Hi everybody, I'm looking for a M42 50mm w/ close-up & f

[Ni!]

Hi everybody,

I'm new in this forum,
I write to you from Trieste, Italy... Excuse me for my poor English

I have a Praktica MTL5 and these are the lenses I have:

Asahi Pentax Super Takumar 24/3.5 (awesome!!!!)
Pentacon 29/2.8
Asahi Pentax Super Takumar 35/3.5
Asahi Pentax SMC Takumar 50/1.4
Pentacon 50/1.8 (the standard Praktica lense's)
Asahi Pentax Super Multi Coated Takumar 105/2.8
Soligor 135/2.8

I'm a little bored about the Tak 50/1.4, maybe becouse it's a little
yellowed (no so much, just a little) and becouse I prefer lenses that have
more close-up (like the Pentacon 1.8/50) and more hyperfocal skills.

My girlfriend uses an old Voigtlander Vitomatic II camera with a
Color Skopar 50/2.8... this lense have a wonderful hyperfocal at f/22
from 1,2m (4 feet?) to infinity

I'm looking for a similar m42 50mm... tessar or planar style.
Do you have some suggestion?
CZJ Pancolar 50/1.8? (it closes at f/22 and it focuses at 35cm!!!)
Other?

Ciao
NI!

[Attila]

Welcome!

Take a Pentax M42 macro lens or Flektogon 35mm f2.4.

[PaulC]

[Nesster]

Welcome aboard!

You've hit on one of the things that makes rangefinder cameras feel diffrent than SLRs - you're more 'outside' the camera, and therefore pay more attention to the lens markings etc. Plus, as Paul says, often the older range finders have the better markings.

Paul's advice is sound: you can get the same performance from your current lens as your girlfriend (congratulations, by the way: she has excellent taste in cameras, and boyfriends I'm sure).

But perhaps your two 50mm lenses only close down to f/16? The Pentacon if I remember focuses very close... but I don't recall the minimum f/stop. Without buying another 50 with the f/22 stop, if you can live with using the 35 (yours is excellent) you can get a wider hyperfocal zone even at f/16.

[Arkku]

As PaulC said above, the hyperfocal distance depends on the aperture and focal length, so any 50mm at f/22 has the same hyperfocal distance. Of course, hyperfocal distance itself depends on the definition of what is “in focus”, so different manufacturers may use slightly different definitions for making their depth of field scale (e.g. Zeiss has notably used a definition more strict than some other manufacturers).

Note, too, that if you focus at the hyperfocal distance, things “at infinity” will be just barely in focus by the definition of “in focus”. This means that you will usually have better results at long distances (“infinity”) by using plain infinity focus. So one should generally use the hyperfocal distance only when it is important to have nearby objects in focus.


As for lenses, well, the Pancolar does indeed focus closer than many other 50mm's. Most of them do stop down to f/22, and stopping down more than that is not very sensible on small formats due to increasing loss of resolution due to diffraction.

For close focus you could also consider M42 extension tubes (very cheap), or a reversing ring (also very cheap and gets 1:1 magnification easily, but at a very short working distance).

[PaulC]

In fact, f16 is probably a better aperture for sharp images than f22 where diffraction may start to soften the image just slightly.

Set the lens to focus at 5.3m and, at f16, you will get DoF from 2.6 meters to infinity, which is not bad at all.

[thePiRaTE!!]

[hexi]

Welcome

I would suggest a Zeiss Tessar 2.8/50mm. Great image quality, focuses mini at 0.35 and has the f22 stop. about 20$/£ € whatever

[estudleon]

The hyperfocal focus tend to make the viewfinder like seeing almost all "out of focus" and it can be confuse.

To use the "hyperfocal" seems to me that the better is a wide lens (20 to 35 mm). And if you can catch a "external" finder, better yet.

With RF cams the question is different. The finder is OK when you use the "hyperfocal". Perhaps the pics can be a bit sharpest at F/16 with the very nice skopar lens.

If you want, put the SMC 1,4/50 to the sun light (or UV) in the mode that this site describes. It can be better lens than the pentacon.

Good luck.

[Excalibur]

[PaulC]

[Arkku]

MC Volna-9 50mm f/2.8 is also nice and focuses down to something like 24 cm.

[Minolfan]

another vote for the Volna. Or Industar 61L, also 50mm 2.8, close focus to 0.3m and smaller than the Volna.

[Excalibur]

***That's a very nice shot; good composition, good focus and nice colour contrast. Well done!***

Well thank you but the camera did all the work, I just put the film in and focussed..................

[PaulC]

[aoleg]

I highly recommend MC Industar 61L/Z ('Z' means it's M42 for SLR cameras; L/D is for rangefinders, you don't want that). It can focus really close, down to 0.3m, and is very, very sharp straight from wide open. I'm using a 21MP full-frame body, and it is still extremely sharp on it! It employs an improved Tessar formula with lLanthanum glass (that's what 'L' stands for in its name). Can be had for around $50-60 in like-new or even new-old-stock condition.

Volna-9 (50/2.8 ) is another contender with quite a unique optical construction and very pleasant rendering. It has that 'glow' wide open (undercorrected spherical aberration), but gets super-sharp and contrasty from f/4. It has, to my eyes, a more pleasing rendering than Industar. Unfortunately, Volna-9 had been discontinued early, and is now quite rare, often fetching quite elevated prices on eBay. If you stumble upon one in good condition, expect to pay $100-150.

[Excalibur]

[Olivier]

+1 for the Industar-61. Very good and nearly a macro lens.