Which vintage lens mount has the best selection of lenses?

Tom Pinchenzo

Tom Pinchenzo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,025
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm looking at getting an adapter to use some vintage glass - my initial thoughts were M42. Is there any downsides here? Are there other mounts that have equal/better range of used lenses? Are there some mounts that have higher quality glass?
 
In my (limited) experience, results of converting M42 lenses to Fuji have resulted in "very average" results vs native Fuji glass. So if you're doing this for financial reasons, you can get some great bargains out there. But if you're doing it for quality reasons, (again IMO) it's not worth it.

"Best" probably needs mode definition. Best as in volume of lenses? (M42 probably wins this in a race with Nikon) or best in terms of quality? I love my 28/50 FD glass but it's still no comparison to normal Fuji lenses. The only adapter I have is Leica-M -> Fuji to use M mount lenses on Fuji X. Everything I've adapted has compared favourably to Fuji native stuff (50mm Summicron & Zeiss, 40mm Nokton, 28mm Summicron and 35mm Ultron).

At 50mm for example, I've tried a CZJ Pancolar 50mm f/1.8 (M42). I paid sub £100 for the zebra version. It was definitely ok. The 50mm Canon FD f/1.4 is a lovely lens. It's around £100, and again very ok. Canon EF wise, I've tried the "old faithful" 50mm f/1.8, f/1.4 and Sigma f/1.4 ART. I wouldn't bother adapting any of these mainly because at this price you may as well get native Fuji. The Fuji 50mm f/2 sells for about £300 second hand and is gorgeous, light, weather sealed and AF. Finally, the Leica Summicron 50mm f/2 is stupidly expensive, and totally not worth the price hike over native Fuji glass unless you need manual focus, a smaller footprint, or want-Leica. If I didn't have the money for a Fuji native 50, I'd get the Canon FD 50mm f/1.4. If I had £000s I'd get the Fuji 56. And I have no experience of LTM, Minolta/Sony, Nikon or any other thread mounts...

If you already have some existing lenses, then an adapter is a very cheap way to get access to a range of focal lengths. If I was starting out, I'd probably get an FD adapter because I have been really surprised by the quality of those lenses - especially at 28 & 50 which are my two primary focal lengths.
 
For precision you probably do need a modern lens. But they can be almost too perfect sometimes. Old lenses can be more interesting, and I have had some tremendous results from my Fuji 35mm 3.5. I suppose it all comes down to what you want to do.
 
Nikon probably have the widest range of quality optics, but older stuff falls behind modern lenses. Also consider Olympus and Minolta A mount, but avoid the consumer lenses in Minolta because they are absolute garbage.
 
What mount are you using at the moment?
You can get AF lenses for some mounts that are also "vintage".
Then what focal lengths are you after?
 
The M42 mounts were not all the same. There were small differences in both Fuji and genuine Olympus ones made to fit the Olympus FTL. It seems that they would work perfectly but the diaphragm stop down pin on the back was not long enough resulting in the lens not stopping down fully. I have also had 'iffy' results when using some Tamron Adaptall lenses on a Pentax Spotmatic. Again some were slightly over exposing.

As far as I am aware, apart from genuine (obviously) Pentax are fine, as well as Praktika, Pentacon, Hanimex branded lenses
 
Harlequin565 said:
In my (limited) experience, results of converting M42 lenses to Fuji have resulted in "very average" results vs native Fuji glass. So if you're doing this for financial reasons, you can get some great bargains out there. But if you're doing it for quality reasons, (again IMO) it's not worth it.

"Best" probably needs mode definition. Best as in volume of lenses? (M42 probably wins this in a race with Nikon) or best in terms of quality? I love my 28/50 FD glass but it's still no comparison to normal Fuji lenses. The only adapter I have is Leica-M -> Fuji to use M mount lenses on Fuji X. Everything I've adapted has compared favourably to Fuji native stuff (50mm Summicron & Zeiss, 40mm Nokton, 28mm Summicron and 35mm Ultron).

At 50mm for example, I've tried a CZJ Pancolar 50mm f/1.8 (M42). I paid sub £100 for the zebra version. It was definitely ok. The 50mm Canon FD f/1.4 is a lovely lens. It's around £100, and again very ok. Canon EF wise, I've tried the "old faithful" 50mm f/1.8, f/1.4 and Sigma f/1.4 ART. I wouldn't bother adapting any of these mainly because at this price you may as well get native Fuji. The Fuji 50mm f/2 sells for about £300 second hand and is gorgeous, light, weather sealed and AF. Finally, the Leica Summicron 50mm f/2 is stupidly expensive, and totally not worth the price hike over native Fuji glass unless you need manual focus, a smaller footprint, or want-Leica. If I didn't have the money for a Fuji native 50, I'd get the Canon FD 50mm f/1.4. If I had £000s I'd get the Fuji 56. And I have no experience of LTM, Minolta/Sony, Nikon or any other thread mounts...

If you already have some existing lenses, then an adapter is a very cheap way to get access to a range of focal lengths. If I was starting out, I'd probably get an FD adapter because I have been really surprised by the quality of those lenses - especially at 28 & 50 which are my two primary focal lengths.
Click to expand...

Most do it for a bit of variety, at least that's been the case with me personally. I have adapted vintage lenses to both M43 and Fuji, I would always have at least a couple AF lenses to hand but there's just something interesting, enjoyable, different to adapting old lenses. I've said it on here many times, part of the thrill is in the hunt, doing the research, looking up reviews on these old timers, then seeking out a nice copy. It can of course be very hit and miss, but you're never really losing out by much, unless you go very exotic in your hunts.

I have used many old lenses on Fuji and was often very satisfied with the results, sometimes there's specific FL that you just can't get native too, like the Carl Zeiss Jena 135 3.5 I had for a while, pleasing results, cannot be replicated by any native AF Fuji lens.

Just realised it was @THIRTYFIVEMILL sold me that lens (y) back in 2016 :)
 
Cagey75 said:
Most do it for a bit of variety, at least that's been the case with me personally. I have adapted vintage lenses to both M43 and Fuji, I would always have at least a couple AF lenses to hand but there's just something interesting, enjoyable, different to adapting old lenses. I've said it on here many times, part of the thrill is in the hunt, doing the research, looking up reviews on these old timers, then seeking out a nice copy. It can of course be very hit and miss, but you're never really losing out by much, unless you go very exotic in your hunts.

I have used many old lenses on Fuji and was often very satisfied with the results, sometimes there's specific FL that you just can't get native too, like the Carl Zeiss Jena 135 3.5 I had for a while, pleasing results, cannot be replicated by any native AF Fuji lens.

Just realised it was @THIRTYFIVEMILL sold me that lens (y) back in 2016 :)
Click to expand...

I did!! That was a lovely lens, too! I've just picked up a 135mm f/2.8 Vivitar Komine Nikon mount today. Looking forward to trying that one!
 
THIRTYFIVEMILL said:
I did!! That was a lovely lens, too! I've just picked up a 135mm f/2.8 Vivitar Komine Nikon mount today. Looking forward to trying that one!
Click to expand...

Aye it's one of few lenses I'm sorry I didn't hold on to, was a very nice copy indeed. But I chop and change a lot , or used to. Atm I just have the one camera and lens, though I do have that Nikon to Fuji adapter that is itching for something that'll make use of it! Trouble nowadays is buying from the UK is dodgy because of customs, real shame. And Irish sellers know this, so want the max they can squeeze out of you
 
Get a Pentax k adapter and an m42 to k adapter and then you'll have access to a huge range of lenses. I moved from Pentax to Fuji, but wanted to keep the use of some lenses (I also shoot film, so had lots to chose from!). I'm often surprised when I check the exif on a picture I like and find it's from an old lens. E.g. the Takumar 55mm f2 makes beautiful portraits.
 
Tom Pinchenzo said:
I'm looking at getting an adapter to use some vintage glass - my initial thoughts were M42. Is there any downsides here? Are there other mounts that have equal/better range of used lenses? Are there some mounts that have higher quality glass?
Click to expand...
When I started my journey into/with legacy lenses 4/5 years ago, I decided up front not to limit myself to just one lens mount. I glad I went this route. It’s enabled me to try lenses with the following mounts; Canon FD, Minolta SR (aka MD), Olympus OM, Konica AR, Pentax K, M42, Contax. I can even mount M42s on my Minolta adapters with an additional “P” adapter.

I appreciate that this means having multiple adapters, which in turn means; 1) additional costs and 2) additional bulk in the camera bag, but for me, these were acceptable trade-offs.

More recently - thanks to me being able to try out a wide variety of lenses and mounts - I have decided to reduce the number and concentrate on fewer mounts, but that/s only come about because of what I’ve managed to do over the last few years.

I do accept, though, that if someone already has a number of lenses in a particular mount (from film days), that there would be a natural tendency to concentrate on that mount.

Looking at previous comments re adapters, I too use mainly K&F.
 
And for what it’s worth, I have gradually reduced the number of Olympus OM Zuikos and Canon FDs in my collection. I now have more Minolta MDs than anything else.
 
M42 is a good place to start with lots of cheaper and some v good lenses available but you may wish to add more adapters as time goes on.

I also like K&F - I have tried some cheapies such as Pixco but most of them have been returned.

Are you using an aps-c camera ?

The reason I ask is because of the existence of focal reducers such as the Zhongyi Turbobooster 2’s - they recover almost the same angle of view as the native lens had on its slr body ( nb not possible to get one for RF lenses like Leica M ). They also give you a stop more light and may improve the resolution- think of tele converters in reverse.
I used one on my nex6 for some time. I chose a canon eos mount which, by adding an adapter to the front allowed me to mount olympus OK, nikon F ai, contax C/Y.

Not cheap ( 100-150 maybe ) but worked well for me.

If you want to use a lens with a shorter registration distance than the 44mm of canon ef, then you probably need a specific TB for that

briansmith.com

Ultimate Guide to Flange Focal Distance

Flange Focal Distance - also known as Flange Distance - is the distance from the camera's mounting flange to the film or sensor plane.
briansmith.com briansmith.com

ps brian smith is an adapter guru
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have Minolta Rokkor, Olympus Zuiko, Canon FD and Film era Nikon lenses and a few 3rd party lenses in those mounts. Of these the Minolta Rokkor MD's are usually the best where there's any difference. I suppose one possible exception is the Nikon AI-S 28mm f2.8. The Olympus Zuiko's and the early Nikon Nippon Kogaku's are nice and have their charms and are lovely to use but are maybe not optically the best.

I have several cheap adapters and some Novoflex which cost in the region of £80-100. The cheap ones generally do their job so I don't know if I'd recommend the likes of Novoflex but at least with the more expensive ones everything lines up and the lenses fit, always, whereas there may be a few niggles with the cheap ones such as my K&F Concept which works fine even though the mount markings don't quite line up.

Good luck choosing, and have fun :D
 
greyowl said:
The reason I ask is because of the existence of focal reducers such as the Zhongyi Turbobooster 2’s - they recover almost the same angle of view as the native lens had on its slr body ( nb not possible to get one for RF lenses like Leica M ).
Click to expand...
I have used, and owned, this exact same Focal Reducer. Sold it on when I moved from m43 to FF.
I got on really well with it and somewhere I think I have a few photos comparing the image using the FR to one without it. I seem to remember they were taken on a zoom lens and I re-zoomed to make up for the “change“ in FL.
If anyone would like me to dig them out, then I’ll see if I can find them.
 
goinggreynow said:
And for what it’s worth, I have gradually reduced the number of Olympus OM Zuikos and Canon FDs in my collection. I now have more Minolta MDs than anything else.
Click to expand...
I’ve been thinking about the Minolta SR mount. What made you stick with Minolta over other stuff?
 
I would say M42 or Minolta MD, they seem to be the more common vintage lenses with decent range I come across when searching, Canon FD also.
 
Tom Pinchenzo said:
I’ve been thinking about the Minolta SR mount. What made you stick with Minolta over other stuff?
Click to expand...
it was a case of playing the numbers game, really.
Early on when I started purchasing old lenses, I managed to secure an outfit comprising 28mm, 50mm F1.4 and my 70-210. Shortly after, I acquired my 35-70 (absolute belter of a lens).
Although I was purchasing other lenses on a fairly selective basis, before I knew where I was I had 5 or 6 Minoltas and they were the predominant make in my collection.
When I started to reduce the numbers, there were individual lenses which I decided “never” to sell but so that I had a manageable number, I had to decide to reduce the Zuikos, Canon FDs or Minoltas. It was almost “toss of a coin” but in the end the Minoltas won out. Along the way, I did some A/B testing to help the decision.
I’m now left with lenses from several manufacturers but predominantly Minolta MDs (never purchased any of the older MC versions).
 
There seems to be a shortage of good M42 lenses, I mean ones that come from the camera manufacturers. Looking at the website of Mr Cad who has probably largest selection of junk screw thread lenses in the country very few are from the likes of Pentax or Pentacon (Zeiss). Other ones seem to be mostly clones manufactured in the far east, some probably very good, some will be atrocious!

His stock of Minolta fitting lenses is quite good with a larger proportion of what he has for sale either MC or MD genuine Minolta fitting. Then there is the likes of Tamron, they are usually good, Recently I bought a 90mm macro (1-2) with an extension tube so it would go to 1-1 and apart from looking a bit scruffy, the optics are fine. I would dearly love a 20mm F2.8 MD but they are rarer than hens teeth.

Top of the list are those for Nikon both genuine and after market.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't quite understand that. There always seems to be a good number of Pentax or Pentacon lenses on e.bay.
 
Probably it is easier to put it on line than pack a lens up and send it to a dealers (Mr Cad) and get daft price for it. With E Bay you are in with a chance that someone as daft as Mr cad, but the other way round, will pay a better price,
 
Cagey75 said:
Aye it's one of few lenses I'm sorry I didn't hold on to, was a very nice copy indeed. But I chop and change a lot , or used to. Atm I just have the one camera and lens, though I do have that Nikon to Fuji adapter that is itching for something that'll make use of it! Trouble nowadays is buying from the UK is dodgy because of customs, real shame. And Irish sellers know this, so want the max they can squeeze out of you
Click to expand...

I just picked up another one of these today. :p
 
darkroom12 said:
Probably it is easier to put it on line than pack a lens up and send it to a dealers (Mr Cad) and get daft price for it. With E Bay you are in with a chance that someone as daft as Mr cad, but the other way round, will pay a better price,
Click to expand...
I find on eBay, you tend to get what it’s worth in terms of buying and selling. You can get really good deals if you’re patient and sell on for at least as much as you bought for. With dealers MPB etc. you always buy above the odds and get below the odds. But that’s how they make their money. Generally you can find new gear on e-infinity for the same price as they’re going for used on MPB.
 
Can Any one recommend an adaptor for Tamron Adaptil lens, in particular the Nikon mount. I have a K&F one which is fine with a standard lens but is causing the aperture ring to be inoperable. It looks to be to tight.
 
I don't quite understand your question. A Tamron Adaptall lens will/should only work with the appropriate adapter for a particular camera. What is a 'K&F' adapter, am I missing something here?

The only problem I can see may be you are trying to use a non AI lens with and adapter fitting it onto an AI or AIS body. Or the adapter you are using is not fitted correctly - they can be tricky. A Tamron adapter is quite a complicated piece of engineering considering they can get any of the Adaptall lenses to work on the vast majority of cameras without too much difficulty they have to be precise..

The only adapter I would recommend is a genuine Tamron one.
 
K&F are a manufacturer of things including lens to body adapters.

K&F Concept: Professional Photography Accessories

K&F Concept offers the widest range of photography and videography accessories, including camera tripods, camera lens filters, camera bags, trail cameras, surveillance cameras, and other must-have accessories for photographers and filmmakers.
www.kentfaith.com www.kentfaith.com
 
Last edited:
darkroom12 said:
I don't quite understand your question. A Tamron Adaptall lens will/should only work with the appropriate adapter for a particular camera. What is a 'K&F' adapter, am I missing something here?

The only problem I can see may be you are trying to use a non AI lens with and adapter fitting it onto an AI or AIS body. Or the adapter you are using is not fitted correctly - they can be tricky. A Tamron adapter is quite a complicated piece of engineering considering they can get any of the Adaptall lenses to work on the vast majority of cameras without too much difficulty they have to be precise..

The only adapter I would recommend is a genuine Tamron one.
Click to expand...
Im adapting a Tamron 90mm Adaptil lens to a fuji camera. The Lens has the Adaptil Nikon fitment. In order to use the lens on a fuji camera I need a lens to body adaptor - Nikon to Fuji. The K&F one i have is binding the aperture ring on the adaptil part of the lens.

The adaptil part has 2 slots that 2 tabs from the aperture ring on the lens slot into. This then has 2 black parts on the bottom of the adaptil mount which rotate when the aperture ring rotates, these are being prevented from doing so by the adaptor I have, therefore i need a diferent one so asking for recommendation
 
Cuchulainn said:
Get a Pentax k adapter and an m42 to k adapter and then you'll have access to a huge range of lenses. I moved from Pentax to Fuji, but wanted to keep the use of some lenses (I also shoot film, so had lots to chose from!). I'm often surprised when I check the exif on a picture I like and find it's from an old lens. E.g. the Takumar 55mm f2 makes beautiful portraits.
Click to expand...
Having come from Pentax, this was the obvious route for me (I had both PK & M42 lenses aplenty before getting a mirrorless) M42 is very limited when it comes to wide lenses, and the slightly newer PK lenses help if that's something you want to play with as well as simple doubling the range of lenses available.
One advantage M42 does have is there are M42 adapters built with built in helicoids these allow normal focusing but have a second focusing ring to add extra extension allowing lenses to focus closer than the normally would. Helicoids seem to be much less common for any of the bayonet mounts, possible as the machining is more complicated.
 
AgentOrange76 said:
Im adapting a Tamron 90mm Adaptil lens to a fuji camera. The Lens has the Adaptil Nikon fitment. In order to use the lens on a fuji camera I need a lens to body adaptor - Nikon to Fuji. The K&F one i have is binding the aperture ring on the adaptil part of the lens.

The adaptil part has 2 slots that 2 tabs from the aperture ring on the lens slot into. This then has 2 black parts on the bottom of the adaptil mount which rotate when the aperture ring rotates, these are being prevented from doing so by the adaptor I have, therefore i need a diferent one so asking for recommendation
Click to expand...
Tamron never made adapters for mirrorless bodies as they simply didn't exist while the adaptall range of lenses was being made. If adapting to mirrorless bodies there is no need of the complex linkages many of the adaptall mounts had since the mirrorless cameras won't make use of these linkages anyway. I don't know if 3rd party adapters are made for Fuji, but I think they are now being made going directly to most mirrorless mounts.
I use PK, M42 & OM adapters for my Adaptall lenses partly because they are the mounts the lenses came with & I already have adapters for those mounts for each of my mirrorless cameras. I do occasionally still use my Pentax DSLRs so having the ability to use PKA adapters is also an advantage.
 
If the adapter is designed (I think you mentioned Nikon) then buy a Nikon adapter, they are still plentiful second hand. Using some lash-up that doesn't work properly may damage either or both your lens or camera. If you bought it expecting it to work with different lenses and it doesn't, ask for your money back.
 
Petrochemist said:
Having come from Pentax, this was the obvious route for me (I had both PK & M42 lenses aplenty before getting a mirrorless) M42 is very limited when it comes to wide lenses, and the slightly newer PK lenses help if that's something you want to play with as well as simple doubling the range of lenses available.
One advantage M42 does have is there are M42 adapters built with built in helicoids these allow normal focusing but have a second focusing ring to add extra extension allowing lenses to focus closer than the normally would. Helicoids seem to be much less common for any of the bayonet mounts, possible as the machining is more complicated.
Click to expand...

C/Y comes in helicoid (y)
 
LeeRatters said:
C/Y comes in helicoid (y)
Click to expand...
Yes there are others, I have a MFT to EF model, and have seen references to old PK to PK versions.
When checking e-bay I've only found one length range for the EF models, yet have seen a range of six or so M42 models going from 10-17mm long right up to 36-90mm long, and then others with M42 at the camera end & m52, m58, or m65 threads at the other end...
 
Guys thanks for all the replies, but you are all missing the point. Im fully aware of when the lens was made and what it is/works

To use a vintage lens fits on a mirrorless body you need a "Lens to Body" adaptor.
I have two of these - one for Minolta MD mount lens and one for Nikon mount lens, both are made by K&F concept. Both work perfectly fine with standard lens mounts.

I have a Vivitar 55mm Nikon mount vintage lens, this fits perfectly onto the Nikon "Lens to Body" adaptor.

The Tamron 90mm Adaptil lens has a detachable "Adaptil" section that makes it fit a Nikon mount camera. This be exactly the same as the mount on the Vivitar but it is not fitting the above mentioned Nikon "Lens to Body" adaptor correctly.

So what I need is a recommendation of an alternative manufacturer of a "Lens to Body" adaptor that they have used with a Tamron Adaptil lens with the Nikon fitment with out an issue.
 
AgentOrange76 said:
Guys thanks for all the replies, but you are all missing the point. Im fully aware of when the lens was made and what it is/works

To use a vintage lens fits on a mirrorless body you need a "Lens to Body" adaptor.
I have two of these - one for Minolta MD mount lens and one for Nikon mount lens, both are made by K&F concept. Both work perfectly fine with standard lens mounts.

I have a Vivitar 55mm Nikon mount vintage lens, this fits perfectly onto the Nikon "Lens to Body" adaptor.

The Tamron 90mm Adaptil lens has a detachable "Adaptil" section that makes it fit a Nikon mount camera. This be exactly the same as the mount on the Vivitar but it is not fitting the above mentioned Nikon "Lens to Body" adaptor correctly.

So what I need is a recommendation of an alternative manufacturer of a "Lens to Body" adaptor that they have used with a Tamron Adaptil lens with the Nikon fitment with out an issue.
Click to expand...
I think you mean Adaptall. There were various versions of this. I think Adaptall 2 is the most common - details for the various systems here:

Tamron Adaptall-2 lenses | Adaptall-2.com

A web resource providing information about vintage Tamron non-AF lenses.
www.adaptall-2.com

Why not take the Nikon mount off and use a direct Adaptall 2 (if that is what you have) to Fuji adapter? There's some discussion here of the various options and potential pitfalls:

www.fujix-forum.com

Tamron Adaptall to Fuji FX

I have the following Tamron Adaptall lenses, 17mm, 24mm, 28mm and 90mm, which I've been using with my Pentax kit. I've come across this adaptor which would seem to do away with the need for using an Adaptall mount plus a Pentax K to Fuji FX converter. K&F Concept Lens Mount Adapter for Tamron...
www.fujix-forum.com www.fujix-forum.com

Someone mentions successfully using a Tamron 90/f2.8 Macro with a Fotodiox Adaptall to Fuji adapter. I can see one listed here:

fotodioxpro.com

Tamron Adaptall SLR Lens to Fujifilm X-Series (FX) Mount Camera Body Adapter

This adapter allows Tamron Adaptall SLR mount lenses to fit on Fujifilm X-Series (FX) System camera bodies
fotodioxpro.com fotodioxpro.com
 
Last edited:
Thanks and yes I do, it’s a Freudian slip as adaptil is a dog product we sell.
I often write Aston Martyn as it’s how my dads name is spelt.

that’s very helpful. Looks like in those posts the adaptor needed some additional material mine needs some removed. I’ll try a fotodiox one and see how I get on

thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top