Sleepers: Great Lenses that Are Truly Affordable

How “good” are vintage lenses when used on modern digital cameras? In a word, vintage lenses are “fine,” though I would have to immediately follow that statement by adding, “It depends,” because there are always exceptions to the rules, though even in these cases, the lens in question often works fine albeit with a technical or optical shortcoming of sorts.

Original photographs © Allan Weitz 2020

When adapting older-generation film camera lenses to DSLRs and mirrorless cameras, most perform well in terms of sharpness, color fidelity, color saturation, contrast, and other qualifiers of image quality. Others do not fare as well, though depending on what you’re looking for, you might prefer the look of the photographs you take with this so-called sub-par lens. Sometimes flare, ghosting, and overblown swirling highlights are exactly what you are looking for.

Regardless, with few exceptions these lenses are still quite usable and, in many cases, they render the image with unique visual signatures that cannot be duplicated by their modern-day, “new-and-improved” counterparts. This isn’t to say newer lenses take sharp but boring photographs—that’s simply not the case. What I am saying is that while modern lenses feature quick and accurate autofocusing, image stabilization, and are made of notably lighter construction materials, older-generation versions of these very same lenses often capture photographs with extremely close, if not identical, image quality to their modern-day counterparts—and at a far lower cost.

For example, the above Zeiss Makro-Planar macro lenses have Contax C/Y lens mounts that can be adapted to most cameras. They are manual focus down to life size and built like missile launchers. Cost? I paid about $800 for the pair and have since used them on Sony A7-series cameras and Leica M10-series cameras with excellent results.

Sometimes the only differences between older- and newer-generation lenses are the coatings, which, depending on the lens coatings and the type of photographs you take and where you take them, may or may not make any difference.

It should be noted that many of the vintage and older-generation lenses mentioned in this B&H Explora post can often be found in the B&H Used Department.

Lens Adapters: Inexpensive or Pricier Ones?

If you plan on using a lens with a mount other than your camera’s, you’re going to need a lens adapter. I’ve personally used lens adapters that cost $12, lens adapters that cost more than $200, and lens adapters at every price point in-between. The costlier adapters were invariably constructed of stronger metal alloys and machined to tighter tolerances, which, taken together, better guarantee spot-on alignment between the focus plane of the incoming image and the camera sensor (or film surface).

As a rule, aluminum does not wear as well as stainless steel and brass, and with time, regardless of how tight the fit may be when new, the fit between the lens, adapter, and/or camera body can develop a measure of play, which in turn can compromise image sharpness. This isn’t to say you cannot or will not get years of use from a less expensive adapter but, in the long run, I’ve found better-made adapters are worth the cost premium.

Pentax M42 Screw-Mount and K-Mount Lenses

The M42 screw mount dates back to 1938. It was originally designed by Carl Zeiss as a lens mount for a new line of Praktica cameras. Also referred to as a Praktica screw mount, in the 1960s it additionally became known as the Pentax screw mount when Asahi Pentax adopted the lens mount for its then newly introduced Pentax single lens reflex cameras. M42-mount lenses were also produced by Zenit, Zeiss Ikon, Zeiss Jena (former East Germany), Voigtländer, Fujica, Ricoh (currently the parent company of Pentax), Yashica, Petri, and Sears, which was also manufactured by Ricoh.

Over the years, Pentax has produced literally millions of Takumar-branded screw-mount lenses, and many of these lenses are quite notable, especially some of the SMC (Super Multi-Coated) Super Takumars. A Pentax lens that’s often mentioned as a top-shelf image maker is the 50mm f/1.4 SMC Super Takumar, a Planar-type lens design that has been produced for decades. Regardless of vintage, Super Takumar 50s hold up to scrutiny even when used on higher-resolution digital cameras.

Earlier vintage Super Takumars, like their contemporary manual-focus counterparts from Nikon and Canon, featured solidly built aluminum lens barrels with stainless-steel mounts. These lenses were built for the long haul, which is why they are still common 50 or more years after they were originally introduced.

My first SLR was a Pentax H3v. (The top-of-the-line Spotmatic, which had a built-in meter, was out of my price range.) I bought it with a 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar and a 135mm f/2.5 Super Takumar, which is a terrific portrait lens and short telephoto. Some of the images I captured with these lenses I still consider “keepers.”

In 1975, Pentax transitioned to the bayonet-style K-mount, which has been the standard Pentax lens mount to this very day. In addition to Pentax, K-mount lenses are also produced by about a half-dozen other manufacturers. Though often overlooked, there are many Pentax Super-Takumars available at very affordable prices.

Over the years, Pentax has also produced a series of compact full-frame 35mm lenses to complement its smaller consumer DSLRs. The smaller form factor of these compact Super Takumar lenses makes them equally well suited for use with other brands of mirrorless cameras via lens adapter. These compact Pentax lenses are available new and used.

Nikon

Nikon, which started out as a lens manufacturer (Nippon Kogaku), first gained recognition when it started producing affordable alternatives to Leica rangefinders, which took the photographic world by storm a quarter century earlier, in pre-WWII Germany.

Many of Nikon’s earliest lenses were like Nikon rangefinder cameras, thinly veiled knockoffs of Leica screw-mount cameras and lenses. Nikon soon began developing lens designs of its own, many of which evolved into some of the same lenses we use to this very day. Some of them. Nikon’s 35mm f/1.8 W-NIKKOR C rangefinder lens—one of the fastest wide-angle lenses in its day—and the multi-generation classic Nikon NIKKOR 105mm f/2.5 portrait lens are among the several rangefinder lenses that were reengineered for use with Nikon’s first SLR—the Nikon F.

In terms of quality, 1960s, ’70s, and ’80s vintage Nikon NIKKOR manual focus lenses are built like tanks, and many of the classics, such as the Micro-NIKKOR 55mm f/2.8 and NIKKOR 50mm f/1.2 AI-S, are still in production after 30-plus years. This isn’t to say there aren’t any newer-generation AF NIKKORs worth mentioning. Nikon’s trio of full-frame autofocus macro lenses, which includes the Nikon AF-S Micro-NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED, AF-S VR Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8 IF-ED, and AF Micro-NIKKOR 200mm f/4D IF-ED, are three among many outstanding lenses that are not only affordable new, but can often be found used and occasionally factory refurbished in the B&H Used Department.

A long-time Nikon user, some of my personal NIKKOR favorites include the 105mm f/1.8 AI-S, which is an outstanding portrait lens with phenomenal image quality, and the 15mm f/3.5 AI-S, which was, for the longest time, one of the few (relatively) affordable rectilinear ultra-wide-angle lenses on the market.

One last Nikon lens worth checking out if you’re into compact glass is the 45mm f/2.8 GN NIKKOR, a sharp pancake lens originally intended for flash photography but reintroduced in later years as a compact normal lens; it was available in chrome or black. A similar 45mm f/2.8 pancake lens was produced by Zeiss for Contax DSLRs.

Canon FD Manual-Focus Lenses

When autofocus technologies first came to light, Canon pounced on them and quickly knocked Nikon out of first place among professional shooters. Production of Canon’s manual focus FD-series lenses came to a grinding halt while the R&D money was redirected to further development of newer Canon EF autofocus lenses. As a result, the value of a lot of truly fine Canon FD lenses—including manual-focus Canon L-series lenses, dropped like a midwinter Arctic Express from Canada.

Many of the original Canon EF autofocus lenses featured the same (or near-identical) lens formulas as the manual focus FD-series lenses they replaced. And many of these lenses have stood up well to time. All you need is an adapter and any of these fine optics can be put to good use.

Canon L-series lenses are Canon’s finest, and many of the original manual-focus versions can also be purchased at prices far lower than their contemporary Canon EF counterparts. Wide-angle, manual focus Canon L-series lenses include the 7.5mm and 15mm Canon FD fisheyes, FD 14mm f/2.8L ultra-wide, and FD 24mm f/1.4L. Other Canon wides include the FD 17mm f/4 and FD 20mm f/2.8. Need speed? There’s always the ever-classic FD 50mm f/1.2L and FD 85mm f/1.2L.

Telephoto manual-focus L-series lenses include the FD 200mm f/1.8L, FD 300mm f/2.8L and 300mm f/4L, FD 400mm f/2.8L, and FD 500mm f/4.5L. And let us not forget a dozen-plus FD L-series zoom lenses and the newer EF autofocus lenses, all of which are available used.

Minolta

Minolta Rokkor lenses are as capable as the best of them. And if you happen to be the owner of a Sony A-mount camera, which uses the Minolta bayonet mount, the number of used lenses you can mount on your Sony A-series camera is staggering.

Two Minolta Rokkor lenses that portrait photographers tend to use are the Minolta MC Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 and the Minolta MD 85mm f/2. Minolta also made excellent wide-angle lenses, including the MD W.Rokkor 24mm f/2.8, which was so good it was rebranded by Leica for its R-series cameras.

Minolta also made a neat 45mm pancake lens, the Minolta Rokkor-x 45mm f/2, that was a stop faster than the 45mm pancake lenses made by Nikon and Zeiss.

On a personal note, I prefer the older manual focus Rokkor lenses over the newer models, specifically because I prefer the all-metal construction of older Minolta lenses. The newer models, including many of the AF Rokkors, are made of polymer materials, which simply do not feel as solid as their metal-alloy counterparts. They are sharp, but the ergonomics and tactile attributes of these lenses have always left me cold.

Zeiss

Zeiss lenses have been considered among the gold standards of the camera industry for over a hundred years. This means there are many very good lenses available in a wide variety of lens mounts. And many of these sleepers are very affordable. As an example, a Carl Zeiss Jena 20mm f/4 Flektogon is a sharp, extremely well-corrected M42-mount ultra-wide-angle lens that was manufactured from 1963 to 1978 by Zeiss Jena (Carl Zeiss’s so-called East-German counterpart during the Cold War). Clean samples can be found for $330 to $400 online or at the B&H Used Department, when available. If you’re looking for a very good—and very affordable—ultra-wide, this is a great option.

Another East German classic that’s quite inexpensive is the Zeiss Jena Triotar 135mm f/4 Sonnar (later shortened to “S”); a simple, 3-element portrait lens that was widely produced with M42 and other lens mounts.

If you prefer newer lens designs, there are numerous Zeiss options on the market. Zeiss Batis autofocus and Zeiss Milvus-series manual-focus lenses are older lens styles designed for Nikon (ZF, ZF.2) Pentax (ZK), and Canon (ZE) that have been updated. Though the newer Batis lenses feature autofocusing, are notably lighter weight, and are better corrected for aberrations, the differences in image quality are negligible among the many variants I’ve shot with over time.

Cost-wise, these older Zeiss lenses cost notably less than their newer Batis and Milvus counterparts, depending on the vintage and condition of the lens. Other Zeiss lenses worth looking for are the equally fine optics produced for the Contax SLRs made by Kyocera (1983-2005).

Depending on the lens, these solidly built, manual focus lenses were manufactured either in West Germany or in Japan by Cosina, Zeiss’s long-time manufacturing partner. These lenses had Contax/Yashica (C/Y) bayonet-style lens mounts, which are easily adaptable to most mainstream mirrorless cameras and DSLRs.

As for value, I recently purchased a pair of Zeiss Makro-Planar C/Y-mount lenses—a 60mm f/2.8 and a 100mm f/2.8—both of which focus to life size, for a total cost of $800. Even with the added cost of a pair of higher-quality C/Y-mount to Sony E-mount and Leica M-mount lens adapters, I was able to purchase both of these solidly built, incredibly sharp macro lenses for less than half the price of either of their current replacements.

Olympus OM Zuiko Lenses

The fact that Olympus OM-series digital mirrorless cameras are small and compact shouldn’t come as a surprise because Olympus OM film cameras were also small and compact. For this reason alone, it’s well worth looking at Olympus OM film-era lenses.

Over the years, Olympus produced several generations of compact prime lenses. Some of the more noteworthy of the lot include the Zuiko 50mm f/2 macro, Zuiko 90mm f/2 macro, and Zuiko 100mm f/2. Longer high-speed telephotos worth checking out include the Zuiko 180mm f/2, Zuiko 250mm f/2, Zuiko 350mm f/2.8, and Zuiko 350mm f/4.5.

Olympus also produced a 35mm f/2.8 shift lens, a fast 90mm f/2 macro, and a 100mm f/2 portrait lens that portrait shooters often mention as a favorite.

Leica M-mount

Introduced in 1954, Leica continues to produce M-mount lenses to this very day. Though current aspheric Leica M-mount lenses are among the sharpest in the industry, many enthusiasts prefer the look of older-generation Leica glass. Regardless of your personal preferences, there are numerous Summicrons, Summitars, Elmars, and other Leica classics available and many are—believe it or not—affordable.

Leica M-mount lenses have also been produced (and continue to be produced) by Zeiss and Voigtländer, and many of these retro-style lenses are surprisingly sharp, not to mention very well made.

Considering the fact cameras and lenses have been around for more than a century and a half, we could go on forever listing oldie-but-still-darn-goody lenses, but I’ve run out of my share of allotted space.

Are there any lenses I’ve missed that others should be aware of? If so, let us know in the Comments field, below—we’d love to hear about more great and affordable glass.