Does any one use M42 lens's

davidh6781

davidh6781

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,181
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
I just got my adaptor and i am amazed at the IQ i got from a m42 aus jena 50mm f2.8 lens.

Any one use the m42 and is there any good IQ version out there?
 
Yes. I use them on my M42 cameras (although I cal them lenses, not lens's!).


Steve.
 
A good lens is a good lens.....doesn't really matter what mount it's got stuck on the back of it.

Bob
 
I had quite an extensive collection of about 12 Manual Focus lenses and most were superb! if you have Live view and you are not taking pics of fast moving objects then it's a cheap way of using decent glass.

As i have a Lumix GF1 now it has been difficult to find an adapter for my old Olympus Lenses that i have kept but i have bought one and it's on it's way. I have one M42 lens left which i will keep and get a M42 adapter for the GF1 and i fancy a Macro lens which i'll get at some point.

MF Lenses are a fun way to do photography.
 
I've just discovered M42 lenses. I've only managed a quick play with them so far but I'm very impressed - especially as they cost me £3 each from a market. By blind luck alone I've managed to find two of the most raved about lenses, my favourite being the Helios 58 f2 (I have two versions of this, the later 44M-2 and the earlier 44-2 both of which are excellent)

I'm so impressed I'm actually contemplating joining Ebay, something I've managed to avoid for years!
 
I wasnt expecting much and the only reason i ahve them is i noticed the prices didn't pull much on ebay. im impressed though. i have been looking at the 135mm stuff and thinking hmm.
 
i've just started using m42 lenses because they are very cheap :thumbs:
i got a panagor 135 f2.8 which cost under £25 and has taken the sharpest image i've ever taken in the 2 months of owning a dslr

chesterzoo26thnov-155.jpg


and this with a helios 44m-4 58mm f2
athena18thnov-1.jpg


i'm not working at the moment so money is tight:bang:, old lenses will be the way forward for me. after some 200mm and 300mm next:thumbs:
 
Yeah, got loads of them. The IQ of a good M42 is as good as anything - and some of the less "perfect" ones, such as the old 135/4 Zeiss Triotar give a pleasant character to the images. For a sharp 135 look for a multicoated Zeiss Sonnar 135/3.5 but beware of sticky aperture blades. They can be cleaned making the lens work like new but it costs money.

BTW, your Aus Jena 50/2.8 is actually a Zeiss Jena Tessar. There was a period when they couldn't use the Zeiss name for exports.
 
I have a Helios 135mm that I use now and then. Also a CZ 55mm 1.8. They are pretty sharp if you use them right but since focusing is manual it isn't easy to use them opened up on a small view finder because it's difficult to judge the focus.

I have a studio session this afternoon with a couple of kids so I might see if I can take a shot with my Sig 50mm 1.4 (£450) and then with the 50mm CZ (£22) for comparison.

The main difference I have noticed in the past is sometimes the old M42 lenses don't produce colours as vibrant as modern lenses and contrast usually needs a boost. The best thing is to shoot RAW so you can compensate.
 
coo info, i will be looking out for 1 135mm to try. Im not tight with money or anything but don't mind a bargain that will work for portraits.
 
the other thing is ... shop carefully and the only thing you have to loose is the postage . Thier prices are pretty constant. (except when a thread like this crops up and everyon hits ebay at the same time ! :thumbsdown: )
 
I love using the Pentacon 50mm f1.8

A couple of images from this lens
eatenDSC08214.JPG


Wine%26Glass.jpg


reservior.JPG
 
No M42's, but I have three MF Tamron Adaptall 2 lenses. I bought the 35-70 off a member here and loved playing with it, but was VERY happy to pick up the Tamron SP 35-80 f/2.8 on ebay recently. It's famed as once of the sharpest zoom lenses built in that period. Here are some shots from it...
4133546068_4bd451573c.jpg


4127452461_234738078d.jpg


I also have the Tamron 28mm f/2.5, which I've yet ot really try in anger.
 
The23rdman said:
No M42's, but I have three MF Tamron Adaptall 2 lenses. I bought the 35-70 off a member here and loved playing with it, but was VERY happy to pick up the Tamron SP 35-80 f/2.8 on ebay recently. It's famed as once of the sharpest zoom lenses built in that period.
Click to expand...

Another Adaptall 2 fan :clap:

I have the SP 17mm f3.5, SP 35-80mm f2.8, SP 90mm Macro f2.5 and f2.8, SP 70-150mm f2.8 soft and the SP 70-210mm f3.5. Excellent lenses :thumbs:
 
God, I'd love to find the 17mm and a nice copy of the 70-210mm.

I've actually just put my 28mm and 35-70 in the classifieds as I need to replace my 18-50 Siggy due to a drop.
 
AndyB said:
The main difference I have noticed in the past is sometimes the old M42 lenses don't produce colours as vibrant as modern lenses and contrast usually needs a boost. The best thing is to shoot RAW so you can compensate.
Click to expand...

It depends on the coating. Modern lenses are all multi-coated, older M42s often have single coating. You'll also notice that the strength of different colours sometimes varies, the multicoated Zeiss Jena lenses tend to enhance blues.

As you say, it is easy to adjust this to your taste in the Raw processing or in PS. And I think it is a matter of taste rather than one being inately better than the other. Some people like subdued tones, some people like rather unreal vibrant colours. Some people even like HDR glow :gag:
 
I actualy prefer subdues but I like to have the choice :)

Incidentally - studio session was rather stressful so I didnt get a chance to switch lenses. Does anyone else swear not to work with kids again after a portrait session?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top