Equipment Worlds collide - M42+Digital

Heres a recomendation for y'all.

I notice a lot of people are buying into DSLRS nowadays and then slating the pants zoom kit lenses you get with them. Well, yeah. That Canon 18-55? Probably costs Canon about a fiver to make em. So of course its a bit lame. You aren't doing your camera body justice!

So whats the solution? Yeah, go and buy a full set of L series lenses! Thats going to happen! I have a new idea. Buy one of those M42 adaptors you see on ebay for a tenner. For those who don't know, M42 is an old photography standard for lenses that basically tells you its fit is a 42mm screw thread. The Pentax Spotmatic was an M42 camera for example.

How much would a Carl Zeiss 50mm F1.4 set you back? A lot? Wrong answer. You can loads of great quality M42 lenses for absolutely nothing on the old Ebay- not to mention any decent camera shops near you. I'm using a Fujinon (Yeah, fuji used to make lenses) 50mm F1.8 on a Dynax 7D body and it's a beast for macro and portrait work, not to mention great in low light as well; like gig photography. And it cost me.... £12.50.

Oh boo hoo- you have to use it on manual focus and manual aperture. The glass is top notch and you paid peanuts for it. Also the bokeh (the out of focus areas) look a million times better than the god awful F4-5 28-80 kit lens I got with it.

So there you go. Investigate these weird old lenses and be rewarded with cheap, stylish photography. Turn off your bloody automatic modes and do it yourself for once!

 

All my Mamiya lenses are being used on my Spotmatic II, and I need AF for what I do. Otherwise a sound suggestion.

 

Yep, certain situations you need AF and spot-on quick metering. But it's really nice to go back to basics once in a while. Also you can spend peanuts, but splash out a bit more and you can get some absolutely awesome lenses.

(Or you could do what I did and turn your 5D into a pinhole camera . Cost £0.00)

 

I'll stick to L glass thanks

 

'I'll stick to L glass thanks'

You seemed to have missed the point a bit here. I'm talking about some interesting ways of doing photography; that as we know is one of the most expensive hobbies you can take up. Especially if the view is constantly put out by gadget addicts that you can only take good pictures with expensive kit. I tell you, a piece of fluorite in a lens does not a good photo make. Some of the photos I've taken on my phone, my parents old skool Olympus compact and my fisheye lomo are just as important to me as any of the shots I've spent hours sweating over with proper gear.

Is it any wonder photography is considered such a geeky, tech-heavy hobby?

 

Not sure if I quite agree with that. Imho it's whatever you make it.

It can be a geeky hobby, if you're spending more time discussing your ultra-fast primes than taking photos with them. On the other hand, if you're more concerned about the photos you're producing, it's not geeky at all. Just depends on your motivation - photos or e-peen.

 

Totally agree with you there skutbag, I have owned a lot of different kit, spent thousands on nikon, but some of the best shots I ever took were on a pentax ME Super + 50mm f1.8 which cost me about £30 from an old bloke in a pub lol.

Some people just have the knack, the 'eye' shall we say, it's not about the camera, it's about the photographer.

I remember seeing an article in AP about a guy that used m42 lenses on a canon 10D, while a good idea in principle, the images they printed looked incredibly 'washy' I don't know if it was just down to his technique or his selection of lenses but they just weren't punchy enough for me, i guess that didn't matter in the days when everything was shot in B+W.

 

Having worked in photo retail let me tell you that 99% of ppl are more interested in flashing a £2k L lens to their buddies in the camera club than actually learning how to take decent pictures.

thankfully most people on these forums seem to be the exact opposite