Very interesting, thanks for the video 😊 You’ve reminded me of back in the day when I was the proud owner of the Canon T90 and a few FD lenses. I bought it when it first came out but sadly had to sell it when I ran short of money buying my first house.
Yes, I've been there too! As I think I mentioned in the video, one reason I went with Canon over Nikon for my first dSLR was the adaptability of the EF mount--money was tight and I knew I wouldn't have much money to spend on lenses, so the ability to pick up cheap vintage lenses on eBay was appealing. Even though modern cameras outresolve them in some cases, it's still fun to break out the manual glass and see what I can come up with!
NIce. The Tamron 90mm was my favourite lens in the film days and was one reason I was excited to try mirrorless cameras when they first became a thing (I skipped DSLRs!). However, I was very disappointed with the sensor reflections when using this lens with bright light in the scene (a purple dot in the middle of the frame). It's there at every aperture, but most noticeable at F16 and smaller (on Sony APSC and FF). So I wouldn't recommend it over other options. The one I would recommend is the (non series 1) 90mm Vivitar (SN 28******). Plus it's a true 1:1 macro without need for tubes/TCs.
Great input, thank you! I haven't noticed that with my Tamron, but I might have to test it to see! If my Vivitar 28mm is any indication, they made really solid lenses back then too, so I might have to add that 90mm to my list. Have you used any of the Soviet Zeiss knockoffs? I always really liked the Helios 58mm, so I definitely want a Jupiter 85mm!
@@wanderland_xyz Please do report back on using the Tamron on the Canon (though I can't think of any reason why it would be any different on another digital sensor). The Tamron was sometimes sold with a dedicated 2x TC and wonder if that might solve the problem. You probably know that vivitar lenses were made (sometimes within the same FL) by a wide variety of manufactures (you can tell by the first two numbers of the serial number). The ones made by Komine (28****), Tokina (37***) and Kiron (22****) generally have good reviews. I have the Helios 44 and the 44-2 (3 of them!). Sharp but very low contrast lenses. I like lenses to have a short FD, so find myself using other 50mm (ish) lenses (Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar is nice, if you can get it cheap). Haven't tried the Jupiter. I can recommend the CZJ 135mm 3.5. It also takes good macro with extension tubes - and can be used as a 'tube lens' when reversing a wide angle on the front of it!
Great info, thanks again! It makes sense that Vivitar would have re-branded lenses from other manufacturers, but I didn't know those specifics. My 28mm's serial starts with 22, so that would make it a Kiron. Pretty darn good, anyway! My Helios is the 44M-6, and I always found it to be plenty sharp and contrasty, and with a distinctive bokeh that adds flavor. Maybe the multicoating helps. Definitely a few more on my wish list, like the Jupiter and the vaunted (and hence frankly overpriced, to my mind) Zeiss Flektogon 35mm.
@@wanderland_xyz I think the later 44s (like your one) are said to have much better contrast and sharpness across the frame, but the early ones (44 and 44-2) are a lot more swirly under the right conditions. The Flektogon is on my wish list but seems to have a very flakey aperture mechanism that is not straight forward to fix. I get a lot of my lenses for next to nothing from my local camera shop. They buy old gear, but any defective ones go straight in their 'bargain bin'. So, fingers crossed, I might find a flek in it one day! I've not tried the Kiron Viv 28 (I have both versions made by Komine, which are OK), but I do have a kiron Viv S1 70-210 zoom that's surprisingly good (and does circa 1:2 macro!). Rather heavy though.
I've tried reverse-mounting, but not with the Canon 50. I think I used the Takumar 50 instead, in conjunction with a nice set of Takumar bellows. I still have the bellows, but the flexible part is disintegrating after 40+ years. I should see about replacing that part and drag it out of retirement!
Very interesting, thanks for the video 😊 You’ve reminded me of back in the day when I was the proud owner of the Canon T90 and a few FD lenses. I bought it when it first came out but sadly had to sell it when I ran short of money buying my first house.
Yes, I've been there too! As I think I mentioned in the video, one reason I went with Canon over Nikon for my first dSLR was the adaptability of the EF mount--money was tight and I knew I wouldn't have much money to spend on lenses, so the ability to pick up cheap vintage lenses on eBay was appealing. Even though modern cameras outresolve them in some cases, it's still fun to break out the manual glass and see what I can come up with!
NIce. The Tamron 90mm was my favourite lens in the film days and was one reason I was excited to try mirrorless cameras when they first became a thing (I skipped DSLRs!). However, I was very disappointed with the sensor reflections when using this lens with bright light in the scene (a purple dot in the middle of the frame). It's there at every aperture, but most noticeable at F16 and smaller (on Sony APSC and FF). So I wouldn't recommend it over other options. The one I would recommend is the (non series 1) 90mm Vivitar (SN 28******). Plus it's a true 1:1 macro without need for tubes/TCs.
Great input, thank you! I haven't noticed that with my Tamron, but I might have to test it to see! If my Vivitar 28mm is any indication, they made really solid lenses back then too, so I might have to add that 90mm to my list. Have you used any of the Soviet Zeiss knockoffs? I always really liked the Helios 58mm, so I definitely want a Jupiter 85mm!
@@wanderland_xyz Please do report back on using the Tamron on the Canon (though I can't think of any reason why it would be any different on another digital sensor). The Tamron was sometimes sold with a dedicated 2x TC and wonder if that might solve the problem. You probably know that vivitar lenses were made (sometimes within the same FL) by a wide variety of manufactures (you can tell by the first two numbers of the serial number). The ones made by Komine (28****), Tokina (37***) and Kiron (22****) generally have good reviews. I have the Helios 44 and the 44-2 (3 of them!). Sharp but very low contrast lenses. I like lenses to have a short FD, so find myself using other 50mm (ish) lenses (Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar is nice, if you can get it cheap). Haven't tried the Jupiter. I can recommend the CZJ 135mm 3.5. It also takes good macro with extension tubes - and can be used as a 'tube lens' when reversing a wide angle on the front of it!
Great info, thanks again! It makes sense that Vivitar would have re-branded lenses from other manufacturers, but I didn't know those specifics. My 28mm's serial starts with 22, so that would make it a Kiron. Pretty darn good, anyway! My Helios is the 44M-6, and I always found it to be plenty sharp and contrasty, and with a distinctive bokeh that adds flavor. Maybe the multicoating helps. Definitely a few more on my wish list, like the Jupiter and the vaunted (and hence frankly overpriced, to my mind) Zeiss Flektogon 35mm.
@@wanderland_xyz I think the later 44s (like your one) are said to have much better contrast and sharpness across the frame, but the early ones (44 and 44-2) are a lot more swirly under the right conditions. The Flektogon is on my wish list but seems to have a very flakey aperture mechanism that is not straight forward to fix. I get a lot of my lenses for next to nothing from my local camera shop. They buy old gear, but any defective ones go straight in their 'bargain bin'. So, fingers crossed, I might find a flek in it one day! I've not tried the Kiron Viv 28 (I have both versions made by Komine, which are OK), but I do have a kiron Viv S1 70-210 zoom that's surprisingly good (and does circa 1:2 macro!). Rather heavy though.
Have you reverse mounted the 50mm Canon? Looks like it's got a bayonet mount on the front.
Enjoyed the video👍👍
I've tried reverse-mounting, but not with the Canon 50. I think I used the Takumar 50 instead, in conjunction with a nice set of Takumar bellows. I still have the bellows, but the flexible part is disintegrating after 40+ years. I should see about replacing that part and drag it out of retirement!