You have good lenses and unless you need a special ability like faster glass for example you are not missing much if anything. It takes a lot of experience and knowledge - some of which is obscure, to know what is good and when there is a special ability or problem. I have a Zeiss 100mm Makro and for the most part it will do the same as my Canon 100mm f2 but a stop darker perhaps on the shadows and closer focus without ext. rings. over 1000$ macro 2:1 vs 150$ autofocus small size lens; choices are endless and expensive.

I've learned plenty about photography pursuing gear, I'll watch the vid and consider the point of such a statement

have family there from those years, they must have watched the games.

I haven't tried one and I did a little looking around I saw that the quality to price ratio isn't great. Yes it's very affordable but considering the canon fifty is also affordable and better by a mile.. Well my friend has a yongnuo 50 and that inspired me to buy the canon 50mm 1.8, an upgrade to my manual focus 50's. It has the worst lens flare I've seen from a modern lens and that includes older canon eos lenses I've tried. I get less flare from a variety old vintage lenses. My first 50 1.8 usm ef kit lens, an older version, lasted 1 day when it wouldn't focus when any other lens would and the focus throw (turn) is too short to be used manually (which I think is different on the new version I have). I think side by side images will reveal better looking images from canon lenses

I've been watching a busy auction site; Catawiki. Buyer pays the 9% fee

scg3 thank you - good to know. I have wondered what cameras this lens has been used on, the obvious being on m42 adaptable 35mm film and a mention of its movie camera history. I think the build won't support the full image circle for medium or larger, but I will try.. tilt and bellows with the glass.
wrangler5 Yes that's what I was thinking, that it could have more than original coatings tho I'm satisfied with the explanation of low refraction in less glass produces minimal flare

It looks like a multicoated lens contrast level. Is this the same as other tessars? The lens is a 1930s Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar f:6.3 f=15cm. It looks like ones I've seem on bellows cameras (6x6?) but is on a matching brass focus helicoid with m42 mount from the same manufacturer. It needs work the iris is so stiff to turn I hurt my hand using it on this cold day. The photos were taken on my canon dslr

(Download)


(Download)

Love that lenses rendition of out of focus areas and tonal to highlights. A friend who has one does portraiture and macro with it

what a camera can do can be amazing, that's why I have so many lenses that are different and filters lighting.. Having had just 1 lens was maddening when I couldn't get a quality photo. So now I've told myself there is one very good photo image that makes it all worth while and many times more. I use old lenses on digital and other expensive quality ones. I made some compromises buying so I'd get good value for money and sale prices. In the mail now is a very heavy one dollar lens! it's very good, rare and not wanted for being hundreds of grams heavier

Lots of sharper image potential on my Canon 5Dsr and I can see it sometimes at web sizes. Some photos really show off their detail and I've found micro-contrast looking sharp. I think detail levels perceived are not at the same rate as megapixel count, double an 8mp might look double but double a 24mp may just appear slightly more.