Vintage Lenses

I collect old cameras which mostly do not have lenses attached but sometimes do. When they do have lenses they are often cheap after-market lenses and nothing to write home about.

Yesterday, I took delivery of a Nikon EM SLR which had a Vivitar lens attached. I took no notice of the lens when I bought the camera but it turns out to be a Kiron 70-150 f/3.8 lens, marketed as a Vivitar, from around 1980. Interweb reviews of this lens suggest it is a fine lens. I don't have a digital Nikon to try it out on so I shall have to wait on my test film to find out just how good.
 
I've got the Kiron 80 - 200 sat here. I've never actually used it. But, they are cheap as chips to buy and apparently quite decent. So one day it might get an airing.
 
john.margetts said:
I collect old cameras which mostly do not have lenses attached but sometimes do. When they do have lenses they are often cheap after-market lenses and nothing to write home about.

Yesterday, I took delivery of a Nikon EM SLR which had a Vivitar lens attached. I took no notice of the lens when I bought the camera but it turns out to be a Kiron 70-150 f/3.8 lens, marketed as a Vivitar, from around 1980. Interweb reviews of this lens suggest it is a fine lens. I don't have a digital Nikon to try it out on so I shall have to wait on my test film to find out just how good.
Click to expand...


Never used it but have heard good things, 150mm is just that awkward FL for me - I've owned a 150mm macro in tha past which i thought would double nicely as a tele lens, but it was never long enough. I prefer 200mm if I'm looking to get any kind of tele action - but I know Nikon also do a very nice 70-150mm and many prefer it over the old 70-210 or 80-200 options
 
Cagey75 said:
Never used it but have heard good things, 150mm is just that awkward FL for me - I've owned a 150mm macro in tha past which i thought would double nicely as a tele lens, but it was never long enough. I prefer 200mm if I'm looking to get any kind of tele action - but I know Nikon also do a very nice 70-150mm and many prefer it over the old 70-210 or 80-200 options
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the E version, if I remember right. Had one a while ago.
 
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
Yes, that's the E version, if I remember right. Had one a while ago.
Click to expand...

The E version is correct, people rave about it but just too short for me, I don't think it had anything else special about it? like a nice close 'macro' mode , where the Kiron [depending on version] does have a macro mode

I haven't had the chance to really push the Nikon 200 F4 AI but I have been reading up on it and my experience matches what many say, wide open CA/purple fringing is awful, but it gets tasty and sharp at 5.6 - not exactly what you desire from an F4 tele prime that generally costs over double if not triple or more what other vintage 200F4 lenses go for. But ... 5.6 is fine, I can deal with that. I think it will eventually get sold on and I will go a huntin' for another 180 2.8 but I'll give it a little more time.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
The E version is correct, people rave about it but just too short for me, I don't think it had anything else special about it? like a nice close 'macro' mode , where the Kiron [depending on version] does have a macro mode

I haven't had the chance to really push the Nikon 200 F4 AI but I have been reading up on it and my experience matches what many say, wide open CA/purple fringing is awful, but it gets tasty and sharp at 5.6 - not exactly what you desire from an F4 tele prime that generally costs over double if not triple or more what other vintage 200F4 lenses go for. But ... 5.6 is fine, I can deal with that. I think it will eventually get sold on and I will go a huntin' for another 180 2.8 but I'll give it a little more time.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the 180/2.8 has become one of my favourite lenses. Even with the TC-14A it's still very sharp. Stunning lens and a real joy to use. Definitely would recommend grabbing one, Keith.
 
Cagey75 said:
Never used it but have heard good things, 150mm is just that awkward FL for me - I've owned a 150mm macro in tha past which i thought would double nicely as a tele lens, but it was never long enough. I prefer 200mm if I'm looking to get any kind of tele action - but I know Nikon also do a very nice 70-150mm and many prefer it over the old 70-210 or 80-200 options
Click to expand...
I now have a Nikon F - M4/3 convertor so I can try my Nikon lenses on my Panasonic G7. Not had time yet shall do so in the coming week.
 
Plain Nev said:
I've got the Kiron 80 - 200 sat here. I've never actually used it. But, they are cheap as chips to buy and apparently quite decent. So one day it might get an airing.
Click to expand...
Kiron are not a well known make, having mostly made for other brand names. This keeps the price nice and low. I already have another Kiron lens, also branded as Vivitar but with a Canon FD mount, which is quite a nice lens.
 
john.margetts said:
I now have a Nikon F - M4/3 convertor so I can try my Nikon lenses on my Panasonic G7. Not had time yet shall do so in the coming week.
Click to expand...

On M43 150mm is that bit nicer, I did own the Panasonic 45-150 when I shot M43 and it was a sweet little lens. On M43 you're getting the equivilant to 300mm on FF or 200mm APSC
 
This is just another test shot of Mrs WW. This time after adjusting my adapter so that the lens markings are at the top. Takumar 50mm at f1.4.

YqQBP0S.jpg


The bokeh is rough in the bottom right corner but the point of focus, her right eye, is certainly sharp enough.
 
Last edited:
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
Yeah, the 180/2.8 has become one of my favourite lenses. Even with the TC-14A it's still very sharp. Stunning lens and a real joy to use. Definitely would recommend grabbing one, Keith.
Click to expand...


It's top of my list now that I've gotten the macro lens I was after. Selling the 180 allowed me get that plus the Nikon 200 F4. I liked the AF 180, but it's not great for MF, way too tight a throw between off to spot on, we're talking mm's, I really want the older AIS ED version but they're not letting them go cheap!
 
Cagey75 said:
It's top of my list now that I've gotten the macro lens I was after. Selling the 180 allowed me get that plus the Nikon 200 F4. I liked the AF 180, but it's not great for MF, way too tight a throw between off to spot on, we're talking mm's, I really want the older AIS ED version but they're not letting them go cheap!
Click to expand...

I'm just after a 300/4.5 but the one I'm after is evading me so far! :mad:
 
Well, I've been having great fun with my new TT Artisans 17mm lens. It really is a pleasure to use and is capable of pin sharp results. Not strictly vintage perhaps. But definitely old school.
 
Plain Nev said:
Well, I've been having great fun with my new TT Artisans 17mm lens. It really is a pleasure to use and is capable of pin sharp results. Not strictly vintage perhaps. But definitely old school.
Click to expand...

That is the other lens on my list, would have bought it already but I'm wary of customs from China. But ... on the Pergear site I see it's only just over €100, so even if I got hit, the max would be something around 150 ... which still makes it worth it I think.

Instead [for now] I went for a Laowa 65mm macro, one I've been after for a while. Also not vintage, but very old school in that it has zero frills, 100% manual with zero comm's to camera, it is Fuji fit though so no need for an adapter.
 
Last edited:
Ah, I thought so.

That's actually saved me some money and I do I suppose have my film era Tokina 17mm and Vivitar 19mm.
 
woof woof said:
Ah, I thought so.

That's actually saved me some money and I do I suppose have my film era Tokina 17mm and Vivitar 19mm.
Click to expand...

What's the close focus like on both of those? I'd like a WA [APSC, so wider than 18mm I guess] , but I want one that focuses nice and close, that TTartisan has that. It focuses down to 20cm and according to reviews is sharp even at CFD at 1.4 - the issues start with soft corners but that never bothers me, as I only care about corners when stopped down a lot, F8+ [landscape, architecture/urban ... anywhere corners actually matter]
 
Last edited:
The Vivitar 19mm focuses noticeably closer than the Tokina 17mm but isn't as good a lens, it has mushier corners and distortion. The Vivitar gives about the same magnification I'd get from a film era 50mm.
 
I got an email back about what size tool will fit the screws on the K&F M42 adapter to get the lens markings to the top and they said...

"the phenomenon you describe is normal and can not work with screws"

So, that went well. They think it's normal that the lens markings aren't at the top but I can say back "Oh yes it does work!" :D
 
I've just been Googling Takumar 55mm f1.8's. I've bided on a couple but restricted myself to sensible maximum bids and didn't win either. It is silly to be looking at these when I have the f1.4, isn't it?
 
woof woof said:
I've just been Googling Takumar 55mm f1.8's. I've bided on a couple but restricted myself to sensible maximum bids and didn't win either. It is silly to be looking at these when I have the f1.4, isn't it?
Click to expand...

I just sold mine yesterday, Alan. Some people say they're sharper than the 1.4s.
 
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
I just sold mine yesterday, Alan. Some people say they're sharper than the 1.4s.
Click to expand...

I've Googled 50mm f1.4 v 55mm f1.8 and opinions seem to be all over the place maybe because of lens copy variations. I really can't see the lens being significantly smaller or lighter than the already teeny tiny 50mm f1.4 so I do think that looking at 55mm f1.8's is silly, when I have the 50mm f1.4.

Just on 50mm f1.4 sharpness. This is a 100% crop from that picture I posted above. Focus is on her eyelashes. I think this would be acceptable for a modern 50mm f1.4 and I really couldn't ask for any more sharpness in the central area at least.

Here goes... I hope the sharpness survives the posting process.

rkt9Hiu.jpg


Damn. It doesn't look as sharp here as on my pc so maybe you'll take my word for it... It's easily sharp enough. Actually at f1.4 camera or subject movement is more likely to be an issue for sharpness than this lens, IMO.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I've just been Googling Takumar 55mm f1.8's. I've bided on a couple but restricted myself to sensible maximum bids and didn't win either. It is silly to be looking at these when I have the f1.4, isn't it?
Click to expand...
I sold one on eBay at the start of this month for £43 plus postage. What sort of prices are you seeing, Alan?

And no, it's a Tak so how can it be silly :cool:
 
Prices seem to be all over the place with Buy It Now lenses advertised for £39,99 to over £100. One I bid on but didn't get went for £20-odd with postage included and a set of two Takumars, 55 and 135 plus a Galaxy 35mm f3.5 went for just under £47 including postage. I nearly increased my bid for that set of three but spotted that the seller had some dubious feedback so didn't.

I do really have too many lenses so unless something very nice pops up I really should stop.

Minolta Rokkor 24, 28, 35mm f2.8's, 35mm f1.8, 45mm f2, 50mm f1.7, 1.4, 1.2, 55mm f1.7, 85mm f2, 135mm f2.8.
Minolta fit 17, 19mm, 50mm f2.8 macro, 70-210mm.
Olympus Zuiko 24, 28, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, f1.4, 85mm f2, 135mm f3.5.
Canon FD 24, 28, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 1.4, 85mm f1.8.
FD fit 24mm f2.8 "Macro."
Nikon Series E 28mm f2.8, 35mm f2.5. AI-S 24, 28, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, f1.4, 85mm f2. Nipon Kogaku 24, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f2, f1.4.
Chinon Pentax fit 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4.
Takumar 28, 35mm f3.5, 50mm f1.4.

There may be some others too.
 
There must be a lot of copy variation as I see some say it's sharp wide open and others saying it's soft up to F4. It also seems there's variations in weight, CFD and magnification, I see at least 3 different versions based on those traits alone

SMC/S-M-C/Super-/Auto-/Takumar 55mm F1.8 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Normal Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

SMC/S-M-C/Super-/Auto-/Takumar 55mm F1.8 lens reviews and detailed specifications. This fast 55mm screwmount lens existed in several versions all with the same optical diagram. From t
www.pentaxforums.com
 
woof woof said:
Prices seem to be all over the place with Buy It Now lenses advertised for £39,99 to over £100. One I bid on but didn't get went for £20-odd with postage included and a set of two Takumars, 55 and 135 plus a Galaxy 35mm f3.5 went for just under £47 including postage. I nearly increased my bid for that set of three but spotted that the seller had some dubious feedback so didn't.

I do really have too many lenses so unless something very nice pops up I really should stop.

Minolta Rokkor 24, 28, 35mm f2.8's, 35mm f1.8, 45mm f2, 50mm f1.7, 1.4, 1.2, 55mm f1.7, 85mm f2, 135mm f2.8.
Minolta fit 17, 19mm, 50mm f2.8 macro, 70-210mm.
Olympus Zuiko 24, 28, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, f1.4, 85mm f2, 135mm f3.5.
Canon FD 24, 28, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 1.4, 85mm f1.8.
FD fit 24mm f2.8 "Macro."
Nikon Series E 28mm f2.8, 35mm f2.5. AI-S 24, 28, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, f1.4, 85mm f2. Nipon Kogaku 24, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f2, f1.4.
Chinon Pentax fit 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4.
Takumar 28, 35mm f3.5, 50mm f1.4.

There may be some others too.
Click to expand...

Fine collection indeed but surely there is always room for one more

 
I bought a Nikon 35mm f2.5 Series E MK1 some time ago but it squeaked when turning the focus ring when pointed downwards. I got it cheap so I didn't complain. A while back I looked on evil bay and they've shot up in price so I invested £50 in a clean and lubrication and now it's perfect. It seems to be a nice, light and compact and perfectly useable lens. I took it out today...

View from the bridge.

37pT2Q4.jpg


The red sign says "Forest Halt." They weren't kidding.

H5WvKmJ.jpg


A lovely garden.

VjnD64z.jpg


Little flowers.

X26NPOG.jpg
 
Last edited:
I've been wanting to do some more bird and wildlife photography lately so decided it was time to invest in a longer lens. I was originally looking for a 300/4.5 but decided longer would be more useful so found a mint Nikon 400/5.6 AIS EDIF which will also work well with my TC-14B, I hope. It's waiting for me at the PO as I type so can hopefully have a play this weekend.

400mm.jpeg
 
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
I've been wanting to do some more bird and wildlife photography lately so decided it was time to invest in a longer lens. I was originally looking for a 300/4.5 but decided longer would be more useful so found a mint Nikon 400/5.6 AIS EDIF which will also work well with my TC-14B, I hope. It's waiting for me at the PO as I type so can hopefully have a play this weekend.

View attachment 322882
Click to expand...


Nice, how much? also let us know how it performs, often thought on similar for some wildlife.


Longest I have atm is the 200mm F4 AI, which is ok for the garden but heading down the river it proves to be too short for anything serious.

A couple of testers I shot using that recently: just checking the quality here really, do like the loop in the plant though

Nettle by K G, on Flickr

Loop by K G, on Flickr

I believe these were shot at 5.6, I've only used it at F4 and 5.6 so far checking for fringing etc, it's much better at 5.6, at F4 it leaves me doubting, a fair bit of post clean up required in anything but perfect light
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Nice, how much? also let us know how it performs, often thought on similar for some wildlife.
Click to expand...

I will do, mate. Got the taste with the 180mm with TC-14A and some birds down the seafront. The 400mm will be great down there. £600 paid for this example from Ffordes. They've got two more at the moment, one for the same price and a cheaper one for £449. £600 is top end but I like 'em mint if I can find them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top