Vintage lenses

otcx

I got my hands on really good condition Auto Miranda, 50 mm f 1.8 lens, but I'm not sure what mount this lens use. Does anyone know if there is adapter for this ? The lens is very sharp, and it have fun vintage colors. It is not a top lens, but I would like to try it.

otcx

These and other old lenses are really cheap. Some of these old lenses are still optically excellent. Here are a few example of the Auto Miranda 50 mm f 1.8 lens

nomad

I only know this lens in M42, but yours looks like some kind of bayonet. No idea for the standard, sorry.

lolo

i don´t know if this would help you,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lens_mounts

but, once i bought a lens that i didn´t know the mount, and look at this list and search one by one in google images, looking for a match, i end up knowing the mount and i actually did a DIY adapter to micro four thirds, i later dismantel the adapter, but only because i didn´t like the lens look, it was too soft, but i was able to focus to infinity and everything in the distance ring where the same (i tested using a self-retracting tape measure)

PS. and my lens end up having an Exakta, Topcon mount, a lens mount that i previously didn´t know it exist! :), the lens was a Carenar 35mm f2.8

otcx

Miranda cameras were quite unusual because they have both M42 and mm44 adapter in the same camera.
Yes I found the DIY instructions for making an adapter, but I do not have skills / tools.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@otcx

You can look at Russian steel universal adapter, if mount diameter is not too large (Canon EF is too large for it).

otcx

@lolo

How did you test it exactly ? (i tested using a self-retracting tape measure) ?

otcx

@Vitaliy_Kiselev

Thanx for advise. I will try to find that.

otcx

It would be interesting if the other how have used the old lenses talked about their experiences, and the lenses that they have used.

nomad

I use lots of Minolta Rokkors. Easy to adapt to µFT, not as expensive as Canon FD or Nikon and very good mechanical build and glass (they co-operated with Leica for many years).
That said, you'll be looking into glass from 35mm or 50mm upwards, wide-angles of that period can't really compete with modern ones. I'm not sure if they just couldn't do better or if it's the specifics of electronic sensors vs. film.
There are also very good Russian lenses, like Helios, Jupiter or Tair. Try to get older ones from before 1990 or recent ones (some are still in production), since quality control was lousy in the 90's. With the older ones, check tree things:
– lenses shouldn't be yellow
– aperture blades should be free of oil
– focus ring should move smoothly

Hope this helps.

lolo

well that was to check the focus,
so i measure with the self-retracting tape measure from the tip of the lens to different objects, and check that the number in the lens barrel were the same

but as for measure, how i was certain that i have found the right lens mount it was:

1) i google the lens mounts, and selected from the images what i think were most likely to be, then check in the wikipedia list the flange focal distance of those lens mount

2) i have a canon fd to m4/3 adapter, so i measure the adapter and made a substarction with the flange focal distance for canon fd of the wikipedia list, i don´t remember the number, but i did this to get the thicknes of the body camera and being able to get the real distance needed for the selected mounts

3)with the result of the substarction and the focal flange distance of the lens mount that i have selected i made a new substraction, being this result the real distance needed

4)then i tried that distance, placing a self-retracting tape measure on a table, the lens over a little box (to center the lens with the camera body), and a black fabric between the lens an the body camera (something like an improvised macro bellows)

i end up having a topcon lens

after that i did the adapter
with:
1)a macro reverse ring
2)step up rings
3)and epoxic glue, i glue the lens mount to one of the rings, i have lots of step up rings and manage to get the distance needed by cutting an spare

lolo

adding to the list of the things to check:
-no fungus
-no scratches on the glass
-no haze or light marks (or little amount)
-and check if there is too much internal dust, a little amount of dust doesn´t really bother, it only gets noticeable when you point directly to the sun or a light source, and actually that looks kind of pretty, so i think the dust becomes actually an aesthethic choice

:)

lolo

ouh and one thing about fungus, fungus is a living creature, so if you have a lens with fungus and place it in the camera there is actually a real risk that a spore flies to the camera body and start a new colony, and that said, it obviusly can travel to the other lenses that you place in the camera, so is a risky thing, if you are not 1000% certain that you can clean it, then you shoudlnt buy glass with fungus

a little trick to get rid of the fungus that i read, is to place the lens with direct sunlight getting inside and through the lens for a couple of months, the UV rays can kill the fungus, but, i don´t know, i still think is dangerous to buy glass with fungus...

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@lolo

Ypu can just buy UV lamp for this and not wait for months:-)

lolo

and ajjajaj i did the DIY adapter because the lens cost me U$5 hahahhaha so it was absurd to buy a real adapter, i didn´t even bother searching for one hahahha

lolo

@Vitaliy_Kiselev
hahah i haven´t tried though, it was something that i read,
but as always my almighty hacker hahah you are more clever (:

v10tdi

Even if you kill/clean fungus (using UV or whatever), you probably won't get all fungal spores. Fungal spores can be really tiny and can sustain very harsh conditions and still produce fungus when conditions are right. Key is that fungus/spores need right conditions to grow = dark, warm, humid environment (think like mushroom, or leather lens pouch that you found on shelf in back of that garage in Hawaii).

I have read lots of "do" and "don't" advice to guard against lens fungus. I guess it boils down to recognition that you probably already have fungal spores, so store lenses in environment that is not conducive to growth of spores...maybe bright, cool and dry.

I found old lens that had fungus. Not worth salvage so I just tossed it. I didn't even want to open it because I thought inside might have a lot of spores that would easily get out if I opened it. Probably silly since every time I would use zoom, air goes in/out.

Perhaps internal zoom/focus lenses are better protected against fungus since less air moves in/out while zooming or focusing?

nomad

@lolo
Yes, these are the regular things to check with any used lens, I was referring to some typical problems with Russian lenses.

Please, don't get me wrong, they made excellent glass and very sturdy mechanics. But for a long time in history they just didn't have good lubricants. The yellow lens problem is something that happened in early Japanese lenses too. They were using a rare earth for high refraction glass and couldn't separate it well enough in those times from a component that is subject to radioactive decay. (No worries, weak alpha radiation, nothing too serious).

But I don't subscribe to the fungus contagion theory. Fungus spores are everywhere, or humanity couldn't have invented yoghurt, cheese, wine or the like…

The only thing to keep lenses safe is: keep them dry! Just store them with some activated silica gel in a closed box if you live in a humid environment. Plus, I don't believe in killing them with sunlight or UV – the spores are so tiny they can survive in threads or other corners where the light doesn't shine.

otcx

I found a small clip that is shot on the Panasonic AF101 with Miranda 24mm and Cimko MT 100-300mm made by Jamie Hooper. I liked this very much. there is certainly also lot of post. But vintage look is amazing.

otcx

Thanks for warnigs. But in this case i get lense from my father (for free) how is pro photograper. Actually lens is in amazig condition eaven it is so old (something like 1974 or something). I also tested it with orginal cam, and photos out of it get me itrested. It is no match to modern leses, but i like a lot of it vintage look.

joethepro

Just made a purchase on ebay for a Helios 44m-4 58/2. The seller just sent me this:

The lens I sent you is not lens in the photo, because I could not find it, the lens is lost somewhere! I sent you the exact objective, only the professional version (MS). He's more enlightened lens. That which I have sent it better and more expensive. It will be a bonus!

Does anyone know which lens he is talking about? I have only found a couple references to MS Helios lenses, but no details. Yes, I contacted the seller about this, but no response yet.

Tscheckoff

@joethepro: He´s maybe talking about the 44M versions (maybe a newer model, 44M-6 or maybe even 44M-7 - Who knows). With "MS" he meant for sure the "M" models (just written in plural form ^^).

joethepro

@Tscheckoff You might be right, its hard to tell what he meant! I did find an MS Helios lens on bay though, different lens, but it shows "MS" markings.

joethepro

Turns out its an MC 44m-4 lens. Either a typo or ignorance by the seller. Nice lens, but the focus ring is stiff as molasses. Holy sh!t....

joethepro

Just got a vemar 28mm f/3 lens in t mount. Got a t to Nikon adapter coming so I can use it on my lens turbo. Hoping that will work. If not I can just get the t to m43 adapter. Anyone have any experience with vemar lenses? Its got 2 aperture rings where the second acts as a clickless open/close ring. Pretty cool.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters