C100: Vintage Lenses on C100

L

LifeInAction

Member
Does anyone use any vintage lenses on their C100? I have been looking into some vintage nikon glass as its supposedly easy and cheap to adapt unlike canon's fd series of lenses. Curious to see if anyone here has tried it?
 
I have a full set of Yashinons that I almost never use. The only real concern with old lenses is that they are so short and narrow. If you plan to use a mattebox and follow focus, it can be really difficult to figure out how to cram it all onto the rails in the little space that the C100 offers you in front of its foot.
 
I don't know if these are old enough to count as "vintage", but I have a set of Contax Zeiss lenses I use regularly. Beautiful lenses and easily adapted to Canon mount with a ~$20 adapter. Avoid the ones with a chip in them for video work...
 
Fahnon said:
I don't know if these are old enough to count as "vintage", but I have a set of Contax Zeiss lenses I use regularly. Beautiful lenses and easily adapted to Canon mount with a ~$20 adapter. Avoid the ones with a chip in them for video work...
Click to expand...

Yes I have a full set of Contax Primes and they are brilliant in IQ. Mechanically mine could use a touch up but the images can be jaw dropping.

Used them on my C100 many dozens of time with success.
 
I have the Nikon 50mm F1.4 AiS, 85mm F1.8 AiS, 105mm F2.8 D Micro, have shot with them for years on the 5D MKII, 5D MKIII, C100, C300, I even used them on my GH4 to shoot 4k, they are excellent. The first two are from the 70s/80s and the last I bought new 25 years ago. All make superb images, I generally like them better than any of the Canon lenses on the C100 other than the really expensive Canons like the 70-200 2.8 and the 300mm 2.8. Razor sharp, beautiful tonal and contrast rendering. Just have to watch the CA when shooting exteriors, lens coatings have progressed a lot since these were made. When I shoot exteriors, I use the Canon 18-135 STM IS, but for interiors, interviews, green screen, I am all about the Nikons. They are mechanical works of art too, heavy brass and steel, quality glass, they are heavy and well crafted. The fact that they were inexpensive it just frosting on the cake. I also have the Canon 28mm 1.8, a nice lens, but if I could afford it, I would replace with a Nikon 24mm 2.0, it is a better lens for most things that I shoot.

Nothing wrong with modern lenses but nothing wrong with old lenses either. Putting your money into good glass is always a smart move. Cameras are disposable, but good glass can last decades, which makes it an excellent investment.
 
cpreston said:
I have a full set of Yashinons that I almost never use. The only real concern with old lenses is that they are so short and narrow. If you plan to use a mattebox and follow focus, it can be really difficult to figure out how to cram it all onto the rails in the little space that the C100 offers you in front of its foot.
Click to expand...

HA! Yeah! Of all the discussions of vintage primes THIS never comes up. But it SHOULD because it really can be an issue.

I was lucky to get a bunch of very old metal Nikon lens hoods that I have used to create something like 'extension tubes' to connect to the shroud I made myself for the matte boxes and get me that extra inch or two out in front of the follow focus.

I'll say this - one of the best 'power tools' a fella can learn how to use well is a SEWING MACHINE.

I only have two of the f/4 Canon L zooms and I REALLY like them on the 6D, but the NIKKOR AI-s primes I put on it for wides look better to me.
 
Good information! How about any zooms? I have already accumulated quite a few canon primes. I own a 24 f1.4L, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.4, and 100 f2.8 macro. I have a 24-105 f4L but have been really unimpressed with it, not very sharp at all. The only thing I like is the IS. I like to have an IS lens for run and gun but not sure which route to take.
 
If you are unimpressed with the 24-105L, you would be severely disappointed with pretty much any pre autofocus zoom. They tend to be big and heavy, wide angle zooms are pretty nonexistent, most have a rotating front filter thread, IQ issues, etc. I think that the old primes have their place due to there "character", but the zooms have almost no advantage other than being dirt cheap. The Vivitar Series 1 70-210 has it's fans. One of the push pull versions is even parfocal which can be useful if you find a good copy that allows really smooth zooms, but it's IQ is significantly worse than the 24-105L.
 
One other thing, if you are used to focusing on Canon lenses, shifting to Nikon or Pentax lenses will cause you to need to relearn directions.
 
i was going to buy the set of zeiss cy, as i had 50mm t1.7, and its good lens, but economically its not practical... the only reason why i bought cy 50mm t1.7, is because i bought it from hands, and the guy who sold it did not know what he was selling, so i bought it new for 130 usd.... the lens was new with box, never used.... just got lucky..

but after, when i decided to look on ebay for the rest of the lenses to build the set, i quickly understood that good fast but used versions of Zeiss cy coast same or even more then modern Zeiss EF or ZF ! yes u can buy f2.8 versions not that expansive, but the point of getting a prime is f1.4 or f2.0, but then u also need to convert them, and its not cheap ether...
http://leitax.com/Zeiss-Contax-lenses-for-Canon-cameras.html

So i came to the conclusion that its just not practical. also as i understand the "newer" SLR (our days after milvus and otus came out, its now older, but so u know what i am talking about it is what came before milvus and otus) lenses have improved optic design... so why bother, plus u never know if that used lens is in great condition....
i contacted local representative of zeiss, and surprise, surprise - i got it for a great price, in fact it was around 15-20% cheaper then the same lens coast used at ebay, plus u know u get the warranty..

before zeiss , i tried to buy Canon FD primes converted to EF, but good examples coast again same or more then zeiss slr.... still fd are interesting, nice character.... but getting good copy is a pain in ..... u know. dust inside, coating separation, if u r serious about your lenses most likely the internal needs to be checked, cleaned and oiled.. all that is $$$

There is one tech issue with old and modern lenses ! NEW lenses are designed for digital sensors, so the lights(photons) that come inside are focused and sent on sensor in the way to get optimal result!
Old lenses were made for film, and the light just comes in more chaotic way, as its does not matter much, because of the chemical reaction process involved....

also when looking for an old lens , keep in mind that spherical or aspherical (not sure what is the difference between these 2) elements on lenses were developed not that long time ago... so very very old lenses does not have these elements.
also i think lens design should be better after PC saw the light

what i love about that old FD is coating, dont know why they use something else now, the look was really nice. Old nikons if i remember it right suffers too much from chromatic aberration.
 
cpreston said:
One other thing, if you are used to focusing on Canon lenses, shifting to Nikon or Pentax lenses will cause you to need to relearn directions.
Click to expand...

Why is this such an issue for people? I switch every time I shoot between Canon EOS lenses and Nikon MF lenses, not a big deal that many make it out to be. I suppose if you are a professional focus puller and are really into it, it could affect your precision but for most of us, this is not an issue. Then again, I drive here just fine and in South Africa and the UK on the other side of the road too so maybe it's just me?

Also, anyone reading this thread will find Jim Matlosz' new article on the Hawk V-Lite Vintage lens line to be interesting. http://www.hdvideopro.com/gear/lenses/hawk-v-lite-vintage-74-anamorphics
 
Last edited:
puredrifting said:
Why is this such an issue for people? I switch everytime I shoot between Canon EOS lenses and Nikon MF lenses, not a big deal that many make it out to be. I suppose if you are a professional focus puller and are really into it, it could affect your precision but for most of us, this is not an issue. Then again, I drive here just fine and in South Africa and the UK on the other side of the road too so maybe it's just me?
Click to expand...

Yeah, for those of us that only ever learned to drive on one side of the road, trying to switch to the other side can be a disaster.

I have a set of Yashinon DX's and a couple DS's that are single coated and I collected them because they are single coated. They definitely have a look. The Contax Zeiss lenses seem to have become collectors items and are therefore overpriced if you just want a good set of lenses to use for video. I had a Contax Zeiss 50mm 1.4 but my Yashinon 50 1.4 actually had less CA so I decided to save some money and just focus on the older Yashinon lenses. Based on my testing and experience, you can get very nice images from older lenses but none of them compare to contemporary lens designs and coatings. Some, of them such as the Olympus OM, Yashica ML, Zeiss, Nikon AIS, and Pentax lenses can get very close and can be adapted to EOS mounts, but they also tend to sell for the same as comparable AF lenses. The offbrand lenses are generally really poor. If you can get a good deal at a local garage sale, go for it. Otherwise, if you are just looking to save some money, older MF lenses are probably not a good investment.
 
anatusa said:
i was going to buy the set of zeiss cy, as i had 50mm t1.7, and its good lens, but economically its not practical... the only reason why i bought cy 50mm t1.7, is because i bought it from hands, and the guy who sold it did not know what he was selling, so i bought it new for 130 usd.... the lens was new with box, never used.... just got lucky..

but after, when i decided to look on ebay for the rest of the lenses to build the set, i quickly understood that good fast but used versions of Zeiss cy coast same or even more then modern Zeiss EF or ZF ! yes u can buy f2.8 versions not that expansive, but the point of getting a prime is f1.4 or f2.0, but then u also need to convert them, and its not cheap ether...
http://leitax.com/Zeiss-Contax-lenses-for-Canon-cameras.html

So i came to the conclusion that its just not practical.
Click to expand...

You don't need to convert them. I've been using simple ring adapters for the last couple of years with no issues. And conversion has a downside: I've used those same contax lenses with direct adapters for gh4, a7s and various Canon cameras; but if I'd done an expensive permanent conversion, I would be going through 2 adapters and that sounds like asking for trouble...

Also the 2.8 versions I have are still really good primes. Still fast, just not as fast. I also didn't find the price difference worth it. The only thing missing in the contax lineup is a fast wide lens. The only one is the expensive 18mm f/4.
 
anatusa said:
what is the price of them?
Click to expand...

Jim's article doesn't say but let's use some deductive reasoning. True cinema lenses, custom made in Germany, designed obviously for pro filmmakers. My conclusion would be, not cheap, really expensive for most of us, probably in the $15 to $22k range per lens? I am sure they would be a rental house item but I bet they look really good. They're a way to get that 70s look without all of the variables of wear and tear and inconsistency between samples. Pretty much the opposite end of the spectrum from most of lenses we are discussing but I thought it was cool that someone made such a lens concept for high end filmmaking too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top