billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I use a ton of older Minolta AF lenses on my Sony A77II and Sony A99. They are very sharp, work very well and have that vintage Minolta rick color look.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

A Canon FLM 100mm f4.0 lens. Works beautifully on my 7D.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I like the idea of being able to use old lenses on new mirrorless cameras, but I won't be buying old lenses for my new Nikons. I have enough new lenses to cover the range I need. I sold all my old Nikon film lenses - no regrets.

Related article
http://www.diyphotography.net/brilliant-bargain-basement-lens-mirrorless-cameras/

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

I have forty or fifty vintage lenses, all bought especially because of the bokeh they produce. Yes, I'm in the deep end where these lenses are concerned, but not the really deep end, where things like Dallmeyer Super Sixes and Meyer Kino Plasmats can go for 5 grand or ten times that.

I'm not going to list them all. They go from little cine lenses originally for 16mm use, to view camera lenses, to oscilloscope lenses, and several special industrial Nikkors originally made for printing circuits that under the right conditions can resolve over 400 lines/mm from corner to corner.

I have Russian lenses, and they are pleasant but nothing special. One great thing about them is that they are cheap--a good place to start. German Meyer lenses, such as the Domiplan, the Primoplan and the famous Trioplan, are an excellent place to go for nice bokeh. The Trioplan and Primoplan are very in demand and expensive these days, but you can still get Domiplans for under $100. Another great deal is the Primotar--both 135mm and 180mm f3.5. They are sharp and contrasty and have great edgy bokeh, very similar to the Trioplan.

Another place to explore is projector lenses, as these can often be had for $40-50 or less, and can produce spectacular results in terms of bokeh rendering.

One question that is important to consider is what your goal in using vintage lenses is. Generally speaking, for general photography you are much better off with cheap modern lenses than vintage lenses, even very expensive ones. If your aim is art, then the sky is the limit with vintage lenses.

I'll post a few examples so you can see what all the fuss about bokeh is about.

Swirly bokeh: Ross 1" f1.9 cine lens

(Download)

Taylor Taylor and Hobson Cooke Ivotal 25mm f1.4 cine lens

(Download)

CRT Nikkor (oscilloscope lens) 55mm f1.2

(Download)

Dallmeyer Dallac Tele Anastigmat 10.5 inch f6.7

(Download)

Dallmeyer #9 Kinematograph f4.5 cine lens

(Download)

Wollensak 50mm f1.6 cine lens

(Download)

Wollensak 75mm f1.9 Oscillo-Raptar LF (6x9 inch film) lens. This one is optimized for 1:0.9x, so very strong negative field curvature and crazy circles.

(Download)

Wollensak 162mm f4.5 Enlarging Velostigmat

(Download)

Dallmeyer Dallac Tele Anastigmat 10.5 inch f6.7

(Download)

Ilex Oscillo-Paragon 80mm f1.3

(Download)

tstar

I have quite a few, actually. I use Sony alpha, so I have Minolta Maxxum zooms, 28-85, 24-85(great lens!), 70-210. In manual focus,, Zeiss Jena Tessar 50mm f 2.8, several Tamron adaptalls including 35-80, 35-210 and 60-300, all SP's. Also a lot of screwmount lenses acquired over many years, including a Yashica 50mm f 1.4 that is as sharp as a Contax 50 f 1.7, supposedly one of the sharpest lenses ever made.

machia Loc: NJ

MD rick color look ? What is that ?
MINOLTA / ROKKOR user here .

alfeng Loc: Out where the West commences ...

FWIW ...

I currently use a variety of vintage lenses on my m4/3 camera bodies ...

Nikkor lenses are great ... especially on my older-and-humongous 4/3 camera body + on the smaller m4/3 bodies ... but, I am one of the few who was used to the weight-and-feel of both large-and-small 35mm cameras (particularly, older Leica-and-Canon bodies) ...

And, I think that some of the Leica-thread-mounted Russian lenses are as good as you could probably want ... its hard to argue with well-executed Zeiss lens designs ... but, the condition of the helicals may dictate the lens needs to be re-lubed ... so, if you like the size of THOSE lenses, then you may want to track down an older Leica or Canon lenses which have the Leica thread mount OR (of course) an M-series lens if you have deep pockets.

Generally, my observation is that some Exakta lenses don't seem to be as sharp, but they have other characteristics which some people cherish for the artsy-fartsy effect. I think that the "Aus Jena" are the Exakta lenses to get if you want a comparatively sharp Exakta lens since they can probably trace their heritage directly to the Zeiss designed lenses.

But, the BEST FIT lenses as far as size-and-weight may be the Olympus Zuiko lenses made for their OM-1 and subsequent series of SLR cameras ... some of the Zuiko lenses are exceptionally sharp.

BTW. I feel that the heavier 35mm lenses generally preclude the need for image stabilization if you can still hand-hold a camera.

Of course, image stabilization is a good thing ... but, for others who have a different mirrorless camera body which may not have IS, some vintage lenses may be worth considering.

catchlight.. Loc: Wisconsin USA- Halden Norway

I had a several from the 80's and purchased adapters... After giving it a go I found them nothing more than a novelty at best...using them wide open with the inability to control dof effectively was a let down. Aperture vignetting anything north of wide open on a Vivitar 80-200 telephoto and Tamron 24-70 were limitations I did not like. You need time and good eyes if you plan on using the old lenses to get a sharp image. Finding inexpensive AF kit lenses on Craigs list might be a better choice lol...

mffox Loc: Avon, CT

I have 2 vintage Minolta lenses: 50mm prime and 70-300mm zoom, with adapter to fit my Olympus EM 10 4/3 camera. The color and clarity from these lenses is outstanding.
Mark

alfeng Loc: Out where the West commences ...

I do not mean to dispute your experience ...

But, IF you observed a problem with DOF or "vignetting" with the two particular zoom lenses when they were mounted on your digital camera body ...

THEN those lenses were probably demonstrating the same limitations when you were using them with your film camera body.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

That has not been my experience. I have Fotodiox Nikon mounts on most of my Leica R lenses, from a 21 f/4.0 Super-Angulon-R to a 560 Telyt-R, and the only Nikkors that I’ve found to equal or better any of them are the top of the line ED lenses.

PhotoArtsLA Loc: Boynton Beach

Both Nikon and Canon are supported by Metabones and their Speedboosters and Straight to Micro 4/3 adapters.

Because, in the cinema, manual focus is standard, this works out famously well. I have a ton of manual lenses, all the way to the Nikkor ED-IF 800mm f/5.6 which I use on with my Micro 4/3 Pocket Cinema and Micro 4/3 2.5K Cinema cameras. The good thing about Metabones Speedboosters is: they concentrate the light, increasing the useful speed of the lens up to 1 2/3 stops, and at the same time effect an improvement in the MTF of the lens, essentially making the lens even better.

Now, Metabones also makes M43 to C-Mount adapters, allowing you to buy full tone One Inch format C-Mounts and get things WIDE going. Like 6mm f/1.8.

Here is a shot of my Pocket Cam at the end of the 800/5.6. If you put the 800/5.6 next to the 300/2.8, the 800 is wider (as is has to be to get the 5.6.)

The Moon shot is what the 800mm does in terms of magnification. The moon is only a half of a degree across, and no longer fits in the 1080 frame. Oh, about the "Shaky Manfrotto Head:" This is a still photography, geared head. It is not for a movie camera, and has a lot of play. This is okay for stills, but a little frustrating for movies. I have a $500 Manfrotto tripod I use as a coat rack. It is not up to any standard. The Gitzo Tele Studex is no longer made, but it was in many rental houses because it has no bad habits and is very, very tough. One trip to L.A. and I will turn this tripod into a ball-leveling fluid head. I machine the ball level adaptor for this tripod. 75mm ball. The little Tele Studex Giant goes up about 6 feet. The standard BIG one goes up about 10-11 feet. And yes, they are heavy, as they should be.

(Download)


(Download)

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

I'm looking to replace the 300mm f4.5 I had before it was stolen in 1994. That and a nice 80-200mm f2.8 two-ring. Those are on my wish list after I pay off my credit card debt (paying for law school).

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

Terrific samples- shows exactly the reason for buying the old lenses!!

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

I'm in the habit of selling off a lens when I find something I like better. Of my 7 lenses my oldest would be my EF 35mm f/1.4 L. It's about 3 yr old. I'm 68 and if I keep that lens till I die it probably still won't be as old as some of the lenses other members have!