Cheap Lens Recommendation

B

bevels

Member
Local time
4:12 AM
Joined
Apr 16, 2009
Messages
17
View My Gallery
Hi Everyone,

My trusty Nikon FE2 which I use for street photography has finally decided to give up the game and I'm about to list one of my Minolta scanners to fund a cheap camera and lens purchase. I would've just replaced the FE2 as secondhand FE/FM2's can be had sub $200 which is a complete steal... however, my curiosity got the better of me and I made a trip into a camera shop while shooting on the street the other day to try on a Leica M6 and a Bessa R and now I want a rangefinder 😎

I was going to wait until I could properly afford a top condition M6 and 35mm Summicron before I made the jump to rangefinders, but with the death of the FE2 I thought I may as well take a nice cheap setup for a test drive before I lay down the big bucks.

Sorry for the rant, my question.. I'd just like some advice on a really cheap M mount RF setup. A cheap Bessa body is likely going to be the best option I guess, I'd like something with an equivilent .72 finder so when I move up to an M6 I'm already acquainted. I really only use the 50 and 35mm focal lengths and from what I've read the .72 is probably well suited??

The lens decision is less clear cut, any advice on a super cheap 35/40/50mm M mount lens would be good. It doesn't have to be a great performer, just something cheap and cheerful to get me by for now.

Thanks very much.

Benjamin.
 
The 0.72x finder is well suited for 35 and 50. The framelines for the 50 have plenty of margin, and no problems focusing a 50/1.4. I have an M2.

For good, cheap 35mm lenses- the Canon 35/2.8 and 35/2 would be my choice.
 
You can look for m4-p or m4-2 since they have the 50/35 framelines, maybe you have to scout eBay or RFF classifieds on regular basis to find steal deal. As for the lens, the canon 35mm f2 in LTM is very good, both in construction and optics, but they are quite hard to find these days, the Summaron in LTM also quite affordable
 
Nothing wrong with Bessa (have an R4A), but the absolutely best and brightest finder is the Zeiss Ikon's finder, which seem to work just fine with my 35mm and 50mm. That would be my first choice if I could find a good price. I suspect that the Ikon and Bessa share many of the same parts. The M6 shutters are smoother and quieter, but the Ikon is first rate. You might also look for an M2. User M2s can be had for a good price.

Zeiss lenses are cheaper than Leica and are a great value, but Voigtländer provides the best value with little money invested. Of course much to be found on the used market
 
There's often a good reason why cheap lenses are cheap: they're just not as good as expensive lenses. Personally, I'd back a modern Voigtländer 35/2,5 Color-Skopar against almost any lens from 40+ years ago, even if the ancient lens were in as-new condition (and many aren't).

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
Hi Benjamin,

It all depends on how much you want to spend...

For one camera/one lens I would buy a Bessa R3M and a Voigtländer 40 1.4, for a bit less than $1000. That's great and very cheap for M mount camera and lens... If you want autoexposure apart from metered manual, there's a used R3A right now for $469 at cameraquest.com... That's a very good price... You could get it before it goes away, and then think a bit about the lens...

Cheers,

Juan
 
Last edited:
Nice one guys thanks for the replies. I hadn't even considered the Canon lenses as an option. I'll do a bit of research on LTM lenses I guess and see where that leads me.
 
Cheap?

I50 50/3.5
J12 35/2.8

Beyond that, it's not cheap anymore.

William
 
I can't keep up.. there about four replies before I managed to get mine out!! Busy forum.

Point noted Roger, I'll keep my eyes peeled for a cheap used 35 skopar.

@Juan - Pretty much as cheap as I can get away with. Quality isn't really an issue for this purchase as I will eventually go gourmet with an M6 and Summicron. That being said, I'm not just after the absolute cheapest disregarding quality altogther, I'll happily pay $200 for an old Canon or Voigtlander over a $150 russian lens that produces images similar to the bottom end of a jam jar 😉

@bwcolor - Thanks for the advice but the Ikon's out of the price bracket of this purchase. I could buy an M4 or even a well used M6 for the price of an Ikon. This is just a cheap replacement for my FE2. Thanks for mentioning it though.
 
Ifyou want really cheap, try to find a used Bessa R and a Canon LTM 50/1.8 or the Color-Skopar 35/2.5 in LTM (or both). Even if the Bessa R isn't M mount.
 
Bought a used Voigtländer 35/2,5 Color-Skopar in mint condition from cameraquest for 218.00 and a Canon 7 with its great finder for 35mm and 50mm lens from KEH.com for 160.00 you cant beat a setup like that for under 400 bucks Buy a jupitar 8 50mm or a I-61LD for another 30 bucks and you will have a set up that with produce images of very high quality almost as good as the leica glass, at a tenth of the cost and that I-61LD is such a sharp lens and such a great deal!!!!!!!!!! Good luck hunting!!!!!!!!!!! -Kievman P.S but if you go the above mentioned route you can't be a Leica snob ....... Oh thats too bad...........................
 
Well gents that was too easy. I guess I'll be buying a Bessa R and the 35 Skopar. I'll also hunt around for a good cheap deal on a Canon 50 or even the voigtlander 50 skopar.

Thanks so much for all the great info, it complimented my research nicely and made the decision that much easier.

@kievman - That I-61LD is absolutely brilliant for the price!!!

B.
 
Hard to beat a I-61 LD for pennies spent.....

Hard to beat a I-61 LD for pennies spent.....

Bevel I bought 2 I-61LDs on evilbay for the princely sum of 19 an 23 bucks including shipping (newer ones and both are quite sharp wide open, stop them down a stop or two and they are very crisp the I-50 is quite sharp too as one came on my late Zorki 4s with a custom brown sheepskin upgrade. I got on the bay for 85 bucks, but the I-50s take a odd filter siize which I cant figure out quite yet, I think 37mm but I am not sure. The 61' s take 40.5 filters and are easy to find. The 61's are F2.8, the I-50s are F3.5 and that half a stop makes a big difference in low light!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dont overlook the Jupitar 8s either the bokeh you get from a sonnar design of a Juptar 8 is stellar!!!!!!!!!!! and there is really nothing as pleasant out there (see the many Brian Sweeney threads on the subject and you will want one Bad!!), plus they are cheap in LTM and with a M adapter you can use them on a Leica M6. but dont let the leica snobs see you doing this!!!!!!!!!!! THey might try to string you up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (hang you) 😀 -Kievman
 
Roger Hicks said:
There's often a good reason why cheap lenses are cheap: they're just not as good as expensive lenses. Personally, I'd back a modern Voigtländer 35/2,5 Color-Skopar against almost any lens from 40+ years ago, even if the ancient lens were in as-new condition (and many aren't).

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

True, unless you find a lens for sale that is misrepresented by the seller.

I shoot a Komura 35/3.5 and it cost next to nothing on eBay. People mistake it for an enlargement lens and miss the distance scale, it seems. That lens was also made by Acall, the Kyoei 35/3.5. There's also a 35/2.8 version and even a 28/3.5, but that one is collectable.

A complete list of Komura and Acall lenses (and other brand names) is here

Komura in the 1960s was the price fighter equivalent of Voigtlander today, so if unable to find a cheap great-quality lens, I'd go that way.

Finally, the Komura lens I shoot is really sharp!

just my 2 cents.
 
Dear Johan,

That's why I was careful to say 'often'. Sure, bargains come up, and there are underrated lenses. But if lens A is reasonably common, and so is lens B, and one is normally significantly cheaper than the other despite superficially similar specifications, then generally there's a good reason why it's cheaper. And it ain't just snobbery, which normally accounts for inflated prices on inferior, old lenses rather than depressed prices on oldies-but-goodies. I would far rather have a 35/2,5 Color-Skopar than either a 35/2.8 FSU or a 35/3.5 Summaron, simply because they're nothing like as good as the Color Skopar, regardless of who made them.

Perhaps needless to say, I've owned and used all three. I have had two Summarons because there wasn't much other choice in the UK at the time, at least among lenses I could afford, and I've lost count of the number of FSU 35/2.8 lenses I've had, which normally came in as part of a package deal.

Cheers,

R.
 
> advice on a super cheap 35/40/50mm M mount lens

We love to talk about lower-cost lens options here. I zeroed in on the term "super-cheap" again. Again, a term that is subjective. I place $100 as a max on "really cheap". Others would call it $500, and some would call it $20.

When I worked in a camera shop, my two questions were "What kind of pictures do you like to take, and what is your budget".

The OP likes street photography. Lens will be stopped down for hyperfocal, probably F5.6~F11 will get used a lot. So stopping down "is the great equalizer" of lenses. (I just felt like dropping a phrase in here, really should be "makes things better for most lenses" )

The J-12 has issues with flare, I know from using it. The I-50 is compact and collapses, but might be a problem on a Bessa. It is safe to collapse a Summicron on an R2- not sure about anything else. The FSU lenses often need to be shimmed, especially for wide-open and close-up work. The I-61 focus mount is not as nicely machined as the all-brass collapsibe I-50. The I-50 that I own is equal to the coated 50/3.5 Elmar that I have owned for 20 years.
 
How about one of the brand new Industar 61L/D's that are on eBay? A 50 mm posted for Au $40. Now that's super cheap. I'd imagine that, stopped down it wouldn't anything less than great. Or that the f2.8 depth of field wouldn't cover any focusing variables at 1m. Should be great for street photos. Just add Bessa R and start snapping.
 
Brian you make a solid point in regards to the intended use of the lens.. 90% of the time my lens stays hyperfocused @ f/11, I never ever shoot wider than f/5.6 on the street. So the consideration would not be for a lens that performs admirably wide open but instead doesn't suffer terribly from diffraction stopped down.

Ideally I'd love a 50mm lens that peaks at f/11 - f/16 but this just doesn't happen... does it??

For a 35mm lens I'd almost never take it off f/11 which is a pretty easy ask of any lens really.

@buzzardkit - Thanks for the info on Komura and Acall lenses, I'll definitely have a look into them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Leica M3 Lens issue
Replies
16
Views
1K
Richard G
Richard G
kxl
Considering my first Leica M body (film)
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
2K
rfaspen
rfaspen
J
Lens suggestions for Epson rd1
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Coldkennels
Coldkennels
A
Nikon SP holder for eyecorrection
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Alpsman
A
mackigator
Cheap point and shoot camera for kid going to summer camp
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
6K
wlewisiii
W
Back
Top Bottom