What vintage lens choose on dslr camera?

[darius_knocturn]

Hello, guys. So, im going to buy vintage lens on my

canon eos 600d with aps-c sensor. I will shoot boudoir,

lingerie style photoshoots, I need 28mm or less mm

lenses because aps-c sensor crops photos 1.6x. Mostly

ill use natural light. Im thinking of vivitar 24mm 2.8 or

pentacon 29mm / 2.8, one guy offered tamron adaptall

28mm 2.5. What Do You Think Guys? What Should I

Choose? Or Maybe You Can Offer Me Better Option On

The Same Price?

[glen_h]

<p>Canon EF lenses aren't so hard to find used, and for reasonable prices. Those might not be vintage enough. </p>

<p>Most adaptall lenses are from before the EF lens transition, but EF adapters are easy to find. (Mail order from China for the lowest prices.) I think they don't have aperture coupling, so you will meter stopped down, or use a hand-held meter. </p>

<p>Your vintage lens choices are much better with Nikon DSLRs, which should all be able to mount AI lenses (back to about 1977), and many can mount even older lenses. Some won't meter with those lenses, though. </p>

<p>What do you really mean by vintage? EF lenses go back to about 1987, for film cameras. I suspect that the Canon EF 24/2.8 or 28/2.8 aren't that hard to find used. I have a Nikon mount Vivitar 24/2.0, but the aperture is stuck open. That often happens to older lenses. </p>

<p>As far as I know, all the real EF lenses are auto-focus, though you can turn that off. <br>

If you want manual focus only, I think the adaptall is the best choice.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>If by "vintage" you mean lenses from pre-1990s--such as M42, K, or non-AI Nikon mount-- you also have to consider that 28mm or wider was VERY wide in those days. For that reason, it's normally difficult to find lenses shorter than 35mm focal length. Because they are rare, they are also often expensive. Your offered lenses would do, but how much are they going to cost? You may want to search for T-mount lenses for which you can buy EF-mount T adapters.</p>

<p>If you actually want "vintage" effects-that is imperfections, I'm not sure that you will see much difference from newer lenses in the Vivitar, Pentacon, or Tamron lenses you mention.</p>

<p>If you just want to shoot old lenses out of some ideological conviction, then you should also look at older, manual focus Nikkors. Stay away from the newer AF lenses that don't have aperture rings.</p>

 

[Jochen_S]

<p>If you are shopping for "a slightly wide lens" on a shoestring budged, I seriously recommend kit zooms, preferably their IS variant.<br>

A heritage wide from the early 80s isn't very likely to make you happy or knock your socks off, especially on your crop sensor. <br>

It's engineers jumped through hoops to provide retro focus and giant FF image circle at affordable cost using just spherical elements. It surely wasn't as easy to do as tossing a standard lens together and the result must have been a sharpness compromise, most likely not meant to shine shot wide open but capable to deliver something at 5.6 -8.<br>

And now you arrive intending to milk about 40megapixel full frame resolution from that poor old lens that (maybe) did well enough on Ilford HP 5? - Dissapointment guaranteed! <br>

I haven't tested the lenses you are mentioning but some Pentax, Soligor Sigma Japanese Exakta etc. I don't own any heritage SLR wide that keeps up with my 100 or 50mm macro AF lenses constructed back in film days and none appears to have an edge over my 12-24mm f4 zoom.<br>

That being said: Manual SLR focusing on an AF camera's brightness optimized screen is no fun and your pentamirror finder makes the chore even harder. <br>

As sluggish as it is, the AF in my Pentax DSLRs nails wide open focus way more successfully than I could by eyeballing that awful screens. <br>

Shoot your kit zoom or buy an used one for 50 Euro, save your pennies and maybe get something great <em>made for crop DSLRs</em> once your piggybank will permit. - Sigma's f1.8 zoom should be one of those lenses but f2.8 zooms with a short range might be good too. <br>

Safe adapting for worthy candidates like a swirl bokeh Helios (but given a choice I'd pick an AF 50mm first). <br>

YMMV, but cases of heritage lenses shining on the compared to film insane pixel count of your camera seem rare. I suppose most people shooting adapted glass either settle on rather low pixel density FF bodies or limit themselves to showing off thumbnails like maybe 6MP because thats all they can squeeze out of an old average superwide on APS. <br>

Lingerie in a dim baudoir should be more fun with AF and kit zooms take pictures! - Good luck and even better light.</p>

[john_tran14]

<p>Not sure what you want, but I did use the three lenses you suggest and none of them was considered good in their time. People mentioned more of the Leica lenses, Pentax Takumars, and manual Nikkors. Some also said they liked the special colors of Minolta (both MD and AF) and I used the 3 lenses you suggest only because I always like to buy cheap stuffs. I had only one Leica lens and agree that it was really good. For my budget, the Takumars are the best, the Nikkors are also very sharp but still expensive to me. I agree with JDM that 28mm was very wide, and I don't think we need very wide lenses to shoot lingerie styles. It is hard to manually focus with pentamirror vf, and harder with wide lenses. For cheaper 28mm manual lenses, I found a Fujinon, and a Yashinon that ae great and I was happy using these two with my 30D. The Fujinon was from a like new Fujica, and the Yashinon was from a Yashica SLR (maybe the SL). They were dirt cheap from garage sales.</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>You are asking because you want to save money? Why not just get the Canon EFS 24mm f/2.8 brand new for $129?</p>

[Tony Parsons]

<p>Lingerie in a dim boudoir ? (I assume a model will be involved). And you want a camera ?</p>

<p>Ho hum</p>

<p>Tony</p>

[david_l3]

<p>What is it you want with a vintage lens? Vintage can mean many things. Are you looking for excellent optical quality? Some old manual focus lenses can be surprisingly good. Better, get a modern EF or EFS lens for your Canon. If not, then consider a soft focus lens. Or a Lensbaby lens if you want optical softness and out of focus areas. </p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Darius, apart from the question others already asked (what do you expect from a vintage lens that a modern lens wouldn't do?), have you also considered how easy it is to focus a lens manually on your camera?<br>

I have no experience with the 600D, but having worked a few times with an older similar EOS camera, I must say the viewfinder strikes me as small and not very bright. OK for autofocus, but I wouldn't want to use it with a manual focus lens.</p>

<p>Btw, the suggestion for a lensbaby is a nice idea. I've got the cheapest model they have, and it's a lot of fun.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Nikkor 28mm f/2 Ai/Ai-S</p>

[darius_knocturn]

I want that vintage color grading and noir(big fan of film

photography and grain) but now I think that is more

achievable through editing and etc. Vintage or old lens

seems to be more sharper than moderns, you can buy

good and sharp modern lens but that price is too much

for me, thats why im searching old, good, sharp lens.

[mark_pierlot]

<blockquote>

<p>Vintage or old lens seems to be more sharper than moderns, you can buy good and sharp modern lens but that price is too much for me, thats why im searching old, good, sharp lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Canon New FD 24mm f/2<br>

Nikon Nikkor 28mm f/2 Ai/Ai-S<br>

Canon FD 35mm f/2 SSC concave</p>