Recomend me a Wide M42 lens

[kb244]

So, I finally bit the bullet and ordered a M42 adapter for the Olympus Pen-FT half-frame camera, basically the cheapest mount of all the adapters you can get for the Pen-FT (short of those bellow adapters).

Right now I have a Olympus F.Zuiko Auto-S 38mm f/1.8 lens that came with my FT which is nice but its basically somewhat a 55mm or so perspective on the half-frame (1.44x give or take).

I'm wondering what is out there in the range of 24mm or wider on the M42 screwmount lens that would make a good candidate to look into. I thought bout just getting a fisheye like the spiratone 12mm f/8 t-mount lens and putting a t-mount on top of the m42 adapter since it would still be corrected for registration distance and would be basically a 16-17 crop equiv (but with just a heck of a bit more distortion and probably a soft as hell image, but I wouldn't have to worry much bout focusing).

What of some like the older Pentax SMC 24mm f/2.8 (the M42 one not the K mount one).

On the flip side whats a good 50 to 55mm lens that has a nice fast aperture (1.8 or faster) that would be sharp at the center for a good portrait lens (as it'll have more or less the 80mm range on the half-framer).

Basically keep in mind I am also somewhat budget minded (and yet I paid 120$ for a lens adapter... sheesh), but feel free to recommend almost anything.

 

[zenrhino]

Its not superwide, but I love the shots I get from my Mamiya/Sekor 28mm f/2.8.

 

[mabman]

In terms of a 50mm for M42 with a faster aperture, the only one I can find is a Takumar 50/1.4 - KEH has a couple for ~US$100 currently.

I have a Volna-9 50/2.8 that I like (it's also macro), and I've just ordered a Helios 44M-6 (58/2) - it's a late-model version which is supposed to be the better Helios build quality (actually it's the default lens on the later Zenit-ET cameras, so I've bought one of those for ~$30). The usual advantage of the Russian/Soviet m42 lenses is price, the tradeoff is possible quality-control issues (eg, buy from a reputable seller).

 

[Andy K]

I second the Takumar.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

The Takumar 24mm will cost you, it never sells under 300$. If you want, I have a much cheaper Vivitar 24mm that I haven't been using much, just PM or email me.

 

[Bandicoot]

I'm wondering what is out there in the range of 24mm or wider on the M42 screwmount lens that would make a good candidate to look into.

What of some like the older Pentax SMC 24mm f/2.8 (the M42 one not the K mount one).

That won't be a particularly cheap lens for you, but it is really nice: I used one for years before moving to Pentax K-mount and was always pleased with it.

The 20mm f4 is also a rather good lens, but also probably not cheap. The 15mm and, especially, 18mm Pentaxes are excellent, and I think both were made in screw-mount versions - again, neither will be cheap.

There is a Kiron 24mm f2 that has a very good reputation though I've never owned one myself. This is said to be particularly good for centre sharpness, which will be good for your application, and, of course, it is fast for that focal length.

There are also some good Tamron Adaptall lenses you could look at. The Adaptall-2 17mm f3.5 I haven't used but have seen good results from: it is maybe a little soft in the corners before about f5.6, but used on half frame that won't matter to you.

The Tamron Adaptall-2 24mm F/2.5 Model 01B is a very good lens that will cost less than the Pentax: not quite as good, but certainly very good for the money. It's also fairly compact, which would make sense used on a small camera. There's also an older Adaptall (no "2") version of this lens, but I don't know whether it is the same optical design or not.

There are also some Vivitar Series One lenses, the older ones, mostly made by Kiron, as T-mounts that should be worth looking at. There is a 19mm that is rather good, and I think a 24mm.

On the flip side whats a good 50 to 55mm lens that has a nice fast aperture (1.8 or faster) that would be sharp at the center for a good portrait lens (as it'll have more or less the 80mm range on the half-framer).

Pentax Super-Multicoated-Takumar 55mm f1.8, Pentax Super-Multicoated-Takumar 50mm f1.4. Both are excellent lenses, and I especially like the f1.4. Fujica also made screw mount lenses, and their fast 50 should be good, and probably cheaper than the Pentaxes.

HTH,



Peter

 

[Trond]

What of some like the older Pentax SMC 24mm f/2.8 (the M42 one not the K mount one).

I don´t think there is a Pentax 24mm 2.8 M42 lens, you must be thinking of the 3.5 lens?

Trond

 

[Phillip P. Dimor]

I've a Zeiss Flektogon 20mm f4 M42 lens that is pretty decent. It's older, there's fall off and distortion but it's pretty wide.

They made a 20mm f2.8 as well but it's more $$$. I paid $120 for mine from Poland. There are a lot of these up there.

 

[Oren Grad]

I don´t think there is a Pentax 24mm 2.8 M42 lens, you must be thinking of the 3.5 lens?

That's correct - the 24 that Pentax offered in M42 is f/3.5. I don't think I'd want to use that on a Pen FT. The Pentax is sized for a full-frame body, and together with the adapter would make an unwieldy match to the Pen FT body. Also, I find that focusing the 25/2.8 Pen Zuiko on the FT's fairly dim screen is difficult enough; I wouldn't relish the thought of trying to do it at f/3.5.

If you want something wide for the Pen I'd have patience and keep an eye out for the 25/2.8 Pen Zuiko.

 

[Nick Zentena]

If you're budget minded look for old M42 cameras with 50mm lenses attached. You can often get a camera and lens for less then some will want for just the lens.

 

[kb244]

Just to cover some things that I already have...

I have the following
Mamiya-Sekor 50mm f/2
Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro (my favorite lens, I use it mainly with the EF or FD mount, very sharp for me even on the digi)
Tamron Adaptall-2 28mm f/2.5 (it's 'ok' softer than I'd like)
I just sold my Mamaiya 200mm f/3.5 not that long ago (doh lol).
I also got a Leica thread mount to M42 adapter somewhere.
And theres the M42 adaptall mount I Got hiding round here somewhere.

I won't get the adapter for the pen til least wendsday.

 

[kb244]

I find that focusing the 25/2.8 Pen Zuiko on the FT's fairly dim screen is difficult enough; I wouldn't relish the thought of trying to do it at f/3.5.

If you want something wide for the Pen I'd have patience and keep an eye out for the 25/2.8 Pen Zuiko.

My Pen-FT is modified ( has a hot-shoe installed, the meter removed, and mirror by the meter replaced with a fully silvered mirror, everything else is bout the same though).

Also I'd eventually get the 20/4 or 25/2.8 however thats a bit of coinage to drop.

 

[Oren Grad]

My Pen-FT is modified ( has a hot-shoe installed, the meter removed, and mirror by the meter replaced with a fully silvered mirror, everything else is bout the same though).

Also I'd eventually get the 20/4 or 25/2.8 however thats a bit of coinage to drop.

Karl, I have an M42-to-Pen F adapter and several Pentax M42 lenses. For my taste using the full frame lenses with an adapter on the Pen really is a kludge - it works, and I wouldn't hesitate to do it to solve a special problem, but it takes an elegant camera and makes it klunky. Yes, YMMV.

Don't despair re finding the genuine article at a non-crazy price. I got a nice deal on a Pen 25/2.8 on which the owner had scratched some numbers into the barrel. Optically and mechanically it was fine. Bad for the collectors, good for me.

 

[k_jupiter]

I got a couple of 50/55s that work well... The Super-Takumar 55mm 1.8 is a very nice lens. Much more interesting is the 50mm 2.8 Zeiss Tessar Jena. Sharp in the middle, pleasing fade off in sharpness on the very edges. It's only downfall is you set the aperture after focus. Be on the lookout for the Fujinon lens in this range also. They are pretty sharp, usually cheap.

tim in san jose

 

[kb244]

Karl, I have an M42-to-Pen F adapter and several Pentax M42 lenses. For my taste using the full frame lenses with an adapter on the Pen really is a kludge - it works, and I wouldn't hesitate to do it to solve a special problem, but it takes an elegant camera and makes it klunky. Yes, YMMV.

Don't despair re finding the genuine article at a non-crazy price. I got a nice deal on a Pen 25/2.8 on which the owner had scratched some numbers into the barrel. Optically and mechanically it was fine. Bad for the collectors, good for me.

hehe, you're talking to a guy who've had a habit of making things klutzier than they should be. I'll always have my 38/1.8 , but until then I'd like to at least be able to use some other lens. Hell I've used my adaptalls on a Canon EOS body, and that would behave the same way (gota manually stop down after focusing).

Also where can you find a non-crazy price on most of the pen lens aside from the 38/1.8, 40/1.4, 100/3.5 or 150/4. kevin cameras seems to have most of the 'artifacts' and most of those prices are like 'holy sh*t man'.

 

[srs5694]

The Tamron Adaptall-2 24mm F/2.5 Model 01B is a very good lens that will cost less than the Pentax: not quite as good, but certainly very good for the money. It's also fairly compact, which would make sense used on a small camera.

I've got a Tamron Adaptall-2 24mm f/2.5 model 01BB. I'm not sure if that's significantly different from the one you mention, but I do like it a lot. I mainly use it with K-mount cameras, but I've got a couple of M42 bodies and an appropriate adapter.

At a bit wider you could look for a Mir-20M, which is a Russian 20mm lens. They pop up on eBay occasionally, or you can buy from an outfit like RuGift in Russia. I've got one of these lenses in a mount for the Kiev 10/15 cameras, and it's nice -- much nicer than my Kiev 15, though, so I seldom use mine. Among other things, I like the fact that it focuses down to 0.18m, which is unusually close for such a wide lens. It's not nearly as compact as the 24mm Tamron, though; the Mir-20 has a very wide front element. It also uses unusual rear-mounted filters (or at least recent production samples do; mine is much older and doesn't seem to take filters at all). Be sure to get one in M42 mount if that's what you want. I don't care as much for my 20mm Mir-47K (mine's K-mount, but M42-mount is also available), since it's downright blurry at the edges unless it's stopped down to f/5.6 or smaller. This might not be a problem with a half-frame camera, though, and my Mir-47K is sharp in the center, even wide open.

Of course, personal standards vary; what I consider a good lens you might consider utter garbage, or vice-versa. It's hard to get around that in online discussions. My own experience is as an amateur who's only used a one or two dozen lenses in total, and fewer than half a dozen wider than 28mm.

 

[kb244]

..
Of course, personal standards vary; what I consider a good lens you might consider utter garbage, or vice-versa. It's hard to get around that in online discussions. My own experience is as an amateur who's only used a one or two dozen lenses in total, and fewer than half a dozen wider than 28mm.

I agree it's personal preference, but I do have at the least a Industar-10 50/3.5, Jupiter-12 35/2.8 and Jupiter-11 135/4 that I use for both my Canon P and Fed-2A, so I'm not extremely picky on weather or not its considered 'good' by the likes of someone who uses mostly Canon L glass. The main problem with the russian stuff is that whenever I do find them at (in my own way) acceptible price, its usually upward to a 50$ shipping charge.

However Rugift, does that price include shipping seems if you goto pay for it, its the same price as they list. Probably overpriced, cuz I remember those MC tilt shift lens being available for half of what they are asking.

 

[srs5694]

However Rugift, does that price include shipping seems if you goto pay for it, its the same price as they list. Probably overpriced, cuz I remember those MC tilt shift lens being available for half of what they are asking.

Click the "Shipping" link on their page. They specify shipping charges are typically in the $20-$35 range except for heavier items.

Their prices have gone up since I last ordered from them, but not all that much. Prices seem variable; as you say, their tilt/shift lenses are pricey compared to, say, their 20mm lenses.

 

[BeatPoet]

The Helios 44 50mm is a very good lens and costs practically nothing. I tested mine against my Nikon 50mm f1.8 (which is outstanding) and there's not much between them in the f2.8-f8 range.

The Vivitar 24mm is worth a go as well, but in general I'd stick to modern wide zooms if you want anything wider. MF lenses in this range are going for stupid amounts of money.

 

[kb244]

The Helios 44 50mm is a very good lens and costs practically nothing. I tested mine against my Nikon 50mm f1.8 (which is outstanding) and there's not much between them in the f2.8-f8 range.

The Vivitar 24mm is worth a go as well, but in general I'd stick to modern wide zooms if you want anything wider. MF lenses in this range are going for stupid amounts of money.

Hrm, I traded my Zenit-11 that had a Helios-44 50mm lens on it for a Jupiter-12 35/1.8 for my Canon P/Fed-2A.

Question though, how would one attach a MF lens such as an Mamiya 90mm f/3.8C (for the RB67) to the likes of an M42 adapter? ( not that I'd ever do that but would look funny as hell having my 90 on the Pen, least more so than if I stuck the Pen-FT to my 1200mm Celestron C90Mak spotting scope).

 

[Nick Zentena]

I doubt you can stick a Mamiya lens on. Maybe with a custom/expensive mount job.

You can stick Kiev P6 lenses. You need a P6 to M42 adapter. Used to be common on Ebay.

 

[dynachrome]

M42 Lenses For Olympus Pen Cameras

I have a 20/3.8 Vivitar Fixed Mount which has the same general shape as the 20/4 Flektogon. Even after all these years it's still a decent lens. You are using the central portion of the lens and that helps too. The Vivitar 24/2 with the 22XXX... serial number was made by Kino but often has oil on the blades. The one with the 28XXX... serial number was made by Komine and is usually in good condition. A 24/2.8 would cost less but be a little dimmer to focus. The Pen cameras do not have very bright viewfinders. You might also look for a 17mm f/3.5 Vivitar or Tokina. These are also nice and were made in M42 mount.

 

[kb244]

I doubt you can stick a Mamiya lens on. Maybe with a custom/expensive mount job.

You can stick Kiev P6 lenses. You need a P6 to M42 adapter. Used to be common on Ebay.

Interesting to know (P6 to M42) not particularly for my Pen, but for other cameras I'm thinking of. Though putting a P6 lens on front of my Pen would be less of a hassle than say the Nikon 6mm f/2.8 on front of a small body (not that it has any relevance but just something I thought of in my mind).

 

[srs5694]

The Helios 44 50mm is a very good lens and costs practically nothing. I tested mine against my Nikon 50mm f1.8 (which is outstanding) and there's not much between them in the f2.8-f8 range.

FWIW, the Helios 44 is actually a 58mm lens, not 50mm. A minor point, but possibly important. It's also very slightly slower than what kb244 wants in his ~50mm lens, at f/2.0. I agree that it's a sharp lens, though.

Concerning the discussion of adapting MF lenses to a 35mm half-frame camera, I'd be concerned about resolution. A lot of MF lenses don't resolve as many lines per millimeter as do lenses for 35mm cameras; the larger MF film size lets the designers get away with this, since the total number of lines per frame will still be bigger. Adapting an MF lens to a full-frame 35mm camera might still produce an acceptably sharp image, but there'll be even more loss (in terms of lines per frame) when attaching an MF lens to a half-frame 35mm camera. Maybe it'd still be OK, but I'd be a bit wary of this. Of course, similar arguments can be made about using full-frame 35mm lenses on a half-frame 35mm camera, but that's a smaller difference in frame size than from MF to half-frame 35mm.

 

[kb244]

FWIW, the Helios 44 is actually a 58mm lens, not 50mm. A minor point, but possibly important. It's also very slightly slower than what kb244 wants in his ~50mm lens, at f/2.0. I agree that it's a sharp lens, though.

Concerning the discussion of adapting MF lenses to a 35mm half-frame camera, I'd be concerned about resolution. A lot of MF lenses don't resolve as many lines per millimeter as do lenses for 35mm cameras; the larger MF film size lets the designers get away with this, since the total number of lines per frame will still be bigger. Adapting an MF lens to a full-frame 35mm camera might still produce an acceptably sharp image, but there'll be even more loss (in terms of lines per frame) when attaching an MF lens to a half-frame 35mm camera. Maybe it'd still be OK, but I'd be a bit wary of this. Of course, similar arguments can be made about using full-frame 35mm lenses on a half-frame 35mm camera, but that's a smaller difference in frame size than from MF to half-frame 35mm.

You are correct in regards to the 58mm focal length.

As for the MF lens, I do remember that traditionally speaking the larger the format, the less resolving power the lens typically has. But far as the medium format lens goes, if I were to adapt it, it would only be one I already own as opposed to seeking out a new lens to try.