Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

The most underrated (superb) lens
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:23 pm    Post subject: The most underrated (superb) lens Reply with quote
I think that it is Zuiko Macro 50mm F2 lens. No one mentions this lens these days.
Yes, this is my opinion. How about yours?


PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh, indeed, that is a VERY fine one, have it since years!!


PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have 50mm f3.5 Zuiko very cheap this days, I never seen better red color rendering on DSLR than this lens doing.

Nikkor 50mm f3.5 Macro also a very, very underrated lens.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila,

Is that Nikkor 50/3.5 Macro "compensating" one or newer "P"?

Minolta MD 50/3.5 Macro does render red colour quite nicely too, IMHO.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
This one.

http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/japenese/nikon_nikkor/micro_nikkor_pc_auto_55mm_f3_5/


I guess we should say here from Konica and Minolta lenses they are high quality lenses and very , very underrated.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Carl Zeiss Sonnar 85mm f2.8

I guess Leica 90mm f2.8 R


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
koji wrote:
Attila,

Is that Nikkor 50/3.5 Macro "compensating" one or newer "P"?

Minolta MD 50/3.5 Macro does render red colour quite nicely too, IMHO.


I assume you mean the early auto compensating 55mm micro? Under rated for sure. I have 5 of them (-:}...

I'll vote for some of the vivitars I've gotten for under $5 (no specific ones but I like the fixed aperture zooms). They are maybe the most under rated of all..


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 4:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I too am a fan of the nikkor. May I suggest that the real problem with Konica and Minolta lenses is that they are very difficult to mount on a non-proprietary camera. Topcors are in a similar boat, although exakta adapters are out there.


patrickh


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 6:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
These are IMHO really underrated lenses:

- Nikkor-N.C Auto 2.8/24 & Nikkor-O 2.0/35 (no AI, that's why they go a lot cheaper then the AI-version. Not important for Canon shooters. Wink Excellent lenses!)
- Olympus Zuiko Auto-W 3.5/28 (too "slow" to go for a high price, but so good!)
- Asahi SMC Takumar 3.5/35 (too "slow" to go for a high price, but so good!)
- Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-S 1.4/50 (such a great lens, often goes for little money)
- Pentax-M SMC 1.7/50 (such a great lens, sometime goes for almost nothing)
- Nikkor 2.0/50 (really, really sharp)
- Nikkor-Q.C Auto 3.5/135 (much cheaper than the f2.8 version but still very good)
- Jupiter-21 M 4/200
- Soligor C/D Zoom+Macro 3.8-5.3/35-200 MC
- Soligor C/D 3.5-4.5/28-105 MC Zoom+Macro
- Soligor MC 3.5/70-220 Macro (many Soligors are really underrated. They seem to be especially good with zoom lenses.)
- Tamron 3.8-4/70-210 Macro 46A (stands in the shadows of the f3.5 version, 19AH)

But the most underrated lens I have is the
Vivitar MC Close Focus Wide Angle 2.0/28 (Komine)
Incredible performance and I got this lens for about 14 pounds!!!


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Asahi 3,5/35 (k version) for me too.
I agree for the smc-m 1,7/50, which is perhaps over the "A" version
Smc-M 2/50 ...
Underrated Soligor : 3,5/135 ...
Jupiter-21 and 11 !
Vivitar 2,5/28 and clones
Eyemik 3,5/200.
And the well-known : industar-50-2 , industar-22 (ltm39), Helios-44 !


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have the Olympus G.Zuiko 50mm f/1.4, much better than my old EF 50mm f/1.8, which I sold Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Of those I own it's got to be the old Micro-Nikkor 55mm 3.5, the Nikkor 50mm f2 AI, both the pre-AI 135mm 3.5 and 2.8, and the Nikkor-Q 200mm. All very cheap lenses that perform superbly.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
SMC Pentax -A/M 1:2/50


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Richard_D wrote:
Of those I own it's got to be the old Micro-Nikkor 55mm 3.5, the Nikkor 50mm f2 AI, both the pre-AI 135mm 3.5 and 2.8, and the Nikkor-Q 200mm. All very cheap lenses that perform superbly.



I can confirm!


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Underrated for me:

Pentacon 50/1,8

Dinarex 100/4,8 (so slow but more sharp)

Septon 50/2 (very similar desig to planar 1,7)


nikkor 50/2

Rolleinar 55/1,4 (mamiya for rollei)

mamiya 135/2,8


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Septon 50/2 (very similar desig to planar 1,7)


I never heard can you give me some details ?


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="Attila"]Septon 50/2 (very similar desig to planar 1,7)


I never heard can you give me some details ?[/quote]


It was similar, not the same, because it had 4 front elements (the first is
curved not as the planar) and rear it had 3 element. Was the voigtlander's designs considered to make the 4 front elements ultron for the icarex, voigtlander-zeiss baby, (lens that after was the genesis of the contax's planar that was not the contarexes planar design).

I had the three lenses. Contax planar is the best for me, but the septon and the contarex planar, side by side, very very similar.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
Of those I own it's got to be the old Micro-Nikkor 55mm 3.5, the Nikkor 50mm f2 AI, both the pre-AI 135mm 3.5 and 2.8, and the Nikkor-Q 200mm. All very cheap lenses that perform superbly.


RichardD has it right - they are all great lenses which the Nikon campers don't want because of the mount issues. However, I do have reservations about the nikon 135's since there are so many out there that are so good and can be had for less


patrickh


PostPosted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Second to Attila...

Leica-R 90mm f2.8

And,
Old version Nikkor 180mm f2.8: What a beauty, but sometimes go so cheap...


PostPosted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Mamiya 65/4.5 for the RB67 is a totally fantastic piece.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sigma Super Wide 24mm/2.8. Very sharp (whith some distortion…).
Pentax-k 35mm/3.5. Known, but not enough…
Pentax-a 50mm/2.8 macro. Has it all.
Helios 44-2 .Cheap (I love this lens).
Jupiter 21 200mm. heavy but excellent. Good contrast and sharpness.

Last edited by Asa100 on Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:58 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Takumar 55mm f1.8 / f2!

also the 35mm f3.5 Takumar


PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 12:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
1. Tamron 24mm f/2.5
2. Vivitar 135 f/2.8 Komine (I recieved mine as a throw in, cost me nothing) Very Happy

Last edited by spiralcity on Wed Dec 17, 2008 6:34 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 1:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Helios-44-2
Industar 50mm f3.5
Jupiter-21m
Kaleinar 100
CZJ Tessar
Meyer , Pentacon lenses
So many Russian and East German lenses


PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 1:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
spiralcity wrote:
1. Tamron 24mm f/2.5


is it performing at the level of more expensive 24mm lenses?

Last edited by kuuan on Tue Dec 16, 2008 2:25 am; edited 2 times in total
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2