Your underrated lenses

[boojum]

Jupiter 8's cannot be counted on to always be good. You know the old FSU joke, "We pretend to work, they pretend to pay us." QC on lenses and cameras was not too good. KMZ made the best Jupiters but even those were uneven. I have a '51 that is alright and a '57 that is just super. It is nearly the best Sonnar I have and I am blessed with some good ones. This is not the best photograph in the world but it does show how well this '57 KMZ Jupiter 8 handles light and color and how sharp it is. Luck of the draw, bought from a seller in Ukraine.

​

Night scene in the Astoria Harbor, West Mooring Basin by Bornstein's Sea Food. M9 - '57 KMZ J8 by West Phalia, on Flickr

​

 

[dexdog]

Luck of the draw, bought from a seller in Ukraine.

Yeah, sometimes you get lucky! I have a 1953 version that is very, very good, perfect outta the box.

 

[kxl]

If you think they're great, and you also think they don't get the attention they deserve, then yes! 😄

I don't know if there's bias in general against "upstart" Chinese lens manufacturers versus German (or Japanese) manufacturers, which admittedly have long histories in manufacturing lenses, but the sub-$1000 Thypoch Simera and LLL lenses punch above their weight in terms of build quality, as well as optical performance--within context.

Beyond the incredible value, the LLL lenses, designed to be replicas, give me an opportunity to shoot lenses that are close in performance (at least from what I've read) to the originals, which are now either hard to find and/or very pricey. In terms of corner to corner sharpness, contrast, etc..., do they compare favorably with the latest Cron ASPH lenses? No, of course not--but they weren't meant to.

 

[ddutchison2]

In the LTM world, the Ver.1 50/2.8 Elmar and the Canon 50/1.8 - if you have a clear one

 

[splitimageview]

Sleeper lenses are a good topic.

I'll start with zooms as primes seem to get the most attention therefore are rarely actually under rated.

Nikkor 28-50/3.5, 50-135/3.5.

Nikkor 28-105 AFD.

 

[titrisol]

In the early 2000s I bought a sears brand 135/2.8 for less than $20 and it is one of the best lenses I owned.

If you had asked this question 15-20 years ago, when adapting vintage lenses to digital was not a thing, I would very easily answer that Takumars and Zuikos are sold at prices that was a criminal offence. Same also for Rokkors. Twenty years fast forward and everyone is aware of their merits.

If I had to name a few today I would say:

a) K-mount Ricoh lenses. I don't own any anymore but every single one I ever used was an excellent lens. From 28mm to 50mm, they were all brilliant.

b) for me, the M-line lenses from Pentax (K-mount) are outstanding. Very well built, excellent performance and compact. The most I paid was £50 for the 35f/2.8 (although this one is more expensive nowadays). The rest varied from £2 to £20 for the 50f/1.4. I also owned the 40f/2.8 but I was never impressed. Maybe a bad copy, maybe poor ergonomics or its just that the 35f/2.8 is a much better lens.

View attachment 4875741

and the SMC-A pentax as well, great lenses

 

[38Deardorff]

My favourite under rated lens is this Canon 28mm f2.8 LTM. The front is wobbly so i took it to my friendly repair guy LensMedicYYC. Someone had previously taken it apart and one of the three screwholes was stripped. No way to repair it. At first i was disappointed, but I continued to shoot with it and the results are always great even wide open. So i live with it. It's got character and unlike the couple of expensive Voigtlander 28mm f3.5....it has no haze.

 

[chuckroast]

Jupiter 8's cannot be counted on to always be good. You know the old FSU joke, "We pretend to work, they pretend to pay us." QC on lenses and cameras was not too good. KMZ made the best Jupiters but even those were uneven. I have a '51 that is alright and a '57 that is just super. It is nearly the best Sonnar I have and I am blessed with some good ones. This is not the best photograph in the world but it does show how well this '57 KMZ Jupiter 8 handles light and color and how sharp it is. Luck of the draw, bought from a seller in Ukraine.

​

Night scene in the Astoria Harbor, West Mooring Basin by Bornstein's Sea Food. M9 - '57 KMZ J8 by West Phalia, on Flickr

​

I can smell the kelp, the fishy remains, the salt air. and hear the skipper in the wheelhouse cussin' because it's taking so long ...

 

[chuckroast]

My favourite under rated lens is this Canon 28mm f2.8 LTM. The front is wobbly so i took it to my friendly repair guy LensMedicYYC. It had previously been taken apart and one of the three screwholes was stripped. No way to repair it. At first i was disappointed, but I continued to shoot with it and the results are always great even wide open. So i live with it. It's got character and unlike the couple of expensive Voigtlander 28mm f3.5....it has no haze.
View attachment 4875818

Drool

 

[boojum]

My favourite under rated lens is this Canon 28mm f2.8 LTM. The front is wobbly so i took it to my friendly repair guy LensMedicYYC. Someone had previously taken it apart and one of the three screwholes was stripped. No way to repair it. At first i was disappointed, but I continued to shoot with it and the results are always great even wide open. So i live with it. It's got character and unlike the couple of expensive Voigtlander 28mm f3.5....it has no haze.
View attachment 4875818

I am with you 100%. I have one and love it. I dropped it about two inches onto my keyboard and now it binds as turn the barrel to get to infinity. I will get it fixed. It has always been a stellar performer, just great.

 

[Rob-F]

In the LTM world, the Ver.1 50/2.8 Elmar and the Canon 50/1.8 - if you have a clear one

Speaking of the 50/2.8 Elmar, I concur! Sharp, with just the right amount of contrast. And may I mention the Collapsible Summicron for its soft-sharp look when used wide-open?