Least expensive but "normal" 50mm for digital M.

[rogue_designer]

The Canon LTM 50/1.8 is a very well-behaved lens, and not expensive.

Aye, though I find the 50/1.4 a bit more modern feeling. Hard to go wrong with either though.

 

[santino]

I second the industar 61ld with rear body cap (aka FED 5b).

 

[Swift1]

I have only one I-61LD now. The lens is capapble of sharp-ish modern look, but its the cheapest build RF lens I own, hands down. Barely usable. I simply don't use it.

What year is your I-61 L/D from, do you know?
I have a I-61 L/D that came with a late 60's FED 3.
The build quality isn't as good as my J-8 from 1956, but it isn't necessarily bad. The focus is smooth from end to end, aperture click stops nicely.

 

[Peter Jennings]

Is around $200 cheap enough? The Japanese LTM planar type lenses from the 50s have a modern look. The Canon 50 f/1.8, as already mentioned, is a good one. There is also the (Minolta) Chiyoko Super Rokkor 50 f/2. A later f/1.8 version of that lens is rarer and usually more expensive. The (Tokyo Kogaku) Topcor 50 f/2 is also a good one.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

User Rigid Summicron.

Phil Forrest

 

[Godfrey]

I have the Color Skopar 50/2.5. A lovely lens: sharp, small, nicely made, etc. It's not as modern in rendering as the current Summicron-M 50mm f/2, but it's certainly a little past the "vintage" look in rendering performance. Well worth the money.

I never buy the Russian lenses because I've found their quality and performance too variable on a unit by unit basis. I just never know what I'm getting when I look at one... Most seem to be somewhat disappointing.

 

[splitimageview]

I'm not really sure what 'modern' rendering is, but I'm assuming that would require a 'modern' lens, which would pretty much mean Voigtlander, Leica, or Zeiss ZM.

Never had any interest in Russian stuff as they are so hit or miss (as mentioned above) and in the end they are just copies of the originals which aren't modern.

 

[maddoc]

Another vote for the Nikon H-C 5cm f/2.0 from me. Excellent rendering on film. J-8 is close.

 

[kuuan]

Aye, though I find the 50/1.4 a bit more modern feeling. Hard to go wrong with either though.

second that

 

[David Hughes]

I'm not really sure what 'modern' rendering is, but I'm assuming that would require a 'modern' lens, which would pretty much mean Voigtlander, Leica, or Zeiss ZM.

Never had any interest in Russian stuff as they are so hit or miss (as mentioned above) and in the end they are just copies of the originals which aren't modern.

Hi,

I agree regarding "ancient" and "modern" rendering, as I've no idea what people are talking about. How would this be described:-

Regards, David

 

[sebastel]

second that

third?

anyway, what i wanted to show is that the canon 50mm f/1.8 LTM can show some kind of "hotspot" in colour photos, like here. (obviously, this won't happen in B&W)

this is heidelberg, too by sebastel23, on Flickr

 

[michaelwj]

Dear Ko

I have a 50 1.8 canon
nice lens ...
You pay for the shipping
NY to Canada ( not sure what that is via USPS)
and it's Yours ~ Enjoy !

I think this wins in the least expensive normal 50mm category.
😀

 

[jamin-b]

Another Sonnar, with superior build to a J-8 (and close focus for live-view cameras): Nikkor-H.C. 5cm f/2 LTM

I second this choice. I really love this lens.

 

[helen.HH]

I think this wins in the least expensive normal 50mm category.
😀

Yes indeed !!!
Thanks M....sweeeet to notice & it's sweet to give

 

[zuikologist]

for something different try here (no affiliation to the seller etc).

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Voigtlan...526660?hash=item467596c844:g:SmsAAOSwMGVab1tP

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I feel very thankful for Helen kindness and generosity! To me it is double special.

 

[sebastel]

Yes indeed !!!
Thanks M....sweeeet to notice & it's sweet to give

and even though i have some sporadic colour probs with mine, i warmly recommend this lens. very nice one.

 

[retinax]

for something different try here (no affiliation to the seller etc).

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Voigtlan...526660?hash=item467596c844:g:SmsAAOSwMGVab1tP

Not coupled though...

 

[mdarnton]

The Canon LTM 50/1.8 is a very well-behaved lens, and not expensive.

This, and if you wait around, you can get a chrome one on Ebay for about $120. The aluminum ones would be good, but you can't buy them remotely because many of them have permanent internal-fogging problems.

I've been through the Russian thing and would never do it again. Your chances of getting one that focuses properly close-up are remote, no matter what anyone says. The standard they were made to was different. I've seen results from them from people who like them, and much of their work is out of focus but they don't notice. Not good enough for prime (ha!) time.

 

[kermaier]

Hi,

I agree regarding "ancient" and "modern" rendering, as I've no idea what people are talking about. How would this be described:-

Regards, David

When I think of a lens with "modern" rendering, I have in mind some of the following:

• Higher contrast
• Better color saturation
• Decent resolution wide open
• Lower tendency to flare/glow
• Low chromatic aberration
• More "density" in OOF areas

Some of this would be due to better coatings, some to more highly corrected optical computations, etc.

So, among vintage lenses I've used, I would consider the following more "modern"

• W-Nikkor 35/2.5 LTM
• Canon 50/1.8 LTM
• Nikkor-H.C. 50/2 LTM
• Canon 85/1.8 LTM

And these, distinctly "vintage" in rendering:

• Canon 25/3.5 LTM
• Canon 28/2.8 LTM
• Canon 35/1.5 LTM
• Canon 35/2.8 LTM
• Canon 50/3.5 Collapsible LTM
• Canon 50/1.5 LTM
• Canon 50/1.2 LTM
• Nikkor-W 35/1.8 LTM
• Nikkor-S.C 50/1.4 LTM
• Leica Summar 50/2
• Leica Summicron 50/2 Rigid
• Leica Summicron 50/2 Collapsible
• Leica Elmar 50/2.8
• Leica Super-Angulon 21/3.4

Now I'll put my foot in my mouth by trying to guess what sort of lens you used for your picture, going from a small JPEG of what looks like a film scan: l'd say it was made with an extremely clean vintage lens. It's not very modern in rendering, but nothing that screams "vintage" either.