Photographs with cheap or old lenses

[Tronhard]

It is not unusual to end up with some kit lenses; or really old lenses if one buys, or has held onto a vintage camera. Often these are disposed of or lurk, forgotten, in some corner of our camera cache. At a time when we may be looking for inspiration it seems not unreasonable to look for, or create, images with such lenses - and a bit of a challenge perhaps?

Of course, if we were producing large, detailed prints, it would be likely our efforts would be marred by such poor optics, but I bet it will be harder to pick holes in the results when they are reduced for display on our webpages.

IF YOU ARE GOING TO POST IT MUST INCLUDE AN IMAGE RELEVANT TO THE THREAD, UNLESS YOU ARE COMMENTING ON A SPECIFIC IMAGE.

So, lenses that qualify are:

• Camera "Kit" lenses - e.g. 18-55, etc.
  
• Old lenses: say around the turn of century or before
  
• Photos can be new (preferably) or from your archive

You can put them on whatever camera you want, but identify the camera please!

So, to start the ball rolling, and to provide an exemplar:



Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 IS STM.

[xpatUSA]

Sigma 17-50mm, constant with zoom f/2.8, on Sigma SD1 Merrill DSLR.

Full-spectrum, including IR.

[pnodrog]

Sigma 17-50mm, constant with zoom f/2.8, on Sigma SD1 Merrill DSLR.

Full-spectrum, including IR.

Does a f2.8 lens qualify?

Nice photo probably just jealous

[Tronhard]

Sigma 17-50mm, constant with zoom f/2.8, on Sigma SD1 Merrill DSLR.

Full-spectrum, including IR.

IF that's the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM, it might be stretching the cheap category a trifle, but still the 18-135 USM kit lens is not far off that either, so let's go for it. And yes, it's a nice photo.

[xpatUSA]

Does a f2.8 lens qualify?

Trev said "So, lenses that qualify are: Camera "Kit" lenses - e.g. 18-55, etc."

[pschlute]

This was one of my early Digital efforts from 2007. The lens was the standard Pentax DA 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 kit lens. Camera was a Pentax K10D.

Scenery was supplied by the wonderful Italian island of Ischia.

[xpatUSA]

IF that's the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM, it might be stretching the cheap category a trifle, but still the 18-135 USM kit lens is not far off that either, so let's go for it. And yes, it's a nice photo.

Yes, Trev, it's certainly not a kit lens for any of the several non-Sigma cameras that it's made for - but mine came as a kit lens with a Sigma SD1 Merrill DSLR. See post #5. Sold the camera but kept the lens ...

[pnodrog]

Yes, Trev, it's certainly not a kit lens for any of the several non-Sigma cameras that it's made for - but mine came as a kit lens with a Sigma SD1 Merrill DSLR. See post #5. Sold the camera but kept the lens ...

Funny lot at Sigma but have some good products.....

[Tronhard]

trev said "so, lenses that qualify are: Camera "kit" lenses - e.g. 18-55, etc."

q e d! It IS a kit lens, and quite a good one!

[Tronhard]

The venerable, and much-maligned Canon EF 28-90mm USM II on a Canon EOS 60D

[Round Tuit]

It is not unusual to end up with some kit lenses; or really old lenses if one buys, or has held onto a vintage camera. Often these are disposed of or lurk, forgotten, in some corner of our camera cache. At a time when we may be looking for inspiration it seems not unreasonable to look for, or create, images with such lenses - and a bit of a challenge perhaps?

Of course, if we were producing large, detailed prints, it would be likely our efforts would be marred by such poor optics, but I bet it will be harder to pick holes in the results when they are reduced for display on our webpages.

So, lenses that qualify are:

• Camera "Kit" lenses - e.g. 18-55, etc.
  
• Old lenses: say around the turn of century or before
  
• Photos can be new (preferably) or from your archive

You can put them on whatever camera you want, but identify the camera please!

So, to start the ball rolling, and to provide an exemplar:



Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 IS STM.

Trev,
Just look at any photo that I have ever posted, including the winner of last month's competition.

[pschlute]

Before the digital age, a lenses properties (colour rendition; contrast; sharpness) were very important. With today's digital tools available I would say the first two are less so. Sharpness can (and indeed must) be applied during digital processing (whether that is in-camera or in raw processing), and can be increased if necessary. But a sharp image recorded by the sensor will always produce a sharper image after pp work.

[LePetomane]

This was taken with the Fujifilm 18-55mm f/2.8-4 kit lens.

[Tronhard]

Trev,
Just look at any photo that I have ever posted, including the winner of last month's competition.

In these times of isolation and lack of inspiration, the point of exercise threads like this, TIBM and Photo Association is give opportunities for members to engage, and stimulate photographic activity to avoid slipping into the "slough of despond".

I would still encourage you to go ahead and take another, then post that!

To make it clear what I am trying to achieve, I have amended the original post to spell out that any post must include an image unless you are commenting on a specific image.

[Tronhard]

Before the digital age, a lenses properties (colour rendition; contrast; sharpness) were very important. With today's digital tools available I would say the first two are less so. Sharpness can (and indeed must) be applied during digital processing (whether that is in-camera or in raw processing), and can be increased if necessary. But a sharp image recorded by the sensor will always produce a sharper image after pp work.

Thanks for your comment Peter. To make it clear what I am trying to achieve, I have amended the original post to spell out that any post must include an image or comment on a specific image.

So, what have you got?

[xpatUSA]

Old lens: Asahi Lens Co M42 'Takumar' 24mm on a Sigma SD15:



Processed in RawTherapee.

[Tronhard]

Old lens: Asahi Lens Co M42 'Takumar' 24mm on a Sigma SD15:

Great shot, and I love the trailer - not many like that in NZ, they wouldn't fit on our roads.
Perhaps I should change the thread title to "Many a good tune played on an old (or cheap) fiddle!"

[xpatUSA]

Great shot, and I love the trailer - not many like that in NZ, they wouldn't fit on our roads.

Thanks, Trev. It's not big by USA standards, I forget the exact length but the picnic table is 8 ft.

[pschlute]

One of my oldest lenses. Pentax SMC 15mm 3.5. it is a heavy beast with a big bulbous front element and fixed hood. The latter is quite useless when the sun is out. http://kmp.pentaxians.eu/lenses/ultra-wide/k15f3-5-ii/

[LePetomane]

Peter, nice photo. How did you get that close to a Concord?