Who here uses vintage manual lens?

[stanislasphotography]

I've only been into photography for over 2 years but I am obsessed with vintage old manual lens.

There's just something about the feel of it.

so far this is my list.

Tokina 28mm 2.8
Pentax M 50mm 1.7
Super Takumar 135 3.5
Super Takumar 200 4

still waiting for the adapter for the super takumars so cant test them out yet.

Any recommendations for a wide angle cheap lens? Tokina is my first wide angle and I now love the point of view.

[ameerat42]

:party7: Yo! Here!
I regularly use an old Formula 5 75-205.

Wide angle? What camera have you got? Is it a crop sensor camera, or FF?
28mm is not all tha-a-at wide on a crop sensor camera.

Tokina (from reports here) make a pretty good 11-16 (I think that's the range).
I don't know its price, though. And also good, Sigma 8-16, but you would NOT want to know its price.

OK, if you look here (http://www.google.com.au/webhp?source=search_app#q=sigma+8-16&hl=en&prmd=imvns&source=univ&tbm=shop&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=1hOGUIT4A6XriAfaiYHABQ&ved=0CDUQrQQ&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=7de7542767aaad1&bpcl=35466521&biw=1920&bih=1077) you'll see some.
Am.

[Rattus79]

28mm on a crop sensor is hardly a WA
The Pentax DA 15 is a superior wide angle. it's tiny and it's not exactly cheap.

I have a few, I got rid of a few too.

Some of those super tak's are acutally raidoactive too (FYI)

Curently I have:
2x tokina 28 2.8
soligor 100 2.8 (rare)
a 135 3.2
Makinon 35 2.8

Do take a care using vintage lenses. Fungus is contagious!

[arthurking83]

In addition too the lenses listed in my sig, I currently have access to an old Schneider 135mm f/3.5 and a Pentax 55/1.8(currently on load thanks to Andrew, my best buddy, chum and mate :D)

In fact I'm almost over my 3 month illness and will be fit for travel again in a couple of weeks to get them back to their owner once again.

Adding further to that in an old UV Topcor 53mm f/2 which seems to be worth the effort to adapt to fit the F-mount(when I can be bothered to do so).
Lens reversal so far seems to indicate some ok images are possible, but not worth the expense if the expense is significant.

The other week I received my 105/1.8 Nikkor, and apart from a few quick comparisons to the 105VR, this lens has yet to come off the D300 ... can't wait for my Fx camera to come soon.
So far this lens seems to offer some promise of nicely rendered images too.

I love 'em and am always on the lookout for interesting stuff here and there.

[StanW]

Amongst my collection, still in use on my Pentaxes:-

135mm Rodenstock Yronar f3.5
Auto-Takumar 85mm f1.8

[ricktas]

I've only been into photography for over 2 years but I am obsessed with vintage old manual lens.

There's just something about the feel of it.

so far this is my list.

Tokina 28mm 2.8
Pentax M 50mm 1.7
Super Takumar 135 3.5
Super Takumar 200 4

still waiting for the adapter for the super takumars so cant test them out yet.

Any recommendations for a wide angle cheap lens? Tokina is my first wide angle and I now love the point of view.

Hope we get to see some of your photos up for critique on the forums soon. Show us that you can use this gear you have accumulated.

[stanislasphotography]

sounds like old gear is alive and well here.

I have a pentax Kr, so yes 28mm is not considered wide or wide enough, did I mention I am also a budget photographer.

so any recommendations for old CHEAP wide angles lens will help =p

I've done it again, bought some more lens, I will pick up from the central coast this weekend.

I'll post some photos this weekend after the central coast trip.

- - - Updated - - -

thanks ameerat42, I had a look at the price. yikes that's out of my league for now.

rattus79, I had my first fungus experience this week, I purchased a pentax m 135 only to find it has fungus, without knowing I stored it in the same case as my other lens and camera and also used it on my camera for a full day.

it's now isolated and awaiting return for refund, are my gears now contaminated? what should I do?

[Rattus79]

Just dont' put it on your body.

I wouldn't worry too much, just never store vintage lenses with your good new ones.

My advice:
dont' go spending a fortune on legacy glass. unless it's a DA* or a limited lens.

You will eventually want USM focus and spend a whole lot again on good new glass.

[William]

Re : The fungus, The spores love it to be in Dark and Humid places , Dont have all the gear stored always in the Camera bag, Apparently especially the old leather type of lens cases , Sunlight (UV) will kill it , Leave the gear out in the fresh air occasionally , BTW , Just Google - "How to kill lens fungus" No probs :th3:

[stanislasphotography]

rattus79 - USM focus?

I dont intend to spending any more money on gear, it's time to start taking photos and stop hoarding.

Thanks for the advice William, I actually left my gear out near my window yesterday near the light, I'll take them out from time to time now just to be safe.

[Rattus79]

USM - Ultra Sonic Motor

It has the focus motor in the lens rather then the screw drive clunk clunk of the older AF lenses. It's quicker and almost silent.

[mongo]

Stanislasphotography,


you have hit upon one of Mongo’s true loves (apart from food) - “special old lenses”.


Mongo has often espoused his love and romance for these and mentioned some he has collected and still uses with much fondness. Just going to mention two of many below:-


First, for your wide angle question, Mongo answers - the SMC Pentax-M 20mm f4. This is a superb piece of old optics which can easily hold its own against modern lenses many times it s size and cost and often better them too. This is Mrs Mongo’s favorite wide angle when she was using full frame film cameras. It is very small, very light, takes 49mm filters, is wonderfully sharp and has superb colour. Sadly, Mrs Mongo has not used it for some time as Pentax do not make a full frame SLR but she is keeping it in case they do in future. It is relatively inexpensive for what you get - if you can find one or some one willing to sell theirs to you. Whilst this is an “M” lens, Mongo speculates that Pentax later made an “A” lens equivalent.

sorry about the small dust specs on this lens
94368

Secondly, Mongo has (amongst others) a lovely old Schneider- Kreuznach Tele-Zener 150mm f5 which he converted with a “T” mount many years ago to use on his Nikon bodies. It is a beautiful piece of engineering just in the way it its made and the materials used to make it. Hopefully, this can be seen in the image of it which Mongo has posted. Whilst not the sharpest lens, it is quite sharp enough but has a lovely “mellowness” to the images it produces (both in colour and features) that Mongo has not been able to match or reproduce with any other lens. Best results have been for portrait use. It is a small lens (80mm high and 50mm at its wides point) but extremely solid. And what a diaphragm !!! - on a very quick count, Mongo counted at least 18 aperture blades giving the most perfect circular aperture opening of any lens Mongo has ever used.

94369

Mongo could go on about many more virtues of these two lenses but he has said enough to surely get you wondering and maybe for them to have earned a little of your admiration and respect.

[GTV6FLETCH]

be warned-collecting and using old MF lenses is very very addictive.:D
my list to date:

Canon FD.50mm 1.8
Canon FD.50mm 1.4 SSC

SMC Pentax Asahi 28mm 2.8
Super Takuma 55mm 2.0
Takuma 135mm 3.5
Takuma 35mm 3.5

Pentacon 50mm 1.8
Elicar auto 35mm 2.8
Meyer Gorlitz Domiplan 50mm 2.8
Nikon Nikkor 50mm 2.0
Yashica DSB 28mm 2.8
Hanimar auto 135mm 2.8
Sun Hi Tele 85-210mm 4.8
Soligor 200mm 4.5

Minolta MD ROKKOR 50mm 1.4
Minolta MC W ROKKOR 28mm3.5

Contax Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 35-70mm F/3.4

Love them,
I actually find that using them kinda makes my photos more ,mmm, umm, involved.
what i am trying to say is that with my canon bodies and these lenses much more thought goes into my photo's.
Having to think more about apertures and iso and shutter speeds.
I feel more like i created the photo with the camera instead of the camera doing all the auto this and that stuff.
any way
enjoy

cheers
Adam....

[Kym]

My manual K mounts lenses...
Pentax M 50/1.7
Tamron 85-210/4.5
Osawa 28/2.8
And a 1.4x TC

[The Man from Mona]

I have three Pentax lenses, one wide and two normals (55/75/105).

They're all awesome and their focus rings are fantastic. I've thought about getting some adapters to switch them over to my 5DII but the crop factor is going to annoy me.

[ameerat42]

Hi Rodney.
What do you mean about these lenses? Are they vintage (ie, old film era) lenses? If they are, then there should be no "crop factor" effect on the FF 5d2
Am.

[arthurking83]

..... I've thought about getting some adapters to switch them over to my 5DII but the crop factor is going to annoy me.

crop factor?? :confused013

I'm as confused as Am is.

What's this crop factor?

And I'm curious as to what makes the focus rings "fantastic" too?

Focus rings are focus rings, and unless it turns through more than 360° they're all pretty much the same to use(except for the really dinky kit lens type focusing ring).

[ameerat42]

Aha! I think I am about to have it "got".
I suspect that the aforesaid adapters would have some optical element built in to accommodate these lenses, thus effecting a crop of the image on the sensor.
If this is not the case, then I own to still being baffled, bamboozled (with figures optional), even balderdashed, or almost anything suitable that starts with "ba".
(But maybe not black sheep.)
:rolleyes:m.

[stanislasphotography]

that pentax m 20mm looks very good mongo, why did you post a picture?

this is just going to fuel my addiction even more.

I have a question for all you vintage lens collectors

Super Taks 50 1.4, these are going bananas on ebay. Are they really worth $120 or more?

or is the 1.8 worth a look at?

[stanislasphotography]

Does any one here have any experience with the brand Soligor? and their wide angle lens?

[ameerat42]

Geez! Attack of the Super Taks:eek:

Actually, when you run the calculator and do some divisions, like:

50mm/1.8 = 27.8mm --- IMO NWW calculating
50mm/1.7 = 29.4mm --- your present, standard glass
50mm/1.4 = 35.7mm --- about 40% more glass than your psg

So the Q is, what do you want it for?

A couple of answers came to mind, viz:
Let in more light. (Sub-Qs: is this an aim? How good is the IQ wide open?)
Better bokeh. (Sub-Q: will it be?)

Apart from this, my answer is, I dunno.:(

A?m.

[stanislasphotography]

from reading various reviews the lens is sharp so I am curious and want to get a copy to see how sharp the lens is. I didnt know the difference between 1.8 and 1.4 besides the obvious aperture size but now that you point out that there is more glass in the 1.4



question: what is IQ?

- - - Updated - - -

from reading various reviews the lens is sharp so I am curious and want to get a copy to see how sharp the lens is. I didnt know the difference between 1.8 and 1.4 besides the obvious aperture size but now that you point out that there is more glass in the 1.4



question: what is IQ?

[ameerat42]

In lens/camera/photography jargon it means image quality.

Yeah, the amount of extra glass is not quite double the area (actually ~40%), but if it had been an f/1, then it would be more than double.

[KevPride]

Suggest you also check out the following - usually has VG info on older lenses.

http://www.mflenses.com/

Pentax Forum also has write ups from members on most lenses that fit K/A & M42 lenses.

[jjphoto]

I don't mind the odd alt lens myself.

http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/Industar_502/ind_011_400.jpg http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/General/g_025_400.jpg http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/General/g_026_400.jpg http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/General/tilt_pb4.gif http://photocornucopia.com/images/Lenses/General/g_003_400.jpg

Try these forums for info re alt gear.

Fred Miranda Alternative Lens Forum; http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/55 (this is probably the most active 'alt' forum for high performance lenses)

GetDPI.com, The Alternative Forum; http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/alternative-forum/

Macro/micro photography Forum; http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/

Manual Focus Forum; http://forum.manualfocus.org/

[Rattus79]

Does any one here have any experience with the brand Soligor? and their wide angle lens?

I've had 2 in my time now.

I have the 100mm 2.8 (M42 Version)
and have previously had a 400 mm 5.6 (I sold this one)

The 100 2.8 is lovley and sharp edge to edge with a 1.5 crop factor. The 400 was a big bit of kit and wasn't bad, but didn't get infinity focus with my adaptor/body combination so I got rid of it.

I dont' know about their WA's though.

Google the lens with with the keyword review.

[umajo]

my macro lens is 25 years old and is the best glass

[ameerat42]

...
and have previously had a 400 mm 5.6 (I sold this one)
...

Not really but I couldn't resist adding:
I very, very previously had a Soligor mirror lens 500/8. (I was very, very glad when this one got destroyed in a flood.:):))
Am.

[Rattus79]

Not really but I couldn't resist adding:
I very, very previously had a Soligor mirror lens 500/8. (I was very, very glad when this one got destroyed in a flood.:):))
Am.

I can imagine!! I'm still yet to find mention on the net of another 100 2.8 by them though. The 85 1.5 is the catch of the bunch though.

[GTV6FLETCH]

my macro lens is 25 years old and is the best glass
hey,what lens is it exactly you have,I am looking for some old MF macro lenses.

[The Man from Mona]

crop factor?? :confused013

I'm as confused as Am is.

What's this crop factor?

And I'm curious as to what makes the focus rings "fantastic" too?

Focus rings are focus rings, and unless it turns through more than 360° they're all pretty much the same to use(except for the really dinky kit lens type focusing ring).

They're both P67 lenses so there is a crop factor associated with using a "Full Frame" camera. It's not quite a 2x crop, maybe a 1.8x.

There is a lot of difference between focus rings imo. These ones are just nice to use. They have a really long throw for precise focusing and the metal feels nice in the hand.

[jjphoto]

They're both P67 lenses so there is a crop factor associated with using a "Full Frame" camera. It's not quite a 2x crop, maybe a 1.8x.
...

There is NO crop factor when using medium format lenses on FF (35mm) cameras with adapters. A 105mm lens on a Pentax 67 is still a 105mm lens when attached to any other body, and it behaves like any other 105mm lens. I use Mamiya medium format glass on Canon FF bodies all the time so I'm not guessing or theorising about that either.

What you're referring to is the field or angle of view that the lens gives for any given format. A 105mm lens on 6x7 gives a field of view which is considered to be about 'normal/standard' and that lens that gives the same field of view as a 50mm lens on a 35mm body. However when you attach a 105mm lens on a 35mm body it will behave EXACTLY like a 105mm lens (clearly) and give you the field of view than any 105mm lens would (ie telephoto).

[The Man from Mona]

What you're referring to is the field or angle of view that the lens gives for any given format. A 105mm lens on 6x7 gives a field of view which is considered to be about 'normal/standard' and that lens that gives the same field of view as a 50mm lens on a 35mm body. However when you attach a 105mm lens on a 35mm body it will behave EXACTLY like a 105mm lens (clearly) and give you the field of view than any 105mm lens would (ie telephoto).

Congrats you've just described what a crop factor is.

[Cage]

I have a very nice Pentax 'K' series 50mm f1.2 which is currently on sale.

In a way I hope it doesn't sell because I'm thinking of getting a Fotodiox adapter and using it on the D600.

[ameerat42]

Congrats you've just described what a crop factor is.

Sheep! Ewe are right, ...Man...
Gore sakes! It just goes ter show whatta loose-fitting linguistic world we cohabit.

I suppose when we all wear semantic overshoes and try swimming in them...

Anyway, since the other term that has some cogency to this sub-topic of the original Vintage Lens thread is "focal length multiplier" (Sure! according to Wikipedia.), why did you not introduce such as it before,
and so foster less word waywardness in the foregoing?

Note that all aspects of the discussion were generally correct. You can have to any reference format for a given lens and accuse the lens of having a crop factor or not.

Well, that's possibly been put to bed - and it's only 9:27 am...
...Am?

[arthurking83]

Congrats you've just described what a crop factor is.


So if you mount a 55,75 or 105 mm lens from any other manufacturer(for argument's sake lets just say Canon), do the Pentax lenses still display this crop factor when compared to the Canon lenses?

[The Man from Mona]

So if you mount a 55,75 or 105 mm lens from any other manufacturer(for argument's sake lets just say Canon), do the Pentax lenses still display this crop factor when compared to the Canon lenses?

They act as any medium format lens would on a 35mm camera: a significant portion of the glass isn't used and instead a smaller, central, portion is used by the film/sensor. Same as a crop factor from 35 down to APSC.

- - - Updated - - -


You can have to any reference format for a given lens and accuse the lens of having a crop factor or not.


Ok as far os overwriting goes you're taking the cake. This sentence at least appears to make sense. The rest is largely superfluous without communicating meaning.

[mongo]

from reading various reviews the lens is sharp so I am curious and want to get a copy to see how sharp the lens is. I didnt know the difference between 1.8 and 1.4 besides the obvious aperture size but now that you point out that there is more glass in the 1.4



question: what is IQ?

- - - Updated - - -

from reading various reviews the lens is sharp so I am curious and want to get a copy to see how sharp the lens is. I didnt know the difference between 1.8 and 1.4 besides the obvious aperture size but now that you point out that there is more glass in the 1.4



question: what is IQ?

Mrs Mongo has an older Pentax A 50mm 1.4 - superlative lens, beautiful quality and results and a pleasure to use. Mongo understands that the Pentax 85mm 1.4 is possibly the best 85 mm ever made. Unfortunately, Mongo does not own one at this time.

[ameerat42]

Ok as far os overwriting goes you're taking the cake. This sentence at least appears to make sense. The rest is largely superfluous without communicating meaning.

Sorry Rodney. Raillery it is. Welcome to the forum.
Am.

[arthurking83]

They act as any medium format lens would on a 35mm camera: a significant portion of the glass isn't used and instead a smaller, central, portion is used by the film/sensor. Same as a crop factor from 35 down to APSC.

.......


Yes! But do they looked like they're more cropped in any way relative to the other manufacturer's similar focal length lens?
That is, does the 55mm Canon lens look like it's less cropped than the 55mm MF Pentax lens does, by way of comparison?
Or do they look similarly 55mm-ish in rendering and FOV?

Most folks purchase full frame lenses(eg. 24-70/2.8's or 70-200/2.8's) for their APS-C cameras, and I've never heard or red of complaints of the crop factor when the discussion is about the lenses.

This is a format issue, not a lens issue, or am I missing something?

And in almost all instances of these full frame(35mm) lenses being used on APS-C cameras, the advantage is that of the better portion of the lens forming the image onto the sensor(ie. higher quality edge rendering) .. so this annoyance makes even less sense(at least to me).

So, just to summarize with an attempt to make some sense of an issue you find annoying:

A 55mm lens is going to render a 55mm focal length image onto the sensor, irrespective of whether it's a MF based lens, a 35mm format lens or even an APS-C format lens ... the 55mm lens is still a 55mm lens, and will form an image onto the sensor plane equally, as long as the image is able to cover the sensor area entirely.
(note that some supposedly APS-C only lenses still have the ability to form an image onto the full 35mm frame, even tho they are APS-C designated lenses).
A lens that is designed for a larger format than the 35mm sensor size, will project an image onto the 35mm sensor from the central portion of the glass, which is generally considered to be the higher quality portion of the lens, resulting in more clarity, detail and usually less vignetting(when used wide open at least) ....


and this is annoying? :confused013

There are a few 35mm format lenses that can project an image circle that is also larger than the actual 135 format .. so in essence some (mainly older) 35mm format lenses are actually wasted, or cropped as well.
We know this from testing with tilting and shifting, and seeing how far a lens can be pushed or to what extent it begins to vignette on the sensor.

This ability is usually seen as a benefit by most users(that I have read from others and experienced for myself), not an annoyance!
I suppose there's a first time for everything.


For the purpose of solving your issue tho, wouldn't a Pentax 645D be a more appropriate camera to own?

[The Man from Mona]

This is a format issue, not a lens issue, or am I missing something?


That's why I'm not mounting them on my 5DII: I'm not keen on the format's crop factor compared to 6*7 (for which my lenses are designed).

I didn't read the rest of your post, you ramble on too much.

[Cage]

That's why I'm not mounting them on my 5DII: I'm not keen on the format's crop factor compared to 6*7 (for which my lenses are designed).

I didn't read the rest of your post, you ramble on too much.

Hi Mate.

I think you need to relax a bit and appreciate other peoples rights to have, and express, an opinion. That is one of the foundations of our democratic society.

This forum is a great place to bounce ideas and theories, right or wrong, off one another. I do believe that the intent of 99% of the posts here is a desire to be helpful.

Chill out a bit and enjoy the ride. :cool:

Cheers

Kevin

[arthurking83]

......

I didn't read the rest of your post, you ramble on too much.

no problem, that's my style and you either hate it or hate it!
(I personally prefer it the way I've done it for countless years and posts, so there's another diametrically opposing philosophy we may have).

But I'm assuming that your lack of response to the actual question posed (multiple times), as to whether there is a difference (to FOV or magnification) in mounting a MF 55mm lens(eg. as with your Pentax) compared to a lens of the same focal length specifically designed for the format size itself(as an example a Canon lens) means that there is none, or that you may not have an answer.

[The Man from Mona]

Sorry I forgot about this forum/thread until I got an email saying I hadn't been here for 45 days.

I can see this place is really active, thread got bumped to second place.

[ricktas]

Sorry I forgot about this forum/thread until I got an email saying I hadn't been here for 45 days.

I can see this place is really active, thread got bumped to second place.

Actually your view of the forums is just that. What you see as second place, is only you. Each members account sees the site based on what they have looked at/not looked at etc. Using cookies the site tracks your usage and thus when you view activity, it is unique to you.

[gordon_l34]

Hi All,

Happy New Year.
My macro lens is a Vivitar 105mm f2.5 made by Kiron in 1984 inthe third week and I cannot speak highly enough of it.

Regards,
.

[ameerat42]

Hi All,

Happy New Year.
My macro lens is a Vivitar 105mm f2.5 made by Kiron in 1984 inthe third week and I cannot speak highly enough of it.

Regards,
.

Ta Gordon, and same to you. Mow, don't waste words singing the praises of that lens. Post a pic-or-two thereform.
Am (in amticipation).

[Kym]

Anyone here have an 8mm f/3.5 Peleng fisheye (M42 mount)?
Reviews?

[scarlet artemis]

I have a pentax KR and 1.8 50mm lens similar to the one you have at the top, great for portraits and I get nice sharp photos with it. Love this forum, not many people seem to use Kr's and they don't seem to be too bad a camera

[mongo]

Hi All,

Happy New Year.
My macro lens is a Vivitar 105mm f2.5 made by Kiron in 1984 inthe third week and I cannot speak highly enough of it.

Regards,
.

Mongo bought one of these new quite a few years ago as the age of the lens will imply. Mongo agrees - it was a superb macro/portrait lens. Mongo sold it to another AP member who was/is over the moon with it. Mongo had 4 other macros so one had to go and Mongo already had another 105 macro.

[gordon_l34]

Mongo bought one of these new quite a few years ago as the age of the lens will imply. Mongo agrees ## it was a superb macro/portrait lens. Mongo sold it to another AP member who was/is over the moon with it. Mongo had 4 other macros so one had to go and Mongo already had another 105 macro.

Hi Mongo,

The Vivitar actually replaced a Tamron 90mm f2.8, ( Ithink that is correct as I am over a thousand kilometers from it at the moment), Adaptall lens that now sits in the dehumidifier, unused, but not unloved!

Regards.

[Lance B]

When I shot with Pentax DSLR's up until 2010 when I switched to Nikon, I had quite a few of Pentax's legendary manual focus glass. I had possibly some of their best engineered manual focus lenses like:
## The A*200mm f2.8. So smooth to focus so beautifully engineered and crafted, just a lovely piece of glass and one lens I really do regret selling. It was just such a beautiful lens to manually focus, it was just good to sit and turn the focus ring and admire it's beautiful engineering. Absolutely superb IQ.
## A50mm f1.2. Another beautiful piece of engineering. Excellent IQ.
## A*300mm f4. This lens was in the same vein as the A*200mm f2.8, just a beautiful piece of engineering. Excellent IQ.
## A16mm f2.8 Fisheye. Another engineering beauty. Excellent IQ
## A100mm f2.8 macro. Another engineering beauty. Excellent IQ.
## A50mm f1.4. Another engineering beauty. Excellent IQ.
## A100mm f2.8 (non macro) beautifully engineered and very good IQ.

I wish I had the opportunity to be able to get their other two legendary lenses, the A*85mm f1.4 and the A*135mm f1.8 to match my A*200 f2.8, but alas, I could not afford them at the time and the examples that came up for sale were never up to the standard that I would have liked anyway. However, as luck would have it, no sooner than I switched to Nikon, and two superb examples of each lens came up on ebay for "realistic" prices. Unfortunately, I had to pass on them as I had sold off all my Pentax gear. Pentax made some of the best lenses there are, in their heyday, and they still make some superb glass nowadays. Their range of "A" K mount lenses and their Takumars are amongst the best ever made by anyone.

Now that I am with Nikon, I am after at least one of their legendary manual focus lenses to rekindle that affection for manual focus glass. Just the love of crafting a photo using those beautifully feeling manual focus lenses and the wonderful engineering that went into them.

[ameerat42]

When I shot with Pentax ... Unfortunately, I had to pass on them as I had sold off all my Pentax gear. Pentax made some of the best lenses there are, in their heyday, and they still make some superb glass nowadays. Their range of "A" K mount lenses and their Takumars are amongst the best ever made by anyone.

...to rekindle that affection for manual focus glass. Just the love of crafting a photo using those beautifully feeling manual focus lenses and the wonderful engineering that went into them...

Made me reflect on all this quality you let slip. Oh, Lance!, I say. (Though others might say "refract".)
Hm.

[Rattus79]

My macro lens is a Vivitar 105mm f2.5 made by Kiron in 1984 inthe third week and I cannot speak highly enough of it.


That reminds me that I have a Kiron 28-105 in a Nikon Mount I need to sell .... They reckoned that the Kiron lenses were easily as good as the Nikon made equivilents at the time, and the example I have is in mint condition. Looks like it was made yesterday!

[The Man from Mona]

Actually your view of the forums is just that. What you see as second place, is only you. Each members account sees the site based on what they have looked at/not looked at etc. Using cookies the site tracks your usage and thus when you view activity, it is unique to you.

How do I undo this?

[stanislasphotography]

Totally forgot about this forum and this thread, looks like old manual lens are very much alive.

Since this thread I managed to get my hands on the very much talked about Super Takumar 50mm 1.4, the radioactive one, I don't think I'll be using any other 50mm, everything is so smooth from focusing to aperture ring and the sharpness is brilliant.

Still looking for a manual wide angle 28mm and less.

[Lurchorama]

My favourite manual lens bar none is an old Pentacon 1.8 50mm m42 with an adapter.
Just something about the character of the lens I cant put my finger on that I love. And works really well with the K-01 and focus peaking.

[Liney]

Just wandering through the archives and thought I would drag this thread back into the daylight.

One of the reasons I went for a Pentax DSLR was so I could continue to use my one manual lenses. Only had a couple (Sicor 80 - 200, Takamur-A 28 - 80, and a Tamron 2X tele-converter) but I wanted to make use of them. It saved me buying a whole new set (especially as I'd had to negotiate with my domestic high command to get the money to buy the DSLR) and I find that they come in handy some times.

I recently tried macro recently by purchasing a cheap set of extension tubes, the aperture on the auto focus lenses I had either had to be full open or full closed so I went back to my manual lenses with an aperture ring. Great results so far

[Kym]

50/1.7 SMC ;)

[jim]

Just wandering through the archives and thought I would drag this thread back into the daylight.



Very good work. Whatever happened to The Man from Mona? I miss him.

[erds]

One of the reasons I went for a Pentax DSLR was so I could continue to use my one manual lenses.
IMO, this is one of the best aspects of the Pentax system. I inherited a couple of (third-party) manual k-mount lenses...they weren't much chop in the IQ department, but were enjoyable to use. I've since collected a number of highly-regarded, manual primes in both k-mount and m42 - many of which can produce images that rival some of today's finest AF primes...for a fraction of the cost. And with the advent of mirrorless cameras, can be used on more systems with a simple adapter. The release of the Sony A7 was a godsend - to be able to use my lenses in all their FF glory was just magic!