Let's talk low-tech lenses

P

Primaural

Member
I've sort of fallen in love with footage I've seen from the Jupiter-9 85mm F1.8 lens I'm seeing, running on a 5D. And also some old Zeiss Planar lenses.

Which got me thinking, what are some other cool 'old-tech' lenses people have played with on the 5D. I don't know why, there is something very appealing to me about pairing this wicked great 5DmkII with some really old tech lenses, just for fun and to experiment.
 
i can report awesome results for video from pretty much anything in the same league from the ex USSR offerings based on pre-war Carl Zeiss designs (Biotar, Sonnar etc...).
the older coatings make softer low contrast beautiful images with that gentle russsian touch none of the modern glass i've tried can emulate.

i love and use the following M42 primes (safe as far as 5D mirror clearance is concerned) :
mir-24N (35f2), helios 44M-6 (58f2), helios 77M-4 (50f1.8), helios 40-2 (85f1.5), jupiter 6-2 (180f2.8), jupiter-9 (85f2), jupiter-11A (135f4), tair-3A (300f4.5), tair-11A (135f2.8)

NB : considering their weight is an understatement : those are built to last and everything seems designed for military use. trekking around with the collection is quite a fitness experience...

There is a friendly french guy also into such lens acquisition syndrome from the communist era with a site filled with extensive information about Zenit cameras and glass.
He now has translated most pages. enjoy and send him a thank email as he has done the 5D mirror clearance test for most about every item he owns.

http://t.hacquard.free.fr/site1/zenit_obj_1_en.html
 
Last edited:
Very cool site, thanks for sharing. I guess it does have to be the coatings, I've been trying to figure out what is so appealing about the images to me.
 
same here, i observed people looking for super contrasty & very sharp modern glass and then struggling with in camera picture styles to get a good video image that doesn't scream HDTV...
while i've got really nice results in videomode right out of the neutral preset shooting older manual glass for a nicer vintage look...

due to pixel binning and other in-camera voodoo, i really see everyday how the coveted filmlook does not like so much AF lenses designed for megapixels photography.
barry said that video is the great equalizer.
indeed, considering cheap glass can make a difference with moiré and aliasing issues and saving time in post too, i would even say that video often makes a lemon fine, really...
once you've tried better manual options such as old zeiss or takumars for video, despite no IS, correction and other digital tricks, there is no turning back... they just shine as is
 
I shoot a lot of old Olympus Manual glass. Have to say it is brilliantly sharp - I recently got a 135mm f/3.5 Zuiko free from a friendly guy in England - it's sharper than my Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 lens!

The 50mm f/1.8 lenses are a complete joy - really cheap, but stunning optical performance and a beautifully damped focus ring.

I'm on the lookout for some M42 lenses to try and I'd love to grab a wideangle (<20mm) lens in any mount to see what the old ones look like. I heartily recommend buying some old lenses - especially OM.

I mean, the only thing you lose is autofocus (and a bit of automatic exposure accuracy), but since we all have to shoot manual focus (and usually in manual mode) for video anyway...!

theChipmunk
 
So...If you're into both stills and cine then I suppose it makes sense to acquire 2 series of lenses. Sharp high resolution for stills, and older slightly soft lenses for cine.
Dave
 
Last edited:
daveswan said:
So...If you're into both stills and cine then I suppose it makes sense to acquire 2 series of lenses. Sharp high resolution for stills, and older slightly soft lenses for cine.
Dave
Click to expand...

That's right. I use the AF Sigma 50mm f1.4 and AF Canon 50/1.8 v1 for stills, but then I have these for video:

C/Y Zeiss Planar 50/1.4
Zeiss Pancolar 50/1.8
SMC TAkumar 50/1.4 (also used for stills)
Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2 (also used for stills)

and these as anamorphic taking lenses:
Nikon 50/1.8 D
Helios 58/2.0

Why so many? Because I have 2 camera bodies and sometimes even borrow a third. They each have their special qualities and since there is less manipulation of the image in video compared to photo, sometimes I like to bake in a certain look.
 
I wouldn't call a nikkor ai, takumar, or rokkor soft. The Russian glass is generally soft wide open but sharp at 5D cine DOF range f/5.6. The 5D needs a bit of softness anyway.

The only issue I have with the Russian glass is that they flare a lot, except for the Jupiter 9, it behaves more like a nikkor.

The M42 pentax SMC takumars give the most bang for buck.
 
Hey yoclay I have the 50 1.4 smc tak, the Helios, and a nikkor 50 ai. I've been thinking of getting either a 58 1.2 rokkor or a voigtlander 58 nokton. Have you tried the 58 rokkor with any anamorphic adapters? The nikkor and tak 50s vignette a bit with my isco 36 so I'm using the Helios. How is the vignetting on the Helios compared to the nikkor 50 1.8 and the rokkor?
 
The Nikon 50/1.8 D is the best choice out there for the 36 at that focal length. No vignetting whatsoever and pretty sharp. The Rokkor 58/1.2 is just too big for the 36, so it vignettes and by the time you approach optimal sharpness for it (f2.5-2.8) you might as well just stick with the Helios...I don't know the Voigtlander so can't comment on that one...
 
I'm gonna try a 1.8 ai, the D looks way too plasticy for my isco. The optics are almost identical and the coating will match all my other ai glass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top