fotomeow
name under my name
50/1.4 SMC Takumar? One hell of a lens. No equivalent in the Pentax or Zeiss M42 range to the 35 Lux, though.
I have seen some photos of this lens before, (and now again on Flickr) I now what you are referring to. I just did a brief search for the type of lens mount, but on clear answer: is it a K mount? m42? Perhaps more importantly, are there adaptors which would allow me to mount to Nikon/Canon/etc?
He might go the opposite way and look for a Nikkor-S 5.8cm f/1.4 from 1960 or so, then
Get it AI-converted and use it on a D700.
RXMD: Interesting suggestion, since another fellow (TWoK) had also referenced this lens in a PM I had sent him before starting this thread. Since two folks have suggested this, I will definitely follow up on it.
I've been curious when the Zuickiholics would chime in and what recommendations they would make. What signature of the OM 50/2 Macro are similar to the Lux?
thanks, Gary
john_s
Well-known
As someone has already suggested, the very old Nikon lenses (pre Ai) need to be modified before they can be used on modern bodies.
fotomeow
name under my name
Will definitely rent the d700 or other dSLR before plunking down $3k. I have been using my 35mm and 50mm Summilux' with my RD1s and like the rendition. I actually havent run a roll thru my M6 with these lenses yet.
Perhaps images will look even better with film and the Lux', but right now I am just loving the convenience of digital. Although I havent tried to max out the print size with the RD1s and the Lux', I have actually been pretty happy with digital screen shots.
Two main reasons I am wanting FF digital: I want a freakin' 35mm to be a freakin' 35mm, not crop factored to 50mm, so that I can have a fasst 35mm. And the second reason is economics: for me, anyway, I want a break from the time and energy of carting negs around, processing, scanning, and the cost involved. This may be heresy on RFF, but plunking $3K down on a digital FF will pay for itself in a couple years in terms of the costs for money and energy spent on film.
That said, I will still keep my M6 for special film projects. eg, I have a couple rolls of Tech Pan to play with.
paulfish4570
Veteran
Flektogon 35/2.4 ...
BTMarcais
Well-known
the 50mm f/1.4 SMC Takumar from pentax is a M42 screw lens (and the last screw mount version of the 50mm f/1.4). Easy to adapt to pretty much any system.
-Brian
-Brian
Quinn Porter
Established
Try the current Zeiss 50 f/1.4. It's available in most modern DSLR mounts.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
Why not the Nikon 50/1.2 AIS?
Bingley
Veteran
What about the MD Rokkor 50/1.4?
nobbylon
Veteran
The only lenses I've seen and had, that give the 35/50 lux look are the leica R glass. However to use on my D700 and use stop down metering would be a pain even though most of the time I use lenses wide open. I've got a single coated 50 H f2.0 Nikkor and it's nice. Very sharp lens and on a D700 gives warmer colours compaired to multicoated. You will need to AI the lens before fitting it to a D700 though. I also use the 28mm AIS which is by far the best 28 i've had and is nearly always on my D700. Sharp, no barrel dist' and nice oof plus it focus's very close 20cm.
fotomeow
name under my name
So far a few folks have mentioned the SMC Takumar 50/1.4, and two gents have suggested the Nikon-S 58/1.4 from the 60s or so.
There seem to be fewer 35mm options, at least at the f1.4 speed. I like the idea of older single coated lenses, I do a lot of B&W.
In any case, Ive started an Excel spreadsheet to write down the suggestions, Ive been research the suggested lenses, but just cant keep up!
Please keep the suggestions coming. If its not to much to ask, any photos of images taken with suggested lenses would be MUCH appreciated!
thanks, Gary
There seem to be fewer 35mm options, at least at the f1.4 speed. I like the idea of older single coated lenses, I do a lot of B&W.
In any case, Ive started an Excel spreadsheet to write down the suggestions, Ive been research the suggested lenses, but just cant keep up!
Please keep the suggestions coming. If its not to much to ask, any photos of images taken with suggested lenses would be MUCH appreciated!
thanks, Gary
fotomeow
name under my name
thanks Nobbylon, but Im not familiar with the "stop-down metering", and why it would be a PITA. Could someone tell me?
Makten
-
Yeah, or the 55/1.2! Both are very soft and dreamy wide open, but sharp as hell once you hit f/2. Contrast is moderate wide open and a little better stopped down. The 50 is certainly more "modern" than the 55, so the choice isn't obvious.
Here are some wide open shots with the 55/1.2 on D700...
The bokeh is a bit nervous, but smoothens considerably at f/2.
And here some with the 50/1.2 wide open on D700. Please note that my PP style is drawn towards high contrast and saturated colors.
And again, if you stop down to f/2 the bokeh gets very nice and "controlled"...
Makten
-
Stop down metering means that you'll have to manually stop down the lens before taking the picture, which means that your viewfinder will go almost black at small apertures (especially if you've installed a focusing screen designed for easier MF). Using Nikon MF lenses on Nikon (pro and semi pro) cameras allows auto-stopdown, just as modern lenses. But you have to use the aperture ring instead of the dials on the camera.
So, using an old Nikkor on D700 is a breeze compared to adapting MF lenses onto a 5D. But you are of course restricted to Nikkors.
ferider
Veteran
If you are serious about your question, you should really have a look here:
http://www.leitax.com/leica-lens-for-nikon-cameras.html
From that page, for instance (after conversion to Nikon mount):
The 35/1.4 R-Summilux is one of the few lenses not adaptable that way, but the 35 Summicron is.
If you don't want to use a Leica-R lens due to budget, that would be understandable, of course.
If you just want smooth bokeh and sharp and don't really care about the very detailed signature, just pick your FF body, and buy a modern lens of the same vendor. I doubt you will be disappointed.
Roland.
http://www.leitax.com/leica-lens-for-nikon-cameras.html
From that page, for instance (after conversion to Nikon mount):
The 35/1.4 R-Summilux is one of the few lenses not adaptable that way, but the 35 Summicron is.
If you don't want to use a Leica-R lens due to budget, that would be understandable, of course.
If you just want smooth bokeh and sharp and don't really care about the very detailed signature, just pick your FF body, and buy a modern lens of the same vendor. I doubt you will be disappointed.
Roland.
Last edited:
andreios
Well-known
Which 28mm Nikkor are you referring to? The f.2.8? Thanks
ashrafazlan
Established
I believe it's the MF 28mm F/2 version, hell of a lens.
Makten
-
The 28/2.8 AI-S is also a hell of a lens, especially for closeups. A very nice thing about it is that it gives virtually NO distortion what so ever. Quite uncommon at that focal length.
Note that the AI version is not the same lens optically, and is often said to be inferior. Haven't tried it though.
nobbylon
Veteran
The 28mm 2.8 AIS. Easily distinguished from earlier version by the 20cm focus mark on the barrel. Even better than the f2 version. Sharp as a pin even wide open. It's one of Nikon's finest. They're not expensive. @ £150-200 I got mine from ebay for £46 !!! It had some fungus on the inside of the front element which after cleaning is perfect. Getting that element out is a bit of a pain though!
fotomeow
name under my name
Makten: THANK YOU for going to the trouble of posting the pics with the 55/1.2 AIS. I really like the signature of that lens. The have more difficulty "seeing" the quality of the lens in color than B&W (I shoot more B&W), but the examples you gave would seem to look quite good in B&W: fast, sharp focus plane, nice (creamy-ish) tonal rendition and bokeh.
I'm not into the modern look at this time, so I would lean toward the 55/1.2 rather than the 50/1.2 (but thanks Frank, all recommendations 'preciated).
And I will remember the 28mm AIS suggested (in my Excel spreadsheet!) if I decide to go wider than 35mm.
Best,
I'm not into the modern look at this time, so I would lean toward the 55/1.2 rather than the 50/1.2 (but thanks Frank, all recommendations 'preciated).
And I will remember the 28mm AIS suggested (in my Excel spreadsheet!) if I decide to go wider than 35mm.
Best,
fotomeow
name under my name
If you are serious about your question, you should really have a look here:
http://www.leitax.com/leica-lens-for-nikon-cameras.html
From that page, for instance (after conversion to Nikon mount):
The 35/1.4 R-Summilux is one of the few lenses not adaptable that way, but the 35 Summicron is.
If you don't want to use a Leica-R lens due to budget, that would be understandable, of course.
If you just want smooth bokeh and sharp and don't really care about the very detailed signature, just pick your FF body, and buy a modern lens of the same vendor. I doubt you will be disappointed.
Roland, thanks for the link to Leitax site, its quite informative. I may have to go with a 35mm Cron instead of a Lux due to compatibility AND cost. The 50mm Luxes arent cheap either, but on par with the M Luxes, so at least I could swap my M 50 Lux for an R 50 Lux.