Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/05/16

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] 200mm test/old lenses/adapters
From: douglas.sharp at gmx.de (Douglas Sharp)
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 00:27:37 +0200
References: <AANLkTilbK3EnpzZp0JIe6iqUaRXlVB-0X98U7g5duwLo@mail.gmail.com> <5A7B4795-BC2B-4158-8B44-13A2BD106DD3@mac.com> <AANLkTimawNeouMBK305ijHBOW6f2J1Yn5rEcN3cjdWkN@mail.gmail.com> <02E59712-DC12-4ECA-A8CE-36D6EFB2CCDB@mac.com>

George,

Precisely what I've been doing since 2003 - some old lenses are a lot 
better than "relatively" good, like  Yashica's 55/2.8 Macro 24/2.8 and 
21/3.5 wideangle and the CZ/Voigtl?nder 135/4, a positively tiny, 
moderate telephoto lens.

I've so far used adapters for M42, CY, Leica, Topcon (no infinity 
focus), Rollei QBM, Canon FD (with correction lens and not too good), 
Adaptall-II, Pentax-K and Olympus OM to EOS so far and LTM, CY and Leica 
R to Leica-M.

So far, one of the best 200 mm lenses I've found is a Rollei QBM mount 
(probably Tokina or Mamiya) 200/3.5, followed quite closely by a CZ 200 
Tele-Tessar, a Yashica 200 mm and then a Tamron - all manual focus.

I am still pretty impressed by a T-mount 200/4.5 lens that goes by the 
name of Optomax that I picked up for 2 pounds or so at a flea market 
near Gatwick airport - it was sold with an M39 (LTM) mount, but 
guestimating distances with a 200mm on my IIIg is not my idea of fun, so 
now it gets used with other T-mounts on other cameras.

Prices are sometimes so attractive that it's worth taking a gamble on 
optical quality. Luckily, I've not been disappointed very often.

One disappointment is an Olympus 35-70 zoom, but maybe it prefers to be 
on an OM and not a Canon 20D, I haven't got around to trying it with 
film yet. (perhaps the adapter is not too good, but the results with an 
OM 75-150 and the same adapter are fantastic).

Cheers
Douglas

On 16.05.2010 21:59, George Lottermoser wrote:
> okay - I get it now.
>
> and yes
> lots of "relatively" impressive used glass
> out there
> from every manufacturer
> for very attractive prices
> for every conceivable format
>
> and every conceivable adapter
> to hang them on current digital bodies
>
> exciting time to play with cameras and lenses
>
> ;~)
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george at imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
> On May 16, 2010, at 2:08 PM, Vince Passaro wrote:
>
>> to my eye rather intense and more than I expected.
>> for a small light* $45 lens it surprised me.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] 200mm test)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] 200mm test)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] 200mm test)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] 200mm test)