Old vs New


philstaff

Link Posted 25/03/2015 - 14:17
I have posted quite a few photos recently using the old smc m lenses. My question is apart from the camera metering and more focus points being available when using the newer models. Is it worth investing in more modern day lenses. Considering I am more than happy with the IQ on all lenses in my bag. My kit consists of
28 35 and 50 mm SMC M lenses also a 75/150 and a 135. As well as the Sigma 10/20 and 17/70 and Tamron 70/300.
Regards Ian

George Lazarette

Link Posted 25/03/2015 - 14:24
If you are happy, why change? The manual lenses are better made, will last longer, and are nicer to handle. I love 'em.

And I especially like the 75-150. I got some cracking pictures with it on slide film.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

Helpful

RussV

Link Posted 25/03/2015 - 16:09
George Lazarette wrote:
If you are happy, why change? The manual lenses are better made, will last longer, and are nicer to handle. I love 'em.


I agree, if your old lenses fit your needs why bother. I have 8 lenses and only one, the 18-55mm, is modern (or even autofocus).
www.russv.me.uk

Stuey

Link Posted 25/03/2015 - 19:43
I really appreciate new an old lenses however, i have many old lenses which serve me so well that I can't justify modern equivalents and I'm a notorious tight was

I have two 28mm lenses which are MF and excellent - my 200/300 and 400mm MF lenses get chosen more often that my 70-300 AF sigma for various reasons whilst my AF sigma 50mm macro is also fantastic whilst the sigma 10-20 certainly has it's uses

I suppose it depends on your wants and needs

I nearly gave away my MF 135 mm lens until I used it for portraits and gigs and now it's my go to lens for these

A major plus point for me is that old lenses can be had for very little and can be superb although the Pentax 20-40 keeps calling to me despite me not needing it - I just hope the SRS sale this weekend is not cheap enough to tempt me
:
K10D, K5 plus plenty of clueless enthusiasm.

My Flickr site link
Last Edited by Stuey on 25/03/2015 - 19:43

George Lazarette

Link Posted 25/03/2015 - 20:07
Stuey wrote:
.... the Pentax 20-40 keeps calling to me despite me not needing it - I just hope the SRS sale this weekend is not cheap enough to tempt me
:

Or, better yet, so cheap it would be foolish not to stock up.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

Stuey

Link Posted 25/03/2015 - 21:43
George Lazarette wrote:
Stuey wrote:
.... the Pentax 20-40 keeps calling to me despite me not needing it - I just hope the SRS sale this weekend is not cheap enough to tempt me
:

Or, better yet, so cheap it would be foolish not to stock up.

G

I must try to resist
K10D, K5 plus plenty of clueless enthusiasm.

My Flickr site link

davidwozhere

Link Posted 25/03/2015 - 23:45
I caught the lens bug through not knowing which was what was good or bad, so I bought them off E bay for comparison and sold what I didn't like. I expected to end up with a very few modern automatic ones but I now have a fantastic collection of manual Takumars, Helios and Jupiters - DO try the Russian ones !

The other benefit for me, being on a pension (get the violin out) is the lack of expense. I look at some of the things members here are drooling over and my wallet positively wilts. Are you going to tell me that a 700 - 800 auto focus f1.2 10mm Thingini Limited Edition macro lens is better than my 1960s preset f4 50mm Tak? The only thing that sets them apart is that mine cost me 21 (inclusive of a working Spotmatic).
Both the *istDS and the K5 are incurably addicted to old glass

My page on Photocrowd - link

LennyBloke

Link Posted 26/03/2015 - 08:50
The newer lenses have many advantages over the "old guard" but overall the IQ from many of the 20+ year old lenses still holds up pretty well. The notable exception, IMO, is in the mid-longer range zooms - for me the DA*60-250 is significantly better than anything else I've used in the 70 to 300 ish ranges (70-200, 70-210, 80-200, 70-300, etc) - a lens definitely worth its price tag.
LennyBloke

George Lazarette

Link Posted 26/03/2015 - 09:37
LennyBloke wrote:
The newer lenses have many advantages over the "old guard" but overall the IQ from many of the 20+ year old lenses still holds up pretty well. The notable exception, IMO, is in the mid-longer range zooms - for me the DA*60-250 is significantly better than anything else I've used in the 70 to 300 ish ranges (70-200, 70-210, 80-200, 70-300, etc) - a lens definitely worth its price tag.

I agree that most of the mid-range zooms weren't up to much. In fact, zooms in general were fairly thin on the ground until the late 1990s. But there were three exceptions:

The first (often bundled with the early AF cameras) was the Pentax-F 70-210 1:4-5.6. The second was the (even better but heavier and not AF of course) Pentax-A 70-210 1:4. And the last was the Pentax-M 75-150 1:4.

Everything else in the 70/80-200/210 area should be avoided like the plague.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

davidtrout

Link Posted 26/03/2015 - 10:05
I'm not a lens expert and have never suffered from LBA (fortunately). But I can distinguish between the relative qualities of a Pentax SMC series 70-210 lens (bought in the early 1990s with a Z1) and the current DA*50-135mm lens which replaced it in every day use around 2007/8.
There is no comparison; the modern DA* is streets ahead on image quality, particularly in sharpness.
Likewise I also bought a F series 28-80 zoom with the Z1 and it certainly can not match the modern successor in my camera bag - the DA*16-50.
David

PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout
PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout
Last Edited by davidtrout on 26/03/2015 - 10:07

George Lazarette

Link Posted 26/03/2015 - 10:16
davidtrout wrote:
I'm not a lens expert and have never suffered from LBA (fortunately). But I can distinguish between the relative qualities of a Pentax SMC F series 70-200 lens (bought in the early 1990s with a Z1) and the current DA*50-135mm lens which replaced it in every day use around 2007/8.
There is no comparison; the modern DA* is streets ahead on image quality, particularly in sharpness.
Likewise I also bought a F series 28-80 zoom with the Z1 and it certainly can not match the modern successor in my camera bag - the DA*16-50.
David

PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout

In fairness, David, you are comparing premium modern lenses with everyday lenses from the '80s. The FA* 28-70 and FA* 80-200 would be much more evenly matched, but they are hard to find, and expensive when you do. That's because they are still good by modern standards.

G
PS: In my earlier post I omitted to mention the FA* 28-200. It is of course a superb lens.
PPS: Ebay is listing several FA* lenses. The shorter ones go for over 500, and the longer for over 800.
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Last Edited by George Lazarette on 26/03/2015 - 10:21
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.