I'm interested in getting a fun little MF lens. I want it to be good quality, but mostly I plan on using it for my 5D Mark II video recording mode (which won't really push the limits of the resolving power of the lens), so that I can have more control over the iris. Looking to spend at most ~$150.
Anyways, I don't know too much about non-digital era cameras and equipment, so I was hoping the gurus here could help me out.
Here are the contenders:
1. Asahi Takumar 50mm f/1.4 (M42) - One of the several versions, not sure.
2. Asahi Takumar 55mm f/1.8 (M42)
3. Zeiss Planar 50mm f/1.7 (C/Y) - Seems like it could hit mirror
4. X - your suggestions for other well-regarded lenses.
Pretty much anything in the somewhat wide to normal range would be fine (35-58mm). Zoom would be okay too, but all the ones with decent reviews seem out of my price range for this application (and a little too heavy).
You gotta' just LOVE the fact that Canon's newest camera is causing people to start searching for non-Canon lenses. The word "irony" doesn't even cut it. Something beyond irony...
And of course, these same folks will then start using these lenses for still shots, realize how much fun it is to use / explore alt glass, a kaboom- vintage prices on Ebay are going to skyrocket.
Well it's because the HD video recording doesn't let the user select the aperture, and the maximum aperture is automatically used.
I think it's possible for Canon to update the firmware to let the user select something other than the max. aperture. It only seems logical. If it was available now, I'm sure less people would be searching for non-Canon lenses with manual aperture controls.
I think it just seems like a bunch of us are perusing this forum lately
After doing searching on various forums, it seems like prices for "alternative' lenses have already begun to climb considerably when I compare what people say they paid for some lenses and what they are going for currently in buy/sell or eBay. I think it's because there are more full-frame cameras and they are more affordable than before.
I just read some stuff about the Zuiko 55mm f/1.2, and yeah, it definitely seems like a good performer. However, it's out of my price range of <$150. Thanks though.
Cableaddict wrote:
You gotta' just LOVE the fact that Canon's newest camera is causing people to start searching for non-Canon lenses. The word "irony" doesn't even cut it. Something beyond irony...
And of course, these same folks will then start using these lenses for still shots, realize how much fun it is to use / explore alt glass, a kaboom- vintage prices on Ebay are going to skyrocket.
It's bad, I tell you, baaaaad.
this statement is like 3 or 4 years (at least) too late. People have been clamoring for better (non-canon) lenses for years.
I like the Nikkor 50/1.4's "drawing style", if you could call it such a nice thing. The only real changes they have made to that optical design over the long life it has had is just improved coatings i think. A BGN (KEH) 50/1.4 pre-ai or ai'd example can go for ~$60.
I have both the Zeiss Planar 1.7/50 and the Zuiko 50mm 1.4 -- both of which are awesome in their own way. The Zeiss is super high rez but has less pleasing bokeh and the Zuiko is great for people shots because of its better bokeh and less contrasty nature. I also have a Rokkor 58mm 1.2 -- also out of your price range, but arguably as good as anything else tin the 50ish range. I love the Zeiss for landscapes and I use the Olympus for people when I don't want to haul around the Rokkor. Both the Oly and Zeiss should be under $150, heck I got my late serial # Zuiko for less than $90.
Paul
PS -- no mirror issues on my 5D with the Zeiss, using Haoda adapter.
PeaktoPeek wrote:
I have both the Zeiss Planar 1.7/50 and the Zuiko 50mm 1.4 -- both of which are awesome in their own way. The Zeiss is super high rez but has less pleasing bokeh and the Zuiko is great for people shots because of its better bokeh and less contrasty nature. I also have a Rokkor 58mm 1.2 -- also out of your price range, but arguably as good as anything else tin the 50ish range. I love the Zeiss for landscapes and I use the Olympus for people when I don't want to haul around the Rokkor. Both the Oly and Zeiss should be under $150, heck I got my late serial # Zuiko for less than $90.
Paul
PS -- no mirror issues on my 5D with the Zeiss, using Haoda adapter....Show more →
What's the difference between late and early serial numbers in the Zuikos?
I mean obviously it seems the late ones are better, but what is it that's better?
Dec 17, 2008 at 12:46 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
It is not like Olympus has come out and said anything directly that I know of, but they may have better coating and even the lens elements may have changed a little. The major difference seems to be that the later serial numbered ones have a bit better contrast at wider apertures.
For $150 you could easily find a Contax 50 1.4. I've tested mine against a Contax 1.7, a German made 3 cam Leica 2.0, an MC Oly 1.4, a Made in Japan Oly 1.8, a Canon 1.8, 2 Rokkor 58 1.2's and a Super Takumar.
Overall, I think it's the best all around lens of all of the lenses I tried, with a natural, transparent look. The Leica was excellent, but costs twice as much as any other lens than the Rokkor, which is also excellent.
I picked up a really cheap Takumar 50mm f/1.4 and a Contax Zeiss 50mm f/1.7.
I'll try them out to see which I like better, and then decide if I want to try out some other of the suggestions you guys made.
Thanks for your help!
Also, feel free to continue the discussion. Researching this stuff is pretty fun.
