D
Deleted member 89409
Guest
As well as a lovely lens it is also a great photo. I need to rethink my aweful shots that I use for ebay.This one arrived today.
As well as a lovely lens it is also a great photo. I need to rethink my aweful shots that I use for ebay.This one arrived today.
As well as a lovely lens it is also a great photo. I need to rethink my aweful shots that I use for ebay.
That's an interesting one. A quick search suggests that rather than coating it, they made it out of curved glass, so it must change the formula of the lens slightly! I've stayed clear of vintage filters up to now - I'd rather have something multicoated and easy to clean. But for Leica lenses, that can mean buying some strange adapters like the SOOGZ, a screw clamp thing that allows you to fit E39 thread filters to lenses designed for A36 push on filters. These used to be cheap at camera fairs, and are now stupidly expensive on ebay. Then there's the SNHOO, which converts the unique conical filter thread of the Summitar to E39. These are rarer than the SOOGZ and would be even pricier if there weren't modern copies.Interestingly, one is a "ghostless" filter, that I'd not really heard of before and is quite scarce apparently.
That's an interesting one. A quick search suggests that rather than coating it, they made it out of curved glass, so it must change the formula of the lens slightly! I've stayed clear of vintage filters up to now - I'd rather have something multicoated and easy to clean. But for Leica lenses, that can mean buying some strange adapters like the SOOGZ, a screw clamp thing that allows you to fit E39 thread filters to lenses designed for A36 push on filters. These used to be cheap at camera fairs, and are now stupidly expensive on ebay. Then there's the SNHOO, which converts the unique conical filter thread of the Summitar to E39. These are rarer than the SOOGZ and would be even pricier if there weren't modern copies.
You might have mentioned it.
Did I mention I bought an 8 element Takumar 50mm f/1.4?
The hood I bought separately as despite it's condition this one will still be a user..
Very nice!
Pentax 35 - 70 / 2.8 - 3.5...... Bleh! Wasn't impressed on the basis of the few images I've taken this far. There is an unpleasant blue cast. I thought I'd done something wrong, but not as far as I'm aware. I know these things can be corrected quite easily. but of the lenses I've tried lately I haven't come across this before. It's a lump of a thing as well.
That’s a real shame.That'a a shame. I got s Minolta 35-70 3.5 to try a few days back but it was sloppy as heck so returned it.
That’s a real shame.
My Minolta 35-70 came from someone’s “personal collection” (to this day, I’m still not sure what that meant!), but anyway, it was spotless, “tight” and simply one of the best legacy lenses I own.
So versatile on FF. Not so much on m43.
It’s even been motor racing!!
Pentacon 135mm F2.8, 15 blade iris on M43 with focal reducer. Shot wide open.
there was a time when I could have recalculated equivalent focal length and AV for FF equivalent, but no longer.
100% accept this is in no way "clinically sharp", but then again, that's not what legacy lenses are all about.
I really must put this lens on my A7iii when the rose comes out this year and do an A/B.
And here's one from my Olly 135 (which nobody seems to want!!)
Almost certainly shot at F5.6/8 on Sony FF.
Pentacon 135mm F2.8, 15 blade iris on M43 with focal reducer. Shot wide open.
there was a time when I could have recalculated equivalent focal length and AV for FF equivalent, but no longer.
100% accept this is in no way "clinically sharp", but then again, that's not what legacy lenses are all about.
I really must put this lens on my A7iii when the rose comes out this year and do an A/B.
Lovely Takumar, thirtyfivemil
I've got an SMC Super Takumar 85-210mm f4.5 that I can't see me using due to the weight and length of it. If anyone would like this monster, all I'd ask is the postage. If more than one person is interested then I'll draw a name out of a hat. Monday at 5pm is the deadline.
@THIRTYFIVEMILL Nobody sent a message or anything else for that matter. It has it's original case. You're welcome to it and do whatever you want with it.
@THIRTYFIVEMILL A-MAZE-ING!
That's very impressive. I think I'll have to go and have a lie down now.
Well, this is a turn up for the books. Thought I'd try and old Soligor lens today. The 28mm 2.8, to be precise. I had no great hopes for it as I understand they didn't make their own lenses and they can be a bit variable in quality. I've obviously got a good one though, because the results are fantastic! Really impressed.
by Neville Watkins, on Flickr
I don't spend all my time in churchyards, I hasten to add. But they are great places to try out lenses, and this is a favourite.
I recently bought a couple of Chinon lenses, 28mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4 in PK mount. Overall I think they're worth looking at as probably lower cost alternatives to the usual suspects. The 28mm has mushy corners though and the 50mm can give more defined outlines to bokeh balls but other than these criticisms I think they're worth a look. The ones I got are in very good condition and could have been made last year.
Yes, I've looked at those a couple of times but I think I have in the region of 16 50mm lenses so maybe that's enough
I just got interested in Chinon, read up on the company, read some reviews and thought I'd give them a try.
I'll be going out later and although the light is quite poor here I'll take a camera, possibly with my Takumar 28mm f3.5 mounted.