Rod’s Mini Reviews

This list is of all the cameras & lenses I have owned or used extensively enough to have images and data on. I intend to eventually review them all. For now the mini reviews are coming slowly but surely. Leave a comment if there is one you would like me to do next or if you would like a full review done on the blog. The review “stars” are a combination of price, image quality, usabilty, build quality, etc. Items in Italic I still own. This is a work in progress 🙂

• Digital Cameras
• Modern Lenses
• Film Cameras
• Vintage and Classic Lenses

Digital Cameras

• Canon S110 ★★★★☆ 2012: 12.2mp 1/1.7 sensor Replaced by S120. Super compact, sharp images, slow lens at tele end, expensive
• Canon G1 ★★★★☆ 2001: 2.3mp 1/1.8 sensor A legend in its time, super dated now, fast lens, articulating screen, very well made with titanium cover.
• Canon G9 ★★★★☆ 2007: 12.2mp Still a viable camera today, well made, optical VF, slow lens at tele end (f/5.9)
• Canon G7x Mark II ★★★★☆ 2016: 20mp 1 Inch sensor I love this camera, my favorite compact, fast lens, well made
• Canon D30 ★★★☆☆ 2000: 3mp APS/C sensor. Almost unusable today, dynamic range was crap.
• Canon D60 ★★★☆☆ 2002: 6mp APS/C sensor. Barely usable today, but dynamic range and high ISO performance is poor.
• Canon 10D ★★★★☆ 2003: 6.3mp APS/C sensor. Excellent in its day, fast, easy to use, EF lenses are awesome
• Canon 30D ★★★★☆ 2006: 8.2mp APS/C sensor. First Canon with oversize rear screen, improve build and dynamic range over 20D
• Canon 40D ★★★★☆ 2007: 10.1mp APS/C sensor. Minor tweaks to 30D, excellent camera in its day
• Canon 50D ★★★★☆ 2008: 15.1mp APS/C sensor. Excellent camera, I used one of these for a couple years. This is still a very usable camera today and they sell for next to nothing I’ve seen them around a $100 at times on EBAY. This camera allowed users to micro adjust each lens to the body, nice feature.
• Canon 7D ★★★★★ 2009: 18mp APS/C sensor. Absolute boss camera, still one of my all time fav DSLR. Pro grade, longest running EOS body EVER over 5 years. Still very usable today with lots of pro features. They sell for around $250-$300 on EBAY.
• Canon Rebel T2i ★★★★☆ 2010: 18mp APS/C sensor. Excellent entry level DSLR at the time, still solid today can find them under $200 used, but spend a few bucks more and get a 7D way better camera, although Rebels are super light weight.
• Canon 5D ★★★★☆ 2005: 12.8mp FF sensor. The start of the legend… Still usable today. Original 5D bodies still fetch close to $300 and that is a tad too high, the legendary status drives the price up methinks. Get Mark II instead for a hundred more.
• Canon 5D Mark II ★★★★☆ 2008: 21.1mp FF sensor. The legend gets some extra pixels. Used prices in the mid 300s to around $400. A quality camera for a fair price.
• Canon 5D Mark III ★★★★★ 2012: 22.3mp FF sensor. This camera gets some of the tech from the 7D, nice upgrade over the Mk II. Prices now tumbling down into the $500 range hard to pass up that deal.
• Canon EOS-R ★★★★☆ 2018: 30.3mp FF sensor. Not a lot of love in the media, I liked the camera. New lower price is good at $1799. I was happy when I paid $2299 in 2018. Camera needed IBIS that was a sad omission by Canon.
• Canon EOS-R5 ★★★★★ 2020: 45mp FF sensor. Has some overheat issues in the max quality video. Stills camera EXCELLENT! IBIS works great. Shoots at a blistering 12fps mechanical (faster than Sony A9 II which is only 24mp) and 20fps electronic. The R5 is a monster stills camera. The 8k video feature is limited in record time to protect from over heating but other video modes like standard 4k and 1080p/120 work fine.
• Canon EOS M ★★★☆☆ 2012: 18mp APS/C sensor. First mirrorless for Canon, behind competition, but cheap used now 🙂 I would not recommend this camera for serious work unless you plan to use it for a conversion like an Astronomy camera or IR camera which mine is converted to. Is very hard on battery, buy a few spares.
• Canon EOS M3 ★★★★☆ 2015: 24mp APS/C sensor. Finally Canon makes a good mirrorless camera. Solid camera value used. flip up screen, no EVF but canon sold optional EVF attachment. Typically M3s get $200-$300 used.
• Canon EOS M5 ★★★★☆ 2016: 24mp APS/C sensor. Almost a 7D Mk II in mirrorless. I love this camera! Canon still sells new but at $979 for the body it’s now too expensive. I paid that for mine at launch, it was worth it then. Used you can find them around $400-$500 a good value.
• Canon EOS M6 Mark II ★★★★☆ 2019: 32.5mp APS/C sensor. A needed boost in processor power, fast and efficient. 14fps with AF and tracking. Upgraded build quality and finish over previous gen. excellent 4k video, easy vlogger rig as well. No EVF requires attachment.
• Nikon D-50 ★★★☆☆ 2005: 6.1mp APS/C sensor. This camera is barely acceptable in today’s modern world, but they still work and make decent images. You can find working bodies for less than $50 these days so it is a great way to get someone started in system cameras. It has a puny 2 inch rear screen and has limited functionality with old Nikon F mount glass. Despite the fact that most modern phones will outperform this old girl, technically speaking, you still get a larger sensor and the benefit of some of the world’s greatest lenses and phones still can’t match that.
• Nikon D-7000 ★★★★☆ 2010: 16.2mp APS/C sensor. This camera won fabulous accolades when it was launched and certainly was one of the best mid-tier consumer cameras on the market. The camera was made in Thailand rather than Japan where competitor Canon makes their similar body. I had no issues with the model I had. Dual SD cards and wide functionality with Nikon glass across multiple generations. Keep in mind that Nikon lenses do not have the same compatibility as Canon as the F mount evolved lenses became a bit fragmented.
• Sony a7 ★★★★☆ 2012: 24mp FF sensor. No IBIS in this original a7 but this is the camera that started the full frame mirrorless craze we see today. Used they are super cheap and thus a good deal. Still usable and it is the smallest of the a7 series cameras.
• Sony a7R ★★★★☆ 2013: 36mp FF sensor No IBIS. Honestly get the a7R II if you want a resolution boost, this camera doesn’t perform as well with AF as the 24mp a7. The R models do not have the AA pass filter and thus offer a bit better resolution on fine details.
• Sony a7 II ★★★★★ 2014: 24mp FF BSI sensor with IBIS. This is still a viable product today and that’s saying a lot considering the rapid changing tech in cameras. These are available used well under $1000 now and they represent an amazing value. Perhaps the best value camera in the world for using old school vintage lenses.
• Sony a7R II ★★★★★ 2015: 42mp FF BSI sensor. IBIS and BSI holy crap, Sony still sells this today! Amazing camera! Sony ergonomics are still not as nice as Canon, the tech inside however is excellent despite being a bit long in the tooth.
• Sony a7R III ★★★★☆ 2017: 42mp FF BSI sensor. IBIS. Still available new, but this camera doesn’t have the pure value of the a7R II. It is faster and has more features, but pricing on it is a bit high due largely to Sony’s impeccable reputation in the mirrorless space.
• Sony a7R IV ★★★★☆ 2019: 61mp FF BSI sensor and improved IBIS makes this one of the best hi-res full frame cameras on the planet. Sony ergonomics clearly lag behind Canon and Nikon but the build quality has been improving with each model and this is a solid camera. For pure resolution this is the king of hill. Canon R5 offers higher video resolution and much faster shooting speeds with a marginal drop in resolution to 45mp. Canon AF is also arguably a little better than Sony these days.

Modern Lenses:

• 7artisans EF-M 35/0.95 MF ★★★★☆ 2021: Nicely built lens to fit Canon EF-M mount cameras, also available to fit Sony, Micro 4/3. This lens sells for around $250 and OUTPERFORMS the Speedmaster lens reviewed below for HALF the money. It is as well made but optically superior. The lens is not razor sharp wide open but in the middle it is pretty decent at 0.95. Really cleans up nicely by f/1.4
• 7artisans EF-M 50/0.95 MF ★★★★☆ 2021: The portrait brother of the above lens, this is also an excellent value. Available in EF-M, Sony, and 4/3. The lens is fairly compact considering its massive aperture.
• Canon EF 15/2.8 Fisheye ★★★☆☆ 1987: Solid performer, early style cheap plastic build, noisy motor.
• Canon EF TSE 17/4 L ★★★★★ 2009: This lens was an amazing optical achievement in its day and honestly still is now some 13 years later (2022). A 17mm lens with an image circle large enough to provide a 12mm shift is hard to wrap your head around when you understand the physics involved. But somehow those crazy engineers at Canon pulled it off. A full SEVEN years later Nikon introduced their ultra-wide PC lens… a 19mm, seriously 19mm? Yes friends this 17mm TSE is still an engineering marvel today as it was in 2009. The lens offers both tilt and shift view camera style movements and these can be rotated to vertical or horizontal planes. An architectural photographers dream lens. Yes that’s me 😉
• Canon EF 24/1.4 L ★★★★☆ 1997: Excellent lens in its day, improved cameras revealed flaws, good value today.
• Canon EF 24/1.4 L II ★★★★★ 2008: Improved optics and weather sealed, one of the best in class but you will pay for it. Sigma has art lens with similar, possibly sharper results for less money.
• Canon EF 35/1.4 L ★★★★★ 1998: Excellent lens best in class at the time, still solid today, improved Mk II in 2015 but new version is a lot bigger and heavier.
• Canon EF 35/1.4 L Mark II ★★★★★ 2015: This lens had some big shoes to fill. Canon introduced the first “Blue Spectrum Refractive Optics” lens element in this very lens to reduce chromatic aberration. A redesign to the optical formula resulted in superior results on modern high resolution cameras. The lens is noticeably longer and heavier than its predecessor but has updated weather sealing.
• Canon EF 50/1.4 USM ★★★☆☆ 1993: Not as good as FD version, a little soft wide open, decent but much cheaper EF 50/1.8 is optically better.
• Canon EF 50/1.2 L ★★★★☆ 2006: Excellent optics, a bit heavy, a bit pricey as well. Bokeh is nice.
• Canon EF 85/1.2 L II ★★★★★ 2006: Excellent optics same as 1989 original, but better focusing and added weather sealing, expensive. New RF mount version is notably better optically but yet even MORE expensive than this lens.
• Canon EF 100/2.8 L IS ★★★★★ 2009: Excellent optics, 1:1 macro, L quality throughout, expensive. Stabilizer works great.
• Canon EF 135/2.0 L ★★★★★ 1996: Excellent optics, hasn’t been replaced in 25 years! Yes, it is that good, a value at current pricing. Sigma makes excellent 135/1.8 that is faster and a touch sharper. Canon launched RF 135/1.8 L in 2022, that is notably better but twice the price.
• Canon EF 135/2.8 Soft Focus ★★★☆☆ 1987: Original crappy plastic design, but very sharp. In soft focus mode nice effect, focus gets sketchy in soft focus mode. When using as normal 135mm lens, it is optically outstanding.
• Canon EF 200/1.8 L “The Eye of Sauron” ★★★★★ 1988: The fastest 200mm lens ever made. I was fortunate enough to borrow this lens from Seawood Photo. The ONLY reason I didn’t buy it is the fact that Canon doesn’t support it any longer and parts are scarce. It was just a touch too expensive for something I couldn’t repair if needed. This lens is sharp wide open and razor sharp at f/2.8. The bokeh is absolutely delicious and the size and weight are a little better than the 300/2.8 L of the same vintage. One note of caution: no more parts available for these so be advised if the AF motor fails you cannot focus at all as manual focus still requires the AF motor. The newer version is an IS model at f/2 and that lens is even a tad sharper than this lens. The newer version also uses a more traditional USM motor that can manual focus without power and is still serviceable.
• Canon EF 200/2.8 L ★★★★☆ 1991: Excellent lens optics so good that Mk II uses same formula, great value fast tele. Weak built in shade is too shallow. The Mk II adds detachable deep shade and weather sealing but has exact same optics.
• Canon EF 300/2.8 L ★★★★★ 1987: This is the original EF 2.8/300 that does not have IS. This lens is outstanding in every measurable way. Focus is fast, precise and quiet. Optics superb. Made until 1998. Later models offer closer minimum focus and IS but you need a machine to show the optical difference. One note of caution: no more parts available for these so be advised if the AF motor fails you cannot focus at all as manual focus still requires the AF motor. I had to sell mine as a parts lens when it failed.
• Canon RF 800/11 DO IS ★★★★☆ 2020: There were many skeptics about this lens and its companion the 600/11 when the lens was announced but it seems many of these skeptics were ultimately impressed. I am among them. The only advantage I see to the 600mm is size and I feel the 600mm could have been an f/9.5 or even f/8 which would have made it a consideration. But at the same speed of f/11 I’ll take the focal length and a few extra inches of length all day long and twice on Sunday 😉 The lens uses a collapsable design to make it compact down, it is still larger than an EF 70-200/2.8 but not as heavy. The lens is pretty sharp from the center to the edges and has a well corrected optical system using Canon’s third generation of ‘diffractive optics’ (Fresnel technology) This lens will not wow you with razor’s edge sharpness and super snappy contrast but it does perform at a very good level optically. The image stabilizer is excellent and when paired with the IBIS cameras it is insanely good. I have rendered sharp images at 1/4 second! I would not count on that happening more than 30% of the time, but it is possible and that is just silly good. The lens does not stop down you always shoot wide open, and lets be honest, of course we would anyway 🙂 You will have a limited AF zone about 30% of the center portion of the viewfinder with this lens. It does work with RF tele-converters so you could shoot 1600mm at f/22 and still get AF in that limited AF zone. I like it actually because even if I could justify and afford the 800/5.6 L IS at $15,000 I wouldn’t;t want to carry it around, this lens is light enough and compact enough to tote around. Min focus distance is a long 6m.
• Canon EF 11-24/4.0 L ★★★★★ 2015: At launch it was the widest lens ever made for full frame, and remained the widest full frame zoom in the world until 2019. It is still the widest full frame AF zoom in the world. This lens is sharp out to the edges and has supreme control of distortion. This lens would work well with film cameras because the distortion is so well controlled yet offers sharpness worthy of Canon’s 45mp R5 sensor. Its a bit heavy on price at $3000 but for what it is, it’s a bargain.
• Canon EF 8-15/4.0 L ★★★★☆ 2010: Zoom fisheye what a great idea. The lens performs well, a bit pricey. At 8mm you get a full circular image that leaves dark space around it. At 15 you get a fisheye that covers the whole frame.
• Canon EF 16-35/4.0 L IS ★★★★★ 2014: Canon’s first ultra wide zoom as good or better than Nikon, Nice price. Lens is significantly lighter than 2.8 model and offers IS. Exceptional optics, well corrected and sharp to the corners. Considered the sharpest ultra wide angle lens Canon ever made for EF mount.
• Canon EF 20-35/3.5-4.5 USM ★★★☆☆ 1989: Reasonable price, but optically mediocre with dramatic distortion, OK in digital age as most distortion flaws correctible in post.
• Canon EF 17-40/4.0 L ★★★★☆ 2003: Great lens, optically superb with minor distortion and solid sharpness. These are available used for good price, weather sealing.
• Canon EF 24-105/4.0 L IS ★★★★☆ 2005: Solid performer, has some distortion later fixed in Mk II, but easy correct in post.
• Canon EF 28-105/3.5-4.5 USM ★★★★☆ 1992: Classic 1990s mid range kit lens. Solid performer, lots of distortion correctable in post, not so great for film. Canon made larger and heavier 28-135 4-5.6 USM IS that was similar as well and featured image stabilization. This is really a 3 star lens but its silly low price on the used market gets it a bonus star.
• Canon EF 70-200/2.8 L IS Mark II ★★★★★ 2010: This lens replaced the original IS 70-200mm that was overdue for an upgrade. The original 70-200 IS was reputed to have inferior optics to the original 80-200/2.8 L “Magic Drainpipe.” Canon needed to make this upgrade and the results are amazing. In fact reviewers have said the the Mark III version has no optical advantage beyond some slight coating improvements. It gets the updated IS with dual modes and 5 stops correction, and images that are sharp enough for even the highest resolution cameras. Weather sealed, built like a tank, internal zoom.
• Canon EF 70-300/4-5.6 L IS ★★★★★ 2010: Optically outstanding, excellent IS system, super compact but heavy. Weather sealed.
• Canon EF 70-300/4.5-5.6 DO ★★★★☆ 2004: Well made and crazy small and light. Overpriced new, soft at long end, great price used. This lens had a retail price new for $1399 and at that price it is a two star affair, but used I see them in the $300s That is two bonus stars!
• Canon EF 80-200/2.8 L ★★★★★ 1989: The Magic Drain Pipe is truly magical. This lens optically is on par with many of its modern counterparts and delivers excellent image quality. The downside is a rather long minimum focus distance of 6 feet and the AF is a bit slow by modern standards. The lens is optically superior to both 70-200/2.8 L Mk I models. The later Mk II and III are a bit better optically and also offer better AF speed and closer focusing. You can find these originals used for $400-$500 so that makes them a tremendous value. Parts are no longer available for this lens.
• Canon EF 80-200/4.5-5.6 USM ★★★☆☆ 1992: Cheap plastic but optics fair and USM is quiet, but this USM does not have the typical full time manual focus override. Nice compact travel lens, MK II has no USM!
• Canon RF 14-35/4.0 L IS ★★★★★ 2021: Crazy wide FULL-FRAME lens. It has severe barrel distortion and vignetting, but all correctible in post. Ridiculously sharp considering the range right out to the corners, and it takes NORMAL 77mm filters!
• Canon RF 35/1.8 Macro STM ★★★★★ 2018: One of four original RF mount lenses, 1:2 macro, compact and very good optically, IS solid. Priced well at around $400.
• Canon EF-S 10-22/3.5-4.5 USM ★★★★☆ 2004: Solid performer for crop camera, quiet, decent build quality.
• Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 USM IS ★★★★★ 2006: Amazing lens, as close to “L” quality as possible for crop lens from Canon.
• Canon EF-S 55-250/4-5.6 USM IS ★★★★★ 2007: This lens is a bargain and it is optically excellent for the money. Tons of reach, great IS and pretty compact.
• Canon EF-M 22/2.0 STM ★★★★★ 2012: The pancake design is super small, lens is really sharp and well corrected, close focusing, the price makes it a five star affair as these are only $250 new and can be found for $100 used.
• Canon EF-M 28/3.5 Macro STM ★★★☆☆ 2016: Wish this was a 2.8 for the price they get. Built in ring light is cool, IS is solid. Great lens optically, but a little slow and expensive, cheapish build for the $400 price tag.
• Canon EF-M 32/1.4 STM ★★★★☆ 2018: Sharp wide open, decent Bokeh, not as good optically as 22mm but close, close focus is excellent with near macro ranges. Lens is quite a bit bigger and heavier than the 22/2.
• Canon EF-M 11-22/4-5.6 STM IS ★★★★☆ 2013: Very small and compact, optically decent, needs some post correction for distortion, but solid considering its diminutive size and reasonable price new $400.
• Canon EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6 STM IS ★★★★☆ 2012: Decent kit lens for M system, better made than the current 15-45mm although some reviews say the 15-45 is optically better.
• Canon EF-M 55-200/4-6.3 STM IS ★★★★☆ 2014: Solid lens, optically very good, cheapish build, priced a little high at around $400, but super small size is great.
• Holga 60/8 EF ★★☆☆☆ This is a fun lens adapted at factory for various mounts. Get that crappy but cool Holga look on your modern camera, Ultra cheap build, seriously its awful.
• Irix Firefly EF 11/4.0 MF ★★★★★ 2017: excellent optics, some flare issues, not bad, Firefly is cheaper build than more expensive Blackstone, optics identical. Cheaper build Firefly around $500, Premium build Blackstone around $700, if you appreciate quality builds get the Blacktone it is amazing, but optically they are identical.
• KamLan EF-M 50/1.1 MF ★★★☆☆ 2017: soft and low contrast wide open, decent metal build, lovely bokeh, super small. Mk II came out 2019 with improved wide open performance. Crazy low price new under $200! Also offered in APS/C Sony E and Micro 4/3
• Lensbaby Velvet 56/1.6 Macro Soft Focus MF ★★★★☆ 2015: Nice build quality, pretty sharp stopped down, Soft focus effect wide open, dreamy. 1:2 macro. Fun lens, a little spendy for an “effects” product. You can not “turn off” the soft effect it is tied to aperture more soft glow the wider you go at 5.6 it almost non-existent. Available in a variety of mounts and either polished aluminum or anodized black. I got the polished its awesome.
• Lomography Zenit 85/2.2 Petzval EF ★★★★☆ 2014: I love the brass barrel (its avail with black anodized for + $100, but why? The brass is so cool) swirly petzval style bokeh, a little soft but acceptable, uses Waterhouse stops, custom shapes avail. Its not cheap sells new around $700-$800.
• Metabones 0.71x Speed Booster EF-EF-M ★★★★☆ 2019: Finally! Metabones is the best. High grade optics and makes your full frame lens a 1 stop faster APS/C lens. Expensive at $479 new. This should be 5 stars but only converts exif data to f/1.4 which is annoying and requires a push button restart every time it powers up.
• Mitakon Speedmaster EF-M 35/0.95 ★★★☆☆ 2018: Nicely made and comes in sexy Tan & Black leatherette box. Soft wide open, almost unacceptable. Sharpens up nice by f/2. Fun lens but heavier and softer than 7artisans version above. Too expensive at $500 but newer versions have come out since that may be worth the $500, hard to imagine they are any better than 7artisans above. Is offered in Sony and 4/3 mounts as well.
• Samyang EF 12/2.8 ED AS NCS Fisheye MF ★★★★★ 2014: Unique fisheye design, less distortion, sharper to the corners than even the Canon L fisheye! Low price for quality, tends to sell new in the $300 range. This may be the harpist fisheye lens I have ever seen.
• Samyang EF-M 8/2.8 UMC II Fisheye MF ★★★★☆ 2014: Nice build quality, optics solid, compact design. Also available in Sony E and 4/3.
• Samyang T-Mount 800/8 Reflex MF ★★★☆☆ 2014: Decent build but perhaps a little too lightweight a bit more weight would help with stability. Optics are surprisingly good for a reflex design comparable to the 1980s Tamron SP 500/8 but not quite as sharp. Difficult to hand hold due to serious vibration even with IBIS so shoot with fast speed. No longer made but available for less than $250 on EBAY or at camera shows like PhotoFair. T-mounts available for nearly any camera ever made. Would have been 4 stars if focus ring had a longer throw. It’s hard to get accurate focus at 800mm with a lousy 90º of focus rotation.
• Sigma EF-S 18-250/3.5-6.3 Macro HSM OS ★★★★☆ 2012: Not really “macro” but focus is close, really nice build quality, optics are very good for this class of lens, will need some distortion help in post but maintains decent sharpness all the way to 250mm although it is noticeably softer at 250mm than 200mm.
• Sigma EX EF 8/4.0 Circular Fisheye ★★★☆☆ Solid lens if you can pick it up used cheap (<$400), at full retail its too pricey.
• Sony Zeiss Sonnar FE 55/1.8 ★★★★★ 2015: I only have 2 complaints about this lens and they are both minor. One: the minimum focus distance is a tad long at 20 inches; a modern 55mm lens should be able to deliver good results down to 12 inches. Two: It is a bit expensive for a 1.8 55mm. I shot with this lens on a Sony a7R II and was very impressed with the color, contrast, and sharpness. Nine blade rounded aperture ensures creamy bokeh even stopped down a bit. It is not cheap typically selling new for around $900 but it was excellent. In its defense, it delivers G master quality in a package smaller and lighter than say a 50/1.2 and notably less expensive than a G master lens. I suppose a third complaint would be that I can’t mount it to my EOS R5 😉
• Tamron SP 11-18/4.5-5.6 EF-S ★★★☆☆ 2004: OK lens actually but not a great performer, was too expensive back in the day compared to Canon lens 10-22mm which is only a little more money and much better.
• Tamron EF-S 16-300/3.5-6.3 VC PZD ★★★☆☆ 2015: Big and heavy, but hey biggest range around. Optics solid, VC is good, just too bulky for Mirrorless, for APS/C DSLR, probably your best choice. Soft at 300mm.
• Tamron EF 28-300/3.5-6.3 ★★★☆☆ early 2000s: Actually reasonable optics for the class, slow noisy focus.
• Tamron EF 28-200/3.5-5.6 LD ★★★☆☆ mid 1990s: Early “super-zoom” terrible for film, needs lots of correction post, but sharp enough for casual digital use. Slow noisy focus.
• Tamron SP EF 90/2.8 Macro 1:1 ★★★☆☆ mid-1990s: Early design cheap plastic feel, 1:1 macro, sharp and contrasty, great optics, slow noisy AF. Later versions offer improved build and focus.
• Tokina ATX 11-16/2.8 EF-S ★★★☆☆ 2008: Excellent build quality with Nikon style crinkle metal finish, top notch, Optics excellent except highly prone to flare, supposedly fixed in second gen model.
• Tokina ATX 24-200/3.5-5.6 EF ★★★★☆ 2005: Excellent considering the range and nice that it goes to 24mm where most in this class only get wide to 28mm. Nice build, slowish noisy AF. The usual distortion issues associated with super zooms. It is par focal.
• Tokina ATX 50-135/2.8 EF-S ★★★★★ 2006: excellent build quality with Nikon style crinkle metal finish, true pro grade, optics excellent, all round stud for APS/C cameras, focus not quite as snappy as Canon USMs.
• TT Artisan 50/0.95 Leica M ★★★☆☆ 2020: Great built quality, knock off of Leica Noctilux, optics, soft wide open, but otherwise respectable, would be 4 stars but too pricey at around $800 new. Offers a very glowy bokeh due to spherical aberration wide open. That is why I still have mine 😉
• Viltrox 0.71x Lens Turbo EF-EF-M ★★★★☆ 2017: First to market for EF-M full AF and EXIF data, actually solid performer at half the price of Metabones.
• Vivitar Series One 85/1.8 EF MF ★★★☆☆ 2010s: Focus is undamped and sloppy, kind of like an old Nikon AF lens in manual focus mode. It tends to flare a bit leading to soft contrast, but a value at around $125, acceptably sharp wide open.
• Zeiss Biogon ZM 35/2.0 Leica M ★★★★★ 2011: Better than the Leica, yep at 1/3 the price! Although the Leica M 35 Summicron aspherical is better corrected for distortion it is not as tack sharp in the corners as this Zeiss. This lens sells new for about $1000 and it is an excellent product. The Leica lens has a slightly better build quality in its defense.
• ZLY 900/8 reflex T-mount MF ★☆☆☆☆ 2022 (?): This Chinese manufacturer makes these lenses under a variety of names. I acquired mine in a trade and was hoping for a miracle that maybe it was as good or nearly as good as the Samyang 800/8. It is not, not even close really. Build quality is suspect and the optics are simply not sharp, even by the forgiving mirror lens standards. You can get good images from it but it is difficult and most images are unusably soft. Under no circumstances was I able to match the Samyang 800/8 performance. The lens is close to its claimed 900mm focal length showing at least a 5-7% magnification bump over the Samyang. It however is also about a 1/2 stop slower T-value than the Samyang 800. This lens is really closer to f/10. It’s worth a $100 at most.

Film Cameras:

• Busch Pressman D 4×5 ★★★★☆ 1950s: The American Linhof…sort of. Great affordable 4×5 folding field camera. The pressman has limited movements, but it does do front tilt and shift and it has a revolving back.
• Cambo SC Monorail ★★★★★ 1980s: Back in the 90s I was doing studio view camera work and needed a “real” monorail. I didn’t want to fork over the Billionaire Bling for a Sinar or Linhof since this was a small part of my workflow. I already had a Linhof Technika IV. I did want a good camera with decent lockdown and a full suite of movements. My Cambo SC did not disappoint. You can still get these very reasonably used. Graflok back accepts 4×5 inch sheet film and roll film adapters.
• Canon 7 & 7s ★★★★★ 1961: The peak of Canon’s 35mm rangefinder designs, excellent cameras with some nice features that rivaled Leica’s M3. Less “pretty” than the M cameras, but excellent none-the-less. 7s model has Cadium Cell meter that runs on battery rather than selenium cell version on 7. Ultra rare 7sz model only identified by larger rewind knob.
• Canon AE-1 ★★☆☆☆ 1976: The world’s best selling 35mm camera in it’s day, but the manual exposure control was clunky, and the build quality mediocre. 35mm
• Canon AE-1 Program ★★★☆☆ 1981: Basically an AE-1 mk II. Added full auto “program” mode and allowed compatibility with the Motor Drive MA at 4fps (nerfed from 5fps on A1). Manual mode still clunky. Also accepted interchangeable focusing screens. 35mm
• Canon AT-1 ★★★★☆ 1977: Basically an AE-1 without auto exposure, simple match needle meter, way better! 35mm.
• Canon A-1 ★★★★☆ 1979: Like the T90 that would come 7 years later the A1 was a tech masterpiece. Digital LED readout and 6 exposure modes. Oh and it even had a 5fps motor drive option! Still had the clunky manual operating like the AE-1. 35mm.
• Canon Canonet G-III QL17 ★★★★★ 1971: I still love these 35mm rangefinder leaf shutter cameras. Synch the flash at any speed. I used to carry this camera with me as my knock around camera. We didn’t have phone cameras back then, wait we didn’t have mobile phones either! The 40mm f/1.7 lens is sharp and the rangefinder is crisp. Great little camera.
• Canon EOS-1 ★★★☆☆ 1989: Canon’s first pro autofocus 35mm body. Kind of like a T90 with AF! Updated in 1994 to EOS-1n which is worth the extra money frankly over this one.
• Canon EOS A2-e ★★★★☆ 1992: Canon’s first attempt at control AF points with eye movements, it sort of worked. The A2 was the same camera with out the eye control. This was a solid backup to an EOS 1. Offer 4.5 fps shooting speed. 35mm.
• Canon F1 ★★★★☆ 1971: The F1 was a fabulous camera, well made, reliable, and every bit the comp to Nikon’s Famous F2, but never got close to the F2 in sales. 35mm.
• Canon F1n ★★★★☆ 1976: Slightly tweaked version of original F1. Definitely no reason to want original over this model other than possibly some collector value as it is the same exact camera with a few ergonomic and technical upgrades, like higher ISO sensitivity in meter, improved advance lever, and 11 other tweaks. 35mm.
• Canon New F1 ★★★★★ 1981: In my humble opinion the New F1 was better than the Nikon F3. The F3 offered TTL flash which is cool, but the Canon had a full range of mechanical speeds from 60th to 2000 sec. The Nikon was stuck at 1/80 sec without the battery. The matte black finish was sexy as hell. 35mm.
• Canon FTb ★★★★☆ 1971: Rugged and reliable manual exposure all mechanical 35mm camera. The FTb also utilized Canon’s impressive quick load system inherited from he FT-QL it replaced and also used in some of Canon’s fixed lens rangefinder models. Much better made than later AT-1.
• Canon IVsb ★★★☆☆ Late 1940s: Basically a Japanese Leica III. Clunky to use, but well made quality cameras. Takes LTM lenses. 35mm.
• Canon Sure Shot 35 ★★★★☆ 1979: This was Canon’s first “point and shoot” 35mm. It was ugly, loud… really loud, and went through batteries like crazy. It had a crude IR focus system with only a few zones so sometimes it would miss. But when it hit that 35/2.8 lens was tack sharp, seriously, RAZORS edge stuff.
• Canon Super Sure Shot ★★★★★ 1981: OK I like fast glass, I do, I really do! This Sure Shot came with a 40mm f/1.9 lens! It suffered from the same issues as the original Sure Shot noisy and annoying, and hit focus about 2/3 of time. When it did, the pictures were so sharp they would make you bleed. 35mm.
• Canon T50 ★☆☆☆☆ 1983: The first of Canon’s new “T” series cameras. This was the first Canon IL SLR to have a built-in film winder, although at lethargic 1.4 fps. It was simple, very simple, too simple. Full auto exposure ONLY so just focus and shoot. It did offer some nice styling for the era. Run away from this one unless you are just trying to collect every Canon camera or something. 35mm.
• Canon T70 ★★☆☆☆ 1984: The second T body offered the same simple design as the T50 but offered a full range of exposure control. This was essentially an AE-1 Program with a built in winder and simplistic controls. The winder in this more sophisticated version of the T50 was updated to a blistering (insert sarcastic smirk here) 0.7 fps. I’m not sure why they would reduce the speed on the more expensive camera, but it is possible there is an error on the T70 wikipedia page where I retrieved the winding speed. I do remember the camera as being sluggish on winding and noisy as well. 35mm.
• Canon T90 ★★★★★ 1986: My all time favorite FD camera body. I had a fabulous New F-1 with all the goodies, but I always went back to the T90, handling, systems, tech, it had it all. Oh and Canon brought in famed industrial designer Luigi Colani to give us a sexy futuristic look that almost every camera maker emulated in the digital SLR era. 35mm.
• Canon VT ★★★★☆ 1956: 35mm Canon rangefinder with Canon’s own design rather than Leica copy. Interesting quick winder lever underneath body, I like this camera! Uses LTM mount.
• Contax T ★★★★☆ 1984: I remember when this launched, it was so cool. It wasn’t the first camera of this type, the Olympus XA was already popular and the Minox GT line had been out as well. This was different… very different. This was an all metal camera with a beautiful polished finish and a Carl Zeiss lens. It is a rangefinder manual focus and exposure. It is super small and compact, much more so than the T2 and T3 that followed but the flash is detachable and when attached the camera is comparable in size to the later models with fixed built flash. Fixed Zeiss Sonnar 38mm 2.8 T* A bit spendy these days on the used market fetching as much 40 years later as they were new. 35mm.
• Contax T2 ★★★★☆ 1991: This was a proper ‘point and shoot’ version of the Contax T featuring autofocus and manual focus as well as auto and manual exposure. Wildy popular at the time and now seeing a resurgence in popularity with prices well above $1000 as of late 2021. Features the same 38mm Sonnar lens as its predecessor. 35mm.
• Contax T3 ★★★★☆ 2001: Pricing on this updated version of the T2 borders on grotesque and that keeps it from earning the fifth star. The camera features a redesigned Zeiss Sonnar lens 35mm f/2.8 rather than the venerable 38/2.8. The updated lens is widely purported to be sharper than its predecessor. I have not shot film through this particular camera. 35mm.
• Graflex Crown 2×3 ★★★★☆ 1960s: I love my mini Crown. You gotta get one with a roll film back though unless you want to cut your own 2×3 film sheets… yech! Small compact and if you get one with an Ektar 101mm you did GOOD! 120 roll film backs available in 6x6cm, 6x7cm, 6x9cm.
• Graflex Speed Graphic 4×5 ★★★★☆ 1950s: The only real difference between Crown Graphic and Speed Graphic models is the built in focal plane shutter on the Speed models. These make fun and inexpensive field camera. Limited to just Rise on the front standard for most models, still fun.
• Hasselblad 500C ★★★★★ 1957: This older Hasselblad was my go to studio portrait camera for years. 6x6cm on 120 film. Zeiss lenses, and a gorgeous polished aluminum finish. Damn Victor, you did good! Leaf shutter lenses so flash synched at any speed! OH and the 500C went to the MOON… literally.
• Kodak Signet 35 with Ektar 50/3.5 ★★★★★ 1951: If you follow this blog you know I have a hot and steamy love affair with this camera. That Ektar 3.5 is razor sharp, full of contrast, and all round wonderful. The camera has some Art Deco themes and you can still buy them for less than $50! The viewfinder is tiny and hard to see through but the rangefinder is a triangle and that is just too cool. 35mm.
• Kodak Bantam Special with Ektar 45/2.0 ★★★★☆ 1936: I love the Art Deco look of this amazing folder. This is an 828 film camera which means film is hard to find. Its image size is a little bigger than 35mm (28mmx40mm vs 24mmx36mm). The Ektar lens is outstanding but mine is uncoated so flare and soft contrast in tough lighting are an issue.
• Leica CL ★★★☆☆ 1973: Smaller more affordable 35mm rangefinder camera that utilizes the Leica M mount but is optimized for use with specific lenses for the camera a Leica C 40/2 and Leica C 90/4. Fun little cameras and until recently very reasonable on the used market. Made in conjunction with Minolta in Japan. 0.60x viewfinder. Not nearly as well made as a Leica M camera, nor is the focus as accurate.
• Leica IIIc & IIIg ★★★☆☆ 1940 & 1957: The IIIc was popular camera lots of them around, the IIIg was the final and most refined of the LTM Leicas. All were hard to load, clunky to use, but beautifully crafted, compact, and reliable. 35mm.
• Leica M1 ★★☆☆☆ 1959: A specialty camera with out a rangefinder. Really geared towards use with Visoflex. Not a good choice for a shooter. Low stars due to its clumsiness of use. It is a quality Leica camera in every sense just not as a user camera today. 35mm.
• Leica M2 ★★★★☆ 1957: An alternative to the Leica M3 offering a viewfinder with frame lines that support 35mm lenses. The Achilles heel for the M3 was that optical “goggles” were needed for framing on the M3 or an accessory viewfinder mounted in the camera shoe. The downside was the viewfinder had a 0.72x image magnification vs the M3’s world class 0.91x. 35mm.
• Leica M3 ★★★★★ 1954: What else can be said about the M3, changed rangefinders forever and led to the death of every competitor in the space. 0.92x viewfinder still desirable today. This is not for wide angle fans. 35mm.
• Leica M4 ★★★★☆ 1966: Perhaps the ultimate compromise between the M2 and M3. M2 did not have 50mm frame line and M3 did not have 35mm frame line. M4 said adios to googles offering 35,50,90,135 frame lines in the same 0.72x viewfinder as M2. Also ended the take up spool BS of yester-models and added a proper rewind crank along with some other tweaks. Canon’s 7 series was clearly a direct influence on the M4 design. 35mm.
• Leica M4-2 ★★★★☆ 1977: Interesting tweak to the M4 with a proper ‘hot’ shoe and motor drive capable in exchange for no more self timer. Hmm, fair trade methinks.
• Leica M4-P ★★★★★ 1981: The final tweak to the M4 and the best of the bunch. This is effectively an M4-2 with additional frame lines to support 28mm and 75mm yet still retains the 0.72x viewfinder magnification. Note you do have to search around the finder to see the edges of the 28mm frame lines. I am a huge fan of this Leica. 35mm.
• Leica M5 ★★★☆☆ 1971: Arguably the most hated and under appreciated Leica camera. The M5 took a trip through the ugly machine and consumers were not having it. Perhaps Leica’s biggest cosmetic design blunder ever. The camera is also physically larger, by an uncomfortable margin than every other Leica M series film camera ever made. It did offer some genuine updates to the viewfinder, film advance and other ergonomic features. But messing with the near perfection in form and function of the M series was a fool’s errand, quickly corrected in 1972 when Leica resumed production of the M4. 35mm.
• Leica M6 ★★★★★ 1984: This is basically a M4-P with a TTL exposure meter. All previous M bodies except M5 used external sensors in the body or a completely separate meter accessory attachment. Exposure values were definitely improved by this design and brought the camera out from under the 1960s tech barrier 😉 M6 cameras are the last all mechanical M cameras. The camera battery is only needed for the light meter. 35mm.
• Leica M6-0.85 ★★★★★ 1998: The M6 fitted with a special 0.85x viewfinder that provides a more precise focus than the 0.72x at the expense of losing the 28mm frame lines. This is the finder the M2 wished it had 😉 35mm.
• Leica M6-TTL ★★★★★ 1998: Not to be confused with TTL exposure meter this TTL designation refers to TTL flash exposure when fitted with a compatible Leica flash unit. All of the computing is done in the flash rather than camera body so this camera is still a mechanical model. Obviously battery still required for proper metering. This represents the ultimate evolution of the M series cameras and is in my opinion the best Leica M body ever made. It was offered in both 0.72x and 0.85x to satisfy both sides of the viewfinder debate 🙂 The only inhibiting factor is the buckets of gold ducats needed to buy one 🙂
• Leica M6 TTL-0.58 ★★★★☆ 2000: Leica added a 0.58x version for wide angle lovers with 28mm lines but don’t even think about shooting fast standard or tele lenses on this model unless you like that charming out of focus look 😉 Unlike the standard 0.72x M6 viewfinder the 28mm frame lines are easily seen even when wearing glasses. Seriously a little too much money for a specialized use. 35mm.
• Leica M7 ★★★★☆ 2002: I wanted to give this camera only 3 stars but I don’t want to incur the wrath of the Leicaphiles and other vocal enthusiasts. The M7 is a fine camera and is sort of like the Nikon FE versus the Nikon FM. In fact if you don’t mind its dependency on battery power, it is a five star affair. Yes, this camera is reliant on battery power to operate. It is the first Leica M camera to suffer this failing. This is where my objectivity fades to hyper subjectivity. To me the Leica M series cameras inherent value is that they are small, quiet, high quality machines that are designed to deliver high performance in nearly any and all conditions. The moment they succumbed to the electron requirements they added a nominal improvement to shutter speed accuracy and aperture priority auto exposure in exchange for the beauty and magnificence of a fully mechanical machine. They also entered into the realm of the Japanese tech giants like Sony & Canon where their ass gets swiftly beaten. Stay in your lane Leica. 35mm.
• Linhof Technika III v5 ★★★★★ 1946: The version 5 actually came out right before the Technika IV in the mid-50s. This camera has a front drop bed similar to the Technika IV whereas all other IIIs have a flat face. Great camera with excellent lockdown. Sturdy, but heavy… very heavy. 4×5 inch sheet film
• Linhof Technika IV ★★★★★ Mid-1950s: I had a IV for years and sold it… then regretted selling it and ended up with the III v5. IV has extra front standard movements and an improved design. 4×5 inch sheet film.
• Mamiya 500 DTL. ★★★☆☆ 1968: This was the entry level camera in the Mamiya line up in the late 1960s. It had shutter speed range from 1/500 down to 1 sec and BULB. The meter was basic. The camera was all mechanical and well made. It took M42 screw mount lenses. This was my first experience with a 35mm SLR when I temporarily swapped my custom skateboard with a high school friend for this camera and a 50/2 Mamiya-Sekor lens. We later swapped back and I bought a Canon AE-1.
• Mamiya 6 ★★★★★ 1950’s-60s: There were a fair number of revisions to this camera over the years it was produced. Much simpler to operate than the over complicated Zeiss Ikon models and in many cases featuring a superior lens as the Zeiss models often used simple Tessar lenses. The camera uses a unique rear film plane focusing system that moves the film rather than the lens or bellows to focus. It is super fast and shockingly precise. These are my favorite 120 folding cameras and shoot 6×6 cm on 120 film.
• Mamiya 6 ★★★★★ 1989: I loved this camera. The images were amazing and I like the square 6×6 cm on 120 film for two reasons over the 6x7cm. First I don’t mind getting a few extra shots on a roll of film 12 versus 10. But more importantly these cameras are fairly big and I don’t like turning the camera vertical for portrait shots as it is clumsy and make rangefinder focus more challenging. In all fairness if you print images in a more typical 8×10 format then you waste a fair bit more film area than you do with 6×7. 8×10 equivalent works out to 6×7.5 cm.
• Mamiya 7 ★★★★☆ 1995: This model replaced the Mamiya 6 and it gets a one star hit for not being square 😉 Totally subjective, most peeps would probably rather have the 6×7 as it is a close equation to the classic 8×10 printing format. It is a slightly but noticeably bigger camera than the previous 6. You only get 10 shots instead of 12 and you have to turn the bulkier camera on its side for portrait style images which is clumsy. in 1999 a Mamiya 7-II came out with an improved viewfinder and multiple exposure capability. 6×7 cm on 120 film.
• Mamiya C330f ★★★★☆ 1972: My first “professional” medium format camera. I went all in buying 4 lenses and got a lot of use. These are easily the most sophisticated TLRs with a massive system built around the cameras. Actually solid system with excellent close focus via a bellows extension built in. 6×6 cm on 120 film.
• Minolta Autocord ★★★★☆ 1955: These cameras were designed to compete with the Rolleicord models and did an admirable job. In my experience the taking lens in the Minolta is a bit better than the Rolleicords with Tessar lenses. These can be had for much less money than a comparable Rolliecord. Some Autocords offered features found on far more expensive Rolleiflex models. 6×6 cm on 120 film.
• Minolta CLE ★★★★☆ 1980: Minolta’s own version of their joint project with Leica on the CL. This camera features an electronically controlled shutter and aperture priority auto exposure, as well as support for wide angle with 28mm frame lines. This model is battery dependent unlike the Leica CL it is based on. It will take Leica M mount lenses as well as special Minolta Rokkor lenses for the camera such as the Rokkor 28/2.8, Rokkor 40/2, and the Rokkor 90/4. All of these lenses are multi-coated where as the Leica Summicron C 40 and Elmar C 90 are single coated. Honestly battery dependance aside, this is a better camera and lens setup than the original Leica CL. 35mm.
• Minolta XD 11 ★★★★☆ 1977: Perhaps the best 35mm film SLR Minolta ever made. (Marketed in Japan as XD and outside North America as XD 7). The last Minolta with all metal construction and a fully mechanical shutter option. 1/100th of a second was available should the battery die. This model had both shutter priority and aperture priority auto exposure modes as well as metered manual. A solid semi-pro body.
• Nikon 35Ti ★★★★★ 1993: This 35mm camera was Nikon’s answer to the luxury point and shoot Contax T2. The lens is a Nikkor 35/2.8 and it is by all accounts sharper than the 38/2.8 Sonnar in the T and T2 but about par with the later T3. Why I like this camera so much is as much about quality as pure cool styling. Honestly, all three Contax T models are more sleek than this squarish Nikon, but the top down view sells the package hard. Those analog dials instead of digital readout is like driving a vintage roadster instead of shooting pictures. One of the coolest looking top plates on any camera EVER. These still fetch King Midas money so keep that in mind.
• Nikon F2 AS ★★★★★ 1977: Still the gold standard among 35mm mechanical professional SLR cameras. I separate this model from the previous non-AI models as those non-AI cameras had a clunky lens mounting system requiring a precise alignment with the metering pin in the head. AI eliminated that. This was the last Nikon camera that could full aperture meter with non-AI lenses with the proper viewfinder. This camera also had the most modern and precise meter of any F2 camera as well as superior low light sensitivity. F2 models prior to this one get 4 stars due to the clunky lens mount. The F2 was the camera that really made Nikon the premier choice among pros shooting 35mm that they carried throughout the manual focus SLR era.
• Nikon F3 ★★★★☆ 1980: The Nikon F3 is the most enduring 35mm Pro SLR model ever released by Nikon with many variations on the camera over a span of 20 years. The F3 HP is the most common model with the HP standing for High Eyepoint. This gave the user the ability to see 100% of the viewfinder from a full inch away from the eyepiece. Great for people with eyeglasses. I never liked the funky flash mount over the rewind knob that reeked of 1960s tech. This was also the first Nikon flagship camera limited to a single mechanical speed of 1/80th sec. MD4 motor drive was able to power camera when camera battery died however. Nikon was also able to deliver 6fps with the optional MD4 motor drive unit, with just 8 AA batteries whereas rival Canon needed 12 AA batteries to power their comparable motor drive unit.
• Nikon F4 ★★★★★ 1988: Nikon’s first autofocus professional grade camera. Nikon decided to keep the legacy F mount as opposed to rival Canon’s all new fully electronic mount. But unlike Canon who abandoned the concept of a true full system camera, Nikon maintained it with the F4. Canon’s top line EOS 1 did not offer interchangeable viewfinders nor did it have any where near the depth of factory accessories. Nikon kept the F system intact although the motor drive was now built in to the camera rather than a separate purchase as with prior F models but a high speed booster pack was an option to increase shooting speed to 6 fps. No Nikon camera ever made will accept as wide a variety of Nikon F mount lenses with full functionality as the F4. This camera was rugged and sturdy perhaps more so than any other 35mm camera in the AF era. This camera was not able to perform AF as well as the Canon EOS 1 but it did everything else as good or better. A true workhorse model that can be found today at prices that are criminally low.
• Nikon FM ★★★★★ 1977: Nikon FM is a legendary mid-range camera. Lightweight, accepts motor drive, completely mechanical. Rugged and reliable. This camera helped keep Nikon in the top spot among pros because it was such a good backup to the higher end F2 and F3 bodies. 35mm
• Nikon FE ★★★★☆ 1978: A near clone of the Nikon FM but this one offers an electronically timed shutter and both manual and aperture priority auto exposure. Camera only has one mechanical speed 1/90th second. 35mm
• Nikon FM2 ★★★★★ 1982: The 35mm FM2 replaced the excellent FM in 1982. The camera featured a very impressive titanium honeycomb shutter that was so lightweight yet strong that it could produce a maximum shutter speed of 1/4000th second which was a world’s first. It also had the fastest flash sync speed of 1/200th in any focal plane shutter. In 1984 the shutter was updated to use the FE2 system that allowed for 1/250th flash synch. Fully mechanical camera only needs battery power for light meter. Shutter is delicate so careful handling is required when loading film. A very expensive FM2-T model with titanium top cover was released in 1993.
• Nikon FE2 ★★★★★ 1983: This 35mm camera replaced the excellent FE model with an improved FM2 titanium shutter offering 1/4000th second max speed and 1/250th second flash sync. The biggest advantage was the addition of TTL flash metering. The camera was limited to 1/250th second if the camera battery failed. Updated MD12 motor drive could supply power to light meter and electronic shutter if main camera battery failed.
• Olympus OM2 ★★★★★ 1976: Undeniably one of the most advanced designs ever. This was the first camera in the world to actually measure light reflecting off the film itself to determine the proper automatic exposure. It was also the precursor to TTL flash and the first camera to offer that as well. I would guess that Nikon and Canon could not work around the patents for the OTF metering but they did on the TTL flash side as both of them had TTL flash by the 1980s. The camera had an unlimited (until battery died) maximum exposure time when used in aperture priory auto. Great for long exposure night photography. 35mm.
• Olympus Pen FT ★★★★★ 1966: 35mm 1/2 frame (18x24mm) I went through a crazy 1/2 frame phase. Hey 72 exposures baby! These are solid little cameras. Important note: when holding the camera horizontal, your images are vertical. Olympus had some sexy glass for this system including a 42/1.2 60/1.5 and 70/2.0. 35mm 1/2 frame is a 1.4x crop factor.
• Pentax LX ★★★★★ 1980: The LX was designed to compete against the Canon F1 and Nikon F3. Although the LX never hit the sales marks of the competition, the camera itself was advanced and rugged and even had proper weather sealing that was absent in the top tier Canon and Nikon models of the day. This was a true system camera with interchangeable viewfinders, focus screens, and high speed motor drive options. It was small and compact like most Pentax models of the era. Aperture priority auto or manual exposure. It had TTL flash like the F3 but used a normal flash shoe rather than Nikons clunky system over the rewind knob. This camera continued in production all the way to 2001 making it one of the longest running 35mm SLR camera models in history.
• Pentax ME super ★★★☆☆ 1979: Pentax cameras were so small and sleek. The ME-super did not disappoint. Had what at the time was a cool LED graph like meter, proved less effective than classic needle. 35mm
• Pentax MX ★★★★★ 1976: This is a small 35mm SLR, really tiny and all manual, mechanical design. Pentax offered 5 fps motor drive for this model.
• Pentax Super Program ★★★☆☆ 1983: Designed perhaps to compete with Canon’s technologically advanced A1, the Super Program offers a similar range of exposure modes. Pentax chose to use more power effiecient LCD display rather than self illuminating LEDs like the A1. Light for the LCD was provided through a translucent section of the Pentaprism housing and in low light the user would switch on a manual light. Not as effective as the A1. 35mm.
• Rolliecord III Xenar 3.5 ★★★★☆ 1950: My first Rollie. Rolliecords are less expensive versions of the Rollieflex. They have very simple winding knob, less bright viewfinder, but they are still good cameras especially later models III and newer which had better lenses and were coated. Great quality starter medium format film camera. 6×6 cm on 120 film.
• Rollieflex C 3.5 Planar ★★★★★ 1956: The 3.5 Zeiss Planar is a fabulous lens, razor sharp, great contrast, an all round stud. Rollieflexes are not for the feint of wallet, they still fetch King Midas money. 6×6 cm on 120 film.
• Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 532/16 ★★★★☆ 1958: This camera is really well built and feels so precision and refined. The camera is a bit over engineered and sluggish to operate especially compared to my beloved Mamiya 6. The Zeiss tessera 80mm f/2.8 is sharp enough but not like Zeiss Planar and in fact the Zuiko 75mm on the Mamiya is every bit as good. The real issue with these Super Ikonta cameras is the weight and the flesh tearing focus wheel. The lens is focus on a tiny threaded helical rather than with the bellows and that is not a great system. The images are very solid and I can’t overstate the build quality on these, seriously top notch. 6×6 cm on 120 film.

Vintage & Classic Lenses

• Canon 50mm f/0.95 ★★★★☆ 1961: This one should have five stars just because of the date of 1961. This was a total flex at Leica. It was the worlds fastest 35mm still camera lens ever made. The lens fails to get that fifth star because one it sells for serious billionaire coin these days and honestly it is not very sharp wide open. The bokeh on this lens is delicious but can be busy at times. This lens is dubbed, “the dream lens” because of its surreal representation of the environment. What is amazing is how small it is compared to all those that came after. This may not have been a tack driver on resolution, it was none-the-less an engineering masterpiece for its era. You often see them converted to Leica M mount. The original mount was a special modified mount that only worked on Canon 7 models.
• Canon XI 50/0.75 Xray Lens ★★☆☆☆ 1960s?: Yes you read that correctly, F 0.75! That by the way is nearly a FULL STOP faster than F/1.0 (0.71 is a full stop faster than f/1) This lens was literally designed for x-ray technology and not typical cameras with film or modern digital imaging. I got an opportunity to briefly borrow one of these that had been Leica M converted. This is a fixed focus lens and on a Leica M mount it is fixed at about 4 feet. I believe you can not get infinity on any modern digital camera with the possible exception of a Nikon Z body with its shallow 16mm flange distance. That said this lens is fun. It is not sharp and the contrast is in a single word… HORRIBLE. But the presence and character is out of this world. I am a freakish nut for ultra fast lenses and this was the fastest lens I ever used. For the most part it is almost unusable and to make it usable takes a fair bit of work.The Bokeh is downright unpredictable with occasional 1960s acid trip crazy to sometimes ethereal dreaminess. OK, not gonna lie, I want one 😉
• Canon Serenar 50/1.8 LTM ★★★★★ 1951: This was the lens that launched Canon into stardom and made Leica flinch. This 50/1.8 was a much better lens than the Leica Summitar and Summars that were used at the time. Blew them away in fact, embarrassing actually. Leica was working on the Summicron and the brass in Wetzlar cracked the whip to get it out faster. In the end the Leica was only “as good” and it was still a 1/3 stop slower. Canon started strutting around like a rooster in the hen house after this lens hit the market.
• Canon Serenar 85/1.9 LTM ★★★★☆ 1951: This is one of three very similar lenses the 2.0, 1.9, and 1.8 Serenars. They are all similar and all perform quite well. The Bokeh is delicious. They are reasonably priced but these are HEAVY lenses, keep that in mind.
• Canon 35/1.8 LTM ★★★★★ 1956: Why on Earth did I sell this lens. ARRGH! Anyway this lens is a solid performer and it is so damn tiny. After kicking Leica in the nuts and Leica just standing there taking it, they started launching crazy glass. Some of it was damn good including this gem.
• Canon 50/1.8 LTM ★★★★☆ 1956: This lens is a smaller and lighter version of the legendary lens above, but the optical formula is different, and I don’t think it looks as good.
• Canon 50/1.2 LTM ★★★☆☆. 1956: Canon tried to kick Leica again while they were still wailing about the Serenar 50/1.8 which was still better and faster than the Summicron, just sayin’ anyway they went for the home run with the 50/1.2 and it was a sacrifice fly with a run scored instead. The lens is soft wide open, but excellent stopped down to f/2. The bokeh is amazing, a little busy but it can make the shot.
• Canon FL 135/2.5 ★★★★☆ 1965: This lens was fast in its day and frankly it’s fast today. The lens is tack sharp, but horrendously heavy. It also suffers from a lack of contrast in some lighting situations. There is a modernized FD version that has better coating for superior performance.
• Canon FD 7.5/5.6 Circular Fisheye ★★★☆☆ 1970s: My only real complaint about this lens was the fixed focus. That limits the distance for close focus to more than 3 feet. Other than that this lens is awesome. It features six built-in filters, Sky, Y3, 01, R1, CCA4 and CCB4 on a rotating turret, very cool. I made an image with this lens that was arguably my most famous.
• Canon FD 17/4 ★★★★☆ 1973: This one is slow but sharp and only modest distortion. I had the “new FD” version from 1979.
• Canon FD 20/2.8 ★★★★☆ 1973: Fast and sharp, low distortion, what more do you want? New FD version in 1979 optically the same.
• Canon New FD 28/2.0 ★★★★☆ 1979: Super fast and very compact. I was not a fan of the 24mm in those days so this was my go to moderate wide angle.
• Canon FD 35/2 ★★★★★ 1971: This lens was shrunk in size in 1979 with the “new FD” design but optically similar. I got so many razor sharp crisp images with this lens it had to get 5 stars.
• Canon FD 35/2.8 TS ★★★★★ 1973: Later tweaked in 1979 to new FD same glass. The first 35mm Tilt and Shift lens, another Canon first and the lens performed well.
• Canon FD 50/1.8 ★★☆☆☆ 1971: This lens is actually a good lens but wide open it is really super soft on the edges. New FD version similar but smaller in 1979.
• Canon FD 50/1.4 ★★★★☆ 1971: The 1.4 50mm a classic and Canon delivers. New FD version in 1979 smaller size. Sharp and Contrasty.
• Canon New FD 50/1.2 ★★★☆☆ 1980: This is NOT the “L” version and it is a bit soft on the corners and wide open even a bit soft in the center. Nice lens though if you can find it cheap enough. Replaced the FD 55mm 1.2. Don’t pay more than $250 because it is not a super sharp lens. The L version is much better optically.
• Canon FD 50/3.5 Macro ★★★☆☆ 1973: Solid macro 1:2 and 1:1 with 25mm tube. New FD version in 1979 is smaller. Wish Canon had matched Micro Nikkor speed at 2.8.
• Canon FD 85/1.8 ★★★★☆ 1975: Small and compact, sharp wide open in the center, lovely bokeh, Smaller New FD version in 1979.
• Canon FD 85/1.2 L ★★★★★ 1976: Original FD version called 85mm f/1.2 Aspherical, later new FD in 1980. Both outstanding optically and legendary lens even TODAY! This lens was one of those Canon “Flex” moves, just because they could, Like the 50/0.95 back in 1961. Unlike the 0.95 this lens is tack sharp and well corrected. Aspherical lens elements were hand ground!
• Canon New FD 100/2.0 ★★★★☆ 1980: Another slim compact fast lens from Canon. Sharp as can be and just performs well. It is super small compared to Nikon’s 105/1.8 and even smaller than Nikons 105/2.5.
• Canon New FD 100/4 Macro ★★★★☆ 1979: Underrated lens, a little slow at f/4 but delivers amazing results. 1:2 flat field macro 1:1 with 50mm tube.
• Canon FD 135/3.5 ★★★☆☆ 1971: This guy is small and lightweight. Reasonably sharp but should be sharper, come on f/3.5 how hard is that? Newer even smaller New FD version in 1979 has buttery smooth focus.
• Canon New FD 135/2.0 ★★★★☆ 1980: This one is not quite as razor sharp as the modern EF version, but it is in the game and these are still reasonably priced used. replaced older FD 135/2.5.
• Canon New FD 200/4.0 IF ★★★★☆ 1982: Skinny little f/4 but snappy fast to use with Canon’s rear group focus (IF). You can find these cheap. Remember some early models are not IF.
• Canon New FD 200/2.8 IF ★★★★★ 1982: This lens is easy and quick to focus and deliver amazing bokeh. Pretty sharp to even wide open. Canon made a bunch of these with regular helical focus, so look for the skinny focus ring, that’s the IF. Canon does not use “IF” nomenclature and they call the IF lenses “rear group focusing” but no nomenclature to delineate the difference.
• Canon New FD 300/2.8 L ★★★★★ 1981: The gold standard fast 300mm. Canon set the world on fire with the first fluorite glass elements in 1969 300/5.6 Fluorite and then later the amazing FD 300/2.8 Fluorite in 1976. These New FD models are well priced these days.
• Canon New FD 500/8 ★★★☆☆ 1980: A bit bulky for a reflex lens, but solid performer none-the-less. I feel like my Tamron SP 500/8 was a better lens.
• Canon New FD 35-105/3.5 ★★★★☆ 1981: This was a big bulky lens but unlike most wide to tele zooms of the time it had had a fixed maximum aperture and it was a bright f/3.5. It was not razor sharp, but it was sharp enough, tended to flare if bright light just out of frame.
• Chiyoko Super Rokkor 45/2.8 LTM ★★★★★ 1947: I love this little lens. Optically it is outstanding and it even has nice bokeh for an f/2.8 standard lens. Well made, and almost a pancake design.
• Chiyoko Super Rokkor 50/2 LTM ★★★★☆ 1947: This lens offers an extra stop of speed and the associated background separation. The lens is quite a bit heavier and bulkier than the little 45/2.8 but it is about the same size and weight as a 1950s Canon Serenar 50/1.8 or an early Summicron so it is not unwieldy. It is sharp, but not quite as much as its little brother and the lens exhibits and nice smooth and creamy bokeh but lacking some of the character of the 45mm.
• Dallmeyer Kinematograph 50/1.9 *LTM ★★★★☆ Pre WW-II: This is a vintage C mount cine lens that was converted for use on Leica 39mm screw mount bodies. The lens does not cover full frame but surprisingly it gets close enough to use with a strong vignette. APS-C works fine however. These are highly collectible and fetch prices that would make Warren Buffet say, “how much”? But I borrowed one from my good buddy Graham and will do a review later on. This lens has a lovely bokeh and old world charm. It’s a bit funky to use but it delivers a style that is hard to emulate and separates it from other lenses. It is not super sharp but sharp enough and it gets 4 stars instead of 5 due to its horrendous tendency to fetch prices well north of $3000.
• Hasselblad Zeiss Biogon C 50/4.0 ★★★★☆ 1960s: Sharp with good flat field. Distortion well controlled. The older C lenses are basically the same formula as the comparable CF lenses. The CF are all T* whereas only some C lenses are T* coated. These old lenses also have small and uncomfortable focus rings. Hasselblad sold handy detachable focus handles for them.
• Hasselblad Zeiss Planar C 80/2.8 ★★★★☆ 1960s: Classic Planar, hard to go wrong with that formula and this lens performs well. The Planar design delivers crisp and contrasty images at any f stop right out the edges. The older C lenses are basically the same formula as the comparable CF lenses. The CF are all T* whereas only some C lenses are T* coated. These old lenses also have small and uncomfortable focus rings. Hasselblad sold handy detachable focus handles for them.
• Hasselblad Zeiss Sonnar C 150/4.0 ★★★★☆ 1960s: The classic Hasse portrait lens delivers the goods. Sharp and snappy but could stand to focus a little closer. The minimum focus distance of 4.5 feet sucks for any kind of tight portrait. Of course it works with extension tubes. The older C lenses are basically the same formula as the comparable CF lenses. The CF are all T* whereas only some C lenses are T* coated. These old lenses also have small and uncomfortable focus rings. Hasselblad sold handy detachable focus handles for them.
• Kodak Ektar 127/4.7 4×5 ★★★★☆ 1940s: This classic press lens is razor sharp and full of contrast. Not a big image circle and only the newer ones had any coating. Definitely better than a Tessar.
• Kodak Ektar 101/4.5 2×3 ★★★★★ 1960s: I love this lens, it is fabulous with sharp center at f/5.6, a little soft wide open, nice bokeh if you do shoot it full aperture. The lens is just a dream to use.
• Leica 50/3.5 Elmar LTM ★★★★★ 1950s: The collapsible 50/3.5 Elmar dates back to pre-war, but mine was a 1950s model that was coated. This was the very first Leica lens I ever owned and I was amazed at how sharp and contrasty the simple design was. The lens collapsed to fit nearly flush with the body. I used to carry a Leica IIIc with this lens mounted in my back pocket while shooting with SLRs at track events, sports, and wildlife shoots.
• Leica 50/2.0 Summar LTM ★★☆☆☆ pre-1950: I bought this lens to have a bit of lens speed for my Leica bodies. This one was uncoated and was a bit soft wide open and the contrast was flat. Optically not a good lens. It did collapse like the Elmar but was a tad thicker. The bokeh was nice, very creamy with a hint of swirl.
• Leica 50/1.5 Summitar LTM ★★★★☆ post-1950: This version is coated, mine has a few cleaning marks on the glass and a slight hint of haze. It still delivers reasonable contrast but wide open this lens is soft, even a mint example will be soft at f1.5 and even a touch at f/2.0. The real juicy bit is that lovely bokeh and a bit of that ‘Leica glow’ at wide apertures.
• Leica 90/4.0 Elmar LTM ★★★☆☆ post war: This is another old school Leica lens that was made before WWII but continued production into the post war period. Mine was post war and coated. It is hard to get excited about a 90/4 but at that time in my life I couldn’t justify the cost of the 2.8 model. This lens delivered crisp and snappy images but nothing spectacular. You can’t really focus close enough on a film camera to get any real background separation but on a modern mirrorless with a macro focus adapter you can, and this lens looks good in that scenario.
• Leica M 50/2.0 Summicron V1 ★★★★★ 1954: I love the Summicron 50, although it is a peer to a much less expensive Canon Serenar 50/1.8 it is an M mount and as such can focus nearly a foot closer than the screw mount lenses. Leica’s lens build quality in this era is a bit better than Canon’s.
• Leica M 35/2.0 Summicron V1 ★★★★★ 1958: The version one is an 8 element design that is widely considered the sharpest of the four versions made through the early 1980s. The modern aspherical version is considered better on all metrics. Later versions V2, V3, V4 focused on better contrast at the expense of absolute sharpness. But in the modern world of digital cameras, sharpness trumps contrast because contrast is easier to fix in post.
• Leica CL 40/2.0 Summicron ★★★★☆ 1975: This is a special lens designed for Leica’s CL and the Minolta CLE. It will work on Leica M bodies but is designed for the CL. It is an excellent lens and works very well on modern digital cameras. An excellent value for a Leica Summicron lens as these routinely sell for 1/2 the price of the 35/2. Optically excellent.
• Leica M 50/2.0 Summicron Dual-Range ★★★★★ 1956-68: This is my favorite M mount Summicron. At first glance it looks like a vintage 50mm Summicron and it is. But this model offer the opportunity to focus twice as close as a normal M mount 50mm. It originally came with a set of ‘goggles’ that clipped on to the top of the lens and altered the rangefinder and viewfinder window to correct for parallax and couple the rangefinder for close focus. The lens remains sharp and contrasty all the way to the closest focus. On modern mirrorless cameras with close focusing adapters it can get into near macro ranges while maintaining sharp and snappy image quality. One of the most handy vintage M mount lenses you can own and they are priced well often under $1000. If you are not using it on an actual M mount camera and find one without the goggles you will spend even less.
• Leica R 90/2.8 Elmarit ★★★★☆ 1962: These are an excellent value as they routinely sell for around $300-$400. The lens is sharp and contrasty with a lovely bokeh. I used mine often with a metabones 0.71x speed booster on my EOS M cameras. Leica R lenses are rather heavy.
• Mamiya-Sekor C 55/4.5 ★★★★☆ 1970s: Solid wide angle, viewing lens is fairly flat field and the taking lens is well corrected.
• Mamiya-Sekor C 80/2.8 ★★★☆☆ 1970s: Not the best standard lens, but works fine for the daily driver. The C330 has significant bellows extension but the 80mm doesn’t perform well up close.
• Mamiya-Sekor C 135/4.5 ★★★☆☆ 1970s: Sharp enough but the 4.5 speed makes for challenging backgrounds on portraits. Difficult to get that clean separation.
• Mamiya-Sekor C 180/4.5 ★★★★☆ 1970s Sharp and contrasty. Extra length over 135 solves some of the separation issues of that lens. This was my favorite lens when I shot the C330f.
• Mamiya-Sekor C 250/6.3 ★★★☆☆ 1970s: I only shot this a few times, but when I did it served me well. I was never knocked out of my chair though.
• Mamiya-Sekor 50/2 M42 ★★★☆☆ 1968: Standard lens for Mamiya 35mm SLR cameras in 1960s and 70s. Decent optically but just an average performer. This was my first experience with a SLR when I temporarily swapped my custom skateboard with a high school friend for a Mamiya 500 DTL and this lens.
• Meyer Görlitz, Trioplan 105/3.8 6x9cm view lens ★★★★☆ 1930s: Another fabulous press lens designed for 6×9 cm cameras. This one is not coated and suffers from flat contrast but it is sharp even wide open and has a fast f/3.8 aperture. The lens produces lovely out of focus backgrounds and holds onto solid performance even at close up distances.
• Meyer-Optik Görlitz Primoplan 58/1.9 M42 ★★★★☆ 1940s-50s: Similar to amazing Zeiss Biotar 58/2 this lens has a little less bokeh motion and is a bit creamier. It does not seem to be quite as sharp in the center as the Zeiss but it’s close. These were available in several mounts including M42, Exacta, LTM, Leica M.
• Nikon Nikkor H-C 50/2 LTM ★★★★☆ 1950s: This lens is tiny, really tiny for an f/2 lens. It is much smaller than the Leica or Canon contemporary competitors. Optically solid with good sharpness and a smooth bokeh. Contrast is a bit flat but that is easy correction in post.
• Nikon Nikkor F 50/1.8 AI ★★★★☆ 1977: This is a solid lens with a professional grade build quality. These days it seems the lesser quality 50/1.8 E series sells for just as much. The E series is a sharp quality lens but lacks the sturdy build quality of the AI version. The lens is sharp wide open and tack sharp from f2.5.
• Nikon Micro-Nikkor F 105/4 AIS ★★★★☆ 1983 (1970): This lens does 1:2 macro and with the matching Nikon extension tube will produce true macro 1:1 life size. It is crisp and focuses smoothly. I had the AIS version with a very nice and adequately deep built in shade. This lens evolved through all three Nikon manual focus eras Nikon F, Nikon F AI, and Nikon F AIS.
• Nikon Nikkor F 105/2.5 AI ★★★★★ 1971: This is a legendary lens that was a staple of pro photographers for decades, literally decades. Serious portrait photographers would upgrade to the 1.8, but the 2.5 was a solid go to for portraits.
• Nikon Nikkor F 105/1.8 AIS ★★★★★ 1981: Compared to the Canon New FD 100/2.0 this lens is a monster! It is big and bulky for a measly 1/3 stop of speed. But it is well made, optically as good or better than the Canon and its 9 blade diaphragm insures smooth bokeh even stopped down a bit. These are a lot more expensive than the 2.5 but in my opinion, worth it.
• Nikon F 135/2.8 Series E ★★★★☆ 1979: The series e lenses were designed to support the less expensive line of consumer cameras Nikon launched in the late 70s and early 80s like the EM and FG. These lenses optically were excellent but the build quality was lighter and less expensive to make them competitive with lenses from Minolta, Pentax, and Canon. These are good lenses this 135 is no exception.
• Olympus Pen F 38/1.8 ★★★★☆ 1966: I bought this lens for my EOS M and M3 because it was small and lightweight and I remembered it being sharp and contrasty back in the days I shot with a Pen FT. All true. These are affordable and the 1.8 is optically better than the 40/1.4 although the 1.4 has nicer creamy bokeh.
• Olympus Pen F 40/1.4 ★★★☆☆ 1966: Me being me, had to have more speed so I sold my Pen 38/1.8 and bought the 40/1.4. This lens is not tack sharp wide open, but it is real sharp at f/2. It is a little bigger and a lot heavier than the 1.8, less sharp but better bokeh. It is quite a bit more expensive than than its cousin the 38/1.8.
• Pentax M 50/1.4 K ★★★☆☆ 1977: Pentax M K mount lenses continued a tradition of compact size and high quality that Pentax took pride in. In general these lenses are really good. The 50/1.4 however was a bit disappointing on center sharpness at full aperture and the bokeh was a bit rough. Pentax also tended to use an annoying 5 or 6 blade apertures.
• Pentax Takumar 135/2.5 K ★★☆☆☆ mid-1970s: This lens is a bit disappointing. These are rather affordable but they are not sharp nor very contrasty. The five blade aperture creates crappy pentagon bokeh highlights.
• Pentax Super-Takumar 135/2.5 U ★★★★★ 1969: The Super-Takumar lenses are multi-coated as Pentax was an early adopter of multi coating. This lens is a spectacular performer with the only bummer being the six bladed aperture.
• Rodenstock Grandagon N 90/4.5 5×7 4×5 ★★★★★ 1980s: The best large format wide angle I have ever used. I paid a lot for this lens back in the day and they are still spendy these days. But the image circle is nearly enough to cover 8×10 it is ridiculous. For use with 4×5 your camera probably can’t move enough to find the edge. It is bright and sharp with some falloff near the edge but like I said, you won’t find the edge on 4×5. It is a big and heavy lens so use on a field camera might be difficult.
• Rodenstock Geronar 210/6.8 4×5 ★★★★☆ 1990s: Geronar lenses are simple designs that offer very sharp images with great contrast. They tend to be limited in the range of movements so other lenses like the Sironar are required when making more extreme movements. For me the 210mm was a mild mover so the Geronar was perfect.
• Schneider Super Angulon 65/8.0 2×3 4×5 ★★★★☆ 1960s: This lens is better suited for 2×3 cameras or maybe a 6×12 panorama. It will cover 4×5 but not much room to move. A little falloff at the corners but the lens is sharp with decent contrast.
• Schneider Super Angulon 90/8.0 4×5 ★★★★☆ 1960s: Classic 90mm with a huge image circle allowing for aggressive camera movements. Lens has some falloff towards the edges but the giant circle means you won’t find the falloff unless you are cranking the movements hard. The f/8 makes it dark on the glass and that is just the way it is with f/8 lenses, but this one can be had for a fraction of the f/5.6 version.
• Schneider Angulon 90/6.8 2×3 ★★★★☆ 1960s: This lens is great. It is really sharp and does have enough circle to cover 4×5, barely. It is sharper than the Super Angulon. Great for using roll film back on field camera.
• Schneider Symmar S 135/5.6 Convertible 235/12 4×5 ★★★★★ 1960s: This lens is really excellent. It is a real champ. Bright and contrasty, super sharp, works good up close or at infinity. A real workhorse. The convertible part is another story at 235/12 it is dim and soft.
• Schneider Symmar S 180/5.6 Convertible 315/12 4×5 ★★★★☆ 1960s: I finally took this lens out after it sat in my 4×5 lens bag for nearly a year. I used it with both my digital adapter for my R5 and on film with a Horseman 6×12 roll film back. The big test came with my digital panorama I did and it performed very well. I feel like it is just a tad less sharp or perhaps its just a contrast reduction versus the five star Symmar S 135. I did not use it converted to 315mm and I would imagine converted it sucks just like the 135 version at 235mm 😉
• Schneider Tele-Xenar 360/5.5 4×5 ★★★☆☆ 1960s: Tele lenses sacrifice image circle for less bellows draw. Normally a 360mm lens needs about 360mm of bellows, which is quite a bit for a field camera. That is just to get infinity, you want to focus closer? Crank out another 30-50mm of bellows. Enter the Tele-Xenar and other tele designs. This lens uses optics to effectively magnify the image reducing the size of the image circle but allowing for less bellows draw. I think I remember this lens only needed 240mm at infinity. A decent optical performer but not as sharp as a standard 360mm.
• Soligor 135/1.8 MD ★★★☆☆ mid-1970s: I love wide aperture glass and so I had to have one of these monsters, right? This lens had nice bokeh and it was reasonably sharp. The lens was a little flat on contrast and tended to flare. But not a bad lens at all, perhaps a tad spendy in the used market. Was made in mounts to fit most 1970s SLRs.
• Sigma 14/2.8 FD ★★★☆☆ 1988: I bought this lens because I was too stingy to fork over the huge billionaire bucks to get the Canon FD 14/2.8 L. This Sigma was made when Sigma was trying to shake off their image as a wannabe brand name. They have shaken it off completely these days as Sigma now makes some of the best glass in the world. Back when this lens was released it was a bold move and the lens was actually sharp and contrasty. The only problem was that it flared like a sinking ship. I had to build a bulky custom lens shade to control it.
• Sigma 16/2.8 Fisheye FD ★★★★☆ early 1980s: This little fisheye was interesting. It separated into two pieces, the focus helical and mount as one and the lens assembly as the other. You could screw in 22mm filters on the back of the lens assembly and three filters were included with the lens. Clever. This fisheye was a solid lens, not tack sharp, and frankly no where near as good as what Canon and Nikon offered at the time, but it was priced well and was shockingly compact. I published many images made with it.
• Sigma 8/4.0 Fisheye Circular FD ★★★☆☆ I bought this lens because it was well priced and I could afford it compared to Canon’s 7.5mm. I ended up selling this and buying the Canon but this lens had the advantage of focusing close and it had an extra stop of speed. Optically Canon is a little better but it is a fixed focus so close ups are not possible. This lens allows you to focus on something nearly touching the lens.
• Sigma 600/8 Reflex MD ★★★☆☆ 1980s I bought this lens because I like the idea of a little more focal length and the same standard reflex speed of f/8. Unfortunately this lens just doesn’t quite hit the image quality of the Tamron SP 500/8 Reflex. It is very nice with a rotating tripod collar built in, 22mm drop in filters, and cool Canon L style off white paint job. The lens is sharp enough but suffers from strong spherical aberration.
• Tamron SP 35-80/2.8-3.8 Adaptall ★★★★★ This lens was well made, all metal construction and utilized a short zoom, high speed formula that delivered amazing images across the whole range. It also had a crazy good macro capability delivering 1:2.5 magnification! The lens was compact and utilizes Tamron Adaptall II mount system allowing a single lens to work properly on nearly any vintage SLR.
• Tamron SP 70-210/3.5 Adaptall ★★★★☆ 1983: Before the rise of the 80-200/2.8 class of lenses from the likes of Nikon and Canon, the 70-210/3.5 was king. Tamron had an interesting take on it with a zoom that allowed for a deep lens hood at 210 to become shallow at 70. Optically this was a solid lens albeit a bit long and heavy.
• Tamron SP 300/2.8 LD II IF Adaptall ★★★★☆ 1986: This was Tamron’s second attempt at a 300/2.8 the first is more collectible due to being rare, but the second is vastly superior with internal focus and a better optical formula. I have owned two different instances of this lens both were solid performers but not quite to snuff with the likes of Canon and Nikon at the time.
• Tamron SP 17/3.5 Adaptall ★★★☆☆ 1980s: I used this lens on my shift adapter for the EOS M cameras. The lens is pretty bright for a 17mm in this era, focuses close and controls aberrations pretty well. Not the sharpest knife in the drawer but solid all round.
• Tamron 28/2.5 Adaptall ★★★★☆ 1980s: Nice build quality, a little faster than most entry 28mm lenses, sharp and contrasty, solid performer for a low price.
• Tamron SP 500/8 Adaptall ★★★★★ 1980s: This was one of the best mirror-reflex lenses in its day. Sharp and contrasty for a reflex; reflex designs tend to have soft contrast by nature. The lens is also notably more compact than the Canon and Nikon equivalents and reflex lenses are designed to be compact alternatives to traditional ultra-teles. Takes 82mm screw on filters or rear mounted 30mm. I believe the optics rely on a 30mm filter present and the lens should come with a clear 30mm attached at the back.
• Tamron SP 70-150/2.8 SF Adaptall ★★★★☆ 1979: This was a unicorn lens that Tamron only made a few thousand of. The lens has three settings No Soft, Soft 1, and Soft 2 with the soften effect increasing between setting 1 and 2. The lens is razor sharp at f/2.8 with out the soften effect. Softening happens by shifting lens groups in the lens to artificially produce spherical aberration to blow out the out of focus areas into a dreamy glow. These are a bit pricey, would have been five stars if the lens were not so expensive, large, and HEAVY. They can fetch well north of $500 used.
• Tamron SP 90/2.5 Macro Adaptall ★★★★★ 1980s: Super beefy build, sharp and bright with good contrast. 1:2 macro, 1:1 with 2x converter or 45mm tube. Decent bokeh, doubles as portrait lens. Under valued in the used market, I see them routinely priced under $100. It is a very heavy lens despite its super compact size.
• Tokina 28/2.8 FD ★★★☆☆ 1982: My first wide-angle lens. This lens had a better build quality than the Canon FD New 28/2.8 and was priced substantially lower. Optically I was happy with the lens. Nothing spectacular, but solid. This is a lens you might find used today at less than $50 so a deal for sure.
• Tokina RMC 500/8 Reflex FD ★★★★☆ 1984: This is a tiny mirror lens that is significantly smaller than the compact Tamron SP mirror 500mm and half the size of camera maker reflex 500mm lenses of the same era. You give up a smidge of T-value compared to the excellent Tamron SP but the lens is much lighter and compact as well as focusing even closer inside of 5 feet! The lens is sharp for a reflex but falls short of the legendary Tamron and well short of the Zeiss Mirotar. It is the only vintage super compact mirror 500mm lens worth owning.
• Tokina 800/8 T-mount ★★★☆☆ 1970s: This lens used the T-mount system so it was a manual lens with stop down metering required. It came in two pieces, a focusing unit and the glass unit that assembled quickly by connecting the two and turning a breech lock ring to lock them together. It was a simple design with no apochromatic correction but still it delivered somewhat crisp images that were a bit soft on contrast. Physically this was a big lens. Literally three feet long.
• Vivitar Series One 70-210/3.5 Version 2 FD ★★★★★ 1980: There were two versions of this f/3.5 lens and two additional later versions that had 2.8-4 variable aperture. The version one came out in 1975 and was made by Kiron, the second version came out a few years later and was made by Tokina. The Tokina version was better although both were quite good. This lens was absolutely legendary in the late 70s and early 80s and probably drove the likes of Nikon and Canon apeshit crazy because they couldn’t touch it. The only issue was a clunky macro range but it did focus really close with a 1:2.2 reproduction ratio! These are sold super cheap these days as the legend is lost to history.
• Vivitar Series One 135/2.3 FD ★★★★☆ late-1970s: The speedy bug tends to bite me over and over. This lens was marketed under a variety of names in the 70s and 80s. It is a solid performer, bright and contrasty with decent sharpness wide open. I remember the bokeh as being a bit rough.
• Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 YC ★★★★★ 1980s: Planar designs in 50mm lenses for 35mm cameras are hard to beat. This lens is a beast and as typical for Contax Zeiss lenses, nicely made. 6 blade aperture diaphragm sucks though.
• Zeiss Biotar 58/2.0 EX ★★★★★ 1940s: I love this lens. Amazing swirly bokeh, pretty sharp and contrasty, coating is old school. Decent build but Exakta lenses are not as smooth as other lenses like those made by Leica. Nice 11 blade aperture keeps bokeh smooth stopped down. Early models uncoated post war models are coated. These can be found in several mounts including Exacta, M42, and LTM.
• Zeiss Pancolor 50/2.0 EX ★★★☆☆ 1950s: This lens is sharp and contrasty. The 5 blade aperture sucks. Bokeh is a bit rough. Cool looking black and silver striped focus and aperture rings. Was also available in M42 mount.
• Zenit Helios 58/2.0 44 M42 ★★★☆☆ 1950s: Helios was a Russian copy of the Zeiss Biotar. They nailed the bokeh as it is swirly and delicious but the lens is really soft wide open nearly unusable outside of portraits of old people. Later versions gave up some bokeh quality for a bit more sharpness, old one is still best. Don’t pay more than a $100 for one.
• Zeiss Tessar 135/4.5 4×5 ★★★☆☆ 1940s: Tessar design is simple and effective but not super contrasty. They are sharp but the soft contrast leads to softer looking images. 127mm Ektar is better choice at similar price.
• Zeiss Sonnar 180/2.8 YC ★★★★★ 1975: This is a fine lens that had two versions. I had the original 70s version later in the early 80s the “MM” version came out with additional compatibility with newer Contax bodies and a change in the focus system to a more IF style. Optically they were the same. The lens is tack sharp with excellent contrast and color rendition.