vintage lens

[jaeger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't have much experience on vintage lenses, I mean pre-war or 40s-60s eras.  The one I had was Leica 5cm f/2 in my avatar but I sold it to fund my new purchase  =P

I've been looking for an inexpensive vintage portrait lens to play with, probably Canon LTM 50mm f/1.4, 100mm F/2 or 85mm /f1.8 <- this one is a bit over budget.  I have modern lenses at that focal length already and I sort of able to mimic the vintage look in post editing. 

My question is... is there anything so special about vintage lens that can't be replicated?  Thank you for your advise.

[a.noctilux]

Much much more aberrations ( astigmatism, coma, curvature of field, etc. ) and less contrast/more resolution, mainly.

Each kind, even each lens of same naming but different period can behave differently.

My best/worse examples come with naming Summicron 5cm or 50mm with the first one from 1951 (yellow Cron), and the last one from 1999,

and some in between.

I can say that one can't replace the other for same rendering and I don't have skills to mimic those characters in post-processing, just use the real lens to

have what I planned (so learn to know them is a must), but those subtle differences can ennoy most of us.

 

Another "good surprise" for me it's the Canon LTM 1.2/50mm just lovely lens that in my stable of Leitz/Leica lenses nothing can compare.

To be close I can say that 1.2/50mm lens is a mix of Noctilux 1.0 rendering with some Summilux-M pre-asph. in most of it's aperture from f/1.2.

And bonus, being shorter, it hides less the VF than the Noctilux 1.0 and much lighter to carry around.

 

Some people who are searching for "sharpness" don't see any benefits from those oldies but goodies.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[spydrxx]

The Canon 50/1.9 collapsible or 2.0 rigid IMHO render much like my former collapsible Summicron. I'm still experimenting with a Nikkor 50/2.0 which I believe is a Sonnar design. Haven't yet used it for portraits but it has the potential to become a favorite. Don't be too quick to dismiss that old standby of Leica's, the 50/3.5 red scale. I really love its rendering - bringing down contrast and smoothing things out nicely. At least that's been my experience using them on both digital and film.

[a.noctilux]

Some years ago, I discovered Canon LTM 1.4/50 along with the Nikkor 1.2/55 to compare with my then "the best lens in the world" 50mm Summilux-M titanium before the asph..

After that I changed my mind to admit there is NO best lens in the world anymore 😵

each one, well used can deliver nice pictures

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

[a.noctilux]

And better yet, the sitter IS the most important

than the best gear 😉

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

seconds or minutes apart, same lens (I don't remember which one) on M9

not very sharp, but I much prefer this one below

 

 

 

 

[Guest JMF]

2 hours ago, jaeger said:

I don't have much experience on vintage lenses, I mean pre-war or 40s-60s eras.  The one I had was Leica 5cm f/2 in my avatar but I sold it to fund my new purchase  =P

I've been looking for an inexpensive vintage portrait lens to play with, probably Canon LTM 50mm f/1.4, 100mm F/2 or 85mm /f1.8 <- this one is a bit over budget.  I have modern lenses at that focal length already and I sort of able to mimic the vintage look in post editing. 

My question is... is there anything so special about vintage lens that can't be replicated?  Thank you for your advise.

The examples you're giving are great lenses, same for the Canon 50 1.2 LTM yet often found not properly calibrated . 

I'd mention the 50 Nikkor 1.4 LTM in the 50mm range and the 73 Hektor 1.9 LTM .

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, jaeger said:

My question is... is there anything so special about vintage lens that can't be replicated?  Thank you for your advise.

You can probably answer this subjective question yourself if you browse through the forum's "The view through older glass" thread.

I agree with JMF above that the 73/1.9 Hektor and Nikkor Kogaku are excellent lenses in a particular way.

Pete.

[pico]

3 hours ago, jaeger said:

is there anything so special about vintage lens that can't be replicated?  Thank you for your advise.

You would need great talent to replicate the field curvature of some old lenses.

[Ecar]

Old lenses typically display a mix of optical flaws, especially the fastest ones. It's impossible to replicate them in post. A bit like "vintage develop presets" in LR that aim to replicate film emulsions: sometimes pretty good in terms of tones, but not the real thing when it comes to textures, transitions, etc.

The lenses you are considering are great choices if you want a relatively "modern" rendering. But there are plenty of others (some suggested in the replies above) if you want more "vintage". I'd also suggest only one of my personal favourites: the Nikkor 85/2 LTM - heavy, but produces a wonderful Sonnar look and can be found at reasonable prices in good condition.

[bayernfan]

Buy a summitar, shoot it wide open.  It will change your life. 😄

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Summitar_f%3D_5_cm_1:2

[jaeger]

4 hours ago, JMF said:

The examples you're giving are great lenses, same for the Canon 50 1.2 LTM yet often found not properly calibrated . 

I'd mention the 50 Nikkor 1.4 LTM in the 50mm range and the 73 Hektor 1.9 LTM .

I read something not quite decent about Canon 50 /1.2 but it make sense because it was not calibrated right.  Does it need to send out to DAG or something is DYI possible?

3 hours ago, pico said:

You would need great talent to replicate the field curvature of some old lenses.

I see what you're saying.  I looked up flickr but... the curvature is more pronounced but not that much from modern lenses. 

2 hours ago, Ecar said:

Old lenses typically display a mix of optical flaws, especially the fastest ones. It's impossible to replicate them in post. A bit like "vintage develop presets" in LR that aim to replicate film emulsions: sometimes pretty good in terms of tones, but not the real thing when it comes to textures, transitions, etc.

The lenses you are considering are great choices if you want a relatively "modern" rendering. But there are plenty of others (some suggested in the replies above) if you want more "vintage". I'd also suggest only one of my personal favourites: the Nikkor 85/2 LTM - heavy, but produces a wonderful Sonnar look and can be found at reasonable prices in good condition.

Nikkor 85 f/2 or Canon 85 f/1.5 or Canon f/1.8? 

1 hour ago, bayernfan said:

Buy a summitar, shoot it wide open.  It will change your life. 😄

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Summitar_f%3D_5_cm_1:2

Too expensive.

Edited August 3, 2019 by jaeger

[pico]

1 hour ago, bayernfan said:

Buy a summitar, shoot it wide open.  It will change your life. 😄

 

Choose a Summitar carefully. Regardless of  the online information, Leica improved over early 6-blade apertures to round 10-blade apertures then later than the round for some they reverted to 6-blade, then to round again later. The difference in rendering is apparent. Late post-war Summitars should be coated. Check.

Edited August 3, 2019 by pico

[Guest JMF]

2 hours ago, jaeger said:

I read something not quite decent about Canon 50 /1.2 but it make sense because it was not calibrated right.  Does it need to send out to DAG or something is DYI possible?

I see what you're saying.  I looked up flickr but... the curvature is more pronounced but not that much from modern lenses. 

Nikkor 85 f/2 or Canon 85 f/1.5 or Canon f/1.8? 

Too expensive.

The first three Canon 50 1.2 LTM I had needed calibrating with shims made and installed. No basic DIY there and yes DAG would sort this out simply.

Yet, I recently "found" a nice one  spot on focus wise.

With the Canon 50 1.2 LTM:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Aux Tuileries by JM__, on Flickr

Ipanema, Rio de Janeiro by JM__, on Flickr

I like the Canon 85 f/1.8 , the same calibration issue might occur with this lens as well. 

With the Canon 85 1.8 LTM:

Ibou by JM__, on Flickr

Best, JM.

Edited August 4, 2019 by JMF

[bayernfan]

4 hours ago, jaeger said:

Too expensive.

If $200 is too expensive, I'm wondering if this is the right forum to making such inquiries. 😋

[jaeger]

21 minutes ago, bayernfan said:

If $200 is too expensive, I'm wondering if this is the right forum to making such inquiries. 😋

see nobody read my OP, I had it before. 

[bayernfan]

24 minutes ago, jaeger said:

see nobody read my OP, I had it before. 

i read it, the canon 50/1.4 LTM regularly sells for over $200.

[Ecar]

6 hours ago, jaeger said:

Nikkor 85 f/2 or Canon 85 f/1.5 or Canon f/1.8? 

Canon 85/1.5 is huge and very heavy (think Summarex).

Canon 85/1.8 is a double Gauss and has the most modern rendering. Canon 85/1.9 (several versions, earlier ones are larger and heavier) are also easy to find and inexpensive.

Nikkor 85/2 is a Sonnar.

I'd go for either the Canon 85/1.8 or the Nikkor 85/2, depending on the rendering you prefer. If you want to push the vintage envelope further, consider the Zeiss-Opton 85/2 (wonderful, but Contax mount, so needs an adapter), CZJ 85/2 or Canon Serenar 85/2.

My absolute favourite in this focal length is (easily) the Nikkor 85/1.5, but it's hard to find and priced accordingly.

[g2van]

I agree with some of the points for the Canon 50/1.2 LTM - great lens.

How about something seldom mentioned - OK it's not LTM or M mount but Leica made an MD to M adapter and with EVF on 240 or M10 it's not a problem - Minolta Rokkor Varisoft 85mm f2.8. 

At f2.8 it's sharp with less than modern contrast but the beauty is in it's varisoft feature - from 0 (none) to 3 (max). I would argue that at 85mm many people (like me) would need an EVF to focus anyway (so the fact that it's not rangefinder coupled is less of an issue); plus, to get the best of the varisoft feature, one would/should use the EVF for WYSIWYG on how much softness to apply anyway. 

 

[jaeger]

On 8/3/2019 at 4:58 PM, pico said:

Choose a Summitar carefully. Regardless of  the online information, Leica improved over early 6-blade apertures to round 10-blade apertures then later than the round for some they reverted to 6-blade, then to round again later. The difference in rendering is apparent. Late post-war Summitars should be coated. Check.

The one I had was 6 blade, I didn't have much love and sold it some time ago.

On 8/3/2019 at 9:18 PM, bayernfan said:

i read it, the canon 50/1.4 LTM regularly sells for over $200.

Yes both canon 50 1.4 and 1.2 are on my list.  I also researching Summarit 1.5 too, I feel very dizzy...

Edited August 6, 2019 by jaeger

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[a.noctilux]

Summarit 1.5 which I have over time, in a couple of units can be "the most quilified as vintage" for me.

One unit can be kind of "Poor man's Thambar" (I used on my M8, the lens fog could not be removed 😵) but used as is so lovely flare.

I do have one with pristine glass and it's round aperture can do wonder, different from other lenses that I have : combination of using close down and round high light "spots"

is possible in 50mm with this Summarit 1.5 and Jupiter 3/8 (but these have some flaws to overcom).