What is your best "sleeper lens"?

[flavio81]

I also have a Nikon 50-135 f3.5 that I like. Heavy little bugger but it's fast and sharp. Isn't that what we seek?

I agree. For me, I don't care yoo much for weight or size as long as the lens is optically great. Perhaps that's why I like thr Mamiya RB lenses so much...

 

[ME Super]

I've got a 28mm f/2.8 Rokinon lens in Pentax K-mount that I like to use with Rollei IR400s. Set the aperture at f/8 and pick a shutter speed that works for what the current lighting conditions are at EI 25. Set focus at 10ft (according to the DOF scale, everything from 5 feet to infinity will be sharp), screw on the filter and fire away. Bracket by taking pictures at EI 12 and EI 6. I usually end up liking the EI 25 one best. I've not tried it at f/2.8 yet, probably because I have a Pentax-M 50mm lens that is a stop faster that I'll use for low light with B&W. If the light is low and I'm shooting my usual color slides, I end up using flash to get color balance right, so lens speed is less critical.

 

[Cropline]

Thinks for the responses,everyone. It was good to see your opinions and conversations.

 

[Jerry Parker]

Pentax 85mm Ultra-Apochromatic Takumar (with fluorite and quartz elements... no 'glass')

Ken

I was intrigued by your lens and found on a Pentax Forum that there are only 25 of these lenses in the world. Lucky you.
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar-85mm-F4.5.html

 

[dynachrome]

I think Nikon made something like this.

 

[snegron]

Definitely my Nikon 35mm 2.0 AF D and my Nikon 35mm 2.0 AIS. Both of these lenses yield extremely sharp images, imperceptible distortion and outstanding color rendition. Most online reviews I have read regarding both of these lenses refer to them as less than stellar, but from my personal experience I can say that they are truly amazing.

If I was to drop, damage or lose any of my lenses these two would be on the top of my list to repurchase.

 

[landzaat]

I have one outstanding sleeper lens. It's a Sigma Super Wide II f/2.8 24mm lens with a Nikon AIs mount. Uses 52mm filters, runs through to f22 and has half stop click stops, something no Nikkor lens does, as far as I know anyway.

The quality, whilst not equal too or better than Nikkor lenses, is nonetheless, extremely good to very very good. I actually bought this lens duty free just prior to leaving Australia, with the idea to use it on a European holiday then flog it when I got back home. The lens was so good I couldn't contemplate moving it along, plus, it was cheap as anything compared to anything Nikon, but more expensive than comparable after market manufacturers like Tamron.

Mick.

Agree. I own the Sigma Super Wide II 24/2.8 in both Sony/Minolta AF-mount and in Minolta SR/MC/MD-mount and it is great. The €50,- I bought it for is a steal and even at €100,- it would still be a good buy. It is my best sleeper lens

 

[MattKrull]

Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm F3.5 Macro (OM Mount)

It is a heavy beast, and I've mostly used on my digital bodies. It has a lot of redeeming qualities. The focusing is very easy (twice the throw of my Zuiko 65-200 F4). I bought it to photograph evening (unlit)football games, a task it excels at.

I posted it for sale a few years ago (after getting an AF lens of similar speed and range), but going over all the photos I've taken with it, I couldn't bring myself to part with it.

It may not qualify as a sleeper though. You show up to the side lines with that on a lens support rig and a monopod, and people give you room. My Zuiko 50-200 F2.8-3.5 Four Thirds lens is bigger, but doesn't have the presence the Vivitar & lens support does.

 

[Axle]

SMC Pentax 55mm 1:2

 

[macfred]

Did we mention the Nikon Series E 100mm f/2.8 ?
It's a real bargain - very sharp with high contrast for all apertures.
The lens is also extremely compact and lightweight (215g).
I use the 100mm f/2.8 on D200, FM and on a F-301 (N-2000).
Really like it !

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/emfgfg20/eserieslenses/htmls/100135mm.htm

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Did we mention the Nikon Series E 100mm f/2.8 ?
It's a real bargain - very sharp with high contrast for all apertures.
The lens is also extremely compact and lightweight (215g).
I use the 100mm f/2.8 on D200, FM and on a F-301 (N-2000).
Really like it !

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/emfgfg20/eserieslenses/htmls/100135mm.htm

I've heard great things on this one too. Tempted to pick one up but I already have an old 105/2.5 Nikkor that is just wonderful...

 

[OldBodyOldSoul]

I got rid of all my sleeper lenses because they slept too much. Two that I remember most fondly are Nikkors 135/3.5 and 50-135/3.5.

 

[macfred]

I've heard great things on this one too. Tempted to pick one up but I already have an old 105/2.5 Nikkor that is just wonderful...

I have the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 Ais - it's a great lens (even better than the 100mm Series E).
The 100mm Series E is pretty inexpensive and a I like it in addition for traveling or hiking light.

 

[Shootar401]

Ektar 207mm f/7.7 Sharpest lens I own

 

[lxdude]

Somewhere I have a microfilm lens. A real sleeper. No one wants microfilms anymore, so it sleeps with the fiches.

 

[Pioneer]

Right now, I think that the finest lens I own is stuck to the front of my Sigma DP3M. It is the Sigma 50/2.8 Macro. Of course my Sigma 50/2.8 Macro K-mount edition is also quite spectacular but I think the two may be a bit different, but perhaps not. It is a very nice lens in either configuration.

 

[MattKing]

Somewhere I have a microfilm lens. A real sleeper. No one wants microfilms anymore, so it sleeps with the fiches.



 

[macfred]

The Nikkor 25-50mm f/4 is a lens, that astonishingly is little noticed nowadays.
I love to use it for landscape photography, so the slow speed is not a problem.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/zoomsMF/2550mm.htm



Bjorn Rorslett :
… the 25-50 f/4 Nikkor is a true optical gem. it has a degree of colour vividness that only is matched or surpassed by the recent and hugely expensive AFS Nikkor 17-35/2.8 and AFS 28-70/2.8. there is very little colour fringing in this lens and it has remarkably good image rendition when stopped well down, a feat that very few modern zooms can match.

 

[Shootar401]

The Nikkor 25-50mm f/4 is a lens, that astonishingly is little noticed nowadays.
I love to use it for landscape photography, so the slow speed is not a problem.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/zoomsMF/2550mm.htm

Bjorn Rorslett :
… the 25-50 f/4 Nikkor is a true optical gem. it has a degree of colour vividness that only is matched or surpassed by the recent and hugely expensive AFS Nikkor 17-35/2.8 and AFS 28-70/2.8. there is very little colour fringing in this lens and it has remarkably good image rendition when stopped well down, a feat that very few modern zooms can match.

I passed on a used one of those in the used section of a camera store in Providence. It was $75 IIRC, It seemed like an odd focal range to me so I didn't think much of it. It was Hunts Camera in Prov. if anyone wants to try and grab it. But it was a while ago so I'm sure it's gone.

 

[macfred]

It was $75 IIRC ...

This one was placed at a very cheap price … :confused:
I got mine (`mint´condition) for about 230 Euro (265 US Dollar).

Maybe you saw the Nikkor 28-45mm f/4.5 Ai ?
This one can be found for 75 US Dollar (more ore less).
I don't try this lens so far.

 

[RattyMouse]

These threads always disintegrate into my-favourite-lens debates, with names like Zeiss, Leitz and Angenieux bandied about as "sleepers". I assume we're talking about lenses that can be bought on ebay for £150, often under £100 and sometimes for less than £50. A Canon L lens rarely qualifies.

The old Canon 100-300mm L zoom lens was a bonafide sleeper. Quickly discontinued, it was available used for a really low price at one time. Not sure about today. Probably not.

 

[John_Nikon_F]

Another vote for the 17/3.5 SP. Rented one of the early built-in filter versions back in 1991 for a trip up to the Skagit Valley Tulip Festival.

If we're talking camera manufacturer lenses, then the Series E 70-210/4 (and the AF Nikkor version) are quite good. The E version sometimes can be had for almost nothing, unlike the AF version, which tends to be somewhat expensive in comparison. Other Nikon lenses I've been pleasantly surprised by: the 28/3.5 Nikkor-H, 135/3.5 Nikkor-Q, 200/4 Nikkor-Q, the 20/3.5 Nikkor-UD, the 50/1.4 Nikkor-S (which, as long as you don't use f/1.4, shoots very well - did a test shot recently at Kenmore Camera on an off-topic Nikon full-frame camera with my copy - tack sharp at f/5.6), and, of course, the 50/2 Nikkor-H. Pentax-wise, I was very happy with my old 55/1.8 Super-Multi-Coated Tak. Not as much with the earlier Super-Tak, but, that was still a decent lens, hung off my beater H3v that I had as a kid.

-J

 

[Shootar401]

This one was placed at a very cheap price … :confused:
I got mine (`mint´condition) for about 230 Euro (265 US Dollar).

Maybe you saw the Nikkor 28-45mm f/4.5 Ai ?
This one can be found for 75 US Dollar (more ore less).
I don't try this lens so far.

Yup! I looked it up on MIR and it was the 28-45.

 

[blockend]

Over Christmas I was reminded what nice lenses Yashica's single-coated DSB are. I finished a black and white film on the FR walking round a local lake. They offer a sharp but subtle rendition that would carry a big price tag if it came on a cult brand. Test charts may not show anything remarkable, but when did they show anything useful about character?

 

[LJSLATER]

Nikkor 135/3.5 "blue coat" and 50/1.8D.