What's your top five adapted lenses?

JohnN

JohnN

Messages
6,293
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

I recently picked up a Fuji X-T1 along with a Helios 44-2 and a Prize Galaxy 135mm 3.5, so as you may have guessed I've very new to adapted lenses so was looking for somewhere to start :)

I guess there's two categories, budget and expensive, but in short which are the best value for money lenses out there to start off?

I general I tend to grab shots of my kids, so this whole manual lark looks to be a lot of fun

Cheers
 
Last edited:
I went for Minolta Rokkor, Olympus Zuiko and Canon FD they're pretty mainstream, pretty easy to find and pretty cheap and there are third party lenses in these mounts which are often cheaper. For example I have a Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro in Minolta mount, as far as I remember it cost £60 and I find it pretty hard to fault.

If you are specifically looking for the best value I think you're probably going to find that the third party ones are the cheapest but having said that some of the camera makers lenses are very cheap for example if looking at a camera maker branded 50mm for £15 I doubt I'd spend too much time looking for an even cheaper third party lens unless it offered something different, like your Helios.

At the more expensive end of the scale there's always the current Voigtlanders which I think look just lovely.
 
That's great, I don't see any Voiglanders in my immediate future (given I've heard of them already I suspect they're at the steep end!), I recall you giving me a link to the FDs before, so ill have a look next payday.

I've someone at my local car boot digging out his box of old lenses, looking forward to seeing what oddments are on offer.
 
Last edited:
I got a m4/3 adapter for my Nikon fit Sigma 105mm macro,its a nice FL foe m4/3 macro.
 
I tend to go for Contax Zeiss lenses- when funds allow!
They are some of the best lenses ever made.

I'm building up a collection of Yashica ML lenses too, quite cheap but decent lenses.

Helios and Industar are always worth a try.
The Tamron Adaptall 2 SP lenses are pretty good and have interchangeable mounts.

And for cheap and cheerful - Hoya lenses from the 80s are fun.
 
JohnN said:
I've someone at my local car boot digging out his box of old lenses, looking forward to seeing what oddments are on offer.
Click to expand...

The main problem I'd have with old lenses at a car boot is deciding what mount they are and what adapter I'd need :D but someone here is bound to know if you get stuck. Maybe make sure that the apertures open and close ok and that there's nothing obviously wrong as it's possible to get a bargain that needs a £75 service.

If you go for FD's you might get a nice surprise as unused ones crop up from time to time, like here...

http://www.ffordes.com/category/Lenses/Canon/FD

I've bought several lenses from this guy and he seems cheap and his service seems good too as he replaced a zoom I wasn't happy with without hassle...

http://www.rockycameras.com/

PS.
Just had a look at Rocky and he seems to have some bargain third party lenses. For example a 24mm f2.8 in FD mount for £25, that's good for a 24mm if the optical quality is anywhere near good :D

Actually he has some cheap lenses in FD, Zuiko and Rokkor mounts.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
The main problem I'd have with old lenses at a car boot is deciding what mount they are and what adapter I'd need :D but someone here is bound to know if you get stuck. Maybe make sure that the apertures open and close ok and that there's nothing obviously wrong as it's possible to get a bargain that needs a £75 service.

If you go for FD's you might get a nice surprise as unused ones crop up from time to time, like here...

http://www.ffordes.com/category/Lenses/Canon/FD

I've bought several lenses from this guy and he seems cheap and his service seems good too as he replaced a zoom I wasn't happy with without hassle...

http://www.rockycameras.com/

PS.
Just had a look at Rocky and he seems to have some bargain third party lenses. For example a 24mm f2.8 in FD mount for £25, that's good for a 24mm if the optical quality is anywhere near good :D

Actually he has some cheap lenses in FD, Zuiko and Rokkor mounts.
Click to expand...


You're seriously suggesting Rocky cameras? :runaway:

There have been a few threads over the years about him...
 
I don't necessarily buy into internet panic as for everyone who complains there'll be how many happy customers?

I've found his lenses cheap and as described and his service good and I have no complaints, at all. I've bought maybe half a dozen or so lenses off him and when buying a £12 lens or even a £45 lens from him my expectations have been realistic and... I've been happy.

YMMV.
 
I do wish you'd not shown me the site today though, I'm skint (big lens not sold yet) and they have a 40% off sale for the next few days, just my luck :)
 
lets see, no particular order...

1. Konica Hexanon AR 40mm f1.8 pancake. Flarey and with some speherical aberation at f1.8, stunningly sharp from f2.8 up. Slightly swirly bokeh too. https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=57827152@N05&sort=date-taken-desc&view_all=1&text=konica
2. Ricoh Rikenon 50mm f1.4 - Mental bokeh! No samples sorry, mine had a near jammed focus ring so it got sent back, but I do want another!
3. Nikon AIS 85mm f1.4 - Massive, stupidly heavy and unwieldy but a stunning lens. https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=57827152@N05&sort=date-taken-desc&view_all=1&text=85mm
4. Zuiko 24mm f2.8. The best 24mm hands down. https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=57827152@N05&sort=date-taken-desc&view_all=1&text=24mm
5. Minolta MD 45mm f2 pancake, similar in performance to the Konica, spherical aberration makes it unusable at f2 in any kind of bright light, but after that it's great. https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=57827152@N05&sort=date-taken-desc&view_all=1&text=45mm
 
I always liked the Vivitar Series 1 lenses where some are made by Komine & Kiron, the serial number will start at 28 if Komine and 22 if Kiron> https://www.cameraquest.com/VivLensManuf.htm......I have had the 28-105 and 70-200mm f2.8 lenses and they were excellent on the XT1 along with the 55mm macro lens. Another favourite of mine was the Tokina 100-300mm f4 lens in Canon FD, mount which I had for a steal.

For primes I found the Pentacons good in 135mm f2.8 and 200mm f4 lens. Also some of the Fujs, IIRC the 55mm f1.8 was very good.

I probably owned over 60 legacy lenses when using Fuji and the fun part for me, was buying and trying the lenses out, some would be poor and I would just re-list them on ebay, so in general I wouldn't loose any money. I later tried to stick to Canon FD and M42 mounts for ease and TC use. It does seem as if the prices have gone up for a lot of legacy lenses over the last couple of years (ebay), as so many are using them on CSC and the cheaper deals aren't so easy to get, for quality, clean lenses. Car boot sales and charity shops are worth looking at.

What ever you do/buy, have fun John.
 
Thats a wonderful set, thanks Alan- the Bokeh on the 50mm 1.4 is a little out there!
 
Thanks Simon - I'm having fun so far - I think when I tried this back on the E-M1 maybe I wasn't ready, or the Fuji is easier - personally I think the former.

I can see just finding lenses being fun, but yet if I keep on randomly picking stuff the adaptors will end up costing more than the body!

Round my way I've never once seen a lens in a charity shop, that said I'm looking at a tray at a car boot tomorrow as I had a chat with a seller and he had some at home, as to eBay prices, yes from little I recall they've gone up - I think most sellers now know theres a market again because of mirrorless.
 
Yeah that's true, I think that the rise of mirrorless has definitely pushed prices up and the number of available lenses down. Some of the lenses you could find easily a while ago you have to hunt for now.

Have to disagree with Alan above as to the Zuiko 24mm f2.8 though. There isn't too much difference but if I had to call it I'd say that the Rokkor is better but the Zuiko is more compact which may be a plus but also actually may be a part of why it and the other Zuiko's IMO fall a little way behind the Rokkors, Maybe they're a bit too compromised by their very compact design. I've read that the Rokkor is one of the best 24mm designs ever although I wouldn't take that too seriously in these days of Sigma Arts etc. It is however one of the reasons I went for the Rokkors.
 
I have a bunch of Olympus OM lenses, a Minolta Rokkor zoom, but the one that stays on my Sony A6000 is a Zeiss C-Biogon 35mm/2.8. It's expensive, and quite heavy, but oh it's so lovely to use. I love the look of the results too. I got a cheap variable close-focus adapter for its Leica M mount, not the Voigtlander one as that's outrageously expensive, which works well.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bethatthehug/26389792674
 
That looks good, I have a bit of a soft spot for a 135
 
JohnN said:
Thats a wonderful set, thanks Alan- the Bokeh on the 50mm 1.4 is a little out there!
Click to expand...

Isn't it! I used mine to make a very hypnotic video that was just dust floating round in the air at f1.4, as each speck moved out of focus it turned into massive bubbles and faded away...
 
On my X-E2 my go to adapted lenses are a Samyang 85/1.4 (adapted as I have this in Nikon rather than FX and use three different adaptors for different purposes) and a Flektogon 35/2.4. I have a lot more adapted lenses in the collection, but these get the most use. The Flek might get displaced by a recently acquired Distagon 35/2.8 HFT, and a Rokkor 35-70/3.5 does also get regular outings.
 
All adapted onto M4/3

1. Olympus OM 50mm f/1.4 (nice length and rendering, not that sharp but so what)
2. Nikon 105mm micro f/4
3 .Olympus OM 300mm f/4.5 (600mm equivalent is nice, 1200mm with a 2x though all sorts of interesting optical issues creep in)
4. Olympus 135mm f/2.8 (really nice results but 270mm equivalent limits usage)

Can't say any others stand out that I've tried. Wouldn't mind trying some of the adaptall options at some point.
 
Voigtlander CV40/1.4 has to be my number 1 used lens!! :)

I also have......
Leitz Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 also in M mount - No complaints expected here, razor sharp wide open.
Canon FD 85/1.8 & 50/1.4 both SSC breechmount - both acceptable sharpness wide open, bit of CA.
Yashica ML28/2.8 [sharp. very little CA], ML50/1.9 [best of the 50's in my experience]
Helios 44-2 - bought for a fiver!! Say no more!!
Helios MC 135/2.8 - sharp enough, bit of CA wide open
Sigma Super Wide II 24/2.8 - sharp wide open, little CA, flares into the sun though.
Tokina SD 28-70mm - Have this from my film days!! It's good enough, not used it on the A7 though.

Sold....
Yashica ML 50/1.4 [early chromenose didn't like it wide open] & ML50/1.7 [no better than the 1.9 IMO]
Pentacon 50/1.8 - was reasonable, bit iffy wide open.
Helios 44M-4 - No real complaints, preferred the look OF the 44M-4 but preferred the images FROM the 44-2!!

You should find albums for the above lenses - https://www.flickr.com/photos/ratters445/albums - But not ALL images are actually in them!!
 
Thanks I'll take a look tomorrow
 
JohnN said:
Prize Galaxy 135mm 3.5
Click to expand...
The Prinz Galaxy 135/3.5 is fun, cheap uncoated 135m.. The "brand" was a house brand for Dixons and it would be interesting to compare your copy of the lens to mine as it's generally thought that they were bought in batches from whoever was would make them at at the time. From memory mine cost me pocket change from a charity shop. The results are better than the price tag would suggest. There's sharpness there, although masked by low contrast. The low contrast itself isn't a problem as it creates a very neutral image for processing. It's no Zeiss, but it doesn't cost what a Zeiss would cost either.
 
I bought an M42 to Nikon-F adaptor (with infinity correction element) when I bought the electric-picture-maker, so that I could try some of my old screw-fit lenses on it....
Ones that I have hung onto include; Pentacon 29, Zeiss 50, Hanimex 135, Pentacon 300, Panomar 12 'fish', Helios 44.. I did have a 70-180 zoom I never used knocking around some-where, and there were a few others. Also got a couple of teleadaptors; a 1.4x and a 3x I think cant remember what brands.

Panomar (re-branded Sigma), was one I wanted to be able to try, but rear element protrusion fouls the infinity correction element, so a no-go on that one.
Pentacon 300, was fitted up to get more reach before I bought an AF long lens. When I did, shots from the Pentacon immediately showed up how much modern AF lenses are compromised to keep costs down, especially so at the consumer end.

With 1.5x crop factor, the 29 offers close to a 'standard' FoV on the EPM, and f2.4 I think, without digging out the bag, makes for a bright view-finder and some nice shallow focus, whilst scales allow for easy selective focus, whilst shaming IQ of 'kit' lens. 50 & 135 are much the same.... and all are lovely lenses to use.... BUT!

Ultimately it's a cheap trick; the small sensor size of an APS-C electric-picture maker, is the weak-link; on a 4/3 sensor with even larger crop-factor, I can only see it being even more so. The Crop Factor, gives the FoV of a longer lens, but it doesn't change the DoF, so if that's what you like about them, then you at getting all they have to offer on a small sensor camera; you have to pull back and increase camera to subject distance to get the same framing, and that inherently increases DoF, defeating the usually 'fast' aperture; shorter lenses, that would let you get closer and reduce DoF for the same FoV and exploit the aperture, though are still suffering the Crop-Factor, and lenses much shorter than 20mm were never very available for manual focus film cameras..... so it's a cheap way to get a lot of easy-reach, and better IQ from an electric picture maker, but, you don't get all you could from your 'cheap' lens, while you get all the 'faff' of using a manual focus camera, and possibly a few more, using one on an adaptor that's not talking to the automation in the camera, along with it, potentially making them even more of a 'faff' to use. Biggest 'advantage' of an electric-picture-maker, to my mind, is simply it's 'convenience'... which an adapted lens is rather defeating..

So, conclusion, for me, has pretty much been to leave them on the camera's they were intended for, and chuck a roll of film in them!

I have an 'old' dedicated film scanner; cost me half a bludy grand sixteen years ago!!! .... picked up a second hand one off e-bay last year for just £30! With modern scanning software, it delivers 10Mpix scans, at 48bit colour depth, as good as anything you would have got straight out of an Electric-Picture-Maker, until probably five years ago, and still as good or better than most in the amateur arena, and with "Full-Frame" FoV/DoF properties..... I DO get all those lenses could offer... and it's barely any more 'faff' to get'em! All the family-photo's I took, util I bought my electric-picture-maker, four years ago were taken on manual focus 35mm film cameras... for convenience I grabbed a compact, and accepted the lesser image quality; for 'better' shots I grabbed one of the SLR's and accepted the small added 'faff'. In that, I dont see that much has changed; Widgetal for convenience, & accept the lesser quality, or film for 'full-frame' better and accept the faff.

So, if you are really concerned with 'better' photo's, then you don't pick a small format/sensor camera as your start-point....

If I had stumped up for a full-frame DSLR, then I suspect that would start to show just where these 'cheaper' old '3rd party' MF lenses aren't so wonderful, but then a modern Full Frame Digi-Nikon will still mount most, old F-Mount Nikkor lenses, that are probably optically as good optically as modern AF offerings, and usually a lot cheaper, if perhaps still far from 'cheap'; but the big sensor has removed the weak link.

Mounting legacy lenses on smaller sensor digitals, is muddling in the middle of the compromises, then, and unlikely to ever deliver the best of both worlds you might hope, while any 'gain' you get will be at a loss, and probably a larger-one elsewhere in the mix. You aren't ever going to get 'Full-Frame' or Medium-Format like perspective from a small sensor camera, even if you can get a 'acceptable' image quality, you wont get the same framing, perspective or DoF effects. Using a Manual Lens on one, then, instantly removes the 'convenience' of a Auto-Focus lens designed to be mounted to it, before you find any other niggles to convenience, and whilst you may see an improved IQ from only taking a image from the sweet-spot in the centre of the 'cheap' legacy lens, if that is so important to you, then it's a bit of a blind alley to get it; It's a hint at how much more you could have, but it's not the full story. Full-Story is you are asking more of the camera/lens you have, than it is really able to offer; and if you really want to step up to that level of image quality, its back round the loop, to look at the sensor size, and stepping up the grades, rather than trying to stretch the margins a little.. and then, the £20 spent on the 'cheap' legacy-lens, isn't, it's £20 that could have gone into that better and 'matched' camera/lens you upgrade to, so it is probably not even a 'cheap' way to slightly stretch the boundaries very much.

But, yeah.. they ARE great fun to play with... and if you are enjoying that, then my advice would be to get the 'most' fun from them..... buy a roll of film or three, use'em as intended!

Notion of buying an old Olympus OM10 & Zuiko 50/1.8 for a tenner, or a Zenit and Helios 44 for a fiver, and chucking away the camera, to mount the lens on a small sensor digital, is to my mind something of an anathema! You get the full faff experience using a manual focus film camera with a manual focus lens, and you have the opportunity for even MORE faffing-fun, getting yourself a dev-tank and kitchen-sink 'souping' the negs... even colour developing isn't all that difficult, or require any huge amount of space or equipment, and THEN you have the faff-fun of scanning the negs, into the widgetal-world, opening up all the faffability you have for photo-shopping your images, as you do with an direct from camera electric picture... just be warned that its a slippery slope, and leap from 35mm to Medium-Format..... but still

Costs a quid for a roll of Agfa Vista from Poudland; costs £3 for a Dev& Scan at ASDA... that's a lot of full-frame loverlyness to be had for pocket-money prices, and you'd have to take a lot of photo's before it really did cost 'more' than buying a supposedly 'free to run' diigital...... it's got to be worth a thought, no?
 
Thats a hell of a read Mike and greatly appreciated, but for me film is not the way to go (at this point) - as I'm very much learning how to get on with manual focus my last three outings with the digital camera averaged about 200 shots and those were not very long little trips - what they were however were fun and an experiment. My focus is on two things really,the interesting things I see and my family - as I have two small children they're not exactly static.

This first shot was something I grabbed just because the camera was on my lap as I was looking at the rear screen, as he approached I thought yep, that'll give me something - I don't do street or journalistic shots, but hell its only a few shots and if I don't like it I can just delete it - it cost me nothing.


Out jogging by John Norton, on Flickr

So with this one I got - a chance shot I probably wouldn't have taken (thank you flip out rear screen) and short silent burst (thanks "free" digital and high FPS)

Moving to this one:


WOW by John Norton, on Flickr

Absolutely no issue catching this on a film, but again it was a short burst that got the moment, not just the shot - also it was another snapshot that if I've been using film simply would not have taken as there was no way I could guess how he'd react to his own picture.

So, what about this one...


Nerf by John Norton, on Flickr

Again, easy on film - or was it, what you can't see is that this was taken at range as he was running, weaving in and out - yes it was a lucky shot, but would I have blown £4 on a lucky shot? Who knows maybe.

In short what I'm getting at is that for me at least digital offers freedoms I don't believe film would and worth mentioning that I'm not a spray and pray type either, contrary to how the above might have appeared.

Now what you say about full frame, yes I get that - I have a full frame, I moved from full frame, to m43 and back for the reasons you listed, however mirrorless just had some touches I wanted back and I have been fortunate enough to be able to get one again, albeit with only manual "cheap" lenses for now.

PS: all the above were with the Pritz 135 :)
 
What you get with older lenses is a lovely softer (gas in gentle, not unsharp) smoother tone that modern ultra contrasty super high tech coated lenses can't do. To me they always look more natural. The XT1 is the first camera I have had where I haven't almost exclusively used old lenses, but I do still keep them on hand because I like the look.
 
I enjoy using old lenses on my x-series, current favs:

Takumar 50mm 1.4 8 element
Takumar 105mm super takumar
Takumar 300mm 3.5 preset

Also have and like
Takumar 135mm 2.5 6/6 s m c version
Flektogon 35mm 2.4

Takumar 105mm
uploadfromtaptalk1469609045778.jpeg


Takumar 50mm 1.4
uploadfromtaptalk1469609122310.jpg

Takumar 300mm 3.5
uploadfromtaptalk1469609205877.jpg
 
Interesting set and thanks for the images, the 300 looks particularly nice
 
Teflon-Mike said:
Ultimately it's a cheap trick; the small sensor size of an APS-C electric-picture maker, is the weak-link; on a 4/3 sensor with even larger crop-factor, I can only see it being even more so.
Click to expand...

Unless you buy the Metabones adaptor which has an optical element which shortens the focal length, restoring it to its previous field of view as it would have been on full frame.


Steve.
 
Last edited:
JohnN said:
Interesting set and thanks for the images, the 300 looks particularly nice
Click to expand...
Yes the 300 is great lens, not easy to use and not for every subject, but with 18 blades the bokeh is great.

Here example of bokeh, it is a brick wall behind.

uploadfromtaptalk1469773644730.jpg
 
bubblecatcher said:
I enjoy using old lenses on my x-series, current favs:

Takumar 50mm 1.4 8 element
Takumar 105mm super takumar
Takumar 300mm 3.5 preset
Edit it is 200mm 3.5 preset not 300mm

Also have and like
Takumar 135mm 2.5 6/6 s m c version
Flektogon 35mm 2.4

Takumar 105mm
View attachment 69991


Takumar 50mm 1.4
View attachment 69992

Takumar 300mm 3.5
View attachment 69993
Click to expand...

Oops note it should be takumar 200mm 3.5 Is 300mm equivalent on xt1.

Have 300mm on brain as looking for takumar 300mm f4 preset.
 
bubblecatcher said:
Oops note it should be takumar 200mm 3.5 Is 300mm equivalent on xt1.

Have 300mm on brain as looking for takumar 300mm f4 preset.
Click to expand...
Ah, that explains why I couldn't find one on eBay :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top