Keith, the last one is showing some really good feather detail. Not bad for an ‘old lens’ that most people would chuck in the bin or charity shop.

    I managed to bag another Helios today, a 44M-6 this time with 3 adaptors ( inc FujiX which I use) and a filter for £21. I’m getting addicted to these old beauties so I’ll have to be careful or I’ll explode with all this GAS!
    I’ve got my eye on a couple more lenses as well, still it’s not like I’m spending a fortune and they’re works of art if nothing else imo.
     
    Cagey75 likes this.
  6. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Can't see anyone throwing this lens in the bin, if nothing else it'd make a damn good weapon! :D This one is also in very nice condition, I imagine non-photography folk would think it was worth a lot more. I've had people ask me about some of the old glass I've owned "ooh, that must have cost a lot?" - y'know, the kind who think everything old is an antique and worth a small fortune

    Where are you getting these deals? locally or good timing on ebay? I never come across such bargains. Though I did get the Vivitar for £22, more like 35 with p&p but still not too shabby. Mostly I end up paying the higher value on these things. I see some of the same on ebay now for £50+
     
    wardy07 likes this.
  7. wardy07

    wardy07

    Messages:
    1,897
    Name:
    chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Yeah I know what you mean about anything old must be insanely valuable, that is until they try and sell it!
    I got lucky with the latest one on Ebay this afternoon, put in a late bid and couldn’t believe it to be honest when it ran down with no additional bids.
    I have paid more for some of my other purchases although last nights was also a pretty good deal.
     
  8. LeeRatters

    LeeRatters

    Messages:
    890
    Name:
    Lee
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    By far my most favourite & most used lens on the A7 (y)

    EDIT - @Carl Hall - I've a Fuji > Leica M adapter here. I bought it when I gave Fuji a try a year or two ago but I don't think I ever used it. PM me if interested.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2018
  9. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The Voigtländer 40mm f/1.4 isn't really vintage, but it's close enough I guess. But then again, what is 'vintage'? Classic might have been a better term perhaps?

    I wonder should we open up the thread a little more to include more modern adapted glass?

    Any sample images lads? I wouldn't mind one, but don't know if I'd be willing to pay the odds. I have eyed up the much more affordable Konica 40mm 1.8 though
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2018
  10. LeeRatters

    LeeRatters

    Messages:
    890
    Name:
    Lee
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'm actually waiting for the 40mm f/1.2 to be back in stock in E mount to give that a try!!!

    [​IMG]
    ***
    by Lee, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    ***
    by Lee, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    ***
    by Lee, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    ***
    by Lee, on Flickr
     
  11. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Those are beauties! My Uncle had that car when I was a kid! :D I used to ask for the keys so I could pretend I was driving when he'd call :D
     
  12. daffington

    daffington

    Messages:
    28
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Love the shot in Bath - really nice filmic look to all of your pics here.

    Plus that part of Bath is one of my favourites with the giant tree and Sally Lunn buns!!!
     
  13. LeeRatters

    LeeRatters

    Messages:
    890
    Name:
    Lee
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    :D:D I've had it since 1996 - Back when I was more of a kid myself :eek::D

    Thank you. Bath is beautiful. Really enjoy the odd wander around. Missed the focus a bit on that one (well, I focused at f/1.4 & then stopped down a little which can give focus shift) - Still one of my favourites though.
     
    Cagey75 likes this.
  14. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Would have been late 80's when he had one, was a late teen meself by '96 :D
     
  15. Carl Hall

    Carl Hall

    Messages:
    2,982
    Name:
    Carl
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Ahh damn, I bought an X-T2 and the M adaptor yesterday after I got home from work. Thanks anyway :) Looking forward to trying the Voigtlander, the photos you posted are awesome!

    Hmm yeah fair point! I think it was introduced in 2004 so it's not really that old. I think I just considered it vintage because it's a manual focus lens made for film cameras.

    Also the lens is called a Nokton Classic so if you change the thread to classic lenses then it fits perfectly :LOL: :p
     
  16. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Ha, I will actually add in classic, should have done to begin with. I wasn't nit-picking, it's hard to really say what exactly 'vintage' is in terms of lenses, do we say over 20, 30 or 40 years old? Classic lenses broadens the spectrum I think :)
     
  17. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic

    Messages:
    5,592
    Name:
    Terry
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I have tested out a Pentax Super Takumar 55mm f2 on my Fuju XE2

    I took three shots in aperture priority with the following results.
    The first shot at f2 was definitely soft but with a beautifully even bokeh.
    The second at f5.6 was sharp also with nice progressive bokeh
    The third at f16 had a much extended depth of field but diffraction had started to soften the finest details.

    I then fused all three in TuFuse Pro which selects the best pixel to use to create the final image. Though the f2 shot contributed nothing to the exercise, the resultant fusion was an improvement on both the f5.6 and f16 shots but is only of academic interest.

    conclusion...
    The Super Tukumar 55mm f2 produced a sharp very pleasant image with great smoothness, and very unlike the critical hard crispness of a digital generation image. It would perhaps make an excellent portrait lens for use on a digital camera.



    All the images were unsharpened and unadjusted processed from raw. Red arrow shows focus point.
    These are a crops at 100% slightly downsized to comply with image size rules.


    [​IMG]no 1 f2 by Terry Andrews, on Flickr



    [​IMG]no 2 f5.6 by Terry Andrews, on Flickr



    [​IMG]no 3 f16 by Terry Andrews, on Flickr



    [​IMG]no 4 F2-F16 fused by Terry Andrews, on Flickr point.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2018
    Cagey75 likes this.
  18. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Certainly looks like a keeper. I agree that some of the better old MF lenses are better suited to portraiture than clinical, overly sharp modern lenses. Especially when photographing women who will forever ask if you 'soften' their face in photoshop :D
     
  19. MatBin

    MatBin

    Messages:
    3,819
    Name:
    matt
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I had a really nice Canon 135 2.8 SF (Soft Focus) EF Mount lens and I'm guessing it was based on an old design, I think I lent it to my son who thinks it's in his loft.....hmmm. I had a 6x6 Yashicamat that had a lovely lens for female portraiture, there's certainly something nice about some older lenses for certain applications.
     
    Cagey75 likes this.
  20. LeeRatters

    LeeRatters

    Messages:
    890
    Name:
    Lee
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Thank you. I'm sure you'll enjoy it. I know you'll have a slightly slimmer field of view but that should cut you off the smeary corners that sometimes happens.

    I only thought of it because I was having a tidy up yesterday & came across the adapter & a few other things I need to sell on at some point.
     
  21. ChrisR

    ChrisR

    Messages:
    8,437
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    As a film photographer, this thread is really enjoyable but also very frustrating... you guys are (part of) the reasons why the lenses I'm still looking for have got so much more expensive over the past few years! :D
     
    Barrysprout likes this.
  22. Barrysprout

    Barrysprout

    Messages:
    6,143
    Name:
    Colin
    Edit My Images:
    No
    But we are also (part of) the reason that your lens collection is much more valuable now. :D

    :welcome:
     
    ChrisR and wardy07 like this.
  23. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Well, not so much as trendy hipster photographers :D I've been using old vintage lenses for over 10 years, had MF vivitar lenses on my old D200 and D90 :) Started using them because they were even cheaper back then - wasn't such a trend. I think it's a good thing in every other way though. It brings the creativity out in photographers, slows them down, forces them to think more about what they're shooting, not exactly like film but better than machine gun fire hope-for-the-best we see many beginners do
     
    ChrisR and wardy07 like this.
  24. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Prices may have risen but if you're looking at mass market lenses in the 24-135 sort of range they're still relatively cheap with a few notable exceptions like rarer wider aperture versions or rarer focal lengths. For example I've seen some wider lenses go for questionable money and some 40mm's too.

    Keep away from the rare stuff and go for a 28 or 35mm, maybe a 50mm and an 85mm or cheaper still a 135mm and you wont have to spend a lot even now especially if you're willing to go for third party lenses.
     
  25. ChrisR

    ChrisR

    Messages:
    8,437
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I lost quite a lot on an 85mm f/2 Pentax-M lens that developed a lazy shutter, two trips to a repairer didn't cure it, and eventually had to sell it as spares or repair. I did get some nice images while it was working, though. Now looks like around £200 to get a replacement (or a Tamron 90 mm). :(
     
  26. SsSsSsSsSnake

    SsSsSsSsSnake

    Messages:
    8,900
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Shan't ask who the top one is dedicated too :D
     
  27. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    If it comes down to a choice, always choose great over blue :ROFLMAO:
     
    SsSsSsSsSnake likes this.
  28. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The beach... Minolta Rokkor 55mm f1.7.

    1-DSC08064.jpg

    Not too sure what the following were taken with but probably Minolta Rokkors.

    1-DSC06000.JPG

    1-DSC05965.JPG
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2018
    wardy07 and Cagey75 like this.
  29. Mike.P

    Mike.P

    Messages:
    4,178
    Edit My Images:
    No
    This isn't really vintage as the lens is only about 11 years old but my Pentax K/DA - EOS-M adapter arrived from China today so I thought I would give it a quick try.

    There are ring adapters that will click into place on the Pentax lens and then you can mount it on the EOS adapter and then the M camera but they don't allow you to change the aperture on newer lenses that don't have an A ring and also I have found then to be a bit flakey when trying to get them off the lens (think plyers). So anyway, I saw this one on Ebay that connects the lens and camera directly and also has a built in aperture ring and I have to say it works very well, the only slight niggles are that the ring turns smoothly rather than clicks and also the lens mounts upside down (which REALLY niggles me).

    Anyway, M5 with Pentax DA 70mm f/2.4 shot wide open ... I so much prefer mirrorless where manual focus is necessary.

    [​IMG]
    Flowers
    by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr
     
  30. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    That is a tasty looking lens, amazing how they managed to create a fast-ish 70mm so dinky!
     
  31. Mike.P

    Mike.P

    Messages:
    4,178
    Edit My Images:
    No
    This is the thing that really annoys me with Pentax. They do a 15mm, 21mm, 35mm macro, 40mm and 70mm for a crop body that are fantastic quality and all much the same size. Mount them on a small compact crop mirrorless body about the same size as the M5 and they would have a sure fire hit on their hands.

    Lack of cash flow I guess.
     
    Cagey75 likes this.
  32. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    A couple of sort of abstract ones.

    Driftwood, Minolta Rokkor 50mm f1.2.

    1-DSC06231-N.jpg

    Something warm on a cold day.

    1-DSC09142-N.jpg

    Canon FD 85mm f1.8.

    1-DSC08394.JPG
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2018
  33. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Now that's my kinda thing, very nice :)

    I've often wondered this, why Pentax are so quiet, why they haven't so much as uttered a peep with all the ML/compact system releases past few years. I'm sure many a Pentax user that is feeling a bit neglected would adore them all over again if they brought out their own small ML body, like you say, they have the lenses for it already! A simple AF adapter to boot and you're laughing
     
  34. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Up ye get!

    A few randoms using the Vivitar 200mm

    Neighbour's back yard tree, not sure if crab apples or what, but the birds seem to like them
    [​IMG]P1020091 by K G, on Flickr

    My wind chime that is constantly blowing off the tree, this isn't where it usually lives, got a bird feeder there now
    [​IMG]P1020102 by K G, on Flickr

    Didn't nail this, but sometimes it's not about sharpness, more about the overall image, I love this sparrow's expression, with the nut hanging to one side, staring me out of it, with that "gonna do something about it?" look
    [​IMG]P1020132-Edit by K G, on Flickr
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2018 at 1:05 PM
  35. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    A few more, a cheeky Robin:
    [​IMG]Robin spit by K G, on Flickr
    [​IMG]Sassy Robin by K G, on Flickr

    And when you just miss the take off, make it artsy like you meant it! - Is this BIF enough? :D
    [​IMG]The Flyover by K G, on Flickr
     
  36. LeeRatters

    LeeRatters

    Messages:
    890
    Name:
    Lee
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ^^^ Lovely shots :)

    I've not used anything aside form the Voigtlander the past weekend. And the photos haven't got through LR yet..... :)
     
    Cagey75 likes this.
  37. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Cheers :)

    Yeah you probably don't need the voigtlander, pass it over this way :p
     
  38. LeeRatters

    LeeRatters

    Messages:
    890
    Name:
    Lee
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    LCE have got one listed .... ;) :p
     
  39. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    They also have a 35mm f2.5 color skopar. I had one years ago, the MC version, and I sooooo regret selling it and I've wanted to replace it ever since but really I don't need one as I have the e mount 35mm f1.4, a Minolta f1.8 and FD, Rokkor and Zuiko f2.8's. I still want a color skopar though.
     
  40. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Just checked out LCE, to see what they have - they're not cheap are they?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice