Soeren
Well-known
Anybody knows about the third party LTM lenses? Angenieux, Killfit, Dallmeyer, Old Delft, Schacht etc. Are some of them worth a closer look? some specialities among them? Some with that certain something?
Best regards
Best regards
raid
Dad Photographer
Why would they be "third" party and not "second" party lenses?
Angeneiux is a top lens brand, which an be very expensive for SLR and for RF cameras. Some people buy the movie camera lenses, and use adapters with their mico 4/ 3 cameras. In comparison, Schacht lenses cost far less.
I have an Angeneiux 70-200 ( or similar) in Canon FD mount. The colors come out incredibly nice.
Angeneiux is a top lens brand, which an be very expensive for SLR and for RF cameras. Some people buy the movie camera lenses, and use adapters with their mico 4/ 3 cameras. In comparison, Schacht lenses cost far less.
I have an Angeneiux 70-200 ( or similar) in Canon FD mount. The colors come out incredibly nice.
DominikDUK
Well-known
I agree with Raid none of the mentioned manufacturers produced an inferior product. Some Kilfit and Old Delft lenses are better than the first party offerings. Olf Delft has an interesting lens lineup with some very special lenses. Angenieux is often very expensive unfortunately that is. They now specialize in motion picture zoom lenses and are considered the cats meow. Their SLR and RF can be good but are not always as good as their high pricetag suggests. I have a somewhat softspot for Schacht and their Travenars one a few in Exakta mount and they are very well built and can be found at lower prices but beware of m39 lenses for the Braun Paxette series of cameras they have the same mount but different mount to film plane. Cooke made leica ltm glass as well so did Wollensak.
If you want special, look no further than some of the more exotic Old Delft lenses. The Delfotar 1.8/50mm is fast and tiny a little slower but still tiny is the 3.5 35mm Minor.
If you want special, look no further than some of the more exotic Old Delft lenses. The Delfotar 1.8/50mm is fast and tiny a little slower but still tiny is the 3.5 35mm Minor.
Soeren
Well-known
Im not implying those oem? lenses are not as good as Leica, Canon, Zeiss or Nikon. I'm just puzled about the amount of lensmakers and the odd names so Im curious about them. Could be some unknown stars was offered for next to nothing.
Best regards
Best regards
S.H.
Picture taker
They can be stars among them, but you have to be lucky to come across one offered cheaply. Collectors know about them, they tend to be much more costly than "1st party" lenses of equivalent vintage/performance, and more costly than a modern VC lens.
Zeiss Jena in original LTM : hard to find, lots of fakes, troubled history, a complex subject in itself. Very good glass.
Kinoptik, Angénieux, SOM Berthiot, Old Delft, Meyer ... in LTM = big $$$ and very low production numbers.
Schacht, Steinheil, ... less so, but they were not known for their optical performance. They were considered third party / second rate, but they can be mechanically beautiful.
Most "bargains" are with Japanese glass (often Zeiss knockoffs) : Acall, Komura, ...
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
There are many manufacturers that provided lenses for LTM and Exakta mount. I don't know that these are any better than the ones made by Leitz, Canon, Nikon, etc, but I do know that many of them are now ludicrously expensive.
I suppose this is because they are now very scarce, but I have never bought into the notion that scarcity necessarily means value. Things like this tend to be scarce because they didn't originally sell very well. I hate being a curmudgeon, but while this could happen because the lens was so good that it needed to have an unattractively high price, but other less appealing reasons are more likely, I think.
Cheers,
Dez
I suppose this is because they are now very scarce, but I have never bought into the notion that scarcity necessarily means value. Things like this tend to be scarce because they didn't originally sell very well. I hate being a curmudgeon, but while this could happen because the lens was so good that it needed to have an unattractively high price, but other less appealing reasons are more likely, I think.
Cheers,
Dez