The love for the old or not….
As you probably already know I recently switched from my beloved Canon setup to the Sony A99.
Some people did not get the idea behind this, but let me put it this way… I’m very picky when it comes to dynamic range, color and image quality and when I compared the A99 to the Canon 5DMKIII I could not really think off any reason not to make the switch, now I have to be honest buying all my lenses again is an idea that I did not like and also an idea that scared the heck out of me for the simple reason that I did not know anything about the quality of Minolta glass etc. And this triggered a journey that I will try to show you on the blog and give you some tips and buying advise as we go along.
Old/vintage love
Maybe you already heard/read about it online but there are a lot of people loving old lenses, and according to many the quality is just as good (or better) than the modern lenses. Now this is something that always had me puzzled, of course I know that glass can be incredibly good, I have the experience first hand when I work with the Mamiya RZ67ProII, the lenses for that camera are awesome and beat everything that it on the market now in my opinion, however…. AF has had an incredible boost in recent years so do realize it will always be a tradeoff, on the other hand when we look at pricing this could be something you could life with every easily.
The first thing I did when I got my Sony A99 was make sure that I got the lenses I needed most were 100% perfect, so I opted for the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8, Sony 70-200 f2.8G and the Sigma 12-24 II these were the lenses I bought new. Now as many of you I also have those lenses that I just love but that I don’t “NEED” like a super fast 50mm, a great portrait prime and of course the Lensbaby (which was replaced for me by the Dutch distributor for which I’m very grateful).
To get some more lenses for my system I decided it would be cool to check out internet and see what people were talking about when it comes to quality of the old glass, well to make a long story short I got very excited and due to the prices I decided to start collecting a few lenses, in the coming weeks (days) I will show you some images of the lenses I get in and will mention the price I paid and I think you will be surprised for what’s possible (because I was).
At the moment I got the :
Minolta 135 f2.8 (review tomorrow)
Minolta 35-200 (review the day after tomorrow)
And in the mail are :
Minolta 85 f1.4
Minolta 50 f1.7
Pentax Super Takumar 55 F2 (M42)
M42
If you’re a little older (than me) you will probably remember this mount?
My very first “real” camera was a Praktica and that one used the universal mount M42, because this mount was so incredibly good for it’s time a lot of different manufacturers started using that mount for their lenses, meaning that if there is a way to mount these lenses on a modern camera you could use Leica, Pentax, Minolta, Praktica etc. lenses on your DSLR. You have to be a little careful with these convertors because some lenses will actually be a little bit too “deep” meaning it can hit your mirror so make sure you know what you’re doing, these lenses can be used but you will need an extra ring which will often sacrifice infinity focus.
Now I found 2 different types of convertors, one a dumb convertor for around 20.00 euros and one with AF confirmation for around 30.00 euros. As you can imagine I went with the second version. I hope to receive that one this week and will also write something about it when I start testing my old Practica lenses (no expectations for those).
Just think about it
99.99% of us have limited budgets and we can only spend our money once. Lenses are expensive when you buy everything new or the want the latest versions, and don’t get me wrong I strongly believe that the “money making” lenses should be top notch quality and probably should be bought new (or second hand), however lenses also are responsible for the image quality and look of an image, I read somewhere (and changed it to my opinion) “some new lenses will make it possible to capture a perfect photo, the old lenses have character and makes it possible to create a vision” in other words, when I look at the Zeiss 24-70 I see an “almost” perfect lens with great colors, razor sharp, incredibly 3D look, no flare etc. so why would I want to have something else… well it’s a bit like using filters, sometimes you just want to have some flare, some lightfall off, maybe some light leakage etc. OR just another look.
And I have to be really clear on something, also for the lenses I’m buying now I will go for absolute quality, but I’m willing to sacrifice just a little bit of sharpness or color accuracy for a better/smoother bokeh. But I would never start using lenses that are “crap” just because they… are vintage. Of course you’re vision might be different 🙂
Old lenses are just like the old cameras… built like tanks and served much better than most new stuff right now (so I say)… I agree with you Frank, and I wish every photographer had respect for the old (and I am not saying this because i am old too, it’s a fact)
just the word “brand new” what makes people buy them most of the time (unfortunately) without even comparing the older stuff to them.
Amen
Hi Frank
If you are interesstet in old Minolta glass try to get the “bible”–Stephan Kölliker Das Sony Alpha Vollformat-System.(www.artaphot.ch/alpha-systembuch)
I think it`s only available in german, but for a dutch it must be readable.
Ferdinand
Will try to hunt it down.
Old lenses can be really good, but sometimes there are big differences to new calculated ones too. I have an old 45mm for the Mamiya 645 film, manual focus, and tried it on a digital IQ140. The results were ok in sharpness, but colours were really odd and I had a lot of work adjusting in pp. Later I got the new 45mm with AF. There are worlds between these lenses. Tag sharp, brilliant and correct colours the new version.
The old lens delivered great results on the old camera based on film, but it could not deliver this on a modern digital body with higher demands.
Especially with the race of more pixel, a lot of great lenses can’t reach the needs of the sensor. This is independent to the manufacturer. A lens can work fine on a body, but it don’t has to. Therefore the test of a lens is only valid in combination with a certain camera. Even with another camera from the same manufacturer, there can be huge differences.
Some people are looking only for pixel, others for the picture. The second group is probably more happy with their lenses than the first one.
I fully agree with you that there is not always the need of the newest lens / body, especially if I read in your G+ post that your new 70-200 is still in repair, as more parts can fail in a more complex construction.
That’s one of the reasons I always double up my lenses, always have an extra option 😀
Hi!
Great that you are discovering the Minolta-gems! If i might suggest, take also a strong look at the 100mm f/2, the 200mm 2.8, the 35 1.4 and of course the STF
thanks will do
I love people who want the newest and greatest lenses, that gives me a chance to buy their old stuff. 😉 That way I got a good deal on a Canon 70-200 2.8L IS USM model 1, I love that lens. I want a lens that gives me pictures I like, no more no less.
The MKII I never bought from that lens, loved my MKI way too much 😀
Stuck between the Fuji X pro1 and A99, which to get? Made the decision to stick with Canon 5d MKll for now, it still does a great job and I don’t feel like spending £3000 for for better auto focus (in the case of Canon.) Decisions, decisions?
Always difficult 😀
Do remember it’s a totally different camera.
Love the FujiFilms for street work, the DSLR for other things. And MF when I have 100% control over light.