peterm1
Veteran
Just a thought.....
On another thread (The "What have you just bought" thread) I posted a response about a lens I just purchased, this being a Steinheil of Munchen Quinaron 35mm f2.8. It is a beautiful looking lens to my eye but never the less a bit kooky looking due to the large "block-house" structure on the side - the actuating mechanism for the semi auto aperture.
And I also recently bought a nice old East German lens - the Carl Zeiss of Jena Triotar 135mm f3.5. Which to modern eyes is a bit weird looking too - long skinny overall but a bit pudgy in the mid section.
It gave me the idea there must be scores of such slightly weird, kooky looking (but often never the less nice lenses, even handsome in a homely kind of way) that people have put to use again (or would like to) now that adapters for M4/3, NEX etc have become so ubiquitous. Well folks, I for one would love to see them. Especially if you have any photos of them mounted on modern cameras with adapters.
So lets see some of your thoughts on what lenses fit this description. Its all subjective of course and that is why I am interested in your ideas as they no doubt differ from mine and that's OK.
Here are the two I mentioned above. (All photos from the internet)
Steinheil Munchen Quinaron 35mm f2.8
Carl Zeiss Jena Triotar 135mm f 3.5. (In this photo compared with the 105mm of the same lens type and a Leica ELmar 90mm. Its a big lens though not heavy being made of aluminium.)
On another thread (The "What have you just bought" thread) I posted a response about a lens I just purchased, this being a Steinheil of Munchen Quinaron 35mm f2.8. It is a beautiful looking lens to my eye but never the less a bit kooky looking due to the large "block-house" structure on the side - the actuating mechanism for the semi auto aperture.
And I also recently bought a nice old East German lens - the Carl Zeiss of Jena Triotar 135mm f3.5. Which to modern eyes is a bit weird looking too - long skinny overall but a bit pudgy in the mid section.
It gave me the idea there must be scores of such slightly weird, kooky looking (but often never the less nice lenses, even handsome in a homely kind of way) that people have put to use again (or would like to) now that adapters for M4/3, NEX etc have become so ubiquitous. Well folks, I for one would love to see them. Especially if you have any photos of them mounted on modern cameras with adapters.
So lets see some of your thoughts on what lenses fit this description. Its all subjective of course and that is why I am interested in your ideas as they no doubt differ from mine and that's OK.
Here are the two I mentioned above. (All photos from the internet)
Steinheil Munchen Quinaron 35mm f2.8
Carl Zeiss Jena Triotar 135mm f 3.5. (In this photo compared with the 105mm of the same lens type and a Leica ELmar 90mm. Its a big lens though not heavy being made of aluminium.)
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Peter,
What about Vivitar Series 1 Solid Cats?
Oh; sorry; they're not mirrorless...
Cheers,
R.
What about Vivitar Series 1 Solid Cats?
Oh; sorry; they're not mirrorless...
Cheers,
R.
besk
Well-known
The Solid Cats are weird for sure.
Currently the only lens I use on my Sony Nex is a Robot Xenagon 30mm f/3.5.
As a Chrome plated brass lens it is a little heavy but sharp.
Currently the only lens I use on my Sony Nex is a Robot Xenagon 30mm f/3.5.
As a Chrome plated brass lens it is a little heavy but sharp.
raid
Dad Photographer
I often use a Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 for the Rolleiflex QBM system on m 4/3 cameras. It is a pleasure to get back beautiful images from this lens.
Austintatious
Well-known
I have a NEX 6 for mirrorless photography. I use several adaptors for classic manual focus lenses.
M42 for Pentax Tackumars and others.
Minolta MD for my Rokkors
Contax/Yashica for mostly Yashica lenses
LTM for my FSU glass and Voightlander Scopar
The Sony auto focus E lenses are nice but they are costly
M42 for Pentax Tackumars and others.
Minolta MD for my Rokkors
Contax/Yashica for mostly Yashica lenses
LTM for my FSU glass and Voightlander Scopar
The Sony auto focus E lenses are nice but they are costly
charjohncarter
Veteran
Peter, I'm looking forward to seeing some of your images with these kooky lens that have been give your sui generis treatment though your special editing program: is it Corel Paintshop?
css9450
Veteran
I bought my Sony mirrorless specifically to use old lenses on it.
Here's an old "Super Rokkor" 45mm LTM lens...
Here's an old "Super Rokkor" 45mm LTM lens...
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
There are some amazing lenses for 16mm motion picture cameras that draw wonderfully on digital sensors. The Kodak Cine Ektars are some of my favorite lenses, period. Most have Thorium enriched glass and are highly corrected, especially for their era. The 15, 25, 40, 50, 63, 75mm all are superb. Longer focal lengths aren't as fancy with their formulations or glass but still draw nicely.
Other than that, I love adapting ancient meniscus and rapid rectilinear lenses to whatever I'm shooting and have made some fun images with them.
Phil Forrest
Other than that, I love adapting ancient meniscus and rapid rectilinear lenses to whatever I'm shooting and have made some fun images with them.
Phil Forrest
Contarama
Well-known
I have always loved the way Contaflex lenses render. Wonder what they would look like adapted to some digital camera. Only way to focus would be with your feet and youd be shooting wide open. They have a sort of odd weird quarky look about them too.
Raid I think I could sit in my room and stare at your snap for hours.
Raid I think I could sit in my room and stare at your snap for hours.
peterm1
Veteran
Thank you John Very kind to say my style is Sui Generis, it is flattering (at least I hope it is flattering - it could mean unique bad not unique good
). In any event I had never quite thought of it in those terms (the last time I saw this term used I think it was in a High Court judgment. ) I will post some shots shortly (just went for a walk with the Steinheil on an NEX 7 and hope something usable will come from it).
And yes the editor is Corel PSP though I am finding it useful to use Lightroom for basic edits due in part to its ability to copy edits across multiple images quickly and easily, and also because it has best in class ability to pull back blown highlights. Nothing else I have seen matches it in that regard. but I still drop out of LR and into Corel PSP for anything more complex or demanding.
CSS 9450 " I bought my Sony mirrorless specifically to use old lenses on it.
Here's an old "Super Rokkor" 45mm LTM lens..."
Yep I think that qualifies as slightly weird looking on an NEX. I have seen these before once or twice but always on an early Minolta rangefinder. Good lenses I believe.
Roger Hicks "Dear Peter,
What about Vivitar Series 1 Solid Cats?
Oh; sorry; they're not mirrorless...
Cheers,
R."
I know what a cat lens is but what is a "solid" cat? In general though I think you are right a cat lens is pretty substantial and might look weird so mounted.
Besk " The Solid Cats are weird for sure.
Currently the only lens I use on my Sony Nex is a Robot Xenagon 30mm f/3.5.
As a Chrome plated brass lens it is a little heavy but sharp."
I would love to see a photo of a Robot lens on a mirrorless camera. I did recently see an adapter for Robot to M4/3 and that set me to wondering about them. I imagine they are pretty small.......I have seen photos but its hard to get a sense of their size.
Raid "I often use a Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 for the Rolleiflex QBM system on m 4/3 cameras. It is a pleasure to get back beautiful images from this lens."
Raid I would love to see an image of this lens mounted.
peterm1
Veteran
A couple of photos of the Schneider Lens and Zeiss Jena lens mentioned below, mounted on an NEX 7 camera. Here I am using an Exakta to M4/3 and M4/3 to NEX adapter (stacked).
Here is another slightly unusual lens by virtue of its tiny size. I had lusted after a Canon 100mm f3.5 lens for some little while, knowing that they were said to be small but not really understanding just how small. (In real life it seems much smaller than even it appears here).
And here I have made some very mundane images from this morning's walk. Made with the 35mm f2.8 Schneider. The results are pretty well what I would expect from a moderate aperture German lens of that era. Respectable enough, but not stunning sharpness together with well behaved, moderate contrast and color rendition. Bokeh is also very moderate and restrained.
My backyard
TV room
A nearby house 1
A nearby house 2
Here is another slightly unusual lens by virtue of its tiny size. I had lusted after a Canon 100mm f3.5 lens for some little while, knowing that they were said to be small but not really understanding just how small. (In real life it seems much smaller than even it appears here).
And here I have made some very mundane images from this morning's walk. Made with the 35mm f2.8 Schneider. The results are pretty well what I would expect from a moderate aperture German lens of that era. Respectable enough, but not stunning sharpness together with well behaved, moderate contrast and color rendition. Bokeh is also very moderate and restrained.
My backyard
TV room
A nearby house 1
A nearby house 2
charjohncarter
Veteran
Unique Good.
peterm1
Veteran
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
Holy...! Do we have a forum member in Vatican City? There must be a Patron Saint for adapter stacking!
... here the Voigtländer Skopagon (not mine)
peterm1
Veteran
Holy...! Do we have a forum member in Vatican City? There must be a Patron Saint for adapter stacking!
It can be a bit hit and miss.
I bought the M4/3 to NEX adapter after buying a Samyang 12mm f2 wide angle lens in M4/3 mount (there was no way I was going to buy this lens in both M4/3 and NEX mounts) so I thought the few bucks it was going to cost for an adapter would be a small risk. But the adapter is a bit sloppy with the above lens. And I found it is a bit sloppy with one or two of my m4/3 adapters too so...............However, with the K and F Exakta mount to M4/3 adapter stacked with the M4/3 to NEX adapter it all clicks together nice and tight, not in the least bit sloppy and focuses just fine to boot. So maybe you are right and I should be saying a few Hail Marys. (Or maybe I should be lighting a few candles for the K and F adapters which do seem to be a cut above the average in tolerances and seldom seem to give me troubles.)
Though I should confess that I have tried stacking a few other adapters. For example an LTM - Leica M adapter can be stacked with a Leica M - M4/3 adapter for use on an M4/3 camera and works well as perhaps might be expected.
And I even have an M42 - Leica LTM adapter that can be added to the above mix too. (Though I did have to modify this as it was not focusing to infinity properly).
Pretty much that is it - other combos I have tried have given me some headaches. But it is fun trying unusual combos like these.
peterm1
Veteran
Holy...! Do we have a forum member in Vatican City? There must be a Patron Saint for adapter stacking!
... here the Voigtländer Skopagon (not mine)
PS the Voigtlander looks nice (as they always seem do) I used to have a Voigtlander Prominent rangefinder camera with several original 1950s Voigtlander lenses and loved both how they handled and the images they made.
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
Peter,
thank you for mentioning K&F In another thread I was scolding Chinese adapters, but I agree, K&F seem to be a good choice! (I have C/Y > M, Minolta SR > M, and Pentax K > M —— no complaints.)
Aaargh! There are so many super cool snazzy bonkers kooky lenses ready for Saint Adaptius!
Again, not mine:
Snazzy Ultron:
—— Original:
Snazzy Distagon:
—— Original:
thank you for mentioning K&F
In another thread I was scolding Chinese adapters, but I agree, K&F seem to be a good choice! (I have C/Y > M, Minolta SR > M, and Pentax K > M —— no complaints.)Aaargh! There are so many super cool snazzy bonkers kooky lenses ready for Saint Adaptius!
Again, not mine:
Snazzy Ultron:
—— Original:
Snazzy Distagon:
—— Original:
goamules
Well-known
I've got a ton of Cine and LTM exotics. Here is my Cooke Ivotal 50/1.4. It does well on APS-C.
peterm1
Veteran
Peter,
thank you for mentioning K&F
Aaargh! There are so many super cool snazzy bonkers kooky lenses ready for Saint Adaptius!
Again, not mine:
Snazzy Ultron:
—— Original:
Snazzy Distagon:
—— Original:
Wow you have a Distagon for a Contarex. I love the lenses for the old Bullseye camera. But I guess the size qualifies them as somewhat kooky on an M4/3 camera. But then again I rather like biggish lenses. (A secret fetish).
And the chrome Ultron as well. I have a serious soft spot for chrome and black/chrome lenses. They just look so darn nice.
peterm1
Veteran
I've got a ton of Cine and LTM exotics. Here is my Cooke Ivotal 50/1.4. It does well on APS-C.
Now this is interesting looking. I do not know much about Cooke lenses though of course I have heard of them. Is this specific one a cine lens or something else? I have often wondered with those how cine lenses cope with coverage of the sensor frame on mirrorless cameras as I had understood that the C mount ones cropped even on m4/3 sensors.
But you say this lens works with APS sensors.......I would like to know more if possible.