Lomo kickstarter - Neptune convertible lenses!

[Huss]

https://www.kickstarter.com/project...llowup&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter

$599 for the 3 lens combo (35mm, 50mm, 80mm)

I think this is very cool just because it is a completely different product than what is out there - both new and used lenses.

I disagree with the statement that doing this makes for a compact system, as Nikon 50 f2D lens is smaller than the base +50 attachment, my CV 40 f2 or Nikon 45 f2.8 is smaller than just the base, etc.

This system will be really fun on a film camera. Especially like an old Nikon F. Where it will also look in place.

 

[Huss]

p.s. of course you can buy a used Nikon 35 2.8 + 50 1.8 + 85 f2 for $599..
But they are used, and for better or worse, regular lenses.

 

[tunalegs]

Isn't this basically the same thing as the old Contaflex pro-Tessar lenses?

 

[B-9]

Hate the video,

Like the concept,

Might buy a set after they're shipped and being dumped on eBay for half the price.

I already have all these focal lengths in high quality primes, I doubt Lomo can compete with quality, the samples look pretty blah.

Glad to see new and unique products coming from Lomo.

 

[Scrambler]

I went through the data to get apertures. 3.5/35, 2.8/50 and 4/80. So in Leica mount you could get a pancake 35 of that speed, a collapsible 50 which was smaller that the add on, and a 75, 85 or 90 that was also more compact than the additions. You could get Zeiss designs ex FSU for cheaper for same size. In Pentax the original lenses are tiny. The M42 3.5/35 barely hits the mount on a K camera. I think this is interesting like a lot of Lomo, but in a deliberately weird and funky way. Good bokeh and small lenses available other ways. Still, if they can get a small 28 they will have beaten history. Thats where retrofocal lenses get messy, and if this is a pro-tessar style setup with lenses in the base then it will be really messy with wide angles. If not, it will still be messy with the massive retrofocal distance.

 

[Huss]

.. I think this is interesting like a lot of Lomo, but in a deliberately weird and funky way....

Which is of course why they do it. They address a need that no-one knew they had, in a way that no-one else offers. It's all about making things fun and interesting again for many. Appealing to the road less traveled types.

The problem I have with kickstarter campaigns is I am impatient. If I drop my money now, I want the product now! For some reason I prefer waiting and paying more for a product that will be readily available. Perhaps because it gives me less chance to mull over a hasty decision..
😉

 

[Scrambler]

Which is of course why they do it. They address a need that no-one knew they had, in a way that no-one else offers. It's all about making things fun and interesting again for many. Appealing to the road less traveled types.

The problem I have with kickstarter campaigns is I am impatient. If I drop my money now, I want the product now! For some reason I prefer waiting and paying more for a product that will be readily available. Perhaps because it gives me less chance to mull over a hasty decision..
😉

I'm sure they know their audience - I think the advertising speaks to it. As I see it, the clip is the right demographic (young tattooed artists) mentioning words like "bokeh". For the price the lenses can't be fully corrected - but no-one will mind - neither artist nor subject. It's the artisans that think differently 🙄

As for the Kickstarter side of things - I feel your pain. Just remember, in years to come you will have encouraged the production of these lenses 😀

 

[x-ray]

Didn't Kodak have something like this for the Retina reflex? Seems they did.

I don't see any advantage really. A used set of AF D Nikkors in 35 f2, 50 f1.8 and an 85 f1.8 wouldn't be much more if any and I'll bet they'll outperform these plus give auto functions, Matrix metering and autofocus. Either way you're changing lenses.

More gadgets adding nothing to the art.

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

Hate the video,

Agreed. Except: There are two particularly beautiful (domestic?) cats in the video.

 

[bayernfan]

this will definitely be a used market acquisition. i can see a lot digital SLR shooters buying this hot new uber-cool lens kit, only to be frustrated by a lack of autofocus. I'm betting they'll go for 300 to 400 middle of next year, and that's when i'll pounce. my F3 is ready. 😀

also, note how hard Lomo is targeting the DSLR crowd in the promo material. this kit makes little to no sense on a modern DSLR. just food for thought.

 

[Huss]

this will definitely be a used market acquisition. i can see a lot digital SLR shooters buying this hot new uber-cool lens kit, only to be frustrated by a lack of autofocus. I'm betting they'll go for 300 to 400 middle of next year, and that's when i'll pounce. my F3 is ready. 😀

That's how I got my 50% off Petzval bucket control lens. And will get this...
😀

 

[Huss]

Didn't Kodak have something like this for the Retina reflex? Seems they did.

I don't see any advantage really. A used set of AF D Nikkors in 35 f2, 50 f1.8 and an 85 f1.8 wouldn't be much more if any and I'll bet they'll outperform these plus give auto functions, Matrix metering and autofocus. Either way you're changing lenses.

More gadgets adding nothing to the art.

I just checked my Retina and you are correct!

You could get a full used ais kit for less than this. But it's the same ol same old. This is a unique product on the market being sold new.

 

[DanskDynamit]

Meh.

my ten words..

 

[Huss]

Meh.

my ten words..

It would have been meh if it was something like a 35/50/90mm plastic AF lens combo as everyone else already makes that.

No-one makes this. Why enter a crowded market when you can have your own niche? Something a little company called Leica seems to know quite well..
😉

I'm with you though in as much that I do not see me being in the market as I already have lenses in those ranges, and have no issues with their size or using them. But if a set came along used/cheap (which they will) then I may be tempted.

I think the buyers are going to be peeps w/ a dslr and kit lens, that don't have any primes. This will look cool to them, but will be soon forgotten once they tire of MF. I do want to try this on a classic film Nikon.

 

[pvdhaar]

$599 is (used) 35-70/2.8 territory.. Gets you faster apertures, superb image quality and as an extra bonus a macro mode thrown in as well.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Isn't this basically the same thing as the old Contaflex pro-Tessar lenses?

Yes, I believe so.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Didn't Kodak have something like this for the Retina reflex? Seems they did.

I don't see any advantage really. A used set of AF D Nikkors in 35 f2, 50 f1.8 and an 85 f1.8 wouldn't be much more if any and I'll bet they'll outperform these plus give auto functions, Matrix metering and autofocus. Either way you're changing lenses.

More gadgets adding nothing to the art.

Sort of. The Retina Reflexes were interesting because when 35mm SLRs with lens shutters began to appear in the 1950s (beginning with the first Zeiss Ikon Contaflex in late 1953) they tended to have either a between the lens shutter (Eg. Contaflex) or a behind the lens shutter (Eg. Bessamatic, Ultramatic). The first Retina Reflex had a between the lens shutter with the ability to interchange front components of its Schneider, or Rodenstock standard lenses with other focal lengths of the same brand, (in the same manner as Contaflex models from the III to S could mount Pro Tessars). But later Retina Reflex models moved to a behind the lens configuration like the Voigtländers, and had a system of discrete lenses which could be changed in their entirety in the same manner as most focal plane shutter SLRs can.

I find the lens shutter SLRs an interesting approach to camera design and own a few different sorts. The best of their type—Ie. the Bessamatic and Contaflexes—are capable of image quality as good or better than many focal plane shutter SLRs made by other manufacturers. I would certainly own an early Retina Reflex (at the right price), particularly if it was the rarer Rodenstock kit. But I have read that the Kodak convertible lens system for the early type is reasonably good, optically, but not great. A later Retina Reflex with completely independent lens units is probably a better choice for getting decently sharp pics. (Ivor Matanle's two "Collecting and Using..." books aren't a bad place to start getting on top of the idiosyncrasies of the different makes and models of this camera class).

On the other hand, the Contaflex Pro Tessars are very good, indeed. Sharpness is not an issue with them and the 35mm & 85mm ones are excellent. They are worlds apart from the cheap third party add on lenses made for various cameras (usually generic) during their heyday of the 1950s and 1960s.
Cheers
Brett

 

[Godfrey]

The concept has been done before. It automatically inherits some trade-offs that are well known.

It's a good setup for someone using an EVF (aka "mirrorless") camera. The lens base with the rear-most lens elements seals off the sensor from intruding dirt and dust, and any good EVF camera compensates for the lack of auto diaphragm and manual focus easily. I could see having this as a low cost, smaller size/weight lens system for my Leica SL specifically for traveling.

Of course, it replicates various lenses I already have. So what? Every lens has its own personality. It's affordable and reasonably compact for a three lens system, and the samples shown are okay quality. I'm long past the point of needing to prove my lens resolves 0.5% better detail... And I have those lenses already if I need that.
🙂

G

 

[Huss]

$599 is (used) 35-70/2.8 territory.. Gets you faster apertures, superb image quality and as an extra bonus a macro mode thrown in as well.

Of course there are other pragmatic options. That's not the point. This is an interesting alternative for the target audience.
Most who I'm sure already have a kit zoom lens.

FYI from what I've seen, that zoom (if it is the Nikon) now can suffer from severe out gassing/hazing as well as other functional issues due to age (not being able to AF at 35mm due to a metal plate which breaks w age). Which is why I skipped it.

But really, recommending an old zoom lens over the Neptune is completely missing the point. It's like saying don't buy a manual transmission Miata. Buy this used Lexus 400 instead. It is bigger, faster, more comfortable. Sure they both get you from point A to point B, but that's not the point now is it?

 

[Pioneer]

I think it is a very tempting offer. The price is pretty decent for three lenses and I would be interested in seeing what type of rendering this lens set brings to the table.

I doubt I'll buy it since I already have quite a few tempting things in front of me, but it isn't because I believe it is necessarily worthless.