Vintage used lenses-- my purchases... thoughts? Advice on adapters?

T

themixtape

Hi guys, I'm a new guy here. :) I introduced myself in the Welcome section but wanted to also post here--

My name is Chris... I use a Canon t3i for YouTube one-man-band video stuff, and random other crap... and I'm in the process of working on a feature-length indie film with a few friends. Decided to pick up some vintage lenses, and wanted to get you guys' opinions of each, and also advice on exactly which adapters I'll need...

1. Albinar 28mm, 2.8. FD mount (I think I found the right one on amazon)

2. Olympus 50mm, 1.8 (also, think I found the right adapter on amazon)

3. Super Takumar 50mm, 1.4 (the "Radioactive", the "Dream Lens")... heard (and have seen) absolutely wonderful things. Got a good deal on it, in ex. condition, too! I think I need the M42 adapter...?

4. Takumar 28-80, 3.5. Have no idea which adapter is needed... possibly the M42?

5. Canon FD 24mm, 2.8. (FD mount I'm guessin')... found an absolutely mint one of these... for dirt cheap. Thrilled.

6. "Amcam"/Prinz/Konia 28mm, 2.8 in mint condition (Minolta mount?)

Thanks for your help.... I'll try to post pics tomorrow after I get some sleep!

-Chris

PHOTOS (Dropbox folder)

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ya850tttp58p2nm/gPxT3CghNy

The photo of the Olympus is a stock photo (and I haven't received any of these lenses yet, but can't wait to try them out).

edit: added photos of the mount side!
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
Anything with Minolta or Canon FD mount will require an EF adapter with a glass element. You'll lose light (i.e. your widest aperture) and you'll lose infinite focus. Without seeing the backs of the lenses, it's hard to know what some of those are.

Nikon, Pentax K-mount, M-42, and Contax/Yashica all use simple Canon EF adapter rings with no additional elements.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Fotodiox is the way to go, and it looks like the one you found corrects for infinity focus. That's good.

They also make an M42 adapter, and adapters for just about anything else. But again, without seeing the bottoms (mounts) of your other lenses, I have no way to figure out which adapters would work.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The Olympus should be an OM, so this mount, I think:

http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Adapter-Olympus-Camera-Digital/dp/B001G4NBNC

The Takumar's may also be a Pentax-K mount, which is pretty common. Do both lenses look to be the same mount or are they different. It is also possible the Super is an M42, while the other one is something else.

If the last one is a minolta, then it is probably an MD, so look for MD to EOS EF-S adapters. I didn't any reputable ones in a 5 second search.

Just guessing on the info given, YMMV, etc. ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Personally wouldn't use any of them. I wouldn't waste my time shooting with lenses with slightly different colourings, with clickety, clickety aperture control and clickety, clickety focus rings etc...

I'd go with lenses purpose built for filming. Since I've started doing this, everything else has been pointless for me except in VFX-heavy environments.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Many of the vintage lenses have optical qualities that can't be duplicated well by altering the pristine image from newer (admittedly amazing) cine lenses. Rokinon makes a really nice set of cine primes that are reasonably priced.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Good to know... still, these Rokinon kits look DOPE. Not bad prices AT ALL. B&H has the 4-piece kit for only $1350. Ridiculous. Might have to sell some music gear to fund those.

I love the long throw of the focus stuff on the cine lenses, as well as the "de-clicked" aperture rings.

Decisions, decisions...

I'm about to drop about $100 on adapters alone... should put that $100 toward a Rokinon Cine lens... or the pack... ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Start with the 85mm rokinon, then read reviews on all the others and get those you feel you need.

You most likely don't need (and potentially don't even want) the 4 lens kit. but the 85mm is a REALLY good lens for the price.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks, Will! Yeah, I read very good things about the 85mm. The only thing is... I hate using a lens like that for indoor shots/scenes, as I can't get back far enough. My guess is with movies that have dialogue/scenes in a bedroom, they're using either a 24 or 35mm, even with DSLR.

Still kind of new to this.

As far as the differences between the Cine lenses and the regular Rokinons..... are the only two differences the follow focus-style focus ring (better grip for gears, etc) and the de-clicked aperture ring? I'm almost wondering if it would be better to go with the cheaper (regular) versions... I have the Kamerar FF-3, and it comes with a ring that grips any lens quite well (I've tested on several with relatively annoying focus rings, and it worked great)... and I've never found myself changing aperture live, during a shot (most of my stuff is indoors).

Just wondering.

From what I've read, the 35mm and the 85mm are the first ones to get... then the 24, and then the 14 if needed. I wonder why they're so much crappier in reviews.. bad t/f stops and horrible low-light performance? Can't find enough YouTube videos showcasing the lenses.

Thanks!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Don't get the 14, get a tokina 11-16 instead, much better lens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ey0ZWOWJKKs


The 24 would certainly help with those cramped quarters shots, but it's quite a bit spendier than the 35 or 85..


Oh, and skip the 8mm too, unless you're going to be shooting super wide landscapes, or oldschool fisheye skate videos. :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
themixtape said:
As far as the differences between the Cine lenses and the regular Rokinons..... are the only two differences the follow focus-style focus ring (better grip for gears, etc) and the de-clicked aperture ring? I'm almost wondering if it would be better to go with the cheaper (regular) versions... I have the Kamerar FF-3, and it comes with a ring that grips any lens quite well (I've tested on several with relatively annoying focus rings, and it worked great)... and I've never found myself changing aperture live, during a shot (most of my stuff is indoors).
Click to expand...

Why use an add on ring when you can pay a slight amount more for one built in?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Good point. But the add-on ring is actually quite smooth! :)

Damn man, that Tokina looks AMAZING. And a little more than the Rokinon, but seems well worth it, especially since it can zoom a little.

I wish the Glidecam was about $250 less than it is... those shots look killer in that video. Perfect! I guess the HD-2000 is the best steadicam for the price. God knows I went through several trash models from ebay (DIY steadicams, etc) in 2010 (wasted hundreds of dollars when people were going crazy with that stuff).

Might be worth it though, for sure... $1000 for an excellent wide angle and a killer steadicam rig? Considering the quality I see in that video... worth the investment.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
My 85mm Rokinon just arrived, literally about 3 minutes ago. :D

If I get some time before the sun fades today I'll try to get a couple shots on my Sony NEX5 with it. It won't be terribly interesting stuff, basically all that's going on here at the moment is lots of melting snow :P
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top