OK SLR Folks, What's the Best Budget 50mm Lens?

I had a contax with a planar 50 1,7, it is not the cheapest but onestly if you can get one take it, sharp shar sharp and very pleasent rendering (eh it's a planar 😀)
 
Nikkor 50mm f1.4 Ai-S 6th & last version. The last I looked this lens runs about $250. The reason I picked this lens is that it fits a number of high end SLRs. There is no such thing a budget lens. Pentax screw mount lens have IMHO a very distinctive and sharp signature but the old Pentax screw mount cameras are difficult to meter.
 
jamais said:
Keep the Contax and buy a Yashica ML 2/50mm, it has a nice bokeh and is very cheap (don't spend more than $15 on it).
Click to expand...

I bought a Contax 139Q with Zeiss T* 50mm f/1.4, and loved them both more than I can say. Until after about 9 years, when the 139Q mysteriously died. That hurt. However, if at its age yours is still working, you probably won't have that problem. Keep them both! The Zeiss T* 50mm f/1.7 may be a little sharper than the f/1.4, as that is not uncommon amoung 50mm lenses, especially wide open. Either of those 50mm lenses is as sharp as you can get. Not as cheap, but as sharp.

For cheaper, the sky is the limit. Takumars are good, as well as those mentioned above. Also, the old M42 Yashinon 50mm f/1.7 lenses are surprisingly good. Why not? They were made by Tomioka. With an adapter they will fit on your Contax 139Q. I have had both, and the Yashinon lenses were good, but not as good as the Zeiss. Fujinon M42 lenses aren't as cheap in the f/1.8 variety, but aren't going for as much as they used to. They are excellent and fit with an adapter.

Check your PMs.
 
About 10 minutes after buying it I discovered all these internet postings swearing that ________.
Click to expand...

Fill in the blank. Lots of people will swear lots of things on the internet. The internet can drive a person crazy. You did a bit of research, and you bought a good lens. Now get shooting. The rest is just mental masturbation, and I say this as someone who wasted too much time doing just that.

I'm attaching a picture I shot at a wedding with an autofocus 50mm SLR lens that I bought used for $30. Pixel and grain peeping isn't nearly as productive as looking for good light. 🙂

2986341413_9ddbcebeca_z.jpg
 
Micro Nikkor

Micro Nikkor

55f3.5 Micro Nikkor is one of the sharpest lenses every made. It is a bit slow but does focus down to 1:2 without the extension rings. And it can be had cheap in its pre AI version.
 
bwidjaja said:
For me, the OM1+50mm f1.8 was it. But selling it now (in RFF ad) as I am leaning towards medium format.
Click to expand...

I agree with the OMZ 50mm f1.8, mine is a MiJ one. It's the only 50mm I got and it performs very well. More performance than I ever needed.
Sharp, only downside might be funny bokeh, it's good at close distance focus but at far distances it tends to look funny.
Other than that, no complaints. Well, it could be f1.4, but it's what it is.
 
Steve M. said:
I got a Contax 139Q w/ a Zeiss Planar 50 1.7.
Click to expand...

I bought my (then) girlfriend such a set about 20 years ago; it's good. I'd say now that you've got it, keep it.

I have a 1.8/50 AI-S Nikkor that's very good, and a 1.7/50 SMC-M Pentax that's also very good. The Pentax is mechanically at least two leagues above the Nikkor (and one league above my Konica and Leica lenses; in the same league is only my 15mm Voigtlaender).
 
The f/1.7 Planar for the Yashica/Kyocera Contax series is an excellent lens, although not always cheap.

Lately, I've been shooting with the f/1.4 Planar for the Rolleiflex SLR. It's another excellent lens. This is one that occasionally can be bought for a bargain, especially if it's attached to a non-working camera, which is often the case with the Rolleiflex SL 35 series of cameras.
 
Well, even though I have that Contax w/ 50 Planar coming, I'm not happy that I spent so much on it. So I went down memory lane and looked through some shots from about 8 years ago, and came up w/ a surprise. Yep, the R 50 Summicron was the best (and the most expensive) SLR lens I'd owned, but there was another 50 that had cost me all of $60, and that was with a camera included. The old Pentax K1000 w/ a SMC 50 2.0 lens. Those shots looked really good, almost Leica-like in some circumstances.

So unless the Planar is a whole lot better I'm going to get another "student kit" and start shooting that Pentax glass. Here's some shots I uncovered from the SMC 50 2.0 Pentax archives (a big box of photos that are in the back of the closet). Film was Kodak C41 B&W w/ Walgreens scans. Can't wait to see some good scans of Tri-X w/ one of these lenses.

So, like Dorthy, I never had to go looking elsewhere for what I needed. What I was searching for was right here at home (or will be once I get another K1000 kit). Who knew?

5005642632_9b2163b6d8_b.jpg



5005642560_a47ed2480b_b.jpg



5005642626_dab91538ef_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
There are very few bad 50mm lenses so I'd pick based on the body that is the most comfortable, fun, and easy to use rather than basing it on the lens.

While Nikons are great, there are such bargains in old Minoltas, Yashicas, Pentaxes, etc. that it's probably worth buying two or three and trying them out, then reselling the ones you don't like.
 
Frank, I was going to say that, too. The 50mm focal length has been around for so long that I can't think of any modern-day lenses that are bad.

Many (most?) are based on the Planar, which of course is an excellent place to start. Early this year, I was using a Vivitar f/1.7 in 42mm screw mount. A nice little lens that you can pick up for maybe $10 or so.
 
Did Pentax ever make a bad 50mm? I can't think of one. I've used the AF 1.4 and the MF 1.7 and 2.0. And the folks who use Super-Tak's seem to love those, too.

I'm currently using the last pre-AI version of the Nikkor 50/1.4 and that's not a bad lens, either -- although its bokeh can be a bit unruly if you're careless. Of course, that's true of most any SLR 50/1.4.

Generally I'd go for the 1.7/1.8/2.0 lenses over the 1.4's. Most SLR 50's at 1.4 are on the edge of usability, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
I bought a Nikon 50 f1.8 Ai-S for 60,- EUR in mint condition for my FM3a.
I was surprised, what a great, light, compact lens it is.

For me, this is THE travel and budget lens for Nikon F MF cameras.
 
semilog said:
…
Generally I'd go for the 1.7/1.8/2.0 lenses over the 1.4's. Most SLR 50's at 1.4 are on the edge of usability, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely right - they are indeed much less pricey and generally mighty good (light and small as well), but don't we all love, to have a stop or two more speed?

This is mighty usable …difficult to nail, as I am getting to know this little gem but usable ;-)

_DSC8260-half%20facial.jpg


"…" 58mm @ f1.4


I am in love with this lens.
It is nowhere a budget lens though, unfortunately.
I understand, the Canon, Olympus and Minolta glass to be much more affordable due to lens mount changes in history of these SLR lines.
Last time, I looked, manual focus Zeiss glass for Contax is also more affordable, than Nikon F glass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom