The Vintage + Classic Adapted Glass Thread

Messages
14
Name
Hans
Edit My Images
Yes






 
OP
OP
Cagey75
Messages
13,496
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No







Nice, what is the actual name of the lens?
 
Messages
21,632
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
A few of Minolta Rokkor 50mm f1.7 MD shots. I posted these in another thread.

I really like this lens. It's small and light and sharp enough anywhere you'd want to place a main subject. It doesn't have the character of the earlier 55mm f1.7 MC which is one of my favorite lenses and instead gives a much more modern look, IMO.

The duck pond...



Marking the spot of the cottage Captain Cook was born in...



Squirrel! This was about as close as I could get without spooking him...



Crop...

 
Messages
14
Name
Hans
Edit My Images
Yes
Since there is 1MB upload limit here I posting my Flicker link.
this eveing I had some fun with this two lady and boy it was different taste,
I bought them to sell but rather to keep, boy I was lucky, this two lens sit in box around 40 years till today!
Asahi Super-Takumar 35mm f/3.5-16 (v2)
and
Asahi Multi- Coated Takumar 135mm f/3.5-22

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmcb7oFV
 
Messages
4,130
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Went to the end of the road yesterday to try the old Hoya 24mm f2.8 lens on the Nikon z6. It vignetted quite a bit, which I corrected in LR. This was taken at f8. OK, but no match for the kit 24-70! Mind you, it only cost £25 many years ago.

River Ribble at Settle Bridge
by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
 
OP
OP
Cagey75
Messages
13,496
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Just received the adapter For Nikon Z6 to my Konica Hexanon 57mm. This was shot at f1.4. Not sure about the bokeh. But in general use the lens seems excellent and easy to focus.

Churchyard @f1.4
by Stephen Lee, on Flickr
Certainly has it's own unique character. Bokeh seems almost like paint strokes, I like it! I imagine it'll be easy to get the 'swirly' bokeh effect using this for portraits - Just get it in front of the right trees and you should be able to achieve some lovely effects
 
Messages
21,632
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Just a couple of pictures taken with my film era Sigma 50mm f2.8.

This lens jammed so I sent it to a repairer in Scotland and it came back sticky. I cleaned it off myself but some of the lens markings that are just painted on came off. Also the rubber grip on the focus ring was loose so I took it off, wrapped insulation tape around the lens to bulk it up and refitted the rubber ring which then fitted tightly. So, unfortunately it's no longer pristine but optically it still works very well.

Pictures followed by 100% crops.









It's a lovely lens but it's not good for long stuff as there's very little movement of the focus ring beyond close distance. I wont be using that company in Scotland again. I sent a very nice Minolta Rokkor 35mm f2.8 to them to be cleaned and it came back unusable with damaged coating so that's two lenses they've made a mess off, one being a write off :(
 
Messages
70
Edit My Images
No
A couple of recent Dandelion photos.

A 35mm f/1.7 CCTV lens adapted to fit an OM-D E-M10 Mark II. Stopped down a touch to around f/2.

6160093-01.jpeg

My silvernose OM Zuiko 50mm f/1.8 from 1976 adapted to an OM-D E-M10 Mark II. Wide open at f/1.8.

6180109-01.jpeg
 
Messages
3,814
Name
Laurence
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm having to radically rethink my lens choices as I've acquired carpal tunnel syndrome as part of another rheumatic condition. I'm shooting with Sony A7RIII and A7II but also have an Olympus E-M1 MkII with a basic Fotodiox adapter for each body. The Sony/Sigma lenses I have are simply too heavy for me to handle at the moment unless I use my Peak Design Slide which I prefer to keep on my 100-400 combination.
At the moment I have the FD 50mm F1.8 and the FD 135mm F2.8. I'm expecting delivery of an FD 100mm F2.8 SSC perhaps tomorrow. My next decision will be for a wide angle lens for landscapes, I'm torn between the 24mm and the 28mm FD lenses.
I went out yesterday by the Thames at Hampton Court as we were baby sitting our grandson and decided to use the 135mm on the A7II. First error was realising that exposure compensation only really worked in aperture priority so 2/3 of shots wasted there!
First shot is of my wife peering over the top of her glasses with grandson. Shot in the fairly gloomy front hall at ISO 1000 1/200th F2.8

This shot is of an old house with a tower by the lock, ISO 100 1/400th f5.6

Both these shots look better on Flickr than on here:cautious:

Sorry for the long post, just dipping my toes in here. I'd be grateful for any tips regarding using these adapted lenses.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,347
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm having to radically rethink my lens choices as I've acquired carpal tunnel syndrome as part of another rheumatic condition. I'm shooting with Sony A7RIII and A7II but also have an Olympus E-M1 MkII with a basic Fotodiox adapter for each body. The Sony/Sigma lenses I have are simply too heavy for me to handle at the moment unless I use my Peak Design Slide which I prefer to keep on my 100-400 combination.
At the moment I have the FD 50mm F1.8 and the FD 135mm F2.8. I'm expecting delivery of an FD 100mm F2.8 SSC perhaps tomorrow. My next decision will be for a wide angle lens for landscapes, I'm torn between the 24mm and the 28mm FD lenses.
I went out yesterday by the Thames at Hampton Court as we were baby sitting our grandson and decided to use the 135mm on the A7II. First error was realising that exposure compensation only really worked in aperture priority so 2/3 of shots wasted there!
First shot is of my wife peering over the top of her glasses with grandson. Shot in the fairly gloomy front hall at ISO 1000 1/200th F2.8

This shot is of an old house with a tower by the lock, ISO 100 1/400th f5.6

Both these shots look better on Flickr than on here:cautious:

Sorry for the long post, just dipping my toes in here. I'd be grateful for any tips regarding using these adapted lenses.
There is a Techart LM-EA7 in sales section for a good price. That may come in handy for you :)
 
Messages
388
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
I went out yesterday by the Thames at Hampton Court as we were baby sitting our grandson and decided to use the 135mm on the A7II. First error was realising that exposure compensation only really worked in aperture priority so 2/3 of shots wasted there!
Nice shots.

EC doesn't only work in Aperture priority, but with adapted lenses the camera has no control of aperture.
Shutter priority can only be used with auto ISO & EC does work for that provided it's within acceptable range. (It's effectively another manual mode)
P & S modes can't work as they usually would if the camera can't control aperture.

I was disappointed to find Auto ISO on the A7ii won't use the ISO values below 100, loosing a stop of flexibility. This messed up loads of shots at an airshow when I thoughtlessly switched to S for prop aircraft. ISO 100 over exposed everything with my mirror lens.
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,347
Edit My Images
Yes
A question if I may (which may be silly), what sort of crop factor would you get on a 24mm primes (for film) used with an APS-C sensor - would it still be the 1.5x?
yep. crop factor is sensor based nothing to do with the lens. Also similarly lens focal length is a physical attribute of the lens and has nothing to do with the sensor.
In both case 35mm film is used as the "base" standard for calculation of field of view.
 
Messages
21,632
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I'm having to radically rethink my lens choices as I've acquired carpal tunnel syndrome as part of another rheumatic condition. I'm shooting with Sony A7RIII and A7II but also have an Olympus E-M1 MkII with a basic Fotodiox adapter for each body. The Sony/Sigma lenses I have are simply too heavy for me to handle at the moment unless I use my Peak Design Slide which I prefer to keep on my 100-400 combination.
At the moment I have the FD 50mm F1.8 and the FD 135mm F2.8. I'm expecting delivery of an FD 100mm F2.8 SSC perhaps tomorrow. My next decision will be for a wide angle lens for landscapes, I'm torn between the 24mm and the 28mm FD lenses.
I went out yesterday by the Thames at Hampton Court as we were baby sitting our grandson and decided to use the 135mm on the A7II. First error was realising that exposure compensation only really worked in aperture priority so 2/3 of shots wasted there!
First shot is of my wife peering over the top of her glasses with grandson. Shot in the fairly gloomy front hall at ISO 1000 1/200th F2.8
Both these shots look better on Flickr than on here:cautious:

Sorry for the long post, just dipping my toes in here. I'd be grateful for any tips regarding using these adapted lenses.
Just to confirm that EC should work with manual lenses in Aperture and Manual modes or at least it does with my A7. I'm sure it works with my MFT GX9 too or at least I'm sure I'd remember if it didn't.

I have the FD 24 and 28mm f2.8's and they're both fine so it just comes down to which you prefer. Personally I prefer the Minolta 24 and 28mm f2.8's but going for them would mean getting another adapter.

Sorry about the CTS
 
Messages
891
Name
Jim
Edit My Images
Yes
yep. crop factor is sensor based nothing to do with the lens. Also similarly lens focal length is a physical attribute of the lens and has nothing to do with the sensor.
In both case 35mm film is used as the "base" standard for calculation of field of view.
Thanks for the swift reply - I might just look at a nice short prime for landscapes.
 
Messages
3,814
Name
Laurence
Edit My Images
Yes
An FD 100mm F2.8 magically arrived in the post yesterday and after an initial panic about attaching the converter to the breech lock mechanism I finally mounted it on a body, in this case a Sony A7RIII.
Initially tried it on a Sirui travel tripod and there was considerable ball head droop so I've ordered a Fotodiox converter with a tripod ring to balance it better. There was some decent light in the garden earlier so I mounted it on my carbon fibre tripod and Flexshooter head, rock solid with zero droop.

1/125th, F8 ISO 1000
 
Messages
388
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
It is 1.5x unless you use a Canon, then it's 1.6x
or 1.7x in the unlikely event you have one of the early Sigma Foveon cameras...

@FlyPhot It doesn't matter where the lens comes from. Crop factor is just used to indicate the focal length on FF that gives the same field of view.
The only time this doesn't apply is when the lens doesn't have sufficient coverage to use all the sensor. A 12mm c-mount lens used on APSC will produce a small circular image in a field of black, the visible FOV almost certainly being smaller than a native 25mm lens.
If you only use APSC & don't have a history of using film you can just forget about the crop factor & get used to what a particular focal length looks like on your camera.
 
Messages
10,183
Name
Robert
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey guys
Got an adaptor today so I can use some old Olympus OM lenses on my A7ii.
I've got a 50mm 1.8, 24mm 2.8, 35mm 2.8 and a couple of zooms 70-210 and 80-200 I think.
Can't wait for a proper chance to try them out.

I'm looking for an old lens for portraits, maybe and 85mm 1.8 or a 135mm 2.8
Any thoughts or suggestions on what's decent?
Don't mind buying another mount so doesn't have to be om.
 
Messages
3,814
Name
Laurence
Edit My Images
Yes
I have 2 Canon FD lenses that I'm starting to use for portraits, the 135mm FD F2.8 and the Fd 100mm F2.8 SSC, both seem to be things of beauty. I'm using the cheapo Fotodiox adapter which is fine.
I'm using these on both my A7ii and A7Riii

100mm F2.8 on the A7Riii, sorry not a portrait.


An indoor family shot, natural light on the A7ii, 135mm f2.8 ISO1000.
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,347
Edit My Images
Yes
Tbh guys if you are after cheaper older lenses why not spend the little extra on LA-EA4 and go with Minolta a-mount glass. They aren't expensive and cost around the same as manual lenses.
You can pick up things like Minolta 135mm f2.8 and still have some usable AF.
There is a Sony 85mm f2.8 which is pretty cheap used and also small/light.

Also not to mention rendering and colours of Minolta lens even the zooms is just great!
 
OP
OP
Cagey75
Messages
13,496
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Tbh guys if you are after cheaper older lenses why not spend the little extra on LA-EA4 and go with Minolta a-mount glass. They aren't expensive and cost around the same as manual lenses.
You can pick up things like Minolta 135mm f2.8 and still have some usable AF.
There is a Sony 85mm f2.8 which is pretty cheap used and also small/light.

Also not to mention rendering and colours of Minolta lens even the zooms is just great!
I've read that the LA-EA3 was much better, as it uses the camera AF system not a built in iffy AF on the adapter. Some reviewers slated the EA4 because AF was terrible [I looked into the option when I was pondering on an A7RII]. It's going to end up pricier to buy the adapter and these A mount lenses and they will not be as good as vintage lenses for manual focus if you can MF with them to begin with. You've used old MF lenses, you know nothing modern can beat them for manual focus, they are designed specifically for that purpose and are usually of a higher build quality. The cheapest I can see that 85mm 2.8 is £149 on ebay, same with the Minolta 135 unless you're willing to buy from Japan. You can have a bunch of decent vintage primes for that.
 
Messages
388
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
I've read that the LA-EA3 was much better, as it uses the camera AF system not a built in iffy AF on the adapter. Some reviewers slated the EA4 because AF was terrible [I looked into the option when I was pondering on an A7RII]. It's going to end up pricier to buy the adapter and these A mount lenses and they will not be as good as vintage lenses for manual focus if you can MF with them to begin with. You've used old MF lenses, you know nothing modern can beat them for manual focus, they are designed specifically for that purpose and are usually of a higher build quality. The cheapest I can see that 85mm 2.8 is £149 on ebay, same with the Minolta 135 unless you're willing to buy from Japan. You can have a bunch of decent vintage primes for that.
I've also investigated these, the LA-EA4 uses AF from the adapter only (now very dated technology) but unlike the EA3 has a motor to drive the AF on lens that don't have their own motor.
It seems a relatively small proportion of minolta AF lenses have the required motor to use the EA3.
Both EA3 & EA4 are very expensive for adapters (perhaps only expensive for smart adapters)
I've decided they're not worth it, the Techart pro manages a reasonable degree of AF with nearly all SLR lenses so seems a better bet.
There are also numerous EF smart adapters...
 
OP
OP
Cagey75
Messages
13,496
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
Yeah if I was going to bother with an AF adapter I'd get one that can use a wider range, like the MC-11 for Sony to use any EF mount glass.

AF isn't everything anyway, part of the fun of vintage lenses is the hunt for those cheap gems and manually focusing those old lenses can be a joy. No fly by wire muck, can't beat true mechanical machinery
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
7,347
Edit My Images
Yes
Techart is actually more expensive than LA-EA4.
Regardless EA4's AF despite being dated works lot better than LM-EA7. EA4 is actually reliable :p
Also LA-EA7 is crap with longer lenses.

I can actually track birds with EA4+long lenses using centre point AF.

Any way my point was older a-mount glass doesn't cost much more than good manual glass in many cases. If someone doesn't want EA4 that's fine just buy a cheaper a-mount adapter for now but you still retain the possibility of having AF in future.
 
Last edited:
Messages
388
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
Techart is actually more expensive than LA-EA4.
Regardless EA4's AF despite being dated works lot better than LM-EA7. EA4 is actually reliable :p
Also LA-EA7 is crap with longer lenses.

I can actually track birds with EA4+long lenses using centre point AF.

Any way my point was older a-mount glass doesn't cost much more than good manual glass in many cases. If someone doesn't want EA4 that's fine just buy a cheaper a-mount adapter for now but you still retain the possibility of having AF in future.
I was lucky enough to get my EA7 for £104 considerably less than I've ever seen the EA4 going for.
It's limited with longer lenses, - it does have a limit for the weight it can drive (lens & any LM-X adapter). I think only one of my lenses longer than 250mm is suitable, but it works well enough with my lightweight 500mm mirror lens. I've used it at an airshow & it honed the focus perfectly.
.
 
Messages
21,632
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Hey guys
Got an adaptor today so I can use some old Olympus OM lenses on my A7ii.
I've got a 50mm 1.8, 24mm 2.8, 35mm 2.8 and a couple of zooms 70-210 and 80-200 I think.
Can't wait for a proper chance to try them out.

I'm looking for an old lens for portraits, maybe and 85mm 1.8 or a 135mm 2.8
Any thoughts or suggestions on what's decent?
Don't mind buying another mount so doesn't have to be om.
I've picked up a rokkor 135mm f/2.8 on Ebay that looks in good condition.
:)
I have that 135mm f2.8, IMO it's a good lens.

85 wise I have a FD f1.8 and Zuiko and Rokkor f2's. I have to look closely at the widest apertures to nit pick any real differences but when doing so I'd rank them Rokkor, FD then Zuiko but that's taking the same shots and nit picking differences. In real world shooting there's next to no difference except that the Zuiko needs more sharpening. I don't think any of these stand comparison to a modern 85mm though, not at their widest apertures where they're much more characterful.
 
Top