Buying a 7D

[Norman Pogson]

Originally Posted by James Donnelly

I seriously considered setting up around a DIY matte box with a Cokin filter attachment, but I was put off by talk of the ND filters having problems with colour balance.

What is your experience? Maybe there are 3rd party ND's available that are better? I am fed up with having a gazillion step up rings, filters and lens hoods.

I don't see color balance problems using the Cokins, lots of people are critical of them for being resin etc, but I have had good luck using them. I regularly use the 4x and 8x and polarizing filter stacked together, I have three filter holders each with a different filter thread so I can use the filters on my Nikkor lenses (52mm) and my Canon 50mm 58mm and Canon HV30 43mm.

I also notice on the 7D and my Nikon D300 that the sensor has a slight magenta color cast, which maybe a factor in color balance.

[James Donnelly]

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

My comment of them being slow should not be extrapolated to the entire series of lenses. My comments were ONLY directed at the lenses I found currently for sale on EBay. Nearly all of the lenses were F3.5, the only exceptions being a 105mm F2.8, and the fast(er) 50-55mm lenses. I have zero interest in F3.5 glass.

Same.

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

Much of this reads like Nikon's offerings. And I suspect that the lens designs of the day were all quite similar. However, I'd imagine that Nikon was outselling Pentax 10:1 or 20:1 at the time. I was shooting for the newspaper back then and I don't know a single photographer who had a Pentax. It wasn't until I was doing portrait work at University that I finally ran into a Pentax photographer and he had a 6x7 that I fell in love with.

Pentax's heyday was late 60's to early 70's. After about 1975 the market share dwindled, but they innovated much of the SLR technology. Nearly all the classic Takumar glass is pre-1975.

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

I need to see some images from these lenses on a 7D or similar. I need a couple of portrait lenses (85mm, 105, and 135) and am interested in trying a few things out. But it looks like it will be a $300-$400 per lens experiment, and I am not willing to put forth that much cash without a VERY good reason. I KNOW what I am getting with the Nikon glass in those focal lengths. The Nikon 85mm and 105mm are world wide legends and are still used all over the world by 35mm portrait photographers.

Nah, ignore those prices. 'Buy now' and 'best offer' ads are worth ignoring in favour of auctions. There seems to be a fashion for listing Takumars at stupid prices these days, but dig deeper you will see their true price. The following links are to 'completed items' in order to show what they really go for.

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

CLEAN NIKON NIKKOR AI 85MM F/1.8 F1.8 LENS D300 D700 D1 - eBay (item 300454832122 end time Aug-17-10 19:58:34 PDT)

Super Takumar 1.9/85mm - eBay (item 270615983950 end time Aug-08-10 01:46:26 PDT)

Pentax Super Takumar 85mm f1.9 M42 lens on eBay (end time 04-Aug-10 21:47:29 BST)

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

MINT NIKON NIKKOR AI 105MM F/2.5 F2.5 LENS F F1 F2 F3 - eBay (item 300455273993 end time Aug-19-10 07:50:50 PDT)

Asahi/Pentax Super-Takumar 1:2.8 105mm Lens - eBay (item 220647125713 end time Aug-08-10 16:27:10 PDT)

PENTAX SUPER TAKUMAR 105MM f/2.8 LENS - eBay (item 130417712048 end time Aug-11-10 15:44:50 PDT)

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

NIKON NIKKOR 135mm f/2 AI-S TELEPHOTO LENS #BR006 - eBay (item 170522702235 end time Sep-02-10 13:31:50 PDT)

Asahi Opt. Co. Japan s m c TAKUMAR 135mm f/2.5 Lens scr - eBay (item 350384196344 end time Aug-16-10 19:25:20 PDT)

ASAHI PENTAX SMC TAKUMAR 135mm ?/2.5 + M42toEOS adapter - eBay (item 220652021094 end time Aug-15-10 11:34:12 PDT)


By the way, in no way am I comparing these to the Nikons you list, which are without doubt more desirable than the examples I offer, but in my opinion, the difference in desirability is not reflected in the difference in price. Takumars are still a bargain and are great for video.

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

See this comes back to the problem for me. At F2.8, I can put a quality zoom lens on. For stills work, the prime would certainly be better, but for video work, the immediacy of the zoom essentially outweighs the slight resolution advantage of the prime. Now if that prime were F2, then we might have something to talk about.

Agreed. If I had the money, it would be L series zooms all the way, especially on a professional shoot. But I would still keep my Takumars for creative purposes. They are just different. Modern lenses are optically superior in a technical sense, but sometimes that L lens might be too clinical and contrasty for what you want, or perhaps you are looking for a particular character of flare. Of course, you can do most things in post, but it's not quite the same, and it's not as much fun.

[Perrone Ford]

Thank you for this post! At thos prices, I'm willing to take a risk on one of these pieces of glass. I'll try to see what pops up in the next couple weeks, and buy something. A 50 if nothing else, because those are very inexpensive.

I am used to looking at the buy it now prices because the Nikons usually bid right up to that. If I can start snagging some of these faster primes at around $100 a piece, and they look good, I am on board.

For the stuff I shoot, I prefer the lenses that have a bit more character to them. Keeps me from having to attach diffusion in front of the lens, or soften things after the fact. I love the character of the Nikon glass pre- 1975. My 300mm Nikon from 1972 is one of the prettier pieces of glass I've used, but has very limited use for me because it's somewhat slow.

And "L" glass doesn't hold much for me. Never has. But I've never been an autofocus fan. And I abandoned Canon after my first EOS cameras... long before digital hit the scene.

Thanks again for this. I'll update in a few weeks with what I bought and how it's working. I've got some model photography to do next month and one of these 85s is going to be perfect.