whats the nicest lens you have ( read more )

[ChrisintheUK]

One of the nicest lenses I have is a Steinhell tele quinar 135 M42 Mount, I picked this up from Ebay with a Pentax Super MTL 35mm Camera and a Bereflex 35mm-70mm, a Pentacon 50mm 1.9, a Petri 50mm 1.9, 3 Flashguns and 2 packs of filters, all for £30.00.

The Steinhell is so sharp and it works on my Film Cameras and also it works great on my Lumix G3 Digital with a M42 adapter.

 

[RSalles]

for 35mm
1: Rollei HFT Planar 1.8/50mm QBM mount
2- Zeiss Contax Planar 1.4/50
3- Zeiss Sonnar 3.5/135 M42

For 6x9:
Kodak Ektar 4.5/103mm
Voigtlander Heliar 4.5/150mm

For 4x5:
Schneider Convertible Symmar 5.6/210
Dallmeyer Pentac 2.9 8"

 

[tomfrh]

I have a Canon 400mm f/5.6 L lens. It's great. I use it on that other type of photography mainly, but also on my 35mm EOS SLR.

It wasn't especually cheap - $800 australian, however it's such a good lens for the price. People sometimes ask if I'm "a photographer" when they see my shots from this lens. That doesn't happen with my other photos

 

[E. von Hoegh]

whats the nicest lens you have, no, not the most expensive lens you have that is nice
but the nicest lens that you bought for very little money not knowing if it was going to be
good or bad, and you stuck it on whatever camera you use and it ended up being a lens
you use for "special" stuff because it gives a look you can't get with anything else.

have one, or is it a secret ?

A Dagor type lens, maker unknown, ca. 8 1/4" focal length. Set in a very early Goerz Sector shutter of 1904 vintage.
It is stunningly sharp and renders an almost three dimensional image if I print the negative well - an otherwise unremarkable image of a glacial erratic in a stream, the texture of the boulder seems to float off the paper. All of my other Dagors have the classic Dagor look, but none performs like this one. It does not cover 8x10 either.

 

[ic-racer]

Some of my best large prints were made from negatives exposed with a mundane plasmat Fujinon W 300mm/5.6.

 

[Steve Roberts]

Not cheap, as I bought it when it was almost new, but it's been incredibly useful as I photograph a lot of industrial buildings - SMC Pentax 24mm f2.8.
Before buying this one, I'd used a friend's 24/2.8 which had a chunk missing out of the front element about the size of a pea (though nowhere near as deep!). That imperfection made no difference to the image that I could discern and I'm often reminded of it when posts appear questioning whether someone should buy a lens with the odd bubble or dust speck.
Steve

 

[Mark Fisher]

Industar 55mm f2.8......I think I paid $30 with a working Fed 2 attached. I don't use the Fed any more, but it works just as well on my other rangefinders. Looks great at 2.8 to my eye. The other one that I got for free is a Canon FD 55mm F1.2 (with an F1N attached!). It is an amazing piece of glass with a nice look wide open. I don't use it much since I don't regularly shoot with an FD....I probably ought to sell it or trade it....):