Vintage Lenses

I shouldn't laugh.... :D

In other news I'm a convert to FD lenses. I have them on two of my Canons, and an FL on t'other. I do like the FL with it's clunky aperture, but the FD is lighter and smoother, I think. I suspect that might be due to, what looks like, its polycarbonate construction. But, oh dear, the Canons are a mare to focus. I'm also using a little Fujica, and the screen on that is much brighter and clearer by comparison.
 
Plain Nev said:
I shouldn't laugh.... :D

In other news I'm a convert to FD lenses. I have them on two of my Canons, and an FL on t'other. I do like the FL with it's clunky aperture, but the FD is lighter and smoother, I think. I suspect that might be due to, what looks like, its polycarbonate construction. But, oh dear, the Canons are a mare to focus. I'm also using a little Fujica, and the screen on that is much brighter and clearer by comparison.
Click to expand...
If you’ve got the later FD lenses they will be lighter, the original FD Breechlock lenses were similar to the FL lenses
 
Yes, both my FD lenses are the breech lock system. I've been buying vintage lenses and always promised myself I wouldn't get into Canon lenses. Well, I suppose they are made to be broken. :p
 
GordonM said:
If you’ve got the later FD lenses they will be lighter, the original FD Breechlock lenses were similar to the FL lenses
Click to expand...

Plain Nev said:
Yes, both my FD lenses are the breech lock system. I've been buying vintage lenses and always promised myself I wouldn't get into Canon lenses. Well, I suppose they are made to be broken. :p
Click to expand...

My 85/1.8 I had for a while was breechlock and it was a bit of a lump in all honesty.
 
Plain Nev said:
Yes, both my FD lenses are the breech lock system. I've been buying vintage lenses and always promised myself I wouldn't get into Canon lenses. Well, I suppose they are made to be broken. :p
Click to expand...
Breechlock FD lenses were all metal, the later twist fit type were lighter, but not polycarbonate for most of them
 
I like the breechlock FD's but I prefer the early and more obviously metal Nikons, Minoltas and Takumars. I only have one breech lock now, a 50mm f1.8 which is very nice but has a longer minimum focus distance than just about all of my other film era 50mm lenses except the FD f1.8 and f1.4 which from memory are about the same.
 
GordonM said:
Breechlock FD lenses were all metal, the later twist fit type were lighter, but not polycarbonate for most of them
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. I'll look out for the later type.
 
I may be wrong but I think some breech lock and later FD lenses were optically identical.

Personally I think that of the film era lenses I have the Rokkors are generally the "best" as in they give the most modern look.
 
Last edited:
I don't think I've come across a Rokkor lens. That's something else to look out for. ;)
 
Plain Nev said:
I don't think I've come across a Rokkor lens. That's something else to look out for. ;)
Click to expand...

Ah, sorry, it's Minolta Rokkor. The earlier MC ones include some nice all metal lenses but the later MD's supposedly have better coatings and do seem to be a bit optically better, maybe. I find the MD's to be the best of the film era primes I have, in that the seem to have fewer optical issues. Having said all that all the old lenses I have are useable :D
 
Managed to snatch a well priced Yashica 135ML to add to the collection.

May well take it out on the A7, might be a lighter/smaller alternative to the Carl Zeiss 80-200/4, might even try it for astro too at some point.

Will have to give a good look first because the listing did say slow aperture blades so might look into a repair to use it on the Yashica FX3...... Anyone had aperture blades 'serviced' before please?
 
Typically slow aperture blades means there is a bit of oil or grease on them. If you can open up the lens you can use some zippo lighter fuel or isopropyl alcohol on a q-tip to gently clean it off. Plenty of videos online.

If you don't have the gear to take it apart I would be happy to have a look at it for you if you are happy to cover postage both ways. Won't be for a couple of weeks though, Dad's funeral on Tuesday next week.
 
moggi1964 said:
Typically slow aperture blades means there is a bit of oil or grease on them. If you can open up the lens you can use some zippo lighter fuel or isopropyl alcohol on a q-tip to gently clean it off. Plenty of videos online.

If you don't have the gear to take it apart I would be happy to have a look at it for you if you are happy to cover postage both ways. Won't be for a couple of weeks though, Dad's funeral on Tuesday next week.
Click to expand...

I do have one of those lens tool things somewhere. I have taken elements out before to clean & I did make one good Yashica ML50/1.7 out of two bad ones so I'll take a look when it arrives. It may well be that it isn't much of an issue just that the seller mentioned it to cover their ar$e as I bought it from that auction site.

Thank you for the kind offer though. I will bear it in mind :)

Sorry for your loss.
 
I watched this vid recently by Matt Johnson featuring amongst others the Zeiss 50mm f1.4. The results may not be to everyones taste but I can certainly see why he likes the effects. So I'm posting it here. Hope you like it too... The Zeiss bit starts at about 1:50.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMwrYohDz00
 
Well, the Yashica ML 135 arrived. Great condition, smooth focus, nice aperture clicks..... but, you can make a brew whilst waiting for the aperture blades to close via the rear lever..... No real signs of oil though but did look like a blade or two could be 'twisted' a touch.
 
I seem to have drifted off into the realms of film lately. I still do use digital, and of course vintage lenses. But film is taking a lot of my time. A word of warning though. Don't buy this camera. It makes it far too easy to take photographs. :p

prod_316_0.jpg

Loving it really though.
 
Having sold most of my kit to fund a new business, I'm finally able to buy it back now. I've purchased a new Nikon Z FC (stunning little camera) and a D700 (my all time favourite). I've used a plethora of vintage lenses but this time round it was interesting to note where I put my money. The VERY first lens I wanted back was the Jupiter 3 (50mm f/1.5). It was always my favourite and produces some stunning renditions. On the Z FC it works more like a 75mm f/1.5 but regardless it's a stunner. Here are a few pics from a Sunday outing with my wife and son.

ROS-JUP-2 copy.jpgROS-JUP-1S copy.jpgROS-JUP-6S.jpgROS-JUP-5S.jpgROS-JUP-4S.jpgROS-JUP-3S.jpgROS-JUP-2-SEPIA.JPGREECE-JUP-1S copy.jpgREECE-JUP-2S copy.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ahhh..... I didn't tell you about my latest find. Mooching around at an antique and bric a brac fair, as you do, I came across a box with a nice Kodak Retinette in it. I didn't buy it, but happened to flick open the bag that was in there and blow me it was only a Canon A1 with four lenses. I quickly closed the bag and asked how much he wanted for it? Wait for it, wait for it. £10.00!!!! Has to be the bargain of a lifetime. I doubt I'll see anything quite like that again.
 
Plain Nev said:
Ahhh..... I didn't tell you about my latest find. Mooching around at an antique and bric a brac fair, as you do, I came across a box with a nice Kodak Retinette in it. I didn't buy it, but happened to flick open the bag that was in there and blow me it was only a Canon A1 with four lenses. I quickly closed the bag and asked how much he wanted for it? Wait for it, wait for it. £10.00!!!! Has to be the bargain of a lifetime. I doubt I'll see anything quite like that again.
Click to expand...

OOOH. What lenses did you get with it?
 
woof woof said:
OOOH. What lenses did you get with it?
Click to expand...

There was a fifty, complete with Olympic lens cap. A 28mm, a 30 - 70, and a 70 - 210. All FD. Oh, and a motor winder too. Sounds like someone had built a kit up. There was even film in the camera. So someone had been using it relatively recently. Sad to think it ended up stuffed in a box at an antique fair. The thing is the dealer just wasn't interested. Hence the price. At least it's gone to a good home.
 
Plain Nev said:
There was a fifty, complete with Olympic lens cap. A 28mm, a 30 - 70, and a 70 - 210. All FD. Oh, and a motor winder too. Sounds like someone had built a kit up. There was even film in the camera. So someone had been using it relatively recently. Sad to think it ended up stuffed in a box at an antique fair. The thing is the dealer just wasn't interested. Hence the price. At least it's gone to a good home.
Click to expand...

Looks like a pretty complete kit, probably someone's pride and joy but now I'm sure you'll look after it and give it a new life.
 
Plain Nev said:
There was a fifty, complete with Olympic lens cap. A 28mm, a 30 - 70, and a 70 - 210. All FD. Oh, and a motor winder too. Sounds like someone had built a kit up. There was even film in the camera. So someone had been using it relatively recently. Sad to think it ended up stuffed in a box at an antique fair. The thing is the dealer just wasn't interested. Hence the price. At least it's gone to a good home.
Click to expand...
I think my M42 bundle, from about 3-4 years back, was even better than that -the A1 & primes should be pretty good but early zooms aren't up to much.
A Practika camera, Zeiss 135mm Sonnar, Zeiss 50mm Tessar, & Zeiss 35mm/2.4 Flektogon plus a few minor extras in the bag for £10. The Flektogon alone was worth more then £200 when I got it (it's a seriously sort after lens). I'll be waiting for years to manage another deal like that, but I keep searching.
 
From another thread, don't know if you guys agree with me:

I tend to prefer MF lenses to modern AF lenses and often that means I have a decent stock of vintage lenses at my disposal. However, a recent new business plan forced me to sell my vintage lenses. Now once again in the position to buy them back I decided to use my experience with them and just purchase the best of the best, rather than have 3 Peli cases full of lenses, some of which were rarely used. The Nikon mirrorless cameras have such excellent focus peaking that not making use of MF lenses is all but criminal as many produce images modern AF lenses just can't and they're often cheaper than the new Z lenses by quite some way. I chose 5 lenses to use with the Z FC.

1. Voigtlander Ultron 21 f/1.8 ASPH
2. Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 ASPH VIII
3. Jupiter 3 50mm f/1.5
4. Nikon 16-50mm kit lens
5. Pentax Asahi Macro-Takumar 50mm f/4

With regards the first 3, on the Nikon DX sensor that's effectively a 30, 50 and 75mm equivalent and all 3 deliver Leica-like image quality with silky smooth bokeh. The 16-50mm kit lens is an optical revelation considering the price and slightly cheap build quality. It still delivers brilliantly sharp images and is "fairly" compact. A great walk around lens and a VERY good product photography lens. On a tripod in studio conditions you really don't need a fast bokeh monster so the 16-50 is definitely a keeper. Finally, the Macro-Takumar is cheap as chips for a lens that is critically sharp. Again, it's MF but who does serious macro photography using auto-focus?

I've said this many times but unfortunately humans tend to follow the crowd. If you're using a Nikon Z mirrorless camera you really should:

a. know how to use it in manual mode with manual focus lenses.
b. if you can, save yourself a fortune by purchasing MF lenses (vintage or new) which will often produce far better images than the latest and (not so) greatest Z lenses.

I understand MF lenses won't work for everyone or every type of shooting but I'd guess they would for most amateur photographers in most situations.

Just a heads-up and nothing more. No criticism intended.
 
I like my film era manual lenses and my modern Sony FE mount manual focus Voigtlander lenses too. I like the more obviously nothing but metal and glass ones but I also like the less visually attractive less tactile ones as I have a thing for inverse snobbery and the underdog :D All of these lenses have their charms and some have their own distinctive look too if only at their wider apertures and in how they portray bokeh.

They all have their charms but for me there's no escaping the fact that the modern lenses and coatings are just so good there's really no comparison for technical ability and that goes not only for film era lenses v new lenses but also for DSLR era lenses v new lenses. The look the less technically good lenses give is another matter and that's a part of the appeal.

The modern Voigtlander FE mount lenses I have are interesting. The 50mm f2 APO is IMO outstanding and whilst the 40mm f1.2 has its issues it's still well worth a look. My most used Voigtlander is the 35mm f1.4 which has its critics and many people no doubt wouldn't think of buying one but it has definite charms. These lenses have very good qualities but may well be bettered by the new higher end AF mirrorless lenses but these may be bigger, heavier and a lot more expensive.

I tend to use the modern AF lenses when I'm with other people or otherwise want to be less the geek with the camera and want to get on with things and be quick. I like the manual lenses when I'm by myself or can for some reason take my time. At each focal length I may have several choices from the various makers and it's difficult to choose between them.

If I simply had to choose,

Takina 17mm f3.5.
Minolta Rokkor 24mm f2.8
Minolta Rokkor 35mm f1.8.
Minolta Rokkor 50mm f1.4.
Minolta Rokkor 55mm f1.7 MD.
Minolta Rokkor 85mm f2.
Minolta Rokkor 135mm f2.8.

But I couldn't ignore these...
Vivitar 19mm f3.8.
Nippon Kogaku 50mm f1.4 and f2.
Nikon AI-S 28mm f2.8.
Nikon AI-S 50mm f1.4.
Olympus Zuiko 50mm f1.8 and f1.4.
Sigma 50mm f2.8 1:1 Macro.
Nikon AI-S 85mm f2.
Takumar 28 and 35mm f3.5.
Takumar 50mm f1.4.
And because they're underdogs but IMO either good or interesting...
Chinon 28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I like my film era manual lenses and my modern Sony FE mount manual focus Voigtlander lenses too. I like the more obviously nothing but metal and glass ones but I also like the less visually attractive less tactile ones as I have a thing for inverse snobbery and the underdog :D All of these lenses have their charms and some have their own distinctive look too if only at their wider apertures and in how they portray bokeh.

They all have their charms but for me there's no escaping the fact that the modern lenses and coatings are just so good there's really no comparison for technical ability and that goes not only for film era lenses v new lenses but also for DSLR era lenses v new lenses. The look the less technically good lenses give is another matter and that's a part of the appeal.

The modern Voigtlander FE mount lenses I have are interesting. The 50mm f2 APO is IMO outstanding and whilst the 40mm f1.2 has its issues it's still well worth a look. My most used Voigtlander is the 35mm f1.4 which has its critics and many people no doubt wouldn't think of buying one but it has definite charms. These lenses have very good qualities but may well be bettered by the new higher end AF mirrorless lenses but these may be bigger, heavier and a lot more expensive.

I tend to use the modern AF lenses when I'm with other people or otherwise want to be less the geek with the camera and want to get on with things and be quick. I like the manual lenses when I'm by myself or can for some reason take my time. At each focal length I may have several choices from the various makers and it's difficult to choose between them.

If I simply had to choose,

Takina 17mm f3.5.
Minolta Rokkor 24mm f2.8
Minolta Rokkor 35mm f1.8.
Minolta Rokkor 50mm f1.4.
Minolta Rokkor 55mm f1.7 MD.
Minolta Rokkor 85mm f2.
Minolta Rokkor 135mm f2.8.

But I could ignore these...
Vivitar 19mm f3.8.
Nippon Kogaku 50mm f1.4 and f2.
Nikon AI-S 28mm f2.8.
Nikon AI-S 50mm f1.4.
Olympus Zuiko 50mm f1.8 and f1.4.
Sigma 50mm f2.8 1:1 Macro.
Nikon AI-S 85mm f2.
Takumar 28 and 35mm f3.5.
Takumar 50mm f1.4.
And because they're underdogs but IMO either good or interesting...
Chinon 28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4.
Click to expand...

Great reposte mate. I tend to shoot by myself or with the family and that may have something to do with my choices. Hadn’t even thought of that!

That said, whilst the 16-50 kit lens is brilliant, it leaves me cold compared to my Voigtlanders.
 
Last edited:
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
Great reposte mate. I tend to shoot by myself or with the family and that may have something to do with my choices. Hadn’t even thought of that!

That said, whilst the 16-50 kit lens is brilliant, it leave me compared to my Voigtlanders.
Click to expand...

I don't like to be the geek with the camera holding everything up plus I'm worried about paying to much attention to the camera gear when really when out with someone else they and the day should be the experience. Manual lenses are therefore my luxury me time choice :D
 
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
I've splurged on a "new vintage" lens to pair with the Nikon Z FC. A Voigtländer Nokton 35mm f/1.2 VM Aspherical III. :oops: :$ Cost almost as much as the Z FC but I think it'll be a cracking combo and compliment the Jupiter 3.

View attachment 356063
Click to expand...
I’ve got the 50mm version of this, very interesting lens that can give modern as well as vintage output depending on aperture. If I didn’t already have a 35mm that I love, I’d definitely buy one of these :)
 
Plain Nev said:
There is a beautiful pastel like quality to them which I think you'd struggle to acheive with a more modern lens.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

I can actually get very similar results with my Tokina 100mm f2.8 Macro.

But I'm finding the Helios to be more versatile and more fun. Then it occasionally does produce something the Tokina can't.

This is with a Raynox 250
_DSF5854 by Simon, on Flickr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top