SLR M42 lenses - undiscovered gems (or not)

[caila77]

I have several M42 camera bodies and several lenses. The quality of many lenses with M42 mount is well known, super-takumar 55mm and 35 mm, Helios 44, the macro Volna, the flektogon 35mm...

The amount of lenses of different focal lengths available on the market today is enormous and many are sold at very affordable prices. The purpose of the post is to gather opinions among M42 mount enthusiasts on lesser-known, but still quality, lenses. For example, I really appreciate the Lydith 30 mm f/3.5, which is certainly not unknown. I recently read positive opinions about the Schacht, which are also known, although rarer. I would instead break the argument in favor of the 50 mm f 1.7 Exaktar, which is available very cheaply and is a good lens.

 

[wlewisiii]

CJZ Tessar 50/2.8
CZJ Sonnar 135/3.5
Often marked "aus Jena" or only "Jena" if made for sale in the west, generally to higher QC standards.

 

[santino]

There is a 50mm 1.7 Yashica lens (it came budled with the TL super) which is slightly radioactive. Top performer and high build quality.

 

[joe bosak]

I use M42 lenses on A7xx cameras, having sold my M42 bodies.

Jupiter 11 135mm, the one with the aperture ring at the far end. Very good for macro with tubes/bellows.

I have a couple of Zenitar 50mm f/1.7, which always/often give me pink/orange/yellow casts on my A7xx's so I've stopped using them although I liked them for B&W.

ZM/3M-5A/5CA 500mm f8 is a nice lightweight catadioptric to carry around for snapshots.

The MTO 1000mm or 1100mm need a tripod seem sturdy and well made but I don't have anything concrete to say about optical quality - I would not be surprised if they are about as sharp as the 500mm with a teleconverter, but that might reflect the limits of what's achievable - I use them for casual, very infrequent astro - atmospheric haze, wind, etc etc probably limit what's achievable in terms of any improvement over the 500mm. And I can put the t/c on the 1000/1100...

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I see you mentioned the Pentax M42 screw mount lenses from the 1960's. That's where I would start and end the quest . . . in fact that's more or less what I did. Apologies for my limited knowledge of the obscure corners of this market. But I found what I needed with the Pentaxes . . . even if I understand the appeal of finding an unknown gem. The Pentax lenses are solid brass, many of them are great optical performers and they tend to sell for fairly reasonable prices (with a couple of exceptions that have attained cult status). I think you'd have to spend $1,000 to get the combination of machined brass and multicoatings on these lenses today. I love the things and at the prices being asked for them these days they are a bit like potato chips . . . you can't eat just one. If the helicals are clean and greased they are smooooth to focus and well-damped. Consider that many of these lenses are 60 years old and are functioning as new. That's Leica-level build quality. IMHO, you literally cannot find a better value in robustness/dollar.

Favorites:

35/2 (slightly expensive); look for the more affordable f:3.5 version in the $40-50 range.
50/1.4 Super-Takumar (bokeh monster, so smooth).
50/1.7 less expensive and so sharp. Hey, what's a third of a stop? Nothing! I tell you, nothing.
55/2 just come on.
85/1.8 (this one is actually quite expensive for what it is) look too for the less cult-y 85/1.9.

My father took all our family photos in the 1960's and 70's with an East German Praktica and a single 50mm lens. It was a great performer, but I don't know where you'd find a good one these days.

Ricoh made a line of Rikenon lenses in M42 IIRC.
Mamiya made a line of Sekor lenses too (55/1.4!) . . . can be had for around$50.
Various manufacturers OEM'd a Sears brand of M42 lenses. Usually can be had for a song.
Tomioka/Yashica, Cosina/Cosinon, Hanimar, Vivitar, Petri too. The list goes on and on . . .

 

[santino]

Then there is the Jupiter 37A 135mm 3.5 - a Sonnar type with all its desired „flaws“. The Helios 77M4 - tack sharp and nice oof rendering.

 

[Hibbs]

Isco-Göttingen Westromat 35mm F2.8

MIR 24M 35mm F2

Kuribayashi C.C. Petri Orikkor 50mm F2

 

[titrisol]

Cant go wrong with most Takumars so beside the ones mentioned above:
the 105/2.8 is a hidden gem
Macro 50/4 and 100/4 are excellent
The fisheye 17/4 is an icredibly fun lens
the 55/1.8 and 55/2 are the same lens, with a limiter Get the 1.8
The only takumar I know its not excellent is the 20/4.5 but for my purposes it works just fine

 

[dexdog]

Isco-Göttingen Westromat 35mm F2.8

MIR 24M 35mm F2

Kuribayashi C.C. Petri Orikkor 50mm F2

I have a copy of the Mir 24M, a beautiful performer.

 

[hilltime]

Now, a bit on the pricey side, but hands down my favorite M42 mt is the Carl Zeiss 50/F1.8 Ultron. I'd put this lens up against any 50mm out there. Use it on a Zeiss-Ikon SL706 or Icarex 35S TM.
I have an old Kadlubeck's lens book and I he lists this lens as going for about $100! Wish I had bought it then.....

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Hellos 44 has hell a lot of variations from copy to copy. And the only "quality" it is known for is cheap frillls swirl optical defect.

 

[Yokosuka Mike]

I have the Pentax 24mm f3.5 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar (M42 mount) lens with Pentax square hood.

I use it on my Sony A7III with a Rayqual adapter. I'm very pleased with the results I get from this lens.

All the best,
Mike

 

[Sanug]

Meyer Görlitz Orestor 2.8/100, often sold as Pentacon 2.8/100. Very sharp, nice bokeh, good portrait lens. And still not too expensive.

Zeiss Jena Flektogon 4/20. Great fun, low distortion, very good overall quality. Not as expensive as the 2.8/20.

Jupiter-21 4/200. Big, heavy, short minimum distance, and excellent optical performance. To avoid the flare you will need to flock the glossy black metal plate behind the rear lens, and use a hood.

Avoid the Meyer/Pentacon 2.8/29. Although a 7-element design, the optical performance is very poor. Sold cheap and not well adjusted in the factory.

 

[das]

My favorite German M42 lenses:

CZJ 25mm f/4 Flektogon
Zeiss 35mm f/3.4
CZJ 35mm f/2.4
CZJ 50mm f/1.8 MC Pancolar
CZJ 80mm f/1.8 MC
CZJ 135mm f/3.5 MC
CZJ 200mm f/2.8 MC

They are all excellent.

 

[CMur12]

Fuji also made lenses in M42 mount. The ones I remember had Fuji Electron Beam coating (multi-coating with 11 coats!).

Pentax Super Multi-Coating was 7 coats.

- Murray

 

[Kai-san]

Very informative thread since I'm looking for good m42 lenses, especially in the wide category. Keep them coming! 🙂

I would like to add the Kaleinar 5N 2.8/100 lens, it's sharp, light and compact. Unfortunately it does not have an auto function, but it can be shot at f3.5 without any loss of sharpness.

 

[santino]

I think, that it is safe to say that every 50 (maybe except for the Domiplan) is decent (I know that there is one user who will probably disagree in regards of all soviet lenses and cameras btw 😜).

Wide angle wise the already mentioned 2.4 35mm Flektogon is a gem but it can develop problems with the automatic diaphragm, since there are some plastic parts.

 

[titrisol]

Fuji also made lenses in M42 mount. The ones I remember had Fuji Electron Beam coating (multi-coating with 11 coats!).

Pentax Super Multi-Coating was 7 coats.

- Murray

Of the hundreds of brands that dipped their toes on M42 Fujinon, Yashinon, Sekor (Auto sekor), Chinon, and many of the Vivitars are in general good, each with its own quirks. Tamron and Sigmas also produced very good lenses.

Many have mentioned the East German and Soviet lenses and there are a few very good ones

Fujinons and Maniyas were very good lenses, but some didnt have the A/M switch

The list is so big that it would be better to go thorugh the databse of lenses at PentaxForums to pinpint each model

 

[caila77]

Fuji also made lenses in M42 mount. The ones I remember had Fuji Electron Beam coating (multi-coating with 11 coats!).

Pentax Super Multi-Coating was 7 coats.

- Murray

The Fujinon 55mm f 2.2 is well known for the good sharpness and the bokeh

 

[Joao]

I will add two more
MIR 1-B 2,8/37
Industar-61 LZ 2,8/50 (interesting to compare it with the Volna-9 - both are often labeled "Macro" but both are good performers at medium distances).