What to get next?

[andk]

Hi there,

I'm the proud owner of a little Minolta set and would like to get my hands on some new legacy lenses and start another collection.

I just really don't know what brand or what mount to get.

Canon FD I've tried and didn't really like.
Leica R and M is too expensive for me.

Might be interested in some of the Russian lenses but I can't really find a good list of what lenses there actually are.

Please let me know your suggestions!

Thanks.

[Lightshow]

Lots of options out there,
M mount: Voigtlander, Konica, Minolta
LTM from: Voigtlander, Canon, Minolta, Nikon, and many more including FSU.
Contax/Kiev RF mount
Konica AR
Pentax K
Exakta: Meyer Optik, CZJ, Topcor,...
M42: Pentax/Asahi, Fuji, CZJ......
Olympus OM
Nikon F
Fujica X
DKL
Pen F, Robot, (half frame)


And the Canon FD/FL, Minolta MC/MD, Leica R.

Here's a list of mounts, pick one(some will be better choice than others.
http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html

[sergtum]

hi!

in my opinion the Jupiter-11, Jupiter-9, Jupiter-8, Helios-44 are the most interesting of Russian (Soviet) lenses to start collecting them. it is advisable to look for the silver lenses of the post-war release. it is believed that they are made from German glass and German schemes. and this is a sign of quality. additionally, the cost of such lenses is relatively low.

for example

if you want to see - https://fotki.yandex.ru/users/sergtum1958/album/488583/

ps. i have black Jupiter-9 and silver Jupiter-11, Jupiter-8, Helios-44 .

[Lloydy]

Most of my lenses are Minolta and M42, and M42 does open up a huge world of lenses, including the best of the Russian lenses. Of course you can then move on to the German, Japanese and everyone else M42

[y]

[jamaeolus]

What is your goal? If you want to collect, say for display, I would target different lenses than for use on a DSLR or mirrorless, or to use on vintage film cameras. I collect mostly to use and as a hedge against the stock market. Most of my lenses, around 200 now, are "good to excellent" and I don't hesitate to use them as I see fit. If you want good usable glass for a mirrorless system I recommend konica. The quality of the optics is generally excellent there are lots to choose from and mostly prices are not too high. IMHO konica glass is generally as good as comparable minolta offerings.

[DigiChromeEd]

I agree with jamaeolus, you really can't go wrong with either Konica Hexanon or Minolta mf lenses.

[Mir]

The introduction of the Rollei SL35 slr in the early ´70s brought a bunch of fabulous lenses.
Some are easy to find, others aren't to expensive and if you're lucky and patient you may find
some in nice condition.

See this guy's collection to get you started : http://captjack.exaktaphile.com/rollei/Rolleilenses.htm

[jamaeolus]

I love rollei lenses. Try for the HFT series. Optics are dramatically better than the Rolleinar. Contax (Zeiss) is another series with some dramatically superior optics, unfortunately prices tend to reflect that. Some other worthy targets might be Fuji, Yashica.or Olympus So many lenses, so little time! Of course one could opt for a whole set of Asahi Pentax super takumar or super multi coated takumar. The main focal lengths from 24 to 200 would not be too expensive. They are robust all metal, excellent optics and common enough to be not overwhelmingly expensive. They get my vote for best overall series, ie factoring optical quality, build quality, reistance to abuse/neglect, price, variety, and usefulness. If i had to choose ONE manual focus manufacturer and mount and could not stray ,Asahi Pentax in M42 is it. Availabe in most focal lengths in super tak and S-M-C. They seldom fail due to neglect, fungus, poor design, and are tough enough that the will resist even some abuse. With careful shopping one could have the 20mm 4.5, 24mm 3.5, 28mm 3.5, 35mm 3.5, 50mm 1.8, 85mm 1.9, 105mm 2.8, 120mm 2.8, 135mm 3.5, 150mm 4, 200mm 4, for maybe in the 550-600 USD range. Which is quite the selection of prime lenses!

[andk]

Thanks for the replies.

My goal is to have a big and solid collection from maybe 20mm to 200mm. All from the same brand.

So I'm looking for lenses that are available in many focal lengths, have really good optics and are affordable.

Minolta MC/MD for example. But those I already own.

Konica Hexanon looks good.
Also the Pentax Takumars or Asahi.
Olympus OM maybe?

What I don't understand is the Russian lenses. Is this all the same brand or are Jupiter and Helios different manufacturers?

Thanks

[cooltouch]

With your stated goals, I would strongly recommend that you consider Nikon. Nikon primes are really hard to beat, and Nikon has probably the broadest selection of any lens manufacturer.

When it comes to zooms, I prefer to mix and match, because there are many excellent zooms out there that were made by aftermarket companies. Lenses like Vivitar Series 1, Tamron SP, and Tokina ATX compete very well with the majors, in some cases, surpassing them.

[sergtum]

[TrueLoveOne]

Like you i collect Minolta MC/MD lenses, i have quite a lot now. Next to that i have acquired a nice range of Konica lenses, very nice lenses in every aspect: build quality and optical quality.
If i had to choose another line-up i think it would most probably be the FD range from Canon. Although i think the newer lenses have a plastic look/feel to them they do offer very good image quality at very reasonable prices.

If you like how Minolta or Konica lenses feel, focus and handle i personally think that Nikon lenses will be a disappointment. They're optically good lenses but somehow they never feel right when i operate them. Nothing personal to the Nikon fans, just my 2 cents, but the focus throw of Nikon lenses just feels cheap to me somehow.... i always end up selling them again.

[buerokratiehasser]

Well Thirdparty lenses are most of the fun.

So you want variety of lenses, all from the same Brand for the Brand system. And to shoot with them so they should be good? And, digital is no issue?


Among the ones that havent been mentioned yet would be Sigma SA.

They had most of the same lenses that Sigma sells for other mounts, only in their back-a-wards Sigma mount (this is only partially an insult, the mount looks just like another well known mount only turned a bit).

You can even purchase a SD14 and shoot them digitally?

The only problem would be that the niche is very small. No one bought these. So you could get a SA camera and two lenses for a buck since no one wants them, OR one lens will set you back $200 because it is so rare.

[andk]

[tb_a]

[buerokratiehasser]

Judging from cursory ebay Completed listings, SA seems to have gone the "rare" route. 4 bucks for film body only, 200 for 105 macro, 300 for 100-300/4.. not my idea of value

[lucca1x]

I'm currentlly collecting OM system items and IMHO there are some very nice built bodies and a lot of very good glass, especially the primes and 1 or 2 excellent zooms, also easily usable on dslr and mirrorless. Some of them are pretty good looking items.
Here is the list of lenses:
http://www.mflenses.com/olympus-om-zuiko-lens-list.html
Another eye catching system is Pentax 6x7/67. Not the most attractive design, but impressive by size. Prices paid for bodies are a matter of luck. Lenses are not that expensive and they are very good performers on 120/220 format.

[jamaeolus]

I used Oly from 1978 until 1995. I had the 50mm 1.8, and a 75-150mm zoom. Really good optics and really small. I really like Oly. but.... After hearing his goal I am doubling down on the Asahi Pentax. Konica would also be a good choice. Oly has great optics but a full range of FL's will set you back well over a thousand. They also tend to be more prone to fungus in my opinion. Others to consider Topcon RE, Carl Zeiss Jena, Meyer, Schneider, Schact, ISCO,

[andk]

So far I got on my list to consider:

Nikon AI
Konica Hexanon
Yashica ML
Olympus OM Zuiko
Rollei HFT
SMC Pentax

Are the SMC Pentax the same lenses as the Asahis? They look great.

[jamaeolus]

Yes, Asahi became Asahi Pentax then Pentax. Same company. The first of the series I recommend are the Super Takumar. They are single coated but very good. Then they improved coatings in the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar series. These were all pentax screw mount aka M42 which was a very widely used mounting system shared by, in addition to Pentax, Zenitar, Praktica, Mamiya Sekor, Fuji, Edixa and likely others I am forgetting. Then came bayonet mounts. Pentax K mounts are found on SMC Pentax IIRC. If I had to choose just one group from the above Asahi Pentax offerings it would be the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar. The lenses are all metal and glass without even a rubber or plastic gripping ring. The optics are multi coated and very well corrected. The range has a lot of focal lengths to choose from they are mostly not that expensive unless you seek out fast glass. They a real pleasure to shoot with. I have around 35 different Pentax lenses from that era (some are duplicates) and only a very few have had any functional issues. Old lenses from that era can tend to have brand specific issues. Minolta and Konica seem to be prone to oily blades, Olympus can get fungus, Topcon are not mechanically robust, Carl Zeiss Jena get stiff focus rings. etc In my opinion you are more likely to get a good lenses from Pentax were you to gamble on an"as is" estate find as compared to most other brands.

[tb_a]

[Oldhand]

[cooltouch]

The oldest SLR lens I own is a pre-AI 55mm f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor, which was made in 1965 or so. It's focusing action is as smooth as a new (MF) lens, its aperture ring has crisp click stops, and the iris blades are clean and snappy.

I have other pre-AI Nikkors, and they all behave similarly, save one. That one is another pre-AI 55mm Micro-Nikkor that was made much later. It has a rubberized focusing collar, which moves very freely. No slop or anything -- the collar just moves with very little resistance. I also have an AI 50mm f/1.4 that behaves similarly -- a "feature" that I don't mind, incidentally. It makes for a quick-focusing optic.

[Mir]

[quote="tb_a"]