Good primes

[dixeyk]

One of the things I am most excited about is the ability of my new E PL1 to use legacy lenses. I have a Canon FD 50/1.4, OM 50/1.8 MIJ and a Pentax K 50/2 to name a few.

I am however interested in picking up some decent (cheaper) lenses to play around with. Some of the ones I was thinking about was the Pentax screw mount 50/1.4 and the Konica 40/1.8 (although I hear the 50/1.7 is sharper). But I have no experience with any of those and the opinion on the Konica varies widely.

Where would the best bang for the buck be in old legacy lenses? Pentax K? Screw mount? Stick with OM?

Kevin

 

[JoepLX3]

Don't you want primes with different focal lengths for different applications?

 

[Gwendal]

I've had very interesting answers to that question centered around the 24-28mm range here : https://www.mu-43.com/f40/recommendation-cheap-fast-legacy-lens-24-28mm-range-4751/

I've also seen absolutely wonderful shots of flowers by a forum member named Alf, who seems to own a nice series of Hexanon primes : Micro Four Thirds User Forum - Here it is

Also, I bought for €60 a superb 50mm f1.4 Carl Zeiss planar in PK mount ; but from what I'm investigating, the best "bang for anybody's bucks" seems to be with those Hexanons.

 

[aleksanderpolo]

Canon FD 50/1.4 and OM 50/1.8 MIJ are among the cheapest you can find, S-M-C Takumar 50/1.4 is probably more expensive. The other ones that are cheaper are Konica 40/1.8, 50/1.4, as well as Minolta MC/MD 50/1.4. You might also want to try some other focal length, though a little slower than 50s, such as OM 28/3.5, S-M-C Tak 35/3.5, etc.

 

[dixeyk]

Don't you want primes with different focal lengths for different applications?

Yeah, sorry I wasn't all that clear...I was trying to keep it brief. I have a few different lenses that came to as a result of a bunch of old camera bodies I picked up cheap (that's why so many 50s). The OM ones are from my own OM1 and OM2. FWIW I plan on culling out the lenses and only keep a few that work well with the E PL1.

OM 50/1.8
OM 35-70/3.5-4.5
OM 28/2.8
Canon FD 50/1.4
Canon FD 135/2.8
Rokkor MD-X 50/1.8
Hexanon 52/1.8
Pentax 40/2

Out of this list the only ones I know that I will keep are the OM primes and MAYBE the OM zoom and the Canon 135/2.8. I have aways wanted to try the Hexanon 40/1.8 (despite the weird swirly bokeh).

 

[dixeyk]

I guess it would be helpful to say what I want to do...it was late when I posted the original question and I can see know it is pretty vague.

I like to shoot closeups of flowers and bugs and what-have-you. I also like to shoot with a standard 50mm (so I suppose given the 2x multiplier I will need to look at something like a 24 or 28). I live in WA state so we don't have a LOT of sunny weather (we do have some) so lowlight is important. Finally, I want to try my hand with a big zoom as the 2x multiplier is a natural for that. I had an OM 300 f4 that I used on my E500 and it was really fun. I regret selling that one.

 

[G1 User]

Yeah, sorry I wasn't all that clear...I was trying to keep it brief. I have a few different lenses that came to as a result of a bunch of old camera bodies I picked up cheap (that's why so many 50s). The OM ones are from my own OM1 and OM2. FWIW I plan on culling out the lenses and only keep a few that work well with the E PL1.

OM 50/1.8
OM 35-70/3.5-4.5
OM 28/2.8
Canon FD 50/1.4
Canon FD 135/2.8
Rokkor MD-X 50/1.8
Hexanon 52/1.8
Pentax 40/2

Out of this list the only ones I know that I will keep are the OM primes and MAYBE the OM zoom and the Canon 135/2.8. I have aways wanted to try the Hexanon 40/1.8 (despite the weird swirly bokeh).

The Pentax 40/2 may be better built and sharper than the Konica 40/1.8, Although I had this lens on Konica Compact SLR, it is a sharp lens. And Swirly bokeh can make a very interesting background with nature images
My 2c worth

 

[dixeyk]

The Pentax 40/2 may be better built and sharper than the Konica 40/1.8, Although I had this lens on Konica Compact SLR, it is a sharp lens. And Swirly bokeh can make a very interesting background with nature images
My 2c worth

I should try that Pentax out. I got that attached to an old Ricoh SLR and not doing much.

 

[Charles2]

Lenses for flowers

I like to shoot closeups of flowers...

The Yashica 28mm f/2.8 does flowers well. But don't take my opinion. Search Flickr. The lens was made for the Contax/Yashica bayonet mount. The focus ring goes down to 0.3 meter, but I haven't tried it that close.

I also use a Zeiss Planar 50mm for flowers, in the same mount.

 

[julienrl]

how is the minolta f2.0?

 

[JohnF]

Hi -

I am a big fan of legacy lenses on either 4/3 or m4/3.

Let's see:

Leica 100mm f4 on bellows for serious macro work, lens out-resolves the sensor
Leica 180 f3.4 APO lens (this lens is probably the sharpest ever made for any 35mm camera, designed for extremely high resolution for the US Navy to be used to take pictures of ships during the Cold War, and handily out-resolves the sensor, and because of the APO design, no color fringing whatsoever!)

Nikon 85mm f2
Nikon 200mm f4

Olympus 50mm f1.4
Olympus 180mm f2.8

They all work wonderfully for certain situations. I use the Leica lenses for watch photography and very large-scale panoramas using the gigapan robotic panorama head; the 85 lens has wonderful bokeh for portrait work; the 200 f4 is a nice solid performer (which I will admit doesn't get much use given the outstanding 180 APO lens), the 50 is great for portraits under low-light conditions as well, and I use the 180 f2.8 for taking pictures of my daughter when she is on the stage (she is in a local theater group).

JohnF

 

[JoepLX3]

Thanks for mentioning applcation per favorite lens, that gives at least me a more clear picture. By the way, very nice set of lenses.

 

[dixeyk]

I'd love to pick up a Leica lens but the prices the command make that an impossibility for the near future.

 

[chalkdust]

One of my favorites is Voigtlander 50mm f3.5 Heliar. However, it is tricky. If you adjust the aperture after focusing, you may shift the focus. It was designed for rangefinder cameras that did not focus through the lens so apertures were set independently of focusing. It is not a fast lens at f3.5 so I use it primarily for outdoors work. So it requires a bit of skill. But it repays that effort with images that, to my eye, are what photography is all about. They look like you are looking at the original scene through a photographic clean, clear window.