[Theme] Pictures taken with vintage lenses

[Fons Baerken]

Copy is from early 2000 i think

[ARTUROARTISTA]

Photograph of a garage in the city of Murcia, taken with a Russian lens from the 60s called Jupiter-8 1:2 F=5CM

[ARTUROARTISTA]

Photo taken with FED-2 and Industar-26m 1:2.8 F=5 lens. It is a portrait of my wife with a Nikon camera that I gave her. We are at the Ecoturismo Cabo Tiñoso restaurant in Cartagena.

[Zang]

Hello, what do you mean with "vintage"? Is there a difference between a nikkor from 1980 and the same from 2012?

Hi there,

I've never given much thought to the strict definition of 'vintage.' To me, vintage generally refers to manual lenses designed up until the early 1990s. That said, if a manufacturer decides to resurrect an old design and restart production of a lens originally made 30 years ago, I would consider that vintage as well.

Cheers,
Zang

[KarlMera]

Hello Zang,

would you think you would be able to recognize the lens or the focal length or the age if you see a picture?

[Birna Rørslett]

Hello Zang,

would you think you would be able to recognize the lens or the focal length or the age if you see a picture?

These aspects of photography are funny for true nerds (my guess most of us belong here? I certainly do), but rather irrelevant for the outcome? Very wide lenses, fish eyes, or really long focal lengths may be apparent though.

Old lenses do tend to have a less contrasty rendering and colours can be more muted. However, in many cases intentional post processing can make such tell-tale signs go away.

For some niche applications, for example IR photography, vintage lenses can lend themselves better than modern equivalents due to the difference in optical design, different coatings, and suchlike features. Most modern Nikkors for Z mount do badly in IR as presence of a pronounced hot spot is commonly observed. The Nikkor 40mm f/2 SE Z is an exception to that rule of thumb, in particular because the vintage equivalent of Voigtländer 40mm f/2 for F mount is troubled by an IR hot spot, while the modern design is well-nigh flawless in this regard.

[KarlMera]

Hello,
its only my personal opinion that the eye of the photographer, the composition, the message, the design, the subject are important for a picture.
If I see a picture I cannot see the age of the lens, only with description.
Lenses, old or new, are not creative and do not have characters, only my personal view.
I also like to play with cameras and lenses.

[ARTUROARTISTA]

Mikro-NIKKOR Auto 3.5 55mm. Spreading its wings.

[Birna Rørslett]

Old camera, very old lens (from 1973!)

[Jürgen Pfeiffer]

This is my oldest one: Nikon S-Nikkor 55mm f 1.2 from 1965 to 1967

[Birna Rørslett]

True vintage: NEX-5N monochrome and Nikkor-S 5cm f/1.4. Lens is from 1952 (approx.).

[Birna Rørslett]

Another of those legendary rangefinder Nikkors: the Nikkor 8.5cm f/2, my oldest copy is from 1948 (!). Here used on a Nikon SP.

[Birna Rørslett]

Another true vintage lens, the Nikkor-Q 25cm f/4 (1951). Here combined with D3X through the N-F tube (1959). I added a CPU so can use it on all modern Nikons. Works also well with Fuji S3 and S5 models.

[Jürgen Pfeiffer]

All right Birna, you've clearly won in terms of age.

But it's always nice to see that glass ages well.

[Birna Rørslett]

I didn't know there was an age-related competition ...   (I do have older lenses than those shown here)