Harry Lime
Practitioner
The manual focus Tamron 90/2.5 macro lens is one of my alltime favorite short tele lenses. It is a very sharp lens.
.
Oooh, totally forgot about that one. I've never actually shot one myself, but everyone I know who has raves about it.
raid
Dad Photographer
The Tamron "killed" my Canon 100/4 macro lens. I never used the Canon again after having used the Tamron.

raid
Dad Photographer
I used a cheap Schneider Xenar 180mm lens on a Canon T90:

raid
Dad Photographer
Steinheil 80/2.8 $40:

Sparrow
Veteran
Steinheil 80/2.8 $40:
That's a lovely photo Raid
raid
Dad Photographer
Thank you, Stewart. I am so glad that Dana was my model for hundreds similar photos when I did my marathon 50m lens comparions, follwed by wide angle lenses and tele lenses.
The Steinheil has a cool color rendition. I forgot if it is 80mm or 85mm.
The Steinheil has a cool color rendition. I forgot if it is 80mm or 85mm.
Sparrow
Veteran
Thank you, Stewart. I am so glad that Dana was my model for hundreds similar photos when I did my marathon 50m lens comparions, follwed by wide angle lenses and tele lenses.
The Steinheil has a cool color rendition. I forgot if it is 80mm or 85mm.
... yes now you mention it the colour is really nice, halfway between ct21 and Ektachrome
raid
Dad Photographer
The finer details stick out when you look at photos taken by many similar lenses side by side. The Leica and Zeiss lenses are warmer in color.
Sparrow
Veteran
... my daughter Alice, got some Minolta lenses as a set and I was impressed by how neutral they were colour wise, and just how good they are across the range
I think the 60's and 70's leica lenses have a pastel look to them, the more modern ones are a bit too Technicolor for my taste ... Technicolor is probably a bit hyperbolical but you get the idea
I think the 60's and 70's leica lenses have a pastel look to them, the more modern ones are a bit too Technicolor for my taste ... Technicolor is probably a bit hyperbolical but you get the idea
Photo_Smith
Well-known
I know it's already been voted for but the Nikkor 50mm H in F mount takes some beating for £20.
Also the 55mm Micro Nikkor ƒ3,5 for £30
I think the 50mm H is cheap because it can't always be mounted to digital Nikons.

Also the 55mm Micro Nikkor ƒ3,5 for £30

I think the 50mm H is cheap because it can't always be mounted to digital Nikons.
Nokton48
Veteran
Here is my Budget Glass Hall of Fame.
Here is my Budget Glass Hall of Fame.
The Minolta Rokkors.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=89545&d=1323980034
Here is my Budget Glass Hall of Fame.
The Minolta Rokkors.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=89545&d=1323980034
Paulbe
Well-known
Photo smith--what a great picture!
Adorable young lady and priceless expression...
Thanks!
Paul
Adorable young lady and priceless expression...
Thanks!
Paul
NickTrop
Veteran
Three gorgeous pics on this page. I got me an 85mm Rokinon F1.4 for Nikon over the summer. Granted I paid $250-ish for it (chipped version) so not sure it this qualifies as "budget" but comparatively spec'd lenses from Nikon (and even Sigma) go for multiples of this (of course those are motorized AF, this is not) - $1000-ish or more, and it is a verrrry good portrait lens imo. I have to downsize some sample pics to post on RFF. Lens money well-spent imo.
maggieo
More Deadly
I have both CV 28s, the 1.9 Ultron and the 3.5 Skopar and they're great, but more than $100.
But for insane value, it's hard to beat my 1974 Jupiter-8, which I bought for $30.00US. Digital, Portra 400, XP2, Ektar, BW400, it seems to love 'em all:

Fallen Colors, October 16, 2012 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Mom Thinks Imperial Palace is OK, October 17, 2012 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Changes, October 16, 2012 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Rubbish, May, 2011 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

On The Move, September, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Fix Prop Mailbox, July, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Umbrellas, Special Olympics Citation Airlift, July, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Beaver Creek, May, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Wise Oven Bakery, Old Cheney Farmers' Market, May 9, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr
But for insane value, it's hard to beat my 1974 Jupiter-8, which I bought for $30.00US. Digital, Portra 400, XP2, Ektar, BW400, it seems to love 'em all:

Fallen Colors, October 16, 2012 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Mom Thinks Imperial Palace is OK, October 17, 2012 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Changes, October 16, 2012 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Rubbish, May, 2011 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

On The Move, September, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Fix Prop Mailbox, July, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Umbrellas, Special Olympics Citation Airlift, July, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Beaver Creek, May, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Wise Oven Bakery, Old Cheney Farmers' Market, May 9, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr
Alfasud
Old Toys
How about the Industar 26 ... I bought one about six years ago for $45.00 and it came with a Fed 2 attached to it.
There is nothing like a great lens with an attached camera (even if the attachment is permanent). My favourite is my Konishiroku Hexanon 48/2.
zuiko85
Veteran
This topic sure seems to be a moving target. Too many definitions;
Compared to more (or much more) expensive alternatives.
Obtained for a uncommonly low price.
Little known gem.
Personally I've found that a manufacturer's slower lenses offer good value. In Olympus OM gear I have built up a modest collection of Zuiko's; 24 f2.8, 35 f2.8, 50 f1.8, 85 f2 (no slower option here and my most expensive lens), 135 f3.5, and 200 f5 all shopped carefully for a total of well less than $500 over the years.
Other advantages are light weight and a common 49mm filter size.
Compared to more (or much more) expensive alternatives.
Obtained for a uncommonly low price.
Little known gem.
Personally I've found that a manufacturer's slower lenses offer good value. In Olympus OM gear I have built up a modest collection of Zuiko's; 24 f2.8, 35 f2.8, 50 f1.8, 85 f2 (no slower option here and my most expensive lens), 135 f3.5, and 200 f5 all shopped carefully for a total of well less than $500 over the years.
Other advantages are light weight and a common 49mm filter size.
mfogiel
Veteran
Brian Legge
Veteran
I'll second the Nikon 105/2.5. I got one in a trade for a strobe two years ago. Finally used it in a portrait shoot for a friend and was blown away by it despite knowing its reputation.
maggieo
More Deadly
I'll second the Nikon 105/2.5. I got one in a trade for a strobe two years ago. Finally used it in a portrait shoot for a friend and was blown away by it despite knowing its reputation.
I'll third it! Great lens! I use it on my F3:

V8 Ford, September, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Empty Egg, July, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Wet Light, July, 2010 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr
Tijmendal
Young photog
Great thread!
My favorite bargain is still the Olympus Zuiko 28mm f/3.5.
Can be had for under 50$ (even after its rise to popularity).
My favorite bargain is still the Olympus Zuiko 28mm f/3.5.
Can be had for under 50$ (even after its rise to popularity).
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.