Vintage Telephoto lenses

D

deltoidjohn

Veteran
I am currently on the hunt for a decent vintage lens or two in the 300-400mm range. Does anybody here have any experiences with older manual glass in this range?

The older Nikon 300mm f/4 looks to be my current choice, but I'm having trouble finding one on eBay in Australia.

There are also quite a few 400mm 5.6 lenses around (not to be mistaken for the the 400 6.3's which are ridiculously long and skinny) from manufacturers such as Vivitar, Soligor etc which all seem to be the same lens sold under different brands. Anybody ever used one of these? They are so cheap that I would not expect much of them, though it's difficult to find reviews for these older lenses.

I've also seen a few Pentacon 300mm f/4 lenses (built for medium format). Anybody know if these are a viable choice for an APS-C camera, is the image circle cropped to the point where lens resolution is compromised?
 
I have a Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 300mm f/4 for pentacon six, from 1974 - the image is nice, but not as sharp as with more normal lenses (in the 35mm-90mm range) (that's specially so in the corners, even on my APS-C, enen though it's a medium format lens) http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsa.html - bokeh is reasonably nice - http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/bokehtests.html - but, the most important thing I wanted to add here is: this lens is HUGE AND HEAVY (without the hood, 24cm long and 2400g), really not confortable to use, keep that in mind - check it out in this picture http://www.pentaconsix.com/1000mm.htm - I wanted a decent cheap lens with very long reach for a moon shot, and this one fits the bill, plus it's a piece of History (original design by the nazis for the 1936 Berlin olympics, made in communist germany in the 1970s)
 
I have my dads 1980's 600mm Nikkor f5.6 and use it all the time on my T3i. It's an incredible lens. It's only drawback is a bit of chromatic abberation (fringing). That is an issue with most vintage lenses vs. todays modern glass that costs 3 - 10 times as much. I think the AIS 300mm F2.8 is supposed to be a great lens but far from reasonably priced. The 300 AF f4 is built just like my older 600mm and a super tough lens. I can't vouch for the image quality of the 300mm but if the 600mm f5.6 is any indication it would be a huge winner for $500 - $600.

Heres's a few samples with my 600mm on a T3i.
http://vimeo.com/34919397
http://vimeo.com/34649288

Cheers,
Pete
 
The Nikon 300/4 or 300/4.5 are the nicest in that range. I have the EF 300/4 and 400/5.6 and also the Sigma 400/5.6, which all have APO glass, which is needed to correct chromatic aberrations at that focal length.

Mirror lens, with their bokeh issues and fixed aperture, do have the advantage of not having chromatic aberrations due to it's design.
 
Last edited:
I have the Asahi Tele-Takumar 300mm f6.3 preset lens.
12 aperture blades, not particularly heavy and bulky (just a bit long) and very good image quality especially for the price.
I don't use it very often, a couple of moon shots and some stills on a sport event. But definitely a great lens especially for the price.
It is M42 and I have both tried it on APS-C and on full frame.
 
I have the Takumar super-multi-coated f/4 300mm. It is a big heavy lens, and comes with tripod mount and a built in hood.

Sharpness is absolutely fine, even wide open. No resolution issues at all. The only issue with it is that it suffers from CA, but for less than £100 you can't complain.

Here is the Pentax forums review:

http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/S-M-C-Super-Takumar-300mm-F4.html

Here's another one I have: Opteka 500mm f/8. Don't laugh! Not vintage, so doesn't fit the question, but a fun lens for the price. I saw this:

http://vimeo.com/14444575

And I went and got the lens on eBay for £25. You know what? It's slow, but it's actually useable for video on a sunny day.

I'm currently on the look out for the Takumar 400mm f/5.6 based on some favourable reviews.
 
c3hammer said:
I have my dads 1980's 600mm Nikkor f5.6 and use it all the time on my T3i. It's an incredible lens. It's only drawback is a bit of chromatic abberation (fringing). That is an issue with most vintage lenses vs. todays modern glass that costs 3 - 10 times as much. I think the AIS 300mm F2.8 is supposed to be a great lens but far from reasonably priced. The 300 AF f4 is built just like my older 600mm and a super tough lens. I can't vouch for the image quality of the 300mm but if the 600mm f5.6 is any indication it would be a huge winner for $500 - $600.

Heres's a few samples with my 600mm on a T3i.
http://vimeo.com/34919397
http://vimeo.com/34649288

Cheers,
Pete
Click to expand...

wow, that moon shot in the first link is seriously AWESOME!!!


also, surprisingly to me, the opteka 500mm f/8 mentioned later seems reasonably ok (though too soft with the 2x extension)
 
The Opteka is interesting but $100 + shipping is a little too much, just to capture one fun moon shot now and then ;)
 
NormanBates said:
wow, that moon shot in the first link is seriously AWESOME!!!
Click to expand...
Indeed. One of the best things I have ever seen. That's why I want a t3i.

NormanBates said:
also, surprisingly to me, the opteka 500mm f/8 mentioned later seems reasonably ok (though too soft with the 2x extension)
Click to expand...

Yep, the rule is, you get what you pay for, but there are exceptions if you're willing trawl through the crap.

I did a test to see what would be better, my Takumar 300mm with a 2x teleconverter (admittedly not the Canon, but a Kenko), or the Opteka 500mm. The images from the Opteka were easily better.

The moral being, in most cases you're better off simply cropping than using a teleconverter at all.
 
The AF era Nikon 300 F4 is a legendary lens - you doo see 'em on eBay from time to time, but they go for around a grand.

The 80-200 2.8 AF is available in several flavors and is a classic, built like a tank. With the crop factor it's about as long as you'd want for most video shooting I would think. You'll see these for under $500 if you hunt around. The lens has serious mojo and is also killer for fashion and still work. With a good quality teleconverter you'd be able to get some sharp images.
 
c3hammer said:
I just saw a Nikkor 300mm F4 in our local classifieds for $600. It's been on there for two weeks so you might get them to go lower. I don't know who they are but thought it looked like a good deal compared to ebay.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=218&ad=18819615&cat=&lpid=1&search=nikon 300mm
Click to expand...

If I was still shooting full-frame fashion on film, I'd get all drooly over that. It's a hell of a lens. But the 80-200 2.8 on a crop sensor seems like all you need except for, I dunno, shooting the moon for your werewolf flick.
 
I found my long lost Olympus Zuiko 300mm F4.5 yesterday! I swear it went on world tour somewhere and I had lost it. Yesterday there it was in pristine condition sitting right on the self with all my old miniDV junk. LOL!!! Funny how oldmanitis takes hold. :)

Anyway, I tested it out today and had some fun with it after remembering this thread. It's a pretty sharp lens and way cheaper when they come up used. For the rare times you really need something that long, it might be just the ticket very cost effectively.

Cheers,
Pete
 
Michael Carter said:
The AF era Nikon 300 F4 is a legendary lens - you doo see 'em on eBay from time to time, but they go for around a grand.

The 80-200 2.8 AF is available in several flavors and is a classic, built like a tank. With the crop factor it's about as long as you'd want for most video shooting I would think. You'll see these for under $500 if you hunt around. The lens has serious mojo and is also killer for fashion and still work. With a good quality teleconverter you'd be able to get some sharp images.
Click to expand...

I've already got a 70-200 f/2.8 so I'm covered for that range. Currently I'm using a 2x convertor for shooting surfing so I'm regularly in the 140-400mm range. I really want something with a nice smooth focus ring and long focus throw as that is what is missing from my current setup.

The AF Nikon 300 f/4 is certainly a nice lens, but I think if I was going to spend $1000+ I would get the Canon L version instead so it works natively. I still don't know if either of those lenses would give me the nice MF feel I am looking for though.
 
I can say the focus ring on the Zuiko is one of the stiffest I've ever used. I'm sure you wouldn't be happy with it, if smooth is your goal. It's stiff enough to make the adaptor move around on my T3i. Its one redeeming factor is that it pulls the same direction as the Canon's. The Nikons all go the opposite way and I tend to get confused when shooting back and forth between my 70-200 L and my 600mm Nikon.

Cheers,
Pete
 
same with my czj sonnar 300mm f/4: huge lens, huge barrel to move, full of heavy pieces of thick glass, not as easy to rotate it as on smaller lenses
 
There's not as many vintage internal focusing 300's. You might be better off looking for a Sigma apo 300/4 in EF mount. I have the Sigma 400/5.6, and the focus throw is quite long and the lens has hard stops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top