M42 addiction?

I used to walk around happily with my ex 1,840g Sigma 50-500 hanging off my ex 300D and no probolems. I wouldn't swing it around or jolt it but otherwise it should be fine.

Thanks Condyk!

Thanks Tiziano and CondyK. I love the old manual lenses because they make me slow down and think about everything I have to do to make the picture. Since all of the settings have to be manually adjusted, it makes the act of tripping the shutter a much more deliberate act than when everything is auto...and that slower pace bleeds over into the composition as well.

It's not the M42 screw mount that makes your pics a different colour, it's the glass. However to answer you question I definitely see a different colour tint from the Zeiss glass that I have. I don't know how to describe it accurately, warmer perhaps, but I like it for sure.

i know it's not from the metal m42 mount, sheesh.

You can use one for a super cheapo Macro-ish ... grab a cheap set of M42 extension tubes (mine are Pentax and cost about £6), stick on one of the nice cheap Zeiss's ( I used my otherwise largely unused 50mm 2.8 ) and have a go.

Hand shake was a problem but should be ok with a tripod This was my first go with a slightly crumpled up receipt ... it sucks, but you get the idea.

Yes, that was my idea. That's why I bought the M42 Macro bellows, to use it with the 50 mm Pentacon.

tiziano wrote:
Oh well, It was a while that I was feeling an uneasy sensation... the lack of prime lens... plus, an interest in vintage lens, because
I'm fashinated by this old style, heavy metal objects.... I find them beautiful.... To make it short, yesterday I was not in the mood of working, and I have been shopping on ebay for half a day... This is what I got:

M42 Lens to Canon EOS mount adapter
Pentax Super-Takumar 50mm 1:1.4
JUPITER-9 Russian 85mm Lens
Carl Zeiss Sonnar 135/3,5
Pentacon auto 50mm f1.8
PZF-Macro accessory bellows

I have never used seriously manual lens, therefore I am not sure yet if I'll use them or not.... but... I like them....

What do you think: am I going insane?

I wonder how the FD 50 1.4 s.s.c. stacks up with the above glass? I have it along with a '73 vintage F-1, and 100-200 push pull, and 133(?) speedlite. The feel of the 50 compared to it's modern EF counterpart is just so much more substantial. Well built would be an understatement.

Can't help.... I guess that it's a comparison hard to do, because to adapt an FD lens on an EOS camera you need an adapter with a lens inside, and therefore a comparison would be meaningless.
As soon as I get the stuff above, I plan to compare the two 50mm I bought with my EF 50 1.8, and to do some kind of testing on all the lens. Anyway, I have read that, in regards of MTF, many of the old primes have a quality comparable with the modern ones, while old zooms quality is very low.

Could someone explain to me the general pluses and cons of owning an M42 mounted lens over a typical modern day consumer lens? I've been looking through various galleries and searching on ebay and would like to experiment with a few, (because I love the quality and price)

The onlky downside is finding mont copies. I feel i paid over the odds when I bought most of mine but I got very good copies ... of course, they are now worth more than I paid for them judging by ebay prices on the really good stuff. You need an adaptor which range, in my experience, from around £8-15 or so, so factor that in. You are really full manual focus and you need to decide if you are comfy with that. I can be hard focusing accurately with the small DSLR screens. You need to learn full manual exposure which is a benefit really. I get more keepers with my MF lens. Not quite in the film category where the screens are actually usable but better than any other approach I've used. Some of them have a particular feel which is different to the Canon L feel. Not better or worse, but if you are used to one 'look' then you need to rethink. They slow myou down which helps with composition ... another reason you get more keepers. I dunno if there are real downsides. I prefer full manual and prefer the results I usually get.

?? They work just fine with Av.

Benefits:

-price

-built quality : Outstanding! full metal body. today even the L's have plastic parts.

-Bokeh : magical, you just don't get anything close to it with modern lenses. Not to mention the aperture (Jupiter 85mm f2 for example has 15 blades)

-Optical quality: more often then not at least as good as the modern lenses (for example my Zeiss Pancolar 50mm f1.8 is just as sharp wide open as the Canon EF 50 f1.8 II @ f/2.8 - beats the crap out of the plastic junk - and i only paid 10$ for it).

BTW, ever since i got my M42s (a few months ago) i haven't used my 70-200 L. Not even once.

Thanks. The quality does look fantastic from what I have seen, and I am comfortable with manual focussing.

Furthermore, there is just the fun of having more different lens for a cheap price. Even if you already have a lens that covers that focal lenght, you get a different one, which may have a wider aperture, a different bokeh and color temperature, sometimes better definition and contrast..... To tell you the true, part of my love for photagraphy goes to the images, part goes to these technological jewels, that are cameras and lens. I guess I'm still a kid who loves toys!

Tiziano,

have you in the meantime received your lenses?
How do you like them?

Best regards,
Andy