Anti Indulgence approach...

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 end

woos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · Anti Indulgence approach...

A great place to check for this kind of thing is the mflenses.com forum! They have a huge wealth of info on old (and sometimes cheap) manual focus lenses. So many hours of productivity lost there at work!

Dec 27, 2012 at 06:01 PM

crazeazn
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Steve Spencer wrote:
Here is the kit I got for my daughter. A cheap Olympus OM to EOS converter - $25. Oly OM 21 f/3.5 - $300, Oly OM 28 f/3.5 - $40, Oly 50 f/1.8 - $25, and Oly 100 f/2.8 - $75. With a bit of money to spare. Not only is this kit cheap, it is small. I also got here a Canon 5D classic to use the lenses on. It is actually a very high IQ and fairly small kit for a very low price.

If you need longer lenses, there are bargains to be had there too, but they don't fit as well in a $500 budget, but you could certainly add a 200mm lens and even a 400mm lens (if you shop well) if you substituted for the 21mm. Basically you can keep either wide angle or longer tele in a $500 budget, but not both.

steve nailed what i would do with low budget. 5d + slower oly lenses or pentax.. the zeiss' have appreciated way too much.

Dec 27, 2012 at 06:12 PM

AhamB
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #3 · Anti Indulgence approach...

RustyBug wrote:
Of course, there is also the C/Y 35-70/3.4 or the Oly 21/3.5 ...

That reminds me, there is also the Oly 35-70/3.6. That's a nice lens that seems to perform surprisingly close to the level of the C/Y. It's just a bit rare (and therefore usually not so cheap) and the more common f/4 and f/3.5-4.5 versions aren't as good.

Dec 27, 2012 at 06:45 PM

philip_pj
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #4 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Here to add that if you look after your alt lenses, they retain high value upon resale, the better ones may increase in value on the used market. Many here own good and expensive lenses rather than good and less expensive lenses, and many have had this experience when time comes to sell.

Bodies are another matter entirely, sadly, but you already know that.

Dec 29, 2012 at 09:09 AM

BFTphoto
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · Anti Indulgence approach...

So true, I just took a $400 loss on a used 5d2 that I bought 6 months ago, bodies seem to lose value so fast these days due to the constant onslaught of new technology.

Alt lenses are a great way to get amazing results on a budget, you just need to do research first because of the amount of stuff out there. That's part of the fun though, finding a gem for a fraction of its modern counterpart.

Dec 29, 2012 at 12:57 PM

nixland
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #6 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Samyang 14mm (used) : $350
Nikon 50/1.4 : $100 (or Takumar 50/1.4 which is cheaper)
Olympus 135/3.5 : $50

Dec 29, 2012 at 06:27 PM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · Anti Indulgence approach...

on a 5D, I'd probably go OM 24/2.8, takumar 50/1.4, and samyang 85/1.4. easily got for $600 and with some patience for $500. competitive with what you could get for $2-3k.

Dec 30, 2012 at 03:00 AM

freaklikeme
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #8 · Anti Indulgence approach...

I think MF Nikons offer the best bang for the buck, so I'd probably go with the underappreciated but still excellent AI 35/2 and 85/2. If you shop carefully, that would allow enough room in the budget for a 135 2.8 or 3.5.

Jan 04, 2013 at 04:47 AM

EltonTeng
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #9 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Here was my most often used bargain line up when I shot Canon:

C/Y Zeiss 28/2.8: $229 (early 2007 price.)
Takumar 55/1.8 (M42): $32

The Takumar was a lovely little lens with great bokeh. Both lenses were getting significantly more time than the 35L that I ended up selling the 35L.

I ended up keeping my (worthless) 1D2N around so that I can play with the Tak 55/1.8 from time to time.

Edited on Jan 04, 2013 at 02:59 PM · View previous versions

Jan 04, 2013 at 05:07 AM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #10 · Anti Indulgence approach...

I still use my Contax Zeiss 28/2.8, although I also still use Canon, too.

Jan 04, 2013 at 12:43 PM

crazeazn
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · Anti Indulgence approach...

I think the 5Dc coming down significantly in price has opened up "decent dof" for those who want FF on a real budget. You can make a real killer kit with any of the aforementioned lenses.

OR you can just get a micro 4/3rd system and call it a day.

Jan 04, 2013 at 02:07 PM

Bifurcator
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #12 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Ben Totman wrote:
So true, I just took a $400 loss on a used 5d2 that I bought 6 months ago, bodies seem to lose value so fast these days due to the constant onslaught of new technology.

Alt lenses are a great way to get amazing results on a budget, you just need to do research first because of the amount of stuff out there. That's part of the fun though, finding a gem for a fraction of its modern counterpart.

Sorry to hear of your loss.

Just a note for people just getting into this though. If you try and do your homework first you usually end up getting in line for a model a few people somewhere have bragged up creating buzz and demand around. And one of the related components of demand is of course high(er) prices. Another component is that now you're standing in the same line to use the same tools as everyone else and your images will show that to some degree.

When your budget for a lens is around $100 or less I think it's MUCH more fun to fly semi-blind. If you're buying it on-line chances are that you have buy AND SELL privileges. Buy something around the standard (average) prices listed (not the cheapest and not the overpriced ones) for the model you're looking at, give it a try, and then sell it off for the same. Some of the lenses I've come across doing that are just wonderful - yet they had no reputation and little or no on-line buzz.

I did this for two years on a fairly large scale and I'm so glad I did. I learned a lot about lenses and lens manufacturers along the way and I know what I like. Not what's popular, not the ones everyone else is in line to get, but what appeals to me! A little less than half of the ones on my like list are the same models as those people are buzzing about so as it happens it was good that I didn't "do my homework first". As I would have missed out on about 60% of the ones I dig the most.

So what do I suggest a person goes by when picking one to try out? I don't. In my case I used the looks of the build quality to choose - at first. But I've since found that some of the plasticky looking ones can be very very awesome - and they're even more cheap than the $100 ones. Like my previous post shows, some are down around $25 or $30.

Hey, try out 4 at a time and sell back the ones you didn't dig.

I guess most people would be surprised to find out which lenses took these images below here. They certainly aren't on anyone's love-list and there's no buzz at all about them. Yet they consistently produce very good results and their 100% crops look pretty sweet too!

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Massive crop - tho not 100% - Wide Open I think too.

- 1/100s, ISO100, GH1

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Wide Open Performance (different lens from above) - 1/640s, ISO320, GH1

Edited on Jan 04, 2013 at 03:17 PM · View previous versions

Jan 04, 2013 at 02:36 PM

EltonTeng
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #13 · Anti Indulgence approach...

jcolwell wrote:
I still use my Contax Zeiss 28/2.8, although I also still use Canon, too.

If Canon got their act together and launched a D700-like body in 2008, I would've stayed with Canon. I missed the opportunity to use various legacy lenses that I sold or are sitting in a case unused:

Oly 18/3.5, 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 55/1.2
Zeiss C/Y 85/1.4, 28/2.8
Leica R 3 cam 35/2

Some of these lenses (especially the Zeiss 28/2.8) are used on a m4/3 for video.

Jan 04, 2013 at 02:56 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #14 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Elton, you should be able to get Leitax Nikon mounts for many of these alts. Probably not the Planar 85/1.4 and maybe not Oly 55/1.2, but the others appear to be supported, http://www.leitax.com/

Jan 04, 2013 at 03:03 PM

telyt
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Bifurcator wrote:
I guess most people would be surprised to find out which lenses took these images below here. They certainly aren't on anyone's love-list and there's no buzz at all about them. Yet they consistently produce very good results and their 100% crops look pretty sweet too!

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Massive crop - tho not 100% - Wide Open I think too.

- 1/100s, ISO100, GH1

This one shows a lot of spherochromatic abberation. This is a very common disadvantage of the anti-indulgence approach.

Edited on Jan 04, 2013 at 11:28 PM · View previous versions

Jan 04, 2013 at 03:21 PM

timballic
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Bifurcator wrote:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Wide Open Performance (different lens from above) - 1/640s, ISO320, GH1

I like this one a lot.

Jan 04, 2013 at 04:02 PM

philip_pj
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #17 · Anti Indulgence approach...

With rare exception, the better lenses, the ones that serious users get excited about, are superior for image making and generally possess something hard to find in industrial products today - character and the ability to transform your work.

I suggest to inquiries like this one to buy at least one of the better lenses from the better lineups, which may mean a 35mm or 50mm, and working with it alongside cookie cutter OEM lenses for a period of time. The difference usually knocks people over. Like the Contax 28/2.8 and Leica 50/2 Summicron they need not cost too much, and you may have C/N equivalents to compare with to see the difference.

You often hear that 'pros could make great work with any lens', but then why do they all use the best they can lay their hands on? I don't think it's down to indulgence.

Another huge benefit for this approach is that you learn what the better lenses can do over time because they limit your photography much less and can produce fine work in harsher conditions.

Also, you then have more time for the activity rather than the endless buying/selling cycle, unless that is your preferred activity of course. I know my good ones keep me working much longer than what I used before.

Jan 06, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Bifurcator
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #18 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Massive crop - tho not 100% - Wide Open I think too.

- 1/100s, ISO100, GH1

telyt wrote:
This one shows a lot of spherochromatic abberation. This is a very common disadvantage of the anti-indulgence approach.

Yeah. It does.

But in response to both you and Philip, I think lenses having some good qualities in this case sharpness, resolution, ultra low cost, color, and a long length, are like paint brushes in more ways than one. Most artists don't want to paint their entire body of work with just one brush or even one brush type. I think the way this lens renders it's CA is an enhancement overall. Of course one has to know their tools and be aware of what it's good for. Like most canvas painters wouldn't wanna use a roller to paint in detailed clouds this lens isn't going to cut it for distant landscapes against an overly bright sky which include lots of foreground objects (maybe). But for bug-hunting from 5 or 6 meters away, it rocks! And that's usually how I go out (I almost said "roll"

) - with a fairly specific activity in mind, be it bugs & flowers, birds, cityscapes, events specific, street, traditional Japanese architecture, 4 different kinds of landscape, and so on.I pick one or maybe two focal lengths for what I'm intending to do so I don't need a lens that's good at all or even any two things. I just need one that renders interestingly given the selected subject of interest.

I don't really need or even want to shoot a Leica 120 or a Voigtlander 125 all the time across all or even many subjects. The Voigtlander can not for example, make that BG grass look nearly as interesting IMO. So I still prescribe just flying semi-blind and trying all kinds of inexpensive lenses as you go along. The buying and selling aspect of that method is indeed part of the hobby and is quite fun! I've met a lot of very interesting people and learned many things by doing so. It's very often not a sterile buy or sell event ya know - It's human interaction and that leads to interesting acquaintances etc.

Here's what the uncropped, unprocessed, image looks like BTW:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

~ 6m away, on the GH1, 1/100s, ISO 100, 300mm, f/6.7, overcast day, Sept 9th, 3:15pm.

timballic wrote:
I like this one a lot.

Thanks! That's with a $35 Sigma 100-300mm f/4.5 DL at 290mm with a very low Sun shining on.

The dragonfly above is with a $30 (I think) Tokina-AF 100-300mm f/5.6-6.7 BTW.

Jan 06, 2013 at 04:09 PM

Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #19 · Anti Indulgence approach...

Ben Totman wrote:
So true, I just took a $400 loss on a used 5d2 that I bought 6 months ago, bodies seem to lose value so fast these days due to the constant onslaught of new technology.

Huh? Do you seriously consider $67 a month is a "loss" for one of the finest cameras on the market? I'd say that's a dirt cheap hobby.

Jan 06, 2013 at 06:58 PM

shoenberg3
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · Anti Indulgence approach...

when i first got into this hobby, i had a tiny budget. So i grabbed a Xti for 250 dollars and went alt with two lenses. a helios 44-2 for 15 bucks and takumar 200-4 for 40 bucks (and an 10 dollar ebay adaptor). So, along with a old tripod that was sitting around at home, my very humble kit costed no more than 300 bucks but for me at the time, it was more than enough. I even daresay I took better photographs back then with such humble equipment than I do now (my current kit is worth around 3K).

Untitled by HSung, on Flickr

Jan 06, 2013 at 07:36 PM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end