New blogpost you might want to check

About 3 1/2 years ago when the EP1 came out, there was a big rush at legacy lenses. It was really funny, because around that time, these lenses cost like $20. They shot up over the following year, sometimes to around $100 (talking the common fast 50s), and now they've settled down into the $50-80 range generally. It was very funny, as people were dragging out their camera bags from their closets, and we all had to relearn about radioactive glass!

I still like manual lenses, though MF gets old after a while, but it's great to learn their individual characteristics. Have you tried Takumars yet? So sweet to focus (though crazy soft at 1.4 on the 50). I tried the MD line, because many people raved about them, but I never got along with them. One of my favorites was the OM 50mm 2.0 macro. Big lens, but really nice and versatile.

I've just purchased a Canon FL 55 1.2, which is a big chunk of (radioactive) glass. The FL line has such a nicer focus ring than the FDs, IMO, though there are a broader array of FD lenses. The downside of the FL line, along with the FD breech mount, is the two part mount. It's a pain.

Around 2010, there was even a CCTV lens craze. I can't remember the name of the place off the top of my head, but there's a discount warehouse in the US that moved a lot of CCTV lenses, but you have to be careful on the mounts. There was some real nice stuff in the 25/1.4 CCTV lenses, but they struggled to cover the m43 image circle. They're even tougher on ASP-C. I just sold my Fujian 35/1.7, which was my favorite CCTV lens, but while it looked good on m43, it's too weak to the edges for APS-C crop.

I've settled into my Voigtlander 40/1.4 (tried the CV35/1.4 -- not impressed. The 40's nicer, IMO). I've also got a CV75 2.5 I'm thinking of selling. And a couple of FD lenses -- a 50mm macro and a 50mm 1.4 that I had purchased before I came into the CV40. I never tried the actual Leica lenses -- I'm too cheap -- but I hear it's hit or miss because of the flange back distance, so maybe not worth risking anyway.

Happy lens shopping! You and Kevin seem to continue the pioneering spirit in legacy glass!

 

Have you tried any 55mm - 58mm lens?

I've tried and liked the following:

* Minolta MC 55mm f/1.7;
* Minolta MC 58mm f/1.4;
* Konica Hexanon 57mm f/1.4;
* Pentax SMC Takumar 55mm f/1.8;
* Vivitar 55mm f/2.8 Macro.

All inexpensive, I got them for < $50. The 55 - 58mm focal length works great on APS-C for portrait.

 

I love the post. Very funny. The true measure of a lens addict. FWIW I just picked up an OM 50/1.8 MIJ (with NEX adapter) and am looking at 35/2.5 and 50/1.4 FL lenses (curse you...ENABLER!)

 

I always keep an eye out for the OM 50/2 macro. That is one niiiice lens. I'm getting an MD adapter (got a 50/1.7, 50/1.4 and 50/3.5 macro in a trade). I'm interested to see what they are like. They are the older MC versions. They feel nice in the hand. Not Takumar nice but better than the Konicas. Remains to be seen how well they do otherwise. The Leica lens I would try (mostly because it's not crazy expensive) is the Summicron-C 40/2 or the Minolta version M-Rokkor 40/2.

 

Thanks, that was a great little read! I only wish I was good enough a photographer as you to justify going out to get more and more (and more) lenses!

 

Ha! After the last two lenses, my wife pointedly asked me "And when are you going to use them?" She was right of course, I had to ban myself from any new lenses until I take my 24 for a good spin, unfortunately I stuck to my 50 and LE this latest trip.

Now your pics of all those shiny lenses got my mouth watering!

 

The FL55/1.2 is interesting.

It's big. Quite big. and heavy. An 85/1.4 from Rokinon is bigger, but this is still big. The focus ring is like a Takumar. Very nice (at least mine is. I'm sure it depends on condition). Aperture is in full stop increments, sadly (I prefer half stops, but oh well). I believe it's radioactive, as mine is a little yellowish, unless I'm imagining it.

I've only used it indoors, but I will say at 1.2, it's sharper than my former Takumar 50/1.4 and 1/4. At one click down from 1.2 (not sure if that's 1.4 or 1.8 -- it's not labeled) it's pretty good. At 2.0 it's very, very nice. I haven't done any formal testing, nor taken it outside, where I suspect it might suffer a bit. I suppose I should test it against my FD 50/1.4. I was really after the wide-open stuff even if a bit soft, and it doesn't disappoint. The bokeh with spectral highlights has been pretty nice, and it's quite useable indoors at 1.2. I don't know if it's a long-term keeper for me (mainly because of size), but I wanted to give it a whirl.

Let us know what you think of yours once you get it.