Your cheapest/most expensive combo

kxl said:
I have the same combo. In fact, the reason I bought the cheap F75 was to shoot my Sigma ART lenses (24, 35, 50 and 35-105) on a film body. The F75 is definitely my cheapest body. My most expensive lens would be my Nikon 70-200mm/2.8.
Click to expand...

I'm kinda diggin the F75. It is actually really nice with a 50 1.8g which is feather light as the camera. But i noticed the Art lens focuses much quicker.
 
Ok, switching it around, cheap lens on big ticket body. Minox lens taken off dead Minox and glued into a plastic LTM mount stuck onto a Nikon Z7:



This lens is actually really decent!
 
Huss said:
I'm kinda diggin the F75. It is actually really nice with a 50 1.8g which is feather light as the camera. But i noticed the Art lens focuses much quicker.
Click to expand...

Same here. When I want a lightweight cheap/cheap combo, I use an 18-55 DX lens - works perfectly from 24-55mm.
 
EOS 300, new for 200$ in nineties.
Three current models of L zooms works well with it.

M-E works with m39 close up ring and any Rigid 50mm Industar.
 
zuiko85 said:
Phil, I'd be interested to see how that Kodak lens does on 4X5. I'm of the "If I can mount it I'll shoot it." school.
Click to expand...

DSC1865.jpg


I am 99% sure I shot this with the aforementioned lens. It was a really bright day and I stopped the lens down all the way I think, which caused the less than sharp image. This negative holder also suffers from a light leak at the felt where the dark slide goes. Aside from having low contrast due to no coating and a bit of veiling flare, this lens is extraordinary. 2 elements sitting inside the most reliable internally governed shutter probably ever made. I got it from a ragged Kodak Autographic 3A I bought in the early 2000s and used the body to create a superwide panoramic camera out of. I chucked the lens in a rubbermaid tote for about 10 years and dug it out when I started playing with it on the end of a sacrificed junk push-pull zoom hanging off my Nikon D3.
At about 2 stops from wide open it rivals what my 180mm f/5.6 EBC Fujinon W can do, but just doesn't have the movement. At infinity, the lens will vignette gently, leaving black corners. I think it's just about perfect for portraits at portrait distances and other things within about 5 yards. I can close this lens up in my field camera, which I can't do with any other LF optic I own, so the lens you have with you is a far better shooter than the lens you left at home.

Phil Forrest
 
A $35 M42 35/3.5 Super-Takumar on an M240. Easily the best IQ/$ of any lens I own, the Minotar in the Minox GT is a close second.
 
Oh yes! If we're talking about expensive bodies and cheaper lenses, then I can do that. I've sometimes shot my Leica M9 with a fairly old Canon P 50mm f1.8 with infinity lock. Surprisingly nice combination. The lens was about $200 or so?


I'm going to be using a Helios 44-M, which I bought for $70 AUD, on my Panasonic GH4 ($1500) for video work. Should be fun!
 
Phil_F_NM said:
DSC1865.jpg


I am 99% sure I shot this with the aforementioned lens. It was a really bright day and I stopped the lens down all the way I think, which caused the less than sharp image. This negative holder also suffers from a light leak at the felt where the dark slide goes. Aside from having low contrast due to no coating and a bit of veiling flare, this lens is extraordinary. 2 elements sitting inside the most reliable internally governed shutter probably ever made. I got it from a ragged Kodak Autographic 3A I bought in the early 2000s and used the body to create a superwide panoramic camera out of. I chucked the lens in a rubbermaid tote for about 10 years and dug it out when I started playing with it on the end of a sacrificed junk push-pull zoom hanging off my Nikon D3.
At about 2 stops from wide open it rivals what my 180mm f/5.6 EBC Fujinon W can do, but just doesn't have the movement. At infinity, the lens will vignette gently, leaving black corners. I think it's just about perfect for portraits at portrait distances and other things within about 5 yards. I can close this lens up in my field camera, which I can't do with any other LF optic I own, so the lens you have with you is a far better shooter than the lens you left at home.

Phil Forrest
Click to expand...
Thanks, that's a nice rendering.
I'm rigging a +5 (200mm) series 6 close up lens to my 4X5 and now waiting for a day to get out and test it. I have waterhouse stops from f16 to f64 to try out with it. On the GG f16 is quite soft and the corners are really soft. At f64 the GG is just too dark to see much so I'll focus at f16 and then shoot at f64.
 
This is the cheapest lens I've used on dear body, so far, although I had two Industar 26's from memory that I got for a pound the pair and used them as well...


1%20-%20Camera-L.jpg



Regards, David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom