Old MF lens suggestions?

Hey, after running through the vintage lens thread here, I've decided I want to jump in!
But I'm not quite sure where I want to start. I don't want to start tremendously expensive. Maybe only around the $100 range for the lens. I only want to dip my toes in the water right now.
Either way, I want to try these lenses out. I'm not too picky about the type of lens, be it normal, wide-angle, macro, telephoto, but I doubt anything but a prime in the normal range would be considered cost-effective for this budget.
The main thing I want from this is a nice-feel for the vintage lens world. I want a lens that'll make me go "Holy Shizznit, this cost me ~$100?!?!"
And I have no idea where to even look for these, so a source could help also.
I think I want to try out an m42 adapter, but if another mount adapter would be better I'd gladly take it into consideration.
Umm, what else.. Oh, here is what I plan on prioritizing.
1. IQ
2. Aperture
3. Price
4. Size, weight, brand, etc...

I know price is third on the list, but thats to say I'd pay a little higher for considerable improvements in IQ and significantly wider apertures.
It'd be nice to also consider my current gear list in your recommendation. I'd like something that could broaden my photography scope.
But remember, all I want is a good taste. I'm not trying to go straight for the steak. (aka blowing my budget out of the water)
Thanks in advance for your time if you help me with this!

Summary: What's the best old MF lens(es) for me on a roughly $100 budget and where can I get it?

Just to clarify: don't consider the cost of the adapter in the budget, I don't mind adding a little extra on that end.

Canon FD lens~!

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=b108QX3omwE

I will have about 20+ Pentax Takumar lenses getting listed on Ebay next week. All M42 mounts.

I have five 50mm f1.4, three 55mm f1.8, and two 55mm f2.0 among other lenses.

That being said, 50mm f1.4 is useless to me since the rear element protrusion causes the mirror lock up on FF bodies.

Personally I have:

Takumar
28mm f3.5
50mm f4.0 Macro (super sharp)
55mm f1.8
85mm f1.9
105mm f2.8

Nikkor
Pre-AI 50mm f1.4
Pre-AI 55mm f3.5 Micro
Pre-AI 135mm f2.8

Canon FD (don't bother with Canon FD Lenses)
50mm f1.4

Here's a picture of Takumar 105mm f2.8 taken with Takumar 50mm f4.0 Macro.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Carl,

M42 to EOS adapter costs $7 to $8 from Fotodiox.

And I would recommend Pentax SMC (super multi-coated) Takumar 50mm f1.4. Nice all around lens. It's just that I'm not sure what you'd gain from it other than having a blast with MF and the feel of creamy smooth focus ring. You already own lenses with quality IQ.

I shouldn't consider FD? I wasn't originally but that Youtube guy is pretty convincing.

That photo is impressive. Excellent sharpness. How's the pricing on those Takumars?
The blast with MF and focus ring is pretty much what I'm after. haha.

Carlwashere wrote in post #12811395
I shouldn't consider FD? I wasn't originally but that Youtube guy is pretty convincing.

That photo is impressive. Excellent sharpness. How's the pricing on those Takumars?
The blast with MF and focus ring is pretty much what I'm after. haha.

FD to EOS adapter has a glass element that adds 1.26 X crop factor and you also lose aperture. And at wide open, the lens is useless...very soft and hazy... it clears up at f2.8 or so...but a 50mm lens becomes 100mm on your body.

Want to see what Takumar 50mm Macro looks like? I'll take some pictures.

I think you can find Takumar 50mm f1.4 for anywhere from $40 to $100 on ebay.

Thanks! I'm considering that macro. Being 50mm, I should be able to easily get more DOF than with my 100mm. I'll lose working distance, but for subjects such as roses, it shouldn't be a problem.
Any good options on the long end? I use a nifty two-fifty, and on it's longer end it's f5.6. I've read that telephotos have gotten much better with recent lenses than they used to be though.

Here's Takumar 50mm f4 Macro. Pictures taken with Nikkor Pre-AI 55mm f3.5 Micro. I thought MF lens would be appropriate. Oh, on 20D nonetheless. Hand held.

Don't judge the book by its cover. Tak 50mm f4 looks funky and has very little glass element rather small glasses it seems. Worse, my copy is all beat up but the glass is fairly clean.. but man oh man, it's one sharp little critter.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Carlwashere wrote in post #12811440
Any good options on the long end? I use a nifty two-fifty, and on it's longer end it's f5.6. I've read that telephotos have gotten much better with recent lenses than they used to be though.

MF telephoto beyond 135mm is little tough for me since it's "Manual Focus" and lacks "IS."

Mine tops out at 135mm and it seems 135mm f2.8 MF lenses are fairly cheap...look at Nikkor or Takumar 135mm f2.5. I have 2 copes that will go on ebay next week. You should be able to find these cheaper than a 50mm MF lens.

Well, it's definitely going to draw attention. From the photo you uploaded earlier, It's definitely impressive. I'll definitely look into it. Thanks for all your help John! I'll grab an adapter on amazon next time I place an order, but I'm going to look into camping ebay for a good deal on one of these for the next few days.
Thanks again!

I would reccomend the Takumar 50 1.4 or the Sears 55mm 1.4 which I think is sharper than the tak at f1.4. The Takumar 55mm 1.8 or 2 are great inexpensive options to get started. Forget using fd lens on Canon dslr as their are alot of better options out there. I use the fd with micro 4/3's as they work with glassless adapters.

I'll probably try the Tak 50. Still deciding between the macro and regular. I'll look into a 135mm too as it beats my 250 at that focal length by almost 2 stops. With a tripod it should be excellent. I'll definitely get a 50, or around that range for my first MF lens. I'll definitely throw the 55mm 1.4 in consideration too. Thanks

For all around lens, 50mm f1.4 would be a better bet for you unless you're looking for Macro. Though remember that Takumar 50mm F1.4 once contained Thorium (radioactive) element to improve optics...unfortunately it turns yellow over the years through oxidation. But you can reverse this process by giving it a sun bathing... UV treatment...it takes good 2 weeks of intense sunlight. I'll take some pictures of 50mm f1.4.

Take a serious look at the super takumar 55mm 1.8. You can find them on ebay for under $50 sometimes and the sharpness and colors are superb. I can guarantee w/ a good copy that you will be blown away.

WideOpen wrote in post #12811639
Take a serious look at the super takumar 55mm 1.8. You can find them on ebay for under $50 sometimes and the sharpness and colors are superb. I can guarantee w/ a good copy that you will be blown away.

+1

I defaulted to 55mm 1.8 because 50mm 1.4 was locking up my mirror on FF. But I'm quite happy with 55mm 1.8. I paid $25 for mine.