Should I sell my Canon L lenses and invest in vintage/classic/prime lenses?

B

brandonanthony1

Well-known member
So I've been shooting for awhile, and have built up an "okay" collection of lenses. I predominately use the Tamron 17-50 2.8, and the 70-200 F4L Canon. While these lenses are fantastic, I've recently had the chance to use a friends old vintage primes/zoom's (Zeiss Jena, Nikkor, and Leica glass) , and have really begun to like them a lot.

Now, those two lenses before new were around $800-900 total, and looking back on it, I could have easily built a collection of some amazing vintage glass. I have been thinking to myself, "should I just up and sell these two lenses, and invest in some amazing vintage glass?"

Before I do so, I figured I'd give the DVXUser crowd a holler and see what you all have to say.

I've been considering some really nice Nikkor glass, as well as some nice Zeiss glass that I could get as an alternative. While I really love the image that the Tamron and Canon L create, it might be a good way to save some money and get some older glass.

Thoughts?
 
The great thing about vintage glass, depending on what you look at, is that it is dirt-cheap in the grand scheme of things. Why sell those two lenses? It won't cost too much to add a set of vintage primes.

I have vintage primes (Yashica ML) and I love them. But there are times when shooting style dictates something more flexible, especially in run-and-gun situations. The two lenses you have are good to have. If you don't ever shoot in high-paced situations, and you have plenty of time to swap lenses often, then sure... switch to vintage glass. But if you want flexibility, keep what you have and start adding vintage primes on the side.
 
Yes, budget matters. But considering you can pick up great vintage glass for +/- $100/lens, picking up a lens here and a lens there as you can afford it may be a better option. Old Nikon glass is so affordable that it may not be impossible for you without selling your current lenses. Now, if you're looking at high-priced, vintage primes (some of the Zeiss stuff goes for $$$), that's a different story. And again, it really depends on your shooting style and what will suit you best.
 
I've got a lot of vintage lenses, and that tamron 17-50 too (the non-VC version)
and I've ran tests on all of them, you can check sharpness here: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsa.html - and bokeh here: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/bokehtests.html

I LOVE most of my vintage lenses, but:
* not all of them are great; in particular, wide-angles and zooms are usually mediocre to awful
* vintage glass is a lottery; you can avoid scratches and fungus if you take a bit of care; most lenses will have some bits of dust inside, which are not a big deal at all (one of the best lenses I have, the leitz 35mm f/2.8, has a big inside, by the rear element, and still takes awesome pictures, super sharp and with amazing bokeh); but some of them have been badly serviced over the years, and will show problems: hard-to-turn focus ring, loss of sharpness, uglier-than-expected bokeh, inability to focus to infinity... it's not too common, but it can happen even on lenses bought from very reputable sources, and it can ruin a lens; check my experiences with a couple of wrongly assembled lenses here: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsc.html
* consider samyang as a great alternative to vintage



edit: sorry, I'm revamping the site, the links will work again in a few minutes; edit2: done
 
Last edited:
Thanks Norman, this is an amazing resource. All of the lenses I were considering are on your chart (for the most part), and not to mention you are comparing it to the lenses' I own also!
 
glad you like it

a year ago I also had another two Carl Zeiss Jena "zebra" lenses: the Biometar 80mm (not stellar) and the flektogon 35mm (absolutely awful)
 
Norman, great set of tests. I'm really impressed. It's a shame you don't have any Nikkors so I could see how my collection compares.

Brandon, as someone who has built a pretty serious collection of vintage primes (all Nikkors), I suggest you keep your two zooms. I LOVE my primes but I still keep my two cheap zoom kits around (canon 18-55mm and 55-250mm) because there are plenty of times when you need to have complete flexability in you're shooting and there are times when you want fast auto-focus/metering. You don't always get to have complete control of your shooting situations and, when those times come, you'll appreciate your zooms.

I also want to really highlight that you'll want your 17-50mm 2.8 even on controlled stuff. Vintage Primes are week in the wide area because they were developed for full frame cameras where the under 28mm range would be a fish-eye. For an APS-C sized sensor though, 18mm, 20mm, and 24mm are a essential for wide shots. In my experience, a fast 24mm is expensive, a fast 20mm is very expensive (and hard to find), and a fast 18mm prime is super expensive and super hard to find (the Nikkor 18mm f2.8 is around $700 used and most say it's a terrible lens and most other 18mm vintage primes I've seen are off brand Russian glass at f3.5 or higher). Keeping this in mind, your Tamron is very worth keeping around just so you can have a 17mm f2.8 (not to mention flexibility in shooting).
 
Last edited:
+1 for keeping the tamron in order to cover the wide-angle side of things; I'd say: start your vintage journey with a 35mm or a 50mm (these are the focal lengths I use most; it's the weak range of my tamron 17-50; and there are great vintage options for this range)
 
Thanks for all of the help. I didn't think about the fact there there are pretty much no 17mm vintage primes out there. I think I'll take everybody's advice and stick with the two current zooms I have, and start slowly building a set of primes.
 
Best vintages are generally 50, 85 and 100 mils. I still just own one Nikkor, the 50 ai-s 1.4, and... well. The day the aparture blades give in I'm gonna weep like a baby.
 
If you can swing it, I second keeping the lenses that you have and putting together a vintage collection on top of that. I have put together a set of Nikkor primes that are my work horses now. I have a 20mm f2,8 AIS, a 24mm f2.8 pre-AI, a 35mm f2.8 AI, a 50mm f1.4 AI, a 50mm f2 AI and a 100mm f2.8 E series lens. They were all bought off of eBay, and are in great shape. I paid in the $100.00 range (give or take $20-$30) for all of them except the 20mm, which cost right at $300.00ish. That lens, 20mm f2.8 AIS lens is still available new, but is $674 at B&H. I REALLY love that lens and it is one of my favorites. I have shot a lot of live punk shows lately in very small bars here in Detroit, and that lens has worked out great. All of the Nikkors are fantastic lenses. Now they are a little different than a lot of modern lenses, from what I have seen of the stuff shot with modern lenses, especially the L series Canon glass. The vintage Nikkors are not "Bleeding Edge" sharp, especially wide open. They are not soft, exactly, but they are not as sharp as modern glass. The also seem to be lower contrast and seem to soften the colors a little bit more than the L series stuff I have seen. Now, this is not to disparage the lenses at all. I think that the look they have is wonderful and are very much more to my liking, aesthetically. I personally think that the vintage Nikkors, on digital cameras, really help to give an image that is more to that elusive "Cinematic" look. The way I describe it, to the guys I have been shooting for lately, is to say that the vintage glass has a certain "Mojo", image wise, and I really think that is the case. I really get a kick out of shooting these bands with lenses that were made before all of the members were even born.

I have very recently started to pick up some other makes of vintage glass (Be careful, it can be addictive). Two lenses I just picked up that I am very excited about are a Vivitar Series 1 28 - 105mm f2.8-3.5 zoom (Off eBay for $129.00) and a Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f3.5 macro zoom (Off of eBay for $35.00), both in Nikon F mount. I haven't had a chance to give them a proper work out, but from just shooting around the house, I am VERY excited about them. They look GREAT. They are very sharp and have a very pleasing contrast and color. Now they are NOT parfocal and are push-pull zooms, so a lot of folks would poo-poo using them for video work. I think that is bunk. Yes they are not parfocal, but I plan on using them as variable primes anyway. As for being push pull lenses, well, that is just a trade off I am willing to deal with for the quality of the lenses and the price (Push-pull lenses can be a problem with matte boxes as the front element moves forward and backward when zooming). It seems that part of the compromise that Vivitar made, when the lenses where introduced ,was to not include parfocal capabilities but to instead spend their money on optical design. I have been really impressed with the look of these lenses so far. There is also a 19-35mm f3.5-4.5 Series 1 model that was made, and I am going to pick one of those up off of eBay, to round out that collection. From what i am seeing, with a F mount, I should be able to get one for less than $130.

As for buying used lenses, yep, it is a crap shoot, but I have found that the buyer protections on eBay mitigate that to a great degree. So far, after buying lenses off of eBay for a little over a year and a half, I just got one that was not functional and I got a full refund for that. The feedback and dispute resolution system they have does not take away all risk, but it sure helps. I have had more trouble buying new stuff off Amazon than I have buying used stuff off of eBay. The thing is, with lenses, make sure that you read the description very closely, and that you compare what they are saying about the lens to what you can find out about the lens after a good google search. When you get the lens, test it right away, and if there is an issue, get back with the seller right away. One tip about testing old Nikkors, make sure that you test not only mechanical functionality, focus, clarity and the normal parameters, but also check for color cast. Some older Nikkors can yellow over time, due to the specific coating used in the manufacture. This is especially an issue with pre-AI lenses. If you are bidding on a pre-AI lens, specifically ask the seller about any color cast/yellowing. Then when you get the lens, test it for the color cast. The way I do it is to first look through the lens (wide open) as it is pointed towards a brightly lit white surface. Then I take pictures of a properly lit white reference, that is properly white balanced and check the pix. Now, perfect white reproduction is not what is the issue, but if there is color cast, from the lens coatings you should be able to see it. If there is one, that is not the end of the world. The 24mm Nikkor I have has some yellow cast, but it is something that I can work with, and while noticeable with direct comparison with other lenses, shooting a white reference, I have used the lens and inter-cut between it and other lenses in the same scene. I deal with it when color grading and it is not that big of a deal. BUT, I know it is something I have to deal with on that lenses, and I can make the decisions about using it with fore knowledge. It is still a very good lens.

Good luck.
 
Last edited:
^ Yea, I have both of those lenses...

Check out the Vivitar Series 1 lenses.... You'll want to make sure of the filter size as different sizes mean different manufacturers.... Some great ones were Kiron and Cosina...

Like for the Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f3.5, you want the one with the 67mm filter size... there are ones w/ 72mm which are not as good....

Other to suggest:
Vivitar:
28-105mm f2.8-3.5
28-90mm f2.8-3.2 (I like this more than the 28-105)
28-85mm 2.8 (I do not own but heard its great)
These also have some macro functionality...

Nikon:
55mm f1.2

I have some tests on my youtube...

youtube/greeches
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top