p.1 #1 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
Having seen a massive variety of lenses used on the A7 and some amazing examples in the A7 image thread, I'm curious as to which cheap legacy glass is recommended at the focal ranges of:
<28mm
28mm
50mm
>70mm
I feel that the A7 has been out long enough for a consensus to have formed on the best bang-per-buck lenses.
p.1 #2 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
Either Canon FD or Minolta MC/MD could tick all the boxes on your list with lenses that routinely go for less than 100 Euros (here in the US anyway). 24/2.8, 28/2.8, and 50/1.4 from either brand are good, solid performers. For your tele, from Canon I'd go with the 100/2.8 and from Minolta the 135/2.5.
The Zuiko 50/1.8 is sharper than the Pentax wide open, but once you stop down the Pentax has more contrast and detail. The Pentax is multi coated too. Its main problem is the incredibly nervy bokeh in busy scenes, and of course it's slow.
The Olympus 28/3.5 is the only one I'd recommend from my lot. I picked one up for less than €20.
p.1 #4 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
Canon FD 24/2.8, 50/1.8 etc.
Aug 17, 2014 at 12:56 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
For wider than 28mm I have three recommendations:
If you want an ultrawide then I think the best option is the Canon FD 20 f/2.8. I haven't seen it for less than 100 pounds, but I have seen two different ones sold for 102.
At 24mm the Olympus 24mm f/2.8 is a nice lens and fits in the budget as is the Pentax K mount 24 f/2.8.
At 28mm, I would recommend either the Olympus 28 f/3.5 or the Pentax K mount (not the M series) 28 f/3.5. The Pentax may be a little better, but both are very good lenses at a very reasonable rate.
At around 50mm, I would recommend the Minolta MC 55 f/1.7. The lens isn't that sharp but has a lovely rendering. There are a lot of really good 50ish lenses, however, but this would be my choice in this price range.
Above 70, I would recommend the Nikon 105 f/2.5 Ai. This an excellent all around lens, but is especially nice for portraits.
p.1 #6 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
My choices would be:
Nikon 24/2.8 AIs or a Minolta 24/2.8 (MC or MD really) if you get lucky on the price.
Pentax 28/3.5 Original K version
Minolta 35/2.8 Either later MD or last MC W Rokkor X with 55mm filter thread version with 5 elements (somewhat rare I belive as most of the MC's are the ealier HG version). This is one of the best lenses I have used at any price! Even though you do not specify 35mm's, this lens is so good you should consider it!
Pentax 50/1.7 A or M. - great lens, incredible bargain.
I think all my > than 50's cost a bit more than 100 pound equivilent. Any of the 85/2 or 85/2.8's or any 100's would likely fit the bill if you can snag a good deal.
p.1 #7 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
Agree with Tariq on the Pentax-M 50/1.7. Now there's a lens!
>70mm, the best value is to be had in the 135mm's. Jupiter 11A (135/4) or Jupiter 37A (135/3.5), Carl Zeiss Jena DDR MC 135/3.5.
I have all these lenses apart from the Jupiter 37A and highly recommend them.
I paid £30 for a mint, optically perfect Jupiter IIA, £80 for the CZJ 135 (mint) and £50 for the Pentax-M 50/1.7.
For a bit more, the Tair-11A (135/2.8) with it's 20 blades is incredible. Don't know if I got lucky with the optics of my copy but it outshines pretty much everything else. Paid £150, mint.
p.1 #9 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
there are so many different lenses in this range and such variety in what people think is important there will never be a consensus.
nevertheless, here's my best list with a heavy weight on edge sharpness:
nFD 24/2.8
nikkor 28/2.8 AIS (hard to find in the price range but occasionally pops up)
rokkor MD 35/2.8
rokkor MC 50/1.4 (if you value center sharpness more go with the nFD 50/1.4 or pentax 50/1.4)
nikkor 105/2.5 AIS (or AI)
i'd rather shoot this set though:
rokkor MC or MD 24/2.8
rokkor MC 28/2.5
rokkor MD 35/2.8
rokkor MC 55/1.7
jupiter-9 85/2 (or rokkor MD 100/2.5 if you want to stick to one adapter)
some other great bargains:
FD 20/2.8 (seems to be the best old slr ultrawide)
OM 24/2.8 (tiny with very even performance across the frame)
OM 28/3.5 (good, tiny, $30)
nFD 35/2 (fast, good, pretty cheap)
olympus pen f 38/1.8 (miniscule, fast, centrally sharp, artistic bokeh)
pentax 50/1.7 (uber sharp)
OM 50/1.8 (great everything except bokeh wide open and solid stopped down)
FD 85/1.8 (small and fast)
FD 100/2 (fast, sharp, cheap)
p.1 #10 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
I'll parrot what Sebboh has said except that the Pen F 38/1.8 vignettes on FF.
The FD SSC 24/2.8, 50/1.4, & 85/1.8 is a nice compact trio that are all very similarly sized.
Rokkor MC 28/2.5, 55/1.7 or 58/1.4(I prefer my 58/1.2), & 85/1.7 is a fun set.
Konica AR 24/2.8, 50/1.4, & 85/1.8
OM 24/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/2 (multi-coated versions)
Pentax SMC K 28/3.5 or 30/2.8, 50/1.4, (still looking for the 85)
Fuji, look for the EBC lenses, in M42 or the old X mount.
p.1 #11 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
sebboh wrote:
i'd rather shoot this set though:
rokkor MC or MD 24/2.8
rokkor MC 28/2.5
rokkor MD 35/2.8
rokkor MC 55/1.7
jupiter-9 85/2 (or rokkor MD 100/2.5 if you want to stick to one adapter)
How do you feel that the jupiter-9 85/2 performs compared to the contax-g 90/2.8? Is it the speed and the problematic adapters for the contax-g that makes you prefer the jupiter?
p.1 #12 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
One thing I will mention is that I have both the Minolta MC W. Rokkor SI 28 2.5 and the Pentax K 28/3.5. While the Rokkor has a nice look to it's rendering, the Pentax is technically better at every aperture - even wide open at 3.5 vs the Rokkor stopped down to 3.5/4. The Rokkor is also larger.
p.1 #14 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
LightShow wrote:
I'll parrot what Sebboh has said except that the Pen F 38/1.8 vignettes on FF.
actually, even on FF vignetting is minimal. sample
ulrikft2 wrote:
How do you feel that the jupiter-9 85/2 performs compared to the contax-g 90/2.8? Is it the speed and the problematic adapters for the contax-g that makes you prefer the jupiter?
i prefer the wide open look of the jupiter for portraits, and it's bokeh at all apertures. the g90 is sharper and contrastier at all apertures (my jupiter is uncoated), though they do have a similar draw. if i was mostly shooting landscape i would prefer the g90. i don't like the focus on either lens and am putting them both in new helicoids (i'm picky though). the ltm version of the j-9 is much easier to focus than the g90 on adapter.
p.1 #16 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
Tariq Gibran wrote:
One thing I will mention is that I have both the Minolta MC W. Rokkor SI 28 2.5 and the Pentax K 28/3.5. While the Rokkor has a nice look to it's rendering, the Pentax is technically better at every aperture - even wide open at 3.5 vs the Rokkor stopped down to 3.5/4. The Rokkor is also larger.
interesting, all the way to the corners? is your rokkor bleached? I haven't shot with the pentax (my bias against lenses slower than f/2.8) but the full sized samples I saw seemed unimpressive in the corners. (bad copy?).
p.1 #17 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
sebboh wrote:
interesting, all the way to the corners? is your rokkor bleached? I haven't shot with the pentax (my bias against lenses slower than f/2.8) but the full sized samples I saw seemed unimpressive in the corners. (bad copy?).
Particularly in the corners. I will post some comparisons when I get a chance.
By "Bleached" do you mean have I UV'd the yellow away? No, I haven't.
The thing about the Pentax K 28/3.5 is that it makes all the difference if it's the much worse M version or the original K version as they are completely different lenses optically. If you saw bad results with the correct version, it must either be the lens sample (doubtful I suspect) or poor technique.
Aug 18, 2014 at 12:17 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Particularly in the corners. I will post some comparisons when I get a chance.
By "Bleached" do you mean have I UV'd the yellow away? No, I haven't.
The thing about the Pentax K 28/3.5 is that it makes all the difference if it's the much worse M version or the original K version as they are completely different lenses optically. If you saw bad results with the correct version, it must either be the lens sample (doubtful I suspect) or poor technique.
There are actually four different Pentax 28 f/3.5 models. Two in M42 mount and two in K mount. The oldest model was a SuperTak with 58mm filter threads it had 7 elements in 6 groups. There was a later model in M42 mount that had 49mm filter threads and had 7 elements in 7 groups, some of these were SMC and some weren't. Then the plain K mount version with 8 elements in 7 groups with a 52mm filter threads, and finally the M series K mount version with 6 elements in 6 groups and 49mm filter threads. It is the plain K mount version that has the good reputation. The other three designs generally are not well regarded. The drawbacks of the plain K mount, IMO, are that it only has 5 aperture blades, which could show ugly pentagons in out of focus highlights at times, and it is pretty big for a 28 f/3.5. With a volume of 232200 cubic mm with adapter on the Sony cameras it is a bit bigger than the Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8, so not really a small lens which is a bit of a bummer for such a slow aperture lens, although it isn't huge in the grand scheme of things either.
Another really interesting Pentax 28 is the plain K mount 28 f/2, which has the same optical formula (but not the same coatings) as the C/Y mount Zeiss "Hollywood" 28 f/2, but in a much smaller package. It actually has a slightly smaller diameter than the plain K mount 28 f/3.5, but is 20mm longer. It costs a lot more too, but seems to go for far less than the C/Y mount Zeiss Hollywood.
p.1 #19 · Sony A7 - recommended sub €100 legacy lenses
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Particularly in the corners. I will post some comparisons when I get a chance.
By "Bleached" do you mean have I UV'd the yellow away? No, I haven't.
The thing about the Pentax K 28/3.5 is that it makes all the difference if it's the much worse M version or the original K version as they are completely different lenses optically. If you saw bad results with the correct version, it must either be the lens sample (doubtful I suspect) or poor technique.
ah, I don't remember which version it was. that could be it. the UV treatment on the rokkor increases the contrast quite a bit making it seem like sharpness has increased as well.
