The Vintage Lens Thread

Kastro said:
Interesting as I got a helios 44-2 from that guy and I'm pretty pleased. The outer ring sets the max aperture and isnt ment to turn all the time as you use the 2nd ring which adjusts your ap from min to max. then you have the focus ring near the base..

Been ok for me.. unless the outer ring isnt supposed to 'lock'..

This is my first helios so i just made the assumption that this is how it is supposed to work, which hasnt hindered my shooting.
Click to expand...

I know how the preset aperture ring works. On the one he sent me, it's nearly impossible to turn. Furthermore, he tried to convince me they were all made like that. Moreover, he left me nasty feedback (which ebay removed because it was in violation of their policies).

Prior to this purchase, I had bought a Jupiter-9 lens from him which was fine. It's a gamble with him. A feedback score of 98.4% is not a good sign at all. Fortunately, ebay's resolution center does work well, as long as you follow its guidelines.

He also sent me several angry messages. I sent him a link to this thread.
 
Are there any nice fast vintages primes? 1.4 or lower. That doesn't suffer from reduced sharpness, vignetting or other drawbacks at maximum aparture. (I mean, in case most old lenses are performing bad, there's no reason to pick it up even if it's cheap(er).
 
1.4 or lower that doesn't suffer from reduced sharpness?

compared to what? a NEW lens at 1.4? clarify what you mean here Martin.
 
Nikkor 35, 50, and 85mm f/1.4 are all excellent lenses. The 50mm will run about $75 but the others are a lot more.

No lens—old or new, with a maximum aperture of 1.4—will be at its sharpest wide open.
 
Jordan, if there is a thread in existence here where you DON'T post right after me, i'd love to see it haha (not literally though, as there are many)...just sayin. we seem to operate during the same hours.

ahh well...
 
Pookie addressed this issue in an article he co-authored with Barry Green. Has to do with the vortex. No need to worry.
 
Jordan_S said:
I know how the preset aperture ring works. On the one he sent me, it's nearly impossible to turn. Furthermore, he tried to convince me they were all made like that. Moreover, he left me nasty feedback (which ebay removed because it was in violation of their policies).

Prior to this purchase, I had bought a Jupiter-9 lens from him which was fine. It's a gamble with him. A feedback score of 98.4% is not a good sign at all. Fortunately, ebay's resolution center does work well, as long as you follow its guidelines.

He also sent me several angry messages. I sent him a link to this thread.
Click to expand...

Understood.. Being somewhat new here i'm unaware of 'everyones' talent therefore I made the assumption that you may have been in the same predicament I was in when I first got the lens and didnt understand preset lens' :)

That sucks though as I was considering getting another lens from him. I may hold off a bit.
 
Chris Light said:
compared to what? a NEW lens at 1.4?
Click to expand...

Yes. Was thinking if old glass were "extra bad" at very low stops compared to new ones (or whatever). It's the final image that counts, and it's nice to be able to save money and get a nice look from vintage primes - however if there happens to be certain aspects (?) of older lenses that has issues, it's nice to know about them before buying... :) Shooting a challenging indoor scene with very little light, so need to know if I should actually invest in a 900 dollar L-prime or if it, amount of light-vise, works fine with an older lens (without suffering from high resolution loss, vignetting would prob be fine since I'm shooting on crop sensor).

So generally speaking then, the real difference old/new lenses is mostly the look and the coating of the glass? (ofc af, is etc etc but i don't count them in, just performance for video). Never been into photography myself so still an epic nab when it comes to the evolution of SLR lenses :happy:

Jordan: Thanks, will check them out. Hmm, any 1.4 M42 lenses worth checking out? Saving even more money...
 
Apart from sharpness, pixel peeping and extreme low light performance, there is something magical in some vintage lenses that you cannot find in modern glass. And this may create interesting situations for video.
For instance, Meyer Optic trioplan 100 f2.8.
The first four pictures were taken wide open, the last one is stopped down to f=4 I think.
 

Attachments

  • trioplan_wo1.JPG
    trioplan_wo1.JPG
    68.3 KB · Views: 0
  • trioplanwo2.JPG
    trioplanwo2.JPG
    72.1 KB · Views: 0
  • trioplanwo3.JPG
    trioplanwo3.JPG
    107.2 KB · Views: 0
  • trioplanwo5.JPG
    trioplanwo5.JPG
    74.2 KB · Views: 0
  • trioplan_f=4.JPG
    trioplan_f=4.JPG
    128.4 KB · Views: 0
kostas said:
Apart from sharpness, pixel peeping and extreme low light performance, there is something magical in some vintage lenses that you cannot find in modern glass. And this may create interesting situations for video.
For instance, Meyer Optic trioplan 100 f2.8.
The first four pictures were taken wide open, the last one is stopped down to f=4 I think.
Click to expand...

Quite a dreamy look there. You've pretty much nailed why I like vintage glass so much. Those old lenses have some personality.
 
'Cause you got personality,
Walk, personality
Talk, personality
Smile, personality
Charm, personality
Love, personality...

I'm sorry Chris, but every time you mention "personality", that song pops in my head.
 
Jordan_S said:
Leaving it in the sun for a few days usually does the trick.
Click to expand...

I've got a yellow one that I want to try to fix.

I've seen on the pentax forums where some people wrap it partly in foil and face in one direction or another. Some people say it works nicely, others say it takes weeks or months of exposure to the sun. Some say that the sun can create havoc with the lubricants and cause other problems. Some say to use UV lamps.

Do you have any experience with this issue?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top