https://www.lenstip.com/473.1-Lens_review-Sigma_A_50-100_mm_f_1.8_DC_HSM-Introduction.html

Not cheap, still prone to flare due to huge amount of glass inside - yet much less than any of the older Sigma & Tokina non cinema zooms.

50-135mm T2.9 MKII cinema lens

At 50mm and maximum aperture, sharpness approaches excellent levels in the centre of the frame, and falls just short of good levels towards the edges of the frame.

Finally at 135mm, sharpness falls just short of very good levels at maximum aperture and clarity towards the edges of the frame is fair. Stopping down just one stop to f/4 results in outstanding performance in the centre of the frame.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-da--50-135mm-f-2-8-ed--if--sdm-lens-review-2567928ePHOTOzine+Reviews%29

A little update after finally receiving both a 50mm 1.4 and a 135 2.8 Canon FD.

So glad I went down this route. It has given me a lot more confidence in using manual lenses and these two are going to be very useful for certain situations. With 2x ETC the 135 is staggering how long it is.

Lenses are both very sharp, even wide open and also very pleased with the overall characteristics of the image too.

Thanking a lot of different people here for helping me out.

@tetakpatak Mine seems to be an export version, the name is written in Latin and it says "Made in USSR" on the barrel. Sorry to hear you've got that problem, maybe you can find a clamp-on version that fits?

@nomad Lucky you, my Jupiter-9 is made 1962 in LZOS Lytkarino factory. Filter thread has 49mm diameter, but only 0,5mm width (instead of standard 0,75mm). 0,5mm was used by Zeiss for 40,5mm diameter since ever and it is still standard for that size. But not for 49mm.

I agree that it's flare prone – coating is the weak point of early Russian lenses.

While it's very difficult to find the original hood, I didn't have any trouble finding a replacement on Ebay: just went for those folding rubber hoods, they come in all sizes, including 49mm. My Jupiter-9 is from 1964, though. Could be that earlier lenses have a different thread. I never tried on the first J-9 I had in hand (from 1959) since I didn't keep that because of severe yellowing and grinding focus thread. The one I have now is a wonderful piece.

Or the Jupiter 9, great Russian lens with lots of blades = always round aperture.

okay so i've ventured away from where i started the topic.... i'll give you that, but i must admit i had not seriously considered old glass before so maybe i should change the topic. :)

I like the samyang 85mm but it was still 4/3rds and i would still need to get a converter anyway. So then when i saw some of the prices for what are described as great condition lenses, i'm thinking i could save a fair amount of cash here.

Why have Panasonic not made some decent telephoto prime 1.8-2.8 lenses?

The nearest is the Olympus 75mm 1.8 but some £500-600 in uk is just not doable for me.

i've ended up going for some old manual Canon FD lenses, 50mm 1.4 & 135mm 2.8.

Got an FD to mft converter as well.

All in all came to around £130 including shipping from the US for two low-light lenses albeit with manual focus/aperture.

For the shots i need them for (tri-pod mounted) this will not be an issue and i'm looking forward to what kind of 'look' i get with these. I've heard the canon lenses can be a little bit softer than the panasonic ones, anybody heard or know differently?

Thanks to the advice from this topic this has definitely got me into looking at vintage lenses!

although if i buy two this wont be so bad...... hmmmmmm :D

There is some good advice already. Nikkor, FD or minolta are the most popular of the not so expensive vintage lenses. Try to find tests online to see what is more close to your taste. They have different characteristic on color rendition, bokeh, flare, etc. But if you like sharp image (you ve mentionned the 12-35 pana) it s'difficult to beat modern lenses : olympus 75mm or the less pricey samyang 85mm.