What do you think is the most versatile M42 lens?

[MattKing]

Are y’all ever concerned with the radioactivity of these old M42 lenses? I would hate to drop one and have it break inside my house or classroom.

Do you eat bananas or have an older luminous watch. If so, you are exposed to more radioactivity than those lenses add to your environment.
It would be worth getting worried about it if you were to swallow broken shards of glass from those lenses, or to sleep with the lenses every night for years.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Are y’all ever concerned with the radioactivity of these old M42 lenses? I would hate to drop one and have it break inside my house or classroom.

They're not all "radioactive". There is a version of the f:1.4 50mm Takumar, and maybe one or two others. They emit very little radiation, nothing to be concerned about unless you line your underwear with the thorium glass elements and wear them for several decades.

 

[Marco Gilardetti]

I can recommend: Helios 58mm

I also have a Helios 44M (58/2) and a Yashica Yashinon DX 50/1.7. I did quite a bit of comparison shooting between the 44M and the Yashinon a while back, and the Yashinon is clearly the better of the two lenses. It's noticeably sharper.

As a matter of fact, I can very hardly understand why the Helios was mentioned at all in a thread concerning "the most versatile lenses". I actually consider it a specialised portrait lens, a soft focus with elliptical defocused highlights wide open (also known as swirly bokeh). Some love it, some hate it, but in my opinion it definitely doesn't qualify amongst most versatile lenses.

Are y’all ever concerned with the radioactivity of these old M42 lenses? I would hate to drop one and have it break inside my house or classroom.

As said by others, the radioactivity level of these glasses is nothing to worry about. The addition of rare earths in the compound was very small to begin with. Quite obviously I don't keep them right under my pillow 24/7, but on the other hand I use these lenses without absolutely any concern.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

As a matter of fact, I can very hardly understand why the Helios was mentioned at all in a thread concerning "the most versatile lenses". I actually consider it a specialised portrait lens, a soft focus with elliptical defocused highlights wide open (also known as swirly bokeh). Some love it, some hate it, but in my opinion it definitely doesn't qualify amongst most versatile lenses.


As said by others, the radioactivity level of these glasses is nothing to worry about. The addition of rare earths in the compound was very small to begin with. Quite obviously I don't keep them right under my pillow 24/7, but on the other hand I use these lenses without absolutely any concern.

I have a Helios 44-2, stopped down, it's sharp enough, but wide open you have to watch the background or the swirlies give you vertigo.

 

[mrosenlof]

Versatile can have a lot of meanings, but my pick would be one of the macro SMC Takumars. Either the 50 or the 100, both are f/4.0. I tend to like the longer focal length, in fact I have the 100, but not the 50. I'd like a larger aperture, but I think you have to go to K-mount to get 2.8.

Since the OP also has Nikons, I would prefer the Nikkor 105mm f2.8 Micro over the Pentax lens. They're both very nice.

 

[Neil Grant]

As a matter of fact, I can very hardly understand why the Helios was mentioned at all in a thread concerning "the most versatile lenses". I actually consider it a specialised portrait lens, a soft focus with elliptical defocused highlights wide open (also known as swirly bokeh). Some love it, some hate it, but in my opinion it definitely doesn't qualify amongst most versatile lenses.

...it's a good half length portrait lens with characterstic 'swirley' bokeh (with the right b/g), it's sharp stopped down, it's cu abilities are appreciably better then most '50s' - 16 percent longer focal length and 0.45m min focus. So, by my reckoning that's 2
'special powers' - in other words 'versatile'. I took a Helios 44-3 for a once-in-a-lifetime vacation to Naples last year along with a 30mm Lydith and a 35mm Flektogon f/2.4 -all used on my 'foundling' non-metered Chinon m1. Hard work, but everything held together. Must go again one day.

 

[flavio81]

It's apparent none of you has owned an Olympus FTL with dedicated Zuiko M-42 glass. Try getting any now.

I don'y have an FTL, but I do have Zuiko OM lenses. I prefer Nikkors and Takumars, generally.

I never understood the glorification of Olympus lenses!

 

[flavio81]

Howdy, APUG!
I've always been a Nikon guy and I've also shot my fair share of Ricoh cameras and lenses. Both have been great complimentary systems. I recently developed in an interest in M42 cameras and lenses, and I landed a clean Yashica J-3 with a Auto Yashinon 50mm f2 last year. I had heard good things about the Auto Yashinon being sharp and such, and it is very sharp indeed. I picked up a Auto Rikenon 50mm f2 that I plan to do a comparison check with the Yashinon, but from what I can tell, there are not many accolades for this particular Rikenon. However, if it renders colors like the K-mount Ricoh lenses that I have, then I will be pleased.
Anyways, I'm curious, from your experience, would any of you care to share what you think is most versatile M42 lens out there, and/or perhaps your favorite and why?

Thanks, APUG! Looking forward to read your responses.
-Paul

My pick is easy: My Carl Zeiss Jena 35/2.4.

It is versatile due to the FOV and reasonable speed, it is not too big, and optical quality is phenomenal.

 

[ac12]

As mentioned, versatile depends on your perspective.
The 35mm or 50mm lenses used as a standard lens is probably as versatile as you can get for most any SLR.

The 70-150 is a good short tele zoom. And the 2:1 zoom range likely made is optically better than the wider zoom range zooms.

The Takumar glass is very likely better than my Mamiya/Sekor lenses.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I never understood the glorification of Olympus lenses!

They're certainly not crap, but I don't think all of them are great. I had a 100/2.8 that was very good, but the 105 Nikkor (Sonnar) I like a lot more. My early 50/1.4 Zuiko was disappointing, but I generally don't like fast 50s; I have 5 50/2 Nikkor H & HC lenses, one for each body, my favorite 50 for Nikon. The 28/2.8 MC Zuiko is very good, as is the 35 shift, 135/2.8 MC, even the 35-70 zoom is decent.
The only 50/1.4 I've ever really liked (including the Nikkor) is the SMC Takumar.
You mentioned the J9 85/2 as being overrated, mine is a Kiev mount from Lytkarino, 1970, and I love it - typical old Sonnar wonkiness wide open, at f:4 you can count eyelashes in a half length portrait, it behaves very similar to the prewar CZJ Sonnars in fact, despite having 7 elements.

 

[flavio81]

I have 5 50/2 Nikkor H & HC lenses, one for each body, my favorite 50 for Nikon.

You mentioned the J9 85/2 as being overrated, mine is a Kiev mount from Lytkarino, 1970, and I love it - typical old Sonnar wonkiness wide open, at f:4 you can count eyelashes in a half length portrait, it behaves very similar to the prewar CZJ Sonnars in fact, despite having 7 elements.

Great taste in Nikkors. The 50/2 is quite an achievement for a 1964 lens.

As for the jupiter-9, mine is way too unsharp and contrast way too low at 2. It gets good at f5.6-8, but what can I think if the EF 85/1.8 is better ar f2.8 than the J9 at f8, yet the EF also has great rendering?

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Great taste in Nikkors. The 50/2 is quite an achievement for a 1964 lens.

As for the jupiter-9, mine is way too unsharp and contrast way too low at 2. It gets good at f5.6-8, but what can I think if the EF 85/1.8 is better ar f2.8 than the J9 at f8, yet the EF also has great rendering?

One of my 50/2 Nikkors came on a '65 Nikkormat FT.
My experience with the FSU stuff is that the Kiev/Contax mount lenses are quite reliable. What mount is your J9 in? My J12 is very nice indeed, excep you must keep the sun off the lens, the original Biogon had the same flaw. J8 behaves very much like my '36 collapsible Sonnar, but with coatings. All the prewar Zeiss Sonnars that I have used behave very similarly to the J9, they assuredly are not modern designs. J9 vs 85/1.8 Nikkor? No contest. J9 on it's own, as an exemplar of a very early super speed long lens? Very impressive. At f:5.6-11, if well shaded, hard to tell from a modern lens. I made sure to get one with a greasy aperture and migrated lubricant all over the inner glass, cheaper & I knew it hadn't been fiddled with. Otherwise like new, and the rf coupling was spot on at 1.15, 2, 5, 10, 20m & infinity. A real sleeper is the Helios 103, ugly and excellent (after you blacken the aperture blades). Another Nikkor I like very much is the 20/3.5 UD, it's a monster, and mounted on an F/ FTN will induce curvature of the spine, and it takes 72mm filters, but what a lens!!

 

[Paul Howell]

Often overlooked over are Vivitar Series 1 (Version 1 - Kiron 22xxxx) 70-210mm f/3.5 the Vivitar Series 1 (Komine) 28-90mm F2.8-3.5, and 90mm Macro in M 42 mount.

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/vivitar-lenses-for-pentax-zooms-c86.html#ixzz5BztJJKRi

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Often overlooked over are Vivitar Series 1 (Version 1 - Kiron 22xxxx) 70-210mm f/3.5 the Vivitar Series 1 (Komine) 28-90mm F2.8-3.5, and 90mm Macro in M 42 mount.

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/vivitar-lenses-for-pentax-zooms-c86.html#ixzz5BztJJKRi

I remember when the Series 1 lenses came out, they were very well regarded.

 

[Paul Howell]

I remember when the Series 1 lenses came out, they were very well regarded.

The problem with Series 1 is that over the years the designs and makers changed AsI recall when reviewed in Pop and Modern Photography the first generation zooms were designed with CAD by Perkin-Elmer. These early lens set the bar, out performed many branded lens. Soligor followed up with there own computer designed lens the CD line up, I have several in Konica mount, very good, but I think they are as good Series 1. I have a second generation 80 to 200 F4, in M42, very good lens, just never seem to use it, will in most cases use a prime.

 

[Paul Howell]

Although far afield from versatile also signedby Perkin-Elmer were the Series 1 mirror lens. From Wikipedia: "Perkin-Elmer sold the 600mm f/8[3] and 800mm f/11 Catadioptric lenses under their own name as well. These were identical to the OPCON-designed Vivitar Series 1 lenses that Perkin-Elmer manufactured."

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I never realised that Perkin Elmer was involved with the Series 1 Vivitars, explains a lot.

 

[Pioneer]

I do like my primes, and the M42 system has some memorable ones, but my most versatile M42 lens is my Vivitar Series One 70-210/3.5. It is a heavy old beast but when I hook it up with some TriX or HP5+ it certainly provides me with more than my share of keepers.