Cheap Prime Lenses

[DDirector]

So, I was watching a YouTube video about some guy who owns about 5 prime lenses (Nikkor ones I believe) and said they cost about $30-80 each, used.

So, I got thinking... What lenses could I get?

NEED:
-Manual Aperture
-Manual Focus
-Sharp
-21mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm
-lowest maximum f-stop f/2.8 (Um.. if I worded that correctly, if you know what I mean)
-For Canon Camera OR can use an adapter
-Relatively cheap when used ($30-$80)
-Not impossible to find used.

 

[Chris Adler]

Your reel has been removed from your website.

 

[Cassius]

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?201760-The-Vintage-Lens-Thread

 

[ROCKMORE]

So, I got thinking... What lenses could I get?

NEED:
-Manual Aperture
-Manual Focus
-Sharp
-21mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm
-lowest maximum f-stop f/2.8 (Um.. if I worded that correctly, if you know what I mean)
-For Canon Camera OR can use an adapter
-Relatively cheap when used ($30-$80)
-Not impossible to find used.

For the price look into Olympus OM Zuiko manual lenses. I would be aware that older lenses can be sharp, but may have CA. (Purple fringing high contrast areas.
I would look at Nikon and Pentax primes, but I would test the CA in a few different brands before investing in a huge collection.
For video shooting it would be less of a problem as long as you are not blowing up the shot too much.

 

[Samuel H]

21mm and 28mm are not going to be easy: vintage wide angles are usually pretty bad. And in general you can't expect great corner sharpness for those prices. You may want to check my sharpness and bokeh tests here: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsa.html http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsv.html http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/bokehtests.html

 

[M. Gilden]

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?201760-The-Vintage-Lens-Thread

Seconded, and moving to the lens sub forum.

 

[DDirector]

Is there a specific kind I should be looking at? Ive looked at the link but everyone keeps talking about various lenses, and I have no idea what really is good and what isn't. I know nothing about Nikon lenses and old lenses.

A) What mount do I need so it works on a Canon? - I know Id need an adapter, but apparently not all will work?

B) What lens brand is good for videos? - So, if I were to go to a Thrift Store and find a stack of old lenses, how would I know which ones are good and aren't without just testing them? I need to know which is a good lens and which isn't a good lens by the name first.

C) Is it really possibly to find good manual lenses for under $100 each?

 

[M. Gilden]

Is there a specific kind I should be looking at? Ive looked at the link but everyone keeps talking about various lenses, and I have no idea what really is good and what isn't. I know nothing about Nikon lenses and old lenses.

Because "various lenses" is actually your answer. There isn't any one brand or particular model to look for- although, the general thought is to stick to a particular brand so that the rendition matches a certain aesthetic. A lens is a lens- you just need to know which will physically fit.

A) What mount do I need so it works on a Canon? - I know Id need an adapter, but apparently not all will work?

First page of the thread linked above has a list, I believe. The most popular is Nikon because they are plentiful and are compatible with just about everything. Then there are others, refer to the thread for the complete list.

B) What lens brand is good for videos? - So, if I were to go to a Thrift Store and find a stack of old lenses, how would I know which ones are good and aren't without just testing them? I need to know which is a good lens and which isn't a good lens by the name first.

Nope. Any lens from any manufacturer can be good or terrible for video (or stills). It doesn't matter- your best bet is to try them out and see what you like. If you want recommendations of brands that people like, that thread is full of them (please don't expect someone to summarize the thread, please).

C) Is it really possibly to find good manual lenses for under $100 each?

Yes. My personal favorite is a Nikon Nikkor (Nikkor is their brand of higher end glass, much like Canon calls theirs "L-series") 50mm F/1.4. It was around $100, if I recall correctly. I also picked up a Nikon E-series for $99 that has a constant 3.5 aperture at 75-150mm. My favorite find was a Sears rebranded 135mm F/2.8, which was all of $7. That's a rare steal to find, but yes- the point is that if you know understand how this works and know what you are looking for, you can find excellent options cheap. But its a lot more intricate and hit/miss than just saying "BUY THIS PARTICULAR LENS".

 

[Samuel H]

lens mount compatibility chart

 

[DDirector]

Thanks!

 

[DDirector]

How is this lens/price?
Contax Zeiss Sonnar T 85mm f/2.8 - $300

I found it at a store that sells vintage camera gear

 

[ROCKMORE]

I would be aware that older lenses can be sharp, but may have CA. (Purple fringing high contrast areas.
I would look at Nikon and Pentax primes, but I would test the CA in a few different brands before investing in a huge collection.

Here are the CA tests comparing the Olympus Zuiko 85-250 against the Canon 55-250 IS. I'm now curious how much CA is in other vintage glass.

 

[ROCKMORE]

In all fairness, these Olympus OM lenses are quite sharp and can produce some great images. This was shot with my OM Zuiko 50mm macro.

 

[c3hammer]

It looks like the bottom pic between the Canon and OM is from the Olympus? Sharper, but with some purple fringing.

My Nikkor 600mm has terrible fringing. It's cyan in the background and magenta in the foreground. Definitely a crazy look depending on which part of the bokeh is most easily seen.

Cheers,
Pete

 

[DDirector]

M personally going to stick with the Contax Zeiss lenses. They may be a bit more pricey from what I was hoping, but looking at the reviews and pictures of sharpness & contrast, it looks like a really nice lens!
Doesn anyone know if all the Contax Zeiss lenses will fit on the T2i? - what about a RED?
It would suck if only a few were to work and others wouldn't.

*Speaking of the Contax Zeiss Sonnar lenses

 

[ROCKMORE]

It looks like the bottom pic between the Canon and OM is from the Olympus?

Yes the bottom is the OM lens. You can tell because the 85-250 is so much heavier than the plastic 55-250 that the camera tilted down when I changed lenses on a locked heavy tripod.
I suspect that the CA problems would not be as apparent in low contrast scenes. I guess most older glass suffers from some level of CA.

 

[ROCKMORE]

Here is a side by side between the Tamron 17-55 non at 50mm vs the OM 50mm macro vs the Canon 55-250 IS @55mm

 

[ROCKMORE]

Here are 2 shots with Olympus OM lenses with a macro tube on a budget.
OM 50mm 1.4 and OM 50mm Macro.

 

[Victor Nhat Nguyen]

just wondering, what happen when you put macro extension tube on a macro lens?

 

[ROCKMORE]

just wondering, what happen when you put macro extension tube on a macro lens?

That shot has the extension tube on with the macro lens fully extended. Without the extension tube the 50mm macro produces a frame similar the the other image posted above.

Here is another shot taken with the Olympus OM 35mm 2.8 with the macro tube. The shot isn't as dramatic because the sun went behind the clouds, but it shows the 35mm standard lens with the macro tube focuses almost as close as the OM macro. This is a very inexpensive macro setup on a budget.