Vintage and Classic Cameras and lenses

[Bacardi]

Not wanting to go off topic on the Panamoz thread...

tog said:

Kermit power said:

I've just picked up an absolute bargain 30yr old 20-35mm f2.8L lens which is absolutely lovely! It feels like it was made yesterday and will likely last another 30 years so long as I store it carefully!

In a similar vein, don't discount the original EF80-200 2.8L if you can find a tidy one. I've had mine at least 25 years and it still as sharp as the day it was made, and gives a lovely look to the images. I kept mine as a spare when I got the first 70-200 2.8 IS, but although the white one had IS and a USM the older lens was sharper. (I rarely use a 70-200 at all these days, prefer the 135 f2.)

... wanted to comment on KP and Tog's comments. Older lenses can be sharper and have more character due to using lead in the manufacture (amongst other things), which was banned some time ago. I'm. bit of a lens nerd and just acquired an 'Eye of Sauron', a 30 year old design, not a cheap acquisition, so bit concerned if it goes wrong I've got an expensive paper weight! However, I discovered a company in Scotland or can repair out of service lenses and even restore and convert them. So might be useful to know if you have older lenses...

http://www.thelensdoctor.co.uk/page14.html
http://www.thelensdoctor.co.uk/page18.html

Lead is not so healthy, but some old FD lenses have Thorium in, which is a bit worse. I would't mind one, but if you can find a good one, they are around £6k

Just browsing around and talking of lead, I have the previous model to this one which I believe was the last SWC to use lead. I was surprised at the price...

https://www.ffordes.com/p/SH-42-047942/hasselblad-...

[Simpo Two]

Nothing dangerous about lead in glass - unless you eat it, and in that case the glass will do you much more harm than the lead

[tog]

Had to google the Eye of Sauron! I've not heard the 200/1.8 called that, although I know the Canon 80-200 is called the magic drainpipe quite often.

I used to work with a football photographer years ago who had the 200/1.8. He preferred the flexibility of using the 200mm with a 1.4x over the more popular 300/2.8. We would both cover the first half of the game (me just with the 80-200) then he'd go off and process the film in a room over a shop opposite the stadium, leaving me and the Eye of Sauron to cover the second half before joining him at the end. Hair dryer, scanner and a G3 Mac laptop completed the process. I don't thinkI've seen 200/1.8 since then, about 25 years ago. Happy days...

The other old cheap lens I use a lot is the original Canon EF 35mm f2 (non-USM). I worked really well as a compact combo on various 5Ds over the years. With the adapter it protrudes more on the R5, but works nicely and gives good results. The only 50mm lens I have ever owned is my original Canon 50mm 1.8, which I have had over 30 years now and still going strong.

I've never really had any interest in adapting really old lenses to use on modern cameras - I like auto aperture and focus!

Edit to add-

I've heard of the Lens Doctor, though never used him. My 15mm fisheye packed up a few years ago and despite me being CPS Platinum Canon declined to look at it. Fixation did mend it, but due to the NOS parts they used it came with no warranty on the repair.

Edited by tog on Thursday 3rd March 10:53

[Elderly]

Bacardi said:

I have the previous model to this one which I believe was the last SWC to use lead. I was surprised at the price...

https://www.ffordes.com/p/SH-42-047942/hasselblad-...

I had one of those too (not the 903), I think I got £450 for it which seemed good at the time.

Here's some of my more interesting ex cameras (I still have the Linhof).

I tried to remember how many analogue Nikons I got through in my time as a pro.
but lost count after 10 ....



[url][url]

[toohuge]

I've always been tempted by the 200 1.8, but concerned about serviceability. The lensdoctor has patchy reviews...

I like (and have a large collection of) vintage / older lenses. Something of an expensive hobby..... I picked up a Nikon 400 2.8 ais a few years ago. It's hilariously big and difficult to use but fun all the same

[Bacardi]

toohuge said:

I've always been tempted by the 200 1.8, but concerned about serviceability. The lensdoctor has patchy reviews...

The restoration of the 400 2.8 in the link above looked impressive, but hopefully I won't need lensdoctor. My copy seems pretty clean, works nicely and I bought it from a dealer in London. I looked at other copies for sale on ebay, one was £500 more and that looked like it had been dragged through mud, all the switches were filthy. Saw another clean one but that was £1k more. The only sign of wear is the rotating collar knob is partially down to the metal so I guessed it's spent a lot of time hanging of someones shoulder and rubbing on clothing. There is also another company in the Sates who service them. They are built like brick outside conveniences though...

toohuge said:

.... I picked up a Nikon 400 2.8 ais a few years ago. It's hilariously big and difficult to use but fun all the same

Suits your username!

[Bacardi]

Elderly said:

(I still have the Linhof).