agillot

newer quality lenses are built using different type of materials , special glass that did not exist at that time , so , you would think a modern glasses would be better , i think they are , but there are exceptions to this , this lens is probably one [ i use old stuff from film era on dig dslr ].exp , i take birds with a 800mm nikon nikkor ED f8 , the newer modern lenses are sharper .

PicsFixer

Do you know of a company that makes a conversion mount for Minolta [SRT 101] lens to Olympus [E5]. I've got some really great lenses for my film cams that I'd like to use with the DigiCam.

agillot

have same issues with tamron zooms .if you take a bicycle tube , cut a strip of rubber , make a round band out of it by gluing the ends so you get the right stretch to it , this work great .a tube and a patch kit [ glue ] will cost you about $ 8 , you can make a LARGE number of bands of any width.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

$3.50!? I paid over $600 for mine. : )

Yes, that is a very good lens, even though it was made years ago. Quality is quality.

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

Curious, which 70-300 were you using, I have the FF copy and love it.

nadelewitz Loc: Ithaca NY

All the test specs in the world don't really matter if one is happy with what one's old lens does and is proud to share the photos he/she takes with it.
Photography is part art, part technical things. Which part is more significant to YOU may not be what is significant to OTHERS.
My wife (artist) and I (tech type) have argued about this for many years, and there has never been an agreement between us, and it doesn't really matter.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

It's a gross generalization either way.... To say that ALL old lenses or zooms are bad... Or to say that ALL old lenses or zooms are good.

The truth is, a lot of old zooms really sucked. In the 1960s, when zooms first started to be produced, very few were worth using. Over time and with continued development, they improved gradually through the 1970s and early 1980s. There were some standouts... but there also were a lot of cheap junk zooms being made and sold.

Computer design was a game changer in the later 1980s and 1990s, when it was used to further improve optical design. Complex zooms especially benefited from it. Simpler primes had already been sorted out to a great degree... some prime lens designs date back to the 1950s and earlier, in fact.

Today even a comparatively cheap "kit" zoom lens is usually surprisingly capable. Zooms improved enough in the 1990s that they became the norm. Film cameras used to be sold with a 50mm (or there-about) prime lens. Now you practically can't find an interchangeable lens camera offered in kit with anything other than a zoom!

There was another dramatic zoom development in the early to mid 2000s. With the advent of digital photography and the vast majority of DSLRs and MILC using cropped sensors, telephotos became more powerful, but wide lenses were no longer wide. Ultra wide lenses needed to be developed... and those were mostly zooms, at least initially.

Today, zooms out-number primes in most systems.

For example, of 176 autofocus lenses available to fit Canon DSLRs (both crop & FF designs)... 101 are zooms and 75 are primes.

Similarly, out of 206 autofocus lenses offered in Nikon F-mount (both crop & FF)... 115 are zooms, and 91 are primes.

(For both the above I simply looked at what B&H Photo shows as avail. Includes both OEM and 3rd party lenses. Searches were limited to autofocus lenses.)

pendennis

I owned two different versions of that lens, and I thought the latest version with VR was a real dog. The distortion, either wide or tele, was awful. I ended up selling it, later buying the newer 24-120 f/4. It's far superior in every respect.

I carry it and the 70-200 f/4 all the time with my D750.

Bob Locher Loc: Southwest Oregon

The best of modern lenses will always be better than legacy glass. There are at least four reasons for this. One is ever-improving computer design software. Two is the newer glasses available - low-dispersion glasses particularly. Three is that aspheric lens designs are now a practical reality for high end lenses. And, four - especially important for lenses with a lot of elements - optical coatings have improved a lot.

Also, while not a direct function of lens quality, autofocus and image stabilization, be it in the lens or in the camera, make it easier to get great images.

That said, many legacy lenses remain quite good by almost any standard, and offer excellent value to every one except the most dedicated pixel-peepers.

Also, the sensor media, be it film or electronic, has improved considerably over the last decade, allowing any lens regardless of age to strut its best stuff beyond what was possible a few years ago.

It's all good!

Cheers

Bob Locher

PeterDragon Loc: Harlan, KY - Kona, HI - Phoenix, AZ

You are right. Older lens work well for some of us. I have Nikkor 75-300 that is sharper than my Nikon 24-120. As far as your zoom creep go to your food store get the rubber bands that they put the broccoli up these work great. Keep shooting with that amazing old lense.
Jim

Mr.D

I think my question has finally been andwered. So my lenses that I used on my Nikon FM-50m, 80-200, and 28m wide angle can be used on newer Nikon digital bodies?

AndyGarcia

Hi - I love old Nikon glass. I have 35/2.8, 50/2.8, 105/2.5 and various zooms. All work a treat on my D300 and D7K. All either Ai or Ai'd.

I would really recommend you get your non Ai lenses Ai'd. Not expensive if you live in the States. I would recommend AI Conversions by John White

www.aiconversions.com
1350 Folkstone Ct.
Ann Arbor MI 48105
734-662-1734

He Ai'd my 105 and 35. Really nice guy.

Pura Vida from Costa Rica.

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Looks like a good score!!! Congrats.

I got lucky and bought a Nikon camera from a police auction website for a few dollars. When it arrived it had a vintage and mint condition 55mm Micro-Nikkor-P, 1:3.5. Originally those came with an M2 extension tube. I bought one used for $9.00 at KEH. I was all in for <$40.00 which included camera and 2 lenses plus the M2 tube. The first photo I took with that lens using the extension tube is the one attached. I was shocked at clarity.

therwol Loc: USA

I have the f/4 lens that followed this one, and in terms of IQ, it is excellent, even on my D810, but I gave it to my son in-law who uses it on my old Nikon FA film camera. Why? No autofocus and no VR. Time and technology marches on. I also don't care for push-pull zooms.

alfeng Loc: Out where the West commences ...

You can check eBay where you will be able to find hollow tube lens mount adapters for most vintage lens mounts to most digital camera body mounts.