Interesting, not-too-expensive lenses for shorter mounts?

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

I have a Fuji X-E1 that I use pretty much exclusively with old manual focus lenses. My Oly (Pen F) 40/1.4 gets by far the most use, because it's just so small and so much fun to use. With full frame SLR lenses this is kind of impossible, because even if the lens itself is small enough (like my OM 100/2.8) adding an adapter almost doubles the size.

So what I'm wondering about is: what other lenses are there for mounts with shorter register distances which (at least more-or-less) cover an APS-C sensor, which might be interesting, and which aren't fabulously expensive? (So either rangefinder lenses or lenses for smaller formats, I guess.) Anything much above $200 is pretty much right out (I think I've only spent around that much for a lens once), and up to around $100 would be more realistic in most cases.

The annoying thing is that (a) I think the mount stops mattering so much from around 85mm, and that from that point lenses for shorter mounts tend to be longer by about as much as the mount is shorter, (b) older wider-angle lenses are reputedly not very good most of the time, and so (c) it's hard to avoid getting redundant in terms of focal lengths after a point, plus (d) rangefinder lenses tend to be super-expensive. I could add a Pen F 38/1.8, but next to the 40/1.4, why? And while my lust for the 60/1.5 is immense, it costs like a million dollars.

So I guess maybe something wider-angle or something in the 50-60 range? I'm not sure what else is out there that's worth looking at. (One thing I've noticed is the Pentax 110 lenses which I might pick up a few of... even if they're not very good and don't always *quite* cover the sensor, at least they're tiny and super cheap.)

JJB · Joined: 02 Oct 2014 Posts: 424 Location: USA

I use a Fuji XE-1 also and by the time you add an adapter, nothing is very small. That said, you might try a Soviet era Industar 50/3.5 or a Zeiss Tessar 50/2.8 - both are diminutive, produce nice images, and are inexpensive. Some of the Jupiters might serve your purpose as well, but avoid the Kiev/Contax mount as the adapters are quite expensive. I saw a DIY adapter for this mount somewhere on this forum, though.

In my experience, I have found that the slimmest adapter for the Fuji X is M39 so you might want to look for that if you are interested in maintaining a compact profile.

Oldhand · Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2015 3:41 am Post subject:

I think that the Industar 61 2.8/55 would work OK on your camera and be quite cheap as well.
Also it is a small lens that will match the camera body aesthetically
OH

uhoh7 · Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA

DSC00745 by unoh7, on Flickr

Canon LTM 100/3.5
Very light, very small, very sharp.
Under 200USD

Other Canon LTMs in your budget:
50/1.8
85/2
85/1.9
135/3.5

Lightshow · Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3666 Location: Calgary

Jupiter 8
Industar 26M
Industar 69(more for artistic uses, centre is sharp) needs to be modded to reach infinity.

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

What Uhoh said. LTM lenses have fairly short adapters for the nex. Dunno about the Fuji, but I expect they're close, dimension-wise. Also, many C-mount lenses can be used on APS-C cameras with varying coveraage, dependent more on focal length, IIRC. The C-mount adapter for the NEX is almost flat. In fact, it dips inward slightly.

As for deals on C-mount lenses, I'd recommend you try doing like I did last year. I spotted an ad in the local Craigslist for a Bolex 16mm camera with lenses. The guy was asking $150 for an H-16 Reflex with three Kern-Paillard lenses. I bargained him down to $125. Hell, if you go by eBay prices, the lenses alone are worth around $700. The bare H-16 Reflex without lenses goes on eBay for about what I paid for the outfit. I've been waiting until I get a camera that can use these lenses, which I finally got about a month ago. And a couple weeks ago, I ordered a C-to-NEX adapter. So I plan to sell the camera and I'll get to keep the lenses for free. I love it when I can pull off deals like that. I'll keep them, that is, provided they cover an APS-C's image circle. If not, I guess I'll sell them to the MFT crowd, which, from what I understand, can make use of the C lenses with no issues.

CuriousOne · Joined: 31 Dec 2013 Posts: 669 Location: Home

Petri 55/1.4 @ NEX5 via DIY Petri to LTM adapter:

newst · Joined: 21 Oct 2014 Posts: 617 Location: Troy, MI USA

While the LTM rangefinder lens/adapter combination will provide a compact option, I have found that the ROBOT camera lenses with adapter are even smaller. The adapter is a couple of millimeters deeper than LTM (on the NEX) but the lenses are generally much smaller.

Here I have a CZJ 30mm lens mounted on an A5000:

There is an adapter for ROBOT to Fuji X:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Robot-Screw-Lens-to-Fuji-FX-mount-X-Pro1-etc-Adapter-/181582041389?pt=US_Lens_Adapters_Mounts_Tubes&hash=item2a4722112d

Nordentro · Expire: 2015-01-29

You should try the Fujinon TV-lens 75mm f/1.8 (C-mount). It covers APS-C and is a superb lens.

Click here to see on Ebay

DConvert · Joined: 12 Jun 2010 Posts: 921 Location: Essex UK

araucaria · Joined: 16 Jan 2014 Posts: 63

Speed boosters also shorten the length a little bit.

cyrano · Expire: 2016-12-30

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas

enzodm · Joined: 11 Sep 2010 Posts: 350 Location: Italy

Oly + Industar 69 28/2.8 (I do not have more the Oly, and the Industar is now on a Nex):

Nex with Industar 22; collapsed is really thin.

newst · Joined: 21 Oct 2014 Posts: 617 Location: Troy, MI USA

enzodm · Joined: 11 Sep 2010 Posts: 350 Location: Italy

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

Thanks everyone!

So my list of interesting lenses so far looks like...

It's cheap why not:

* Industar 69 28/2.8
* Jupiter 8 50/1.8
* Industar 26M 50/2.8
* Industar 61 55/2.8
* Industar 22 55/3.5

If I find a good copy for a decent price:

* Jupiter 12 35/2.8
* Jupiter 3 50/1.5

I guess the frustrating thing is that there's this huge, yawning gap between the cheap-as-chips Industars and Jupiters at one end, and the sell-both-kidneys Leitz, Zeiss, and Voigtlanders at the other, with nothing in between but a couple of PenF and Canons, especially if you want something fast and/or outside the 50s range.

So I have a few questions still...

* The longer focal length Canons look interesting, but are they actually any shorter than SLR lenses of the same focal length after you take register distance / adapter size into consideration? (As far as I've managed to investigate, they don't seem to be.)

* Likewise does anyone have precise specs for the Fujinon-TV 75/1.8? This looks *very* interesting, but the one place I've managed to find with any kind of physical specifications says that it's 315g and a diagram suggesting that it's 94mm(!) long, which would make it about as heavy and considerably longer than various 85mm SLR lenses, again after adding adapters.

* Are there any at least semi-affordable wider-angle lenses of note besides the Jupiter 12, Industar 69 and the Pens?

* And any semi-affordable faster lenses besides Pen 40/1.4, Jupiter 3, and Canon 50/1.4?

* Is there any easier way to find out which C-mount lenses cover APS-C than to look at posts about all the various lenses individually?

enzodm · Joined: 11 Sep 2010 Posts: 350 Location: Italy

You are right: cheap or very expensive, and poor choice on the wide side, while on tele side lengths are similar to reflex lenses.
In fact, I have a beautiful Serenar 100 but even if it has small diameter, is long and heavy -about half kg! Pure glass and metal. In creating my Nex kit, I somewhat surrendered to the idea of covering long focal lengths because of size.
However, do not underestimate the quality of some ens in your cheap list.

One option you could consider (I had) if you accept some quality compromise is the Fujian 35/1.7, C mount that covers APS-c and cheap as chips. Nothing to do with Fuji: just a Chinese brand with a name that sounds known.

Another option if you like to work is to adapt compact camera lenses (or rangefinder fixed lenses): some are good if you are able to adapt them. I played with disposable cameras, Ricoh 35, and a recent Kodak aps but never reached the last mile (that is, some decent adaptation).

Finally, Pentax 110 lenses are very small but need an adapter with diaphragm.

Nordentro · Expire: 2015-01-29

The Serenar 100mm f/4 is a Brass lens (heavy) and another optical design (longer) than the later 100mm f/3.5 which are small, sharp, lightweight and compact.

The Fujinon 75mm f/1.8 is a compact lens too. Remember that the C-mount adapter doesn`t build at all, it actually protrube the camerabody slightly. Wink

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

enzodm: Yeah, Pentax 110 lenses are also on my list, at least the 70mm, though I haven't been able to find any adapter for Fuji X that provides aperture control. The Fujian also looks good... I was about to ask if there's any point to adding 35mm lenses next to the 40/1.4 Pen, but it turns out it costs something like $20 together with an adapter, so that's definitely another case of "it's cheap why not"!

Nordentro: I guess the later Canon lens is this one? If I add the length there to the mount's registration distance, I get 69.5mm + 29mm = 98.5mm; if I do that for OM Zuiko 100/2.8 (which I own), I get 48mm + 46mm = 94mm. So it seems the SLR lens is actually (slightly) shorter in practice, even together with adapters.

Similarly the Fuji 75/1.8... do you have one, or have seen one in person? Is 94mm for its length realistic? The diagram from the link in my previous post seems to suggest it, though it's not explicitly listed. If it's true, then we have 94mm + 17.5mm = 111.5mm, and 46mm + 46mm = 92mm for the Zuiko 85/2, or 56mm + 42mm = 98mm for the Canon FD 85/1.8. Which would mean that the Fuji 75mm is actually considerably longer than these in practice. So I'm hoping that the 94mm length is wrong and it's actually shorter than that, but I haven't been able to find any other sources for that information.

Nordentro · Expire: 2015-01-29

Yes, and you also have Canon 100mm #3 which you can see here:

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/lens/s/data/100-1000/s_100_35v3.html

Remember that all these lenses mentioned has a slimer body compared to SLR lenses. There are physical laws here when it comes to focal lenght, but RF lenses both look and feels quite a bit smaller than SLR lenses which are more chunky
Wink

Here is my fujinon, and yes, I also have the Canon 100 f/3.5 II & III and the Serenar 100mm f/4.

Nordentro · Expire: 2015-01-29

The Fujinon is 80mm long and 50mm wide in front. The Canon 100mm f/3.5 #2 is 70mm long and 35mm wide in front. I checked mine Wink

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

Much thanks! That makes it about as long as heavy as an FD 85/1.8 with-adapter, which is at least reasonable if not as tiny as I'd wish. I might try to get one for myself if I can find one for a good price. ;) (All the cheaper ones seem to have simultaneously disappeared off eBay a few days ago...)