kokoshawnuff
Alex
Unfortunately I haven't taken it out to shoot much, but a few shots around the house have been promising.
Canon 135 LTM (black), portra 400, $65
Canon 135 LTM (black), portra 400, $65
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
I'll be restricting myself to lenses for which I've paid less than $100.
Helios-40 85/f1.5
Second version in aluminum body with rotating tripod collar in M39 SLR mount
With an M39-M42 and M42-Nikon adapter on a F2AS
$70 in 2008
EDIT: Seems to have undergone a ridiculous price hike and now sells for $500ish! Forget about this being a budget lens.
Jupiter-12 35/f2.8
Kiev/Contax mount on a 1949 Kiev
Flares like hell but gives beautiful rendition when it doesn't
$25
Jupiter-3 50/f1.5, early KMZ version, in LTM mount
On a Leica M5
$60
Would now probably not qualify as a budget lens any more
My standard "50" on the Leica
Helios-40 85/f1.5
Second version in aluminum body with rotating tripod collar in M39 SLR mount
With an M39-M42 and M42-Nikon adapter on a F2AS
$70 in 2008
EDIT: Seems to have undergone a ridiculous price hike and now sells for $500ish! Forget about this being a budget lens.
Jupiter-12 35/f2.8
Kiev/Contax mount on a 1949 Kiev
Flares like hell but gives beautiful rendition when it doesn't
$25
Jupiter-3 50/f1.5, early KMZ version, in LTM mount
On a Leica M5
$60
Would now probably not qualify as a budget lens any more
My standard "50" on the Leica
kokoshawnuff
Alex
I'll be restricting myself to lenses for which I've paid less than $100.
Helios-40 85/f1.5
Second version in aluminum body with rotating tripod collar in M39 SLR mount
With an M39-M42 and M42-Nikon adapter on a F2AS
$70
Very nice. A quick look on eBay shows chrome versions from the early 60s going in the $400-$600 range
Brian Legge
Veteran
A bunch of us who got into these cameras late really miss the days some of these lenses were deals.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
I bought mine on a flea market three years ago, together with the leather case, M39-M42 adapter and everything. I haven't looked at the prices for them in a while but those seem absolutely crazy - moreover since people actually seem to be buying them at that price!! I guess I should remove it from this "budget glass" thread.
kokoshawnuff
Alex
If you got it for the price you did I'm sure there are others to be found well below the inflated eBay prices...we just have to look harder and be patient
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
My current favorite underdog is the Mamiya Sekor CS 200/3.5.
I am blown away with anything this lens produces so far:
I am blown away with anything this lens produces so far:
-doomed-
film is exciting
On my DSLR's I love my AF Nikon 70-210 F4 that I snagged for $120.00. It's a fairly compact zoom that produces fantastic results throughout the F-stop and zoom range.
Here it is at 110mm @ F5.6
Here it is at 110mm @ F5.6
sparrow6224
Well-known
The Zuiko 42mm f/1.7 attached to my Olympus 35 SP. Fantastic. I paid $30 for it.
One of the sharpest lenses I own -- I think it's THE sharpest among my SLR lenses -- is the MD Rokkor X 24mm f/2.8. I paid about $90 for it but they go for a bit more now. You'll notice that this lens, the Nikon, and the above-discussed Sigma were all basically super close on the photodo comparison. Everyone else was noticeably behind. I was very very surprised at the Nikon because I've had two versions and both were dull. Might have had some haze or something....
The Nikon AI 50mm f/2. Same optics as the non-Ai one mentioned above. $49. To my eye it is sharper than the f/1.8 and is the sharpest 50 Nikon has made for the SLRs -- there is also just a richness and depth to it that can't be described.
I second -- I eighth -- everyone on the SMC Takumar 50/1.4 -- astounding. They're going for over $100 now because people like us keep talking about them. HOW do you couple a Pentax-M lens to a Leica rangefinder??????
Canon FD SSC 50/1.4 -- very rich and very sharp and I got it for $75.
But sticking to the 50s is unfair -- as someone said, most mfr's have a very good one.
How about zooms? The Minolta MD 70-210 f/4 and the Nikon Ai 80-200 f/4.5 -- both incredible, both can be had well under $100. Both companies also make Solingen-sharp and rich color-ed 200mm f/4's that can had for a song.
Finally the Jupiter 9 (?) -- the 35/2.8 Biogon knock off with the perilous looking rear end -- is amazing. And one more 50 for the RF that was availble for about $100 a few years ago: the LTM Canon 50mm f/1.8. It's tiny. It's incredibly good.
One of the sharpest lenses I own -- I think it's THE sharpest among my SLR lenses -- is the MD Rokkor X 24mm f/2.8. I paid about $90 for it but they go for a bit more now. You'll notice that this lens, the Nikon, and the above-discussed Sigma were all basically super close on the photodo comparison. Everyone else was noticeably behind. I was very very surprised at the Nikon because I've had two versions and both were dull. Might have had some haze or something....
The Nikon AI 50mm f/2. Same optics as the non-Ai one mentioned above. $49. To my eye it is sharper than the f/1.8 and is the sharpest 50 Nikon has made for the SLRs -- there is also just a richness and depth to it that can't be described.
I second -- I eighth -- everyone on the SMC Takumar 50/1.4 -- astounding. They're going for over $100 now because people like us keep talking about them. HOW do you couple a Pentax-M lens to a Leica rangefinder??????
Canon FD SSC 50/1.4 -- very rich and very sharp and I got it for $75.
But sticking to the 50s is unfair -- as someone said, most mfr's have a very good one.
How about zooms? The Minolta MD 70-210 f/4 and the Nikon Ai 80-200 f/4.5 -- both incredible, both can be had well under $100. Both companies also make Solingen-sharp and rich color-ed 200mm f/4's that can had for a song.
Finally the Jupiter 9 (?) -- the 35/2.8 Biogon knock off with the perilous looking rear end -- is amazing. And one more 50 for the RF that was availble for about $100 a few years ago: the LTM Canon 50mm f/1.8. It's tiny. It's incredibly good.
sparrow6224
Well-known
Perhaps that 35/2.8 Jupiter is called the Jupiter 12? I can't remember.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
kanzlr
Hexaneur
correct, the late Minolta MD 200/4 is an astonishing lens that can be had sub 100.
it is sharp wide open, has great colors and contrast and doubles as a 300ish lens on my GXR
it is sharp wide open, has great colors and contrast and doubles as a 300ish lens on my GXR
David Hughes
David Hughes
Using Leica as a yardstick is a little dangerous IMO ... we need to stay connected to reality here!
Hmmmm, but think of it as cost per year and per film and Leicas become a bargain. When I bought my CL there were just three new ones on sale in London and one second-hand (at Fox Talbot in TCRd). I bought the SH one and put the savings towards the 90mm f/4. It took a couple of week's spending my lunch time hunting for them but it paid off.
Regards, David
sparrow6224
Well-known
It has emerged as a general consensus that the lenses we are most interested in are those that cost $~100 or less. We can leave aside the old arguments about Leica pricing/Leica value versus this that or the other. We're talking CHEAP. Budget is the nice word.
Greyscale
Veteran
This is my newest budget find
MC Rokkor - PG 50/1.4 by Greyscale3, on Flickr
$15, and it came with five cameras and a Minolta AF 35-70 3.5/4.5 lens.
Now, all that I need is a body to hang it on.
I've heard that Rokkor glass is a bargain, but this is ridiculous.
MC Rokkor - PG 50/1.4 by Greyscale3, on Flickr
$15, and it came with five cameras and a Minolta AF 35-70 3.5/4.5 lens.
Now, all that I need is a body to hang it on.
I've heard that Rokkor glass is a bargain, but this is ridiculous.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
That IS ridiculous! I'm on a hunt for the 58/1.2, even though I have no Minolta body ...
sparrow6224
Well-known
If you had the 58/1.2 you'd get yourself a minolta body right quick. They're easy to find. I recommend the XD-11, XE-7 or the X-570, roughly in that order. The much loved SRT101/102/201/202 series are muscular but to my hand and eye, clunky. If you're patient, any of these could be had for $50.
sparrow6224
Well-known
You won't find the 58/1.2 at a "budget" price however.
Steve M.
Veteran
Both of my 2 remaining lenses are budget lenses. The 1st is a non AI HC 50 2.0 Nikkor. Not a Summicron, but it has a beautiful way of handling light, and I have maybe $65 in it, w/ another $13 for an adapter to use it on my AE-1P.
The other is a Canon FD SSC 85 1.8 BL. Lots of dust internally, loose focus, beat up as can be. Makes beautiful portraits w/ butter smooth bokeh. It was $110 w/ the Canon hood, but it looks like they sell for over twice that in better condition.
The other is a Canon FD SSC 85 1.8 BL. Lots of dust internally, loose focus, beat up as can be. Makes beautiful portraits w/ butter smooth bokeh. It was $110 w/ the Canon hood, but it looks like they sell for over twice that in better condition.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Series E version -- even cheaper and every bit as good.