Can a 50-year old lens stand challenge of modern sensors?

[MelSnyder]

[img][/img]

Shot with a 1952-designed Canon 135mm f3.5 rangefinder telephoto, wide open on my Sony A7. Mine is the later 1950s version with the black shell, but the same 1952 optics. You can still buy this lens on eBay for $100 or less.

I took this about 5:30AM from the cockpit of my sailboat, then rushed down below to check it on my Macbook Pro - and was blown away.

This is a lens I bought for display on a 1960s Canon IVS2b rangefinder I received in 2007 as a gift from my two kids. I took a few few snaps with it, but then it just sat on a shelf. I decided to test it last weekend when the whaling ship Charles Morgan came up to New Bedford, MA for "homecoming" from its normal Mystic Seaport dock.

More shots with this lens and other MFs at https://www.flickr.com/photos/melsnyder/sets/72157645031947049/

[/url]

[philslizzy]

Hi Mel, sharp as a tack I would say. I think most old lenses can work well with modern sensors. Of course we see the bad as well as the good with digital. I used a lovely 50mm f2 Sonnar from a Contax on my NEX and found it lacking in contrast, sharpness and 'zap' whereas an adapted Color Skopar from a Voigtlander Vito B produced sharp punchy results. I reckon its a lottery with old lenses.

You've got a good one there.

Lovely pics on your Flickr too.
Phil

[iangreenhalgh1]

You got unlucky with that Sonnar Phil, I have a couple of Sonnar 50mms and several of the Russian copies, they all work beautifully on my NEX.

As for old lenses, I have a 1903 Cooke Triplet that at f8 is as sharp as anything else I own.

[Attila]

My oldest lens what I found was stunning made in 1934 Voigtlander Heliar even contrast was pretty good, general lens condition is matter really, but in most cases they are just fine especially now with digital cameras and digital post processing a simple auto contrast, color what you can do in batch can helps a lot.

[RSalles]

Atilla, Voightlander Heliar is a dream lens to me...

Mel, the other day I came across this picture at flickr website, took with a Kodak Premo folding camera from 1916 and its Bausch&Lomb Rapid Rectilinear lens:

[/url]https://www.flickr.com/photos/56296811@N05/14628640834/[url]

As we use to say "old but gold",
Old glasse has always weack points and strong points. At their time, the photographers had to know how to overcome the limitations and explore the strength of their lens, even today we do it with many aged lenses and often with soviet lenses with soft corners, some AC and a incredible bokeh and sharpness at the center of the lens. For a bad carpenter there is no good hammer,

Cheers,

Renato
[/url]

[iangreenhalgh1]

Renato, there are other options for a Heliar type that are much cheaper.

The Kodak Enlarging Ektar 75mm is a Heliar an a very fine one, the bokeh is beautiful and it is extremely sharp, this lens is very common and cheap.

Also, there are the Voigtlander Apo-Skopar process lenses, these turn up from time to time and are usually very cheap, they are actually Heliars.

There is also a Kodak Ektar 100mm that is a Heliar, I think it is the f3.5 version, it was fitted to the Kodak Medallist and was also sold on it's own in shutter, it is a superb lens, extremely sharp.

For a longer length, there is the Dallmeyer Pentac 2.9 8 inch (240mm) these are very common here in England, I have one, it's soft wide open but sharp stopped down, it has the usual beautiful Heliar bokeh.

Pentacs come in all lengths but are not cheap, the 2.9/8" is cheap because so many were made for wartime use.

[RSalles]

Ian,

Thanks for the info, actually i'm loosing a lot of biddings at egay.com trying to buy a Sinar Copal Shutter for 300 USD or less, It will permit me to use some barrel old glasses with the F2 - I'm refusing to pay more then this for a shutter with the cables, which are also expensive and selling for 150,00 bucks or more, just the cables.
The intention is to get a lens which covers 4x5 with some movements, for some still and portraiture.
The Heliars shuttered which covers 4x5 are expensive. To make fit a shutter in these lens is also not cheap. So, I'm not sure if the lenses you pointed at will cover the amount of film I need: pretty easily it could cover 6x7, 6x9 or more with 120 film, and it would be great if the intention was landscape photo, which is not the case. Finally, maybe in a near future I will give up the idea to fit everything in my Sinar and decide to buy a smaller camera to use these lenses. Maybe it's a cheaper solution, but now I'm in love with negatives that big and until this passion goes away i'll keep trying,


Cheers,

Renato

[woodrim]

I have not had any bad experience with old lenses on digital that would not also be bad on film. All in all, I'm very impressed with the old glass.