So, who loves adapting old lenses?

Lefrash

Lefrash

Suspended / Banned
Messages
136
Name
Fraser
Edit My Images
Yes
I've got an a6000 and I cam across a YouTube video that opened up a whole lot of fun for me! Adapting old glass using little dummy adapters. I went and bought an old minolta 28 f2. 8 and although it almost certainly not giving super sharp results (even withstanding the manual focus aspect) its absolutely brilliant fun! I then bought a 50mm f1. 7 for basically nothing, and that's great too! So much more play than what I get with the kit lens. I've now got a 300mm coming which I got for very little again, so I'm looking forward to that!

So who else does this? Anyone got any glass from yesteryear getting used for more than just a bit of cheap fun?

Fraser
 
I use a few old M42 screw mount lenses on the X-T1, you can get some nice results and experiment with various focal lengths for very cheap. I always prefer primes, and there's tonnes of lovely chunks or prime glass out there for buttons.

Pentax Takumar 200mm F4:
Blue tit and Green Finch argue over feeder position by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr


Carl Zeiss jena 135mm 3.5
_DSF2239 by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr


Helios 44-2 58mm F2:
Summer's end by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr

Doesn't have to be old glass, you can adapt modern glass from other mounts too, this was a Sigma 150mm 2.8 Nikon mount lens on the Fuji X-T1:
November dew by Enticing Imagery, on Flickr
 
Raymond Lin said:
I find it fun for 2 mins then gets frustrated and goes back to modern AF lenses.
Click to expand...

Patience is a virtue ...

I don't know why anyone gets frustrated tbh, it's so easy to use MF lenses with mirrorless cameras. They do half the work for you.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Patience is a virtue ...

I don't know why anyone gets frustrated tbh, it's so easy to use MF lenses with mirrorless cameras. They do half the work for you.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that means I am still doing half the work :p

My skill is moment to moment, composition, timing that split second, seeing a shot ahead of time and have the tools to be ready at a moment’s notice.

MF with old lenses just not the same. I could do it, have done it, the shots I end up getting is different to what I normally get, it’s not a good or bad thing but different.
 
Raymond Lin said:
I find it fun for 2 mins then gets frustrated and goes back to modern AF lenses.
Click to expand...
:agree:
But you can get decent quality glass for not much expenditure. Some on here think that the cheaper the lens the more brownie points you get.
Modern glass is just so much simpler to use.
You can watch TV on an old cathode ray tube set, but why would you when you can get HDTV with remotes, Internet connections and catch up etc.
It's called progress. Lenses are designed to fit with the camera systems. Why introduce a rogue element other than to show how clever you are?
(P.S. I do use legacy glass!!!)
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
Yeah, that means I am still doing half the work :p

My skill is moment to moment, composition, timing that split second, seeing a shot ahead of time and have the tools to be ready at a moment’s notice.

MF with old lenses just not the same. I could do it, have done it, the shots I end up getting is different to what I normally get, it’s not a good or bad thing but different.
Click to expand...


It depends what you expect from old lenses. It should be a bit of fun, you still have your AF gear on side for more serious work. If it's not fun, then don't use them I guess, you lose nothing really. I'm not sure who regular ol' fuddy duddy up there is referring to with the usual snide remarks every time old adapted lenses comes up, but I've only ever really used a few, and never gotten a steal or great bargain. If anything I seem to end up paying more for old lenses than most. The Helios 44-2 being a good example, I paid £50 for mine, where others claim to get them 'mint' for £20 odd. I'd love to know where! I plan on buying more once I get hold of my G80, should be even better with that stabilization.
 
mickledore said:
:agree:
But you can get decent quality glass for not much expenditure. Some on here think that the cheaper the lens the more brownie points you get.
Modern glass is just so much simpler to use.
You can watch TV on an old cathode ray tube set, but why would you when you can get HDTV with remotes, Internet connections and catch up etc.
It's called progress. Lenses are designed to fit with the camera systems. Why introduce a rogue element other than to show how clever you are?
(P.S. I do use legacy glass!!!)
Click to expand...

For a bit of fun perhaps? I certainly don't expect people to use nothing but adapted glass, but it's definitely an interesting (and cheap) offshoot from your regular shooting.

The shots above are great xamples of what can be had!
 
Lefrash said:
For a bit of fun perhaps? I certainly don't expect people to use nothing but adapted glass, but it's definitely an interesting (and cheap) offshoot from your regular shooting.

The shots above are great xamples of what can be had!
Click to expand...

There are people who do chose to use nothing but manual focus lenses, especially those more into video. But yup, it's fun, and not a bad side hobby to have. There's a lot of history in some of the really old 'legacy' glass, and it can be very interesting reading up on them. One of the forums suggested above might be a good place to check out. You won't get as many modern gear heads ;)
 
I enjoy using old lenses and old cameras spending a bit of time focusing choosing apertures to suit ,do I use the camera loaded with black and white or colour, take a light reading or try using the Sunny 16 rule,if i wanted it fully automatic I'd get someone else to take it and send me a copy save all the hassle. That said if the photos are going to be one chance photos, memories rather than hobby photos then I will take the point and press out !
 
I use a couple of old (1970s) Nikkors on my 30D occasionally, because I like them, but I really prefer to use these lenses on the F2 and FM. Manual focus can be a bind on the small, dim, crop camera viewfinders but it's doable..:D
 
Cagey75 said:
It depends what you expect from old lenses. It should be a bit of fun, you still have your AF gear on side for more serious work. If it's not fun, then don't use them I guess, you lose nothing really. I'm not sure who regular ol' fuddy duddy up there is referring to with the usual snide remarks every time old adapted lenses comes up, but I've only ever really used a few, and never gotten a steal or great bargain. If anything I seem to end up paying more for old lenses than most. The Helios 44-2 being a good example, I paid £50 for mine, where others claim to get them 'mint' for £20 odd. I'd love to know where! I plan on buying more once I get hold of my G80, should be even better with that stabilization.
Click to expand...

It's not really what I expect from old lenses. I don't really think of the age of the lens, there is no expectations except that it works.

The joy of photography isn't how the gear shoot, they are just an extension of my mind. The entire aim of the camera, and the lenses for me is they get what I imagine. The buzz for me is when I take the photo and it comes out how I wanted it, or better than I wanted it. When I TRULY capture something that I love, there is a sense of ecstasy and joy to a point that i feel like my heart skips a beat. Sounds weird but it is almost like a high, and every now and then I chases that high.

The problem is that to get that high again, the next photo needs to be better, if I get a similar shot, the same, I am happy but that initial rush from the first time isn't there so I am constantly chasing for new ideas, execution and moments that I have never captured before.

The lenses, manual, old, new, whatever, its a means to an end really.

If however the process is one that slows me down, even as a hobby, then I would get frustrated.
 
MartynK said:
I use a couple of old (1970s) Nikkors on my 30D occasionally, because I like them.
Click to expand...

Actual best reply! :D What other reason should we offer? once you enjoy using them, then it's only ever a good thing.

On focus assistance, I never use any peaking that newer cameras offer, I find it annoying at best. I use focus check on the Fuji, which is basically a digital crop in to show detail - I fine tune there and I get a decent keeper rate. I can pretty much get a sharp shot of a scene within seconds of switching the camera on if needed with any MF lens attached. I've shot birds in flight, insect macro - inc moving specimens, portraits, landscape and some street with old MF glass. Sure, I'll miss a few, but as mentioned by others, you allow yourself a little extra time, plan ahead more if needed and well, you're not using these older lenses for professional paid work ... you could, the quality is very much decent enough - but you probably won't be shooting pro sports :D [though photographers from the dawn of photography to the mid 80's managed just fine without AF]


Raymond Lin said:
If however the process is one that slows me down, even as a hobby, then I would get frustrated.
Click to expand...

It's definitely not for everyone. Just the same as certain types of photography aren't for all photographers. I have no interest in shooting sports, I hate shooting weddings or 'party' events, and I don't think I will ever spend time doing food photography! - then there's shooters who would never bother with what I like to shoot, like macro or arty close ups, nature/scenic or even portraits.
 
Last edited:
Lefrash said:
I've got an a6000 and I cam across a YouTube video that opened up a whole lot of fun for me! Adapting old glass using little dummy adapters. I went and bought an old minolta 28 f2. 8 and although it almost certainly not giving super sharp results (even withstanding the manual focus aspect) its absolutely brilliant fun! I then bought a 50mm f1. 7 for basically nothing, and that's great too! So much more play than what I get with the kit lens. I've now got a 300mm coming which I got for very little again, so I'm looking forward to that!

So who else does this? Anyone got any glass from yesteryear getting used for more than just a bit of cheap fun?

Fraser
Click to expand...

I have Minolta 28mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.7 and on my A7 they're pretty sharp.

I mostly use old film era lenses on my A7 via Novoflex adapters, my favorites are probably the Minolta Rokkors but I do like the Oly Zuiko 24 and 28mm f2.8's and 50mm f1.8 because they're so small and cute :D I also have some FD's.

The Sony thread is polluted with my old lens pictures :D

On MFT I often use a film era Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro.
 
I'm on the lookout for a nice 50-55mm 1.4 - 1.7, no rush to get it so I'm looking about for info. Seems there is a whole sheet tonne of 50mm vintage lenses, hard to narrow it down. Anyone ever used a Zenitar 50mm f/1.7? I also read some great things about the Minolta MD 35-70 f/3.5 'macro' - the constant aperture version. Apparently it was so good Leica made a copy of it. It's not a true macro, but apparently it does 1:2 ~ ish, which would be very impressive for a zoom. Could be tasty with ext tubes.
 
Last edited:
When I stuck my toe into DSLR, I bought a M42 adapter so I could use my M42 lenses for film cameras on the electric-picture-maker.
I subsequently expanded the lens set for the EPM with dedicated lenses for it, covering the range I had for film.
A-N-D pick up a film camera to use the 'legacy' lenses on.... If I have to 'faff' may as well do the job properly!
Adapted lenses are a mongrel.
On a smaller sensor MFT or APS-C sensor camera, a lot of the perceived IQ you get from a legacy lens is simply from the smaller format camera so heavily cropping the delivered image circle. More from the fact you actually have to set the focus properly yourself; you cant blame the electrickery! They often do deliver higher IQ results, as they often are higher grade bits of equipment than the made down to a more market-conscious price break, electric lens; but the crop-factor flatters them a lot, and diligence of using a manual lens even more.
And ultimately, a fast aperture prime on an electric-picture-maker may 'wow' with before unseen shallow focus effects; but its a one hit trick, and short changing yourself on what the lens MAY deliver on its native, larger format camera.. and if you enjoy the faff.. for the price of a petrol-station disposable you can probably pick up a roll of £-Land Agfa and a matching legacy body to go with legacy lens to get the full picture it was designed to deliver and the full-faff experience of using fully manual film camera, not just kidding yourself you are in control cos you twiddle the focus ring!
There you get the full manual 'experience' and get to see what the lens can really do when allowed to 'breath' on a slightly larger format, as far as those shallow focus effects go, and so much more..... A-N-D you don't struggle with everything but a fish-eye being made a telephoto thanks to the crop-factor.. you can actually get wide-angle views from the things!
It may be a bit of fun... but its horses for courses, and short changing yourself to a large degree in the process... lenses work so much better on the camera they were designed for.
If you like the convenience of digital, legacy lenses rob it. If you like the involvement of manual (film) cameras, the a digital and adapter isn't offering even all of that.
So... if you 'like' the Minolta manual lenses, my advice is to get a old Minolta and try them on that!
 
I shot film for years as a kid, I don't miss anything about it tbh. I don't really care about native, or I wouldn't be looking at old Zenitar or Pentax lenses, because I'm certainly never buying their old film bodies. That's a whole other hobby I don't have time for. All I want is a bit of relaxing, fun shooting, with some old lenses that have good character. I am not, nor never have been a purist. I'll get the best out of these old lenses on digital that I can, good enough for me.
 
Teflon-Mike said:
When I stuck my toe into DSLR, I bought a M42 adapter so I could use my M42 lenses for film cameras on the electric-picture-maker.
I subsequently expanded the lens set for the EPM with dedicated lenses for it, covering the range I had for film.
A-N-D pick up a film camera to use the 'legacy' lenses on.... If I have to 'faff' may as well do the job properly!
Adapted lenses are a mongrel...
Click to expand...

Mike, I have to disagree with much of what you've written there.

I have two formats, MFT and "FF" and I use manual lenses on both so for my A7 that's coming up to four years and for MFT longer. My own experience is that legacy lenses can perform well on MFT and even better on FF with the main issues relative to modern native lenses being sometimes a lack of sharpness but that may not always be noticeable and sometimes CA and / or other optical issues such as flaring, blooming and other stuff down to the design and coatings etc but these things may not be deal breakers and may be reduced or negated by stopping down or through the wizardry of post capture processing.

Besides technical considerations there's also character and look. I have old lenses which give character at wider apertures and once stopped down perform more like a modern lens so if I want sharpness across the frame I can have it and if I want character and look I can have it.

Obviously what you get depends on the lens but all I use is mass market Rokkors, Zuiko's and FD's which are relatively cheap and some of them perform well on MFT and better on my FF A7. One thing I like about some of these old lenses, apart from the fun and the inverse snobbery I get from using cheap old lenses, is the look that they can give and if I choose a lens for the look it gives choosing that lens may be the only way to get that look.

There are advantages to using old lenses other than the look and the fun. They have end stops and that's nice and they have markings too and these things are nice for things like zone and hyperfocal shooting and old lenses can offer a real and viable choice here as equivalent modern lenses with end stops and markings and nice manual focus may be expensive or alternatively quite cheap but also quite crappy.

Some modern lenses are simply outstanding and my Sony 55mm f1.8 for example just crushes any legacy 50mm I've used for technical excellence but it doesn't give the look I can get from an old Rokkor at wider apertures and if I want that look the old Rokkor is the lens I need to use.

Another thing old lenses offer is portability between systems, I can use my old lenses on my MFT or FF cameras or on anything else I might jump ship to in the future whereas if I had a large collection of native lenses I'd lave to sell them all and start again if moving to a different camera and mount.

And on "doing the job properly" as you put it by getting a film camera. Film is a faff and with it I'm limited to xx number of pictures and then I have to change the film and there's the issue of getting it developed and how I then get it on my pc and there's noise performance and the whole image quality thing. Personally I'm digital now. I did revisit film a few years back but it was only a brief return and I much prefer being able to take as many pictures as I want at any ISO I choose and I love being able to see the results as quickly as I can load them onto my pc and process them. The results I can get from my digital cameras are better than anything I ever got from film and for me for reasons of quality, hassle and everything else there's no going back :D

I'll probably always have some old manual lenses because of the pictures I can take with them that can't be easily replicated with modern lenses and also for the joy of using them :D
 
Err... you disagree I bought an electric picture maker, and an M42 adapter? ;-)

Elsewise, you aren't actually contradicting me; you are agreeing that legacy lenses are more faff... just expanding that you like that faff.... B-U-T... you have done the film thing, so you don't want ALL that faff... any-more.. but its still faff, and you aren't getting the full measure on an adapter, just the having to focus bit, and you get the full-frame experience using legacy lenses optimized for 24x36 on a 24x36 Full-Frame digi-sensor.... not the cheapest way to try it, I have to say... compared to a roll of pound-land vista, a £10 film camera and maybe £5 for D&P at ASDA! But hey-ho... that's your prerogative!

For some-one discovering all-manual photography via legacy lenses on adapter, on a small sensor camera, offered those shallow DoF effects from oft larger available apertures, offered opinion, they may well 'like' trying those legacy lenses on the legacy camera they were designed for, I think, still stands

Some-one with no legacy film experience, sticking a toe in the water of more involved 'faff' feuxtograffy and all manual operation, can, for very little outlay, get the entire unadulterated, uncompromised experience, by buying the film camera that matches the legacy lens they'd like to experiment with, for probably no more than cost of the adapter to put it on a digital, and get so much 'more' for the experience...

Whether that leads them to stick the film camera back on the shelf as 'too much faff' or leads them down the dark path of home developing, getting silly about scanning, chasing ultimate IQ via medium format, or whatever... matters little. Advice is that they are only getting a very small part of what these lenses might offer, on an adapter, and so sampling the real-deal of these lenses on their intended camera, whether they like the 'feel' or 'look' or the 'faff'... advice is to let the lens breath and find out for themselves by giving the legacy camera a go.. not dismissing it entirely just because you didn't appreciate it.

I still have the M42 adapter for my EPM, and do still put one of two of the M42 lenses on it; usually for stuff in the margins, like close up work, but unless I really 'need' the image in a rush, if I am using those lenses for the joy, I will pick up the M42 film camera, and take my time, which includes taking the time to change films, and/or be more discriminatory what I shoot and/or dropping the film in to 1hr process whilst I do my shopping, (to see the prints often quicker than I can clear down an SD card and see them on a bigger screen) or taking the time to home dev on the kitchen side (again, oft quicker to view than clearing a SD card!), on to whether to make a print under the enlarger, or to scan to PC, and myriad choices on that, what machine to use. etc etc etc..... Practically I can faff to my hearts content... or not... and the question of 'acceptable image quality' is largely academic. either medium deliver more than enough for pretty much all practical purposes!!

In the world of photo-graphical legacy, Halide Film, let alone 35mm film is still but such a tiny fraction! BUT its a doorway to a huge area of potential involvement and enjoyment. Legacy lenses COULD be a door to! I mean... it's not like I am suggesting that they should shun ALL commercial cameras and make their own large format plate camera from plywood, and start preparing wet plates f-gawds sake, to experience the 'full-faff and nothing but the faff' feuxtograffy!!
 
I have a number of vintage manual focus lenses. Some in M42 mount and some in OM mount. BUT I also have a film body for these (Pentax Spotmatic and Olympus OM20).
I have:
M42
35mm f2.8
55mm f1.8
135mm f2.8

OM:
24mm f2.8 macro
50mm f1.8 (x2)

M42 35mm f2.8 on Canon 60D
Vintage Citroen at Broadcasting House by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr

M42 55mm f1.8 on Canon 60D
Warm sunset by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr

OM 24mm f2.8 Macro on Canon 6D
Don't lose your marbles by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr

M42 fit Tamron Twin Tele 135mm f2.8 on Canon 6D
Devil's music by Alistair Beavis, on Flickr

I love having a play with them, they are good to push creativity and to make you think about composition a bit more.
The 35mm is good for street photography. The 24mm is good for a creative, unusual perspective.
I've tried them on my EOS-M10 too, which has focus peaking making life a bit easier.
 
c22w1 said:
Helios 44m-4 or 44-2. Which is the one to get?
Click to expand...

I had the 44-2, sold it recently but might buy again. That's the one to go for if you want the 'swirly' bokeh. The 44-4 will probably be a little sharper and won't have that swirly effect as later versions were corrected. Any of them will be sharp stopped down a little and they are great value portrait lenses.
 
Cagey75 said:
I had the 44-2, sold it recently but might buy again. That's the one to go for if you want the 'swirly' bokeh. The 44-4 will probably be a little sharper and won't have that swirly effect as later versions were corrected. Any of them will be sharp stopped down a little and they are great value portrait lenses.
Click to expand...
Is it worth paying double for? 44M-4 for £10 or 44-2 for £20? Both good condition
 
c22w1 said:
Is it worth paying double for? 44M-4 for £10 or 44-2 for £20? Both good condition
Click to expand...

I'd actually buy both for that if they're in good nick! I paid £50 for the 44-2 last year. Managed to sell it for same though, it was a very nice copy.
 
Cagey75 said:
I'd actually buy both for that if they're in good nick! I paid £50 for the 44-2 last year. Managed to sell it for same though, it was a very nice copy.
Click to expand...
Mmmm may do. Seems a bit greedy though to have both these and my fuji 18-55. Suppose I could put whichever I don't want on here for someone else to have an experiment with.
 
c22w1 said:
Mmmm may do. Seems a bit greedy though to have both these and my fuji 18-55. Suppose I could put whichever I don't want on here for someone else to have an experiment with.
Click to expand...
Look for a camera with one attached - it may be cheaper and you can sell the camera :)
 
c22w1 said:
Mmmm may do. Seems a bit greedy though to have both these and my fuji 18-55. Suppose I could put whichever I don't want on here for someone else to have an experiment with.
Click to expand...

If you only choose one I would get the 44-2. It's a little uglier on adapters because of the stepped down rear - where the 44-4 will fit flush, but for the added bonus of that playful bokeh when desired [it only happens at certain distance to subject + background] the 44-2 is worth it IMO.

Here's how it looks on an xpro1:

Helios by K G, on Flickr


It's also useful for macro with ext tubes, or reverse mounting it on the adapter.
 
Cagey75 said:
If you only choose one I would get the 44-2. It's a little uglier on adapters because of the stepped down rear - where the 44-4 will fit flush, but for the added bonus of that playful bokeh when desired [it only happens at certain distance to subject + background] the 44-2 is worth it IMO.

Here's how it looks on an xpro1:

Helios by K G, on Flickr


It's also useful for macro with ext tubes, or reverse mounting it on the adapter.
Click to expand...
That does look a little strange but it's the final image I'm after so I can live with it. [emoji106]
 
Or have a try with an Industar 50-2. It's about a 1/4 to a 1/3 the size of the Helios.
Next to a D80:
Industar 50-2 3.5 by Ken, on Flickr
 
I'm pondering over some 50mm variants myself, the Ricoh rokinon 50mm 1.7 is another one that gets very high ratings on MF review sites.
 
Helios 44M on a G80. Had just taken the Helios apart, cleaned it and put it back together again. I was only looking to confirm that I hadn't reversed any of the lenses/glass elements and took this very quick snap, probably at F4. Put through LR but very little done to it - probably toned down the pink a bit.

P1130250.jpg

I think my "love" of these old lenses has morphed into something approaching an obsession.
At last count I have 5 Zuiko OMs, 3 Prakticar/Zeiss Jena (including a soon to be repaied Flektogon), 5 Minolta MDs including 2 copies of the excellent 70-210 F4 and a couple of M42 fit lenses including this Helios and a Pentacon 135MM F2.8 (15 blade diaphragm).
Against that I have only one AF lens - a delightful Panasonic 25mm F1.7. Great VFM by the way.
Manual focus bothers me not one bit unless I'm taking photos of the grandchildren where I always revert to the AF lens.
Pretty much the only thing I dislike is the lack of EXIF info meaning that I have no real idea of my aperture setting (as per the above image).
 
There's a very long thread about the Helios 44 lens. It' worth having a read.....but you'll need quite a big of time!
 
goinggreynow said:
Helios 44M on a G80. Had just taken the Helios apart, cleaned it and put it back together again. I was only looking to confirm that I hadn't reversed any of the lenses/glass elements and took this very quick snap, probably at F4. Put through LR but very little done to it - probably toned down the pink a bit.

View attachment 114324

I think my "love" of these old lenses has morphed into something approaching an obsession.
At last count I have 5 Zuiko OMs, 3 Prakticar/Zeiss Jena (including a soon to be repaied Flektogon), 5 Minolta MDs including 2 copies of the excellent 70-210 F4 and a couple of M42 fit lenses including this Helios and a Pentacon 135MM F2.8 (15 blade diaphragm).
Against that I have only one AF lens - a delightful Panasonic 25mm F1.7. Great VFM by the way.
Manual focus bothers me not one bit unless I'm taking photos of the grandchildren where I always revert to the AF lens.
Pretty much the only thing I dislike is the lack of EXIF info meaning that I have no real idea of my aperture setting (as per the above image).
Click to expand...

Nice, the Helios is a great little lens for getting in close. I've used mine on extension tubes and you can get pretty close to 1:1, even more by reversing it onto the tubes [AF fuji tubes, 10mm + 16mm]

I just got that 25 1.7 Pany today, couldn't believe how small the box was :D still haven't a camera to attach it to yet, which is annoying, awaiting MPB to check my trade ins and send out my G80. I will definitely be adapting some nice primes to that.
 
Cagey75 said:
Nice, the Helios is a great little lens for getting in close. I've used mine on extension tubes and you can get pretty close to 1:1, even more by reversing it onto the tubes [AF fuji tubes, 10mm + 16mm]

I just got that 25 1.7 Pany today, couldn't believe how small the box was :D still haven't a camera to attach it to yet, which is annoying, awaiting MPB to check my trade ins and send out my G80. I will definitely be adapting some nice primes to that.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Have thought about extension tubes but haven't got round to doing anything yet. At the other end of the scale, I'm also considering a focal reducer/lens turbo type device to give a bit more width and an extra stop (or part stop) of light.

The Panasonic 25mm F1.7 is a great little lens. My only gripe is that it doesn't "feel" very substantial. That said, I think it is one of those lenses where the image quality acheived totally surpasses what you should realistically be able to expect from a lens costing this little (£150 or so new??).

Even though I'm considering trading my lens for the Panasonic/leica 25mm F1.4, I'm having a real problem justifying the additional spend, given the image quality I'm already getting.
 
Last edited:
goinggreynow said:
Thanks. Have thought about extension tubes but haven't got round to doing anything yet. At the other end of the scale, I'm also considering a focal reducer/lens turbo type device to give a bit more width and an extra stop (or part stop) of light.

The Panasonic 25mm F1.7 is a great little lens. My only gripe is that it doesn't "feel" very substantial. That said, I think it is one of those lenses where the image quality acheived totally surpasses what you should realistically be able to expect from a lens costing this little (£150 or so new??).
Click to expand...


If you are planning to buy ext rings, don't get the pricey Fuji ones, they will be much better built but the £20 'Each shot' ones i got on Amazon do precisely the same job, including maintaining AF with Fuji lenses when needed.

I got the 25mm for €109 [£96] as there's a deal for it atm in Connscameras [Dublin] - it is pretty much going to replace my fuji 35mm, while my Fuji for now will become my main MF lens body. I find manual focusing with it a cinch, even with the 200mm F4 Takumar I have. You definitely improve technique over time, the more you use these mf lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top