Rangefinderforum.com

Rangefinderforum.com (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/index.php)
-   Photography General Interest (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=110)
-   -   Your cheapest/most expensive combo (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=168631)

Huss 05-30-2019 21:11

Your cheapest/most expensive combo
 
Just picked up this perfect condition Nikon F75 for $8.
I put a Sigma Art 50 1.4 lens on it for my entry into the cheapest/most expensive combo:



(yeah I could have put a Zeiss ZF.2 lens on it, but this baby deserves an AF lens!)

Watchoo got? I'm figuring a winner would be some Soviet ltm body w/ a limited edition ltm Summilux... Or is someone out there shooting a Kiev 19 with a Zeiss Otus?!

Archiver 05-30-2019 22:41

This is difficult because I, uhhh, don't own too many cheap camera bodies :D

The cheapest cameras I own are point and shoots like the Olympus Trip and 110 cassette cameras, so the most expensive combination would be to load them with Portra or something more expensive.

The cheapest bodies I own (least expensive) are my Dad's old SLR bodies, the wonderful Pentax ME and Minolta SR-T. I've actually thought about buying some modern Zeiss PK mount lenses for the ME; using something new and lovely on a near-mint late 70s camera would be super cool.

pyeh 05-30-2019 23:12

Me too. Through a long history of injudicious acquisitions I have no cheap camera bodies. I do have a free Jupiter 8 though that was thrown in with a body I bought, so I could reverse the formula and have a cheap lens on an expensive body.

kiemchacsu 05-31-2019 00:46

I do not have cheap bodies camera at the moment either. only Leica and Rolleiflex
I used to have a FM2N but I guess that doesnt fit the criteria in the OP

santino 05-31-2019 02:52

That would be my yashica fx 7 (10 euros) with my c/y zeiss lenses.

zuiko85 05-31-2019 05:37

Mine would be a Sears KS500 (Ricoh KR5) with the standard 50 f2. Picked up at a camera show for $5 and it even had good meter batteries.
A pleasant little SLR, easy to focus, not too loud, fairly light weight and fully mechanical so it will operate even with dead or no batteries.
I quite like it. If any company has the courage to produce a new 35mm SLR today they could do a lot worse than just copy this camera but increase the top shutter speed from 1/500 to 1/1000 and include a DoF preview feature. Those are the only changes I’d make.

zuiko85 05-31-2019 07:26

Ah, I see I misunderstood your original premise. Must learn to read carefully.
Well...I just cannot think of any cheap/expensive (body/lens) combos I would have. Pretty much a bottom feeder all the way.
Except possibly in reverse. I have a Leica M4-2 and have mounted a 28mm f8, two element plastic lens into a body cap, fixed at infinity. The lens came from a plastic 35mm labeled Bell & Howell (you know the type) picked up in a thrift store for $2, so that might qualify.

filmtwit 05-31-2019 07:34

Cheapist - Leica CL with a busted meter for a $100, I think I then ran a 18mm f4 zeiss zm on in for about a year.

taemo 05-31-2019 07:46

couple of years ago.. M240 with a Jupiter 8 lens

aizan 05-31-2019 08:37

Leica MP and a Canon 28/2.8 LTM works out to a 13:1 ratio, and I was thinking about getting a Voigtlander 125/2.5 APO-Lanthar SL for the Canon EOS 600. That would be around a 75:1 ratio.

Takkun 05-31-2019 10:33

Put a D850 through a few tests, and wanted to try out a wide-angle; borrowed a bog standard 18-55 from a relative. Didn't really remember that a DX lens is going to be cropped anyway, but used it to illustrate to a relative I'm teaching photography to that an 18mm DX is not the same as an 18 full frame!

Brother traded up from a D50 to something newer, and to test functionality before finding a home for it, popped on an 85/1.4. That little focus motor was trying its hardest, but pictures looked good now as then.

Other than that, like many, cheap vintage LTMs on a new digital body.

css9450 05-31-2019 10:58

I have a Kmart "Focal" 28mm M42 lens; I've used it on my a6000 digital and my CL film camera (the latter requires two adapters! :eek:) but I don't really have anything terribly expensive I can shoot it on. But for $12, its a lens that is overpriced by almost ANY camera!

ktmrider 05-31-2019 10:59

Cheapest is a chrome Nikon F paired with either the 55f3.5 Micro Nikkor or 50 f1..4 Nikkor while the most expensive is a Leica MP240 paired with 50 Summicron.

Chriscrawfordphoto 05-31-2019 11:12

Huss,


You and many others here are using expensive lenses on cheap cameras. My combo is the opposite. I have an Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark II, a $1700 body, that I bought new a few months ago that I am using quite a lot with a Panasonic 45-150mm f4-5.6 zoom that cost me just $150 new.


I'd love the 40-150mm f2.8 Olympus Pro lens, but its more than I can afford now, and it is so big and heavy that I wouldn't be able to keep it in my everyday carry bag. The cheap Panasonic is TINY and light and very sharp, even wide open. It really only has one flaw: it vignettes a lot unless stopped down to f8 on the wide end or f11 on the long end.







I shot this with the Panasonic 45-150mm at the 150mm zoom setting, ISO-3200, 1/20 at f9 handheld with the Olympus Pen-F (IBIS is awesome! handheld 1/20 with a lens that is like a 300mm on fullframe.)







I shot this one with the Panasonic 45-150mm at the 45mm zoom setting, ISO-3200, handheld at 1/15, wide open at f4 on the OM-D E-M1 mark II.

narsuitus 05-31-2019 11:15

Decades ago, I purchased a brand new Nikon EM for $243.50. Three years ago, I purchased a used Nikon EM for $23. The EM is my cheapest Nikon body that accepts F-mount lenses.

My most expensive F-mount lens is a 500mm f/4 Nikkor.

I have never needed to mount the 500mm on the EM but if I did, it would be my cheapest/most expensive combo.


Nikkor 500mm Lens by Narsuitus, on Flickr

kxl 05-31-2019 11:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huss (Post 2890868)
Just picked up this perfect condition Nikon F75 for $8.
I put a Sigma Art 50 1.4 lens on it for my entry into the cheapest/most expensive combo:



(yeah I could have put a Zeiss ZF.2 lens on it, but this baby deserves an AF lens!)

Watchoo got? I'm figuring a winner would be some Soviet ltm body w/ a limited edition ltm Summilux... Or is someone out there shooting a Kiev 19 with a Zeiss Otus?!

I have the same combo. In fact, the reason I bought the cheap F75 was to shoot my Sigma ART lenses (24, 35, 50 and 24-105) on a film body. The F75 is definitely my cheapest body. My most expensive lens would be my Nikon 70-200mm/2.8.

B-9 05-31-2019 11:32

Im all cheap.

50$ 50/1.8 MKI on a 50$ EOS 1

Otherwise it was probably the M8 with a USER Nickel Elmar. Camera cost me atleast 12 times what the lens did. Really was a great combo for me.

Phil_F_NM 05-31-2019 12:11

This is an interesting idea.
Maybe a free Nikon FM with an 85mm f/1.4 AIS. I don't own either of those anymore but that was probably the greatest disparity. Nowadays it could be a free Nikon FA with 50/1.2.
Or my F2 with pre-AI 5cm f/2 Nikkor H. The lens was almost free.
My Nagaoka 4x5 cost me something significant plus a lot of work refitting a new bellows. My Kodak meniscus lens in ball bearing shutter cost me about $3 I think.
I could go on...
Phil Forrest

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

zuiko85 05-31-2019 12:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM (Post 2891016)
This is an interesting idea.
Maybe a free Nikon FM with an 85mm f/1.4 AIS. I don't own either of those anymore but that was probably the greatest disparity. Nowadays it could be a free Nikon FA with 50/1.2.
Or my F2 with pre-AI 5cm f/2 Nikkor H. The lens was almost free.
My Nagaoka 4x5 cost me something significant plus a lot of work refitting a new bellows. My Kodak meniscus lens in ball bearing shutter cost me about $3 I think.
I could go on...
Phil Forrest

Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

Phil, I'd be interested to see how that Kodak lens does on 4X5. I'm of the "If I can mount it I'll shoot it." school.

webOSUser 05-31-2019 12:34

A free Nikon E Series 50mm on my Nikon D750.

The lens works well enough.

Steve W

Huss 05-31-2019 14:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by kxl (Post 2890999)
I have the same combo. In fact, the reason I bought the cheap F75 was to shoot my Sigma ART lenses (24, 35, 50 and 35-105) on a film body. The F75 is definitely my cheapest body. My most expensive lens would be my Nikon 70-200mm/2.8.

I'm kinda diggin the F75. It is actually really nice with a 50 1.8g which is feather light as the camera. But i noticed the Art lens focuses much quicker.

Huss 05-31-2019 14:22

Ok, switching it around, cheap lens on big ticket body. Minox lens taken off dead Minox and glued into a plastic LTM mount stuck onto a Nikon Z7:



This lens is actually really decent!

kxl 05-31-2019 16:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huss (Post 2891046)
I'm kinda diggin the F75. It is actually really nice with a 50 1.8g which is feather light as the camera. But i noticed the Art lens focuses much quicker.

Same here. When I want a lightweight cheap/cheap combo, I use an 18-55 DX lens - works perfectly from 24-55mm.

cary 05-31-2019 16:25

Mint minolta SR-1s and a 28mm f3.5 MC Rokkor for $30.

Ko.Fe. 05-31-2019 17:15

EOS 300, new for 200$ in nineties.
Three current models of L zooms works well with it.

M-E works with m39 close up ring and any Rigid 50mm Industar.

nickthetasmaniac 05-31-2019 17:26

M2 (~$1000aud) + adapted Super Takumar 28/f3.5 (~$50aud)

Zone focus street dream :)

Phil_F_NM 05-31-2019 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by zuiko85 (Post 2891021)
Phil, I'd be interested to see how that Kodak lens does on 4X5. I'm of the "If I can mount it I'll shoot it." school.



I am 99% sure I shot this with the aforementioned lens. It was a really bright day and I stopped the lens down all the way I think, which caused the less than sharp image. This negative holder also suffers from a light leak at the felt where the dark slide goes. Aside from having low contrast due to no coating and a bit of veiling flare, this lens is extraordinary. 2 elements sitting inside the most reliable internally governed shutter probably ever made. I got it from a ragged Kodak Autographic 3A I bought in the early 2000s and used the body to create a superwide panoramic camera out of. I chucked the lens in a rubbermaid tote for about 10 years and dug it out when I started playing with it on the end of a sacrificed junk push-pull zoom hanging off my Nikon D3.
At about 2 stops from wide open it rivals what my 180mm f/5.6 EBC Fujinon W can do, but just doesn't have the movement. At infinity, the lens will vignette gently, leaving black corners. I think it's just about perfect for portraits at portrait distances and other things within about 5 yards. I can close this lens up in my field camera, which I can't do with any other LF optic I own, so the lens you have with you is a far better shooter than the lens you left at home.

Phil Forrest

bayernfan 05-31-2019 19:41

A $35 M42 35/3.5 Super-Takumar on an M240. Easily the best IQ/$ of any lens I own, the Minotar in the Minox GT is a close second.

Archiver 06-01-2019 00:46

Oh yes! If we're talking about expensive bodies and cheaper lenses, then I can do that. I've sometimes shot my Leica M9 with a fairly old Canon P 50mm f1.8 with infinity lock. Surprisingly nice combination. The lens was about $200 or so?


I'm going to be using a Helios 44-M, which I bought for $70 AUD, on my Panasonic GH4 ($1500) for video work. Should be fun!

zuiko85 06-01-2019 11:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM (Post 2891111)


I am 99% sure I shot this with the aforementioned lens. It was a really bright day and I stopped the lens down all the way I think, which caused the less than sharp image. This negative holder also suffers from a light leak at the felt where the dark slide goes. Aside from having low contrast due to no coating and a bit of veiling flare, this lens is extraordinary. 2 elements sitting inside the most reliable internally governed shutter probably ever made. I got it from a ragged Kodak Autographic 3A I bought in the early 2000s and used the body to create a superwide panoramic camera out of. I chucked the lens in a rubbermaid tote for about 10 years and dug it out when I started playing with it on the end of a sacrificed junk push-pull zoom hanging off my Nikon D3.
At about 2 stops from wide open it rivals what my 180mm f/5.6 EBC Fujinon W can do, but just doesn't have the movement. At infinity, the lens will vignette gently, leaving black corners. I think it's just about perfect for portraits at portrait distances and other things within about 5 yards. I can close this lens up in my field camera, which I can't do with any other LF optic I own, so the lens you have with you is a far better shooter than the lens you left at home.

Phil Forrest

Thanks, that's a nice rendering.
I'm rigging a +5 (200mm) series 6 close up lens to my 4X5 and now waiting for a day to get out and test it. I have waterhouse stops from f16 to f64 to try out with it. On the GG f16 is quite soft and the corners are really soft. At f64 the GG is just too dark to see much so I'll focus at f16 and then shoot at f64.

David Hughes 06-03-2019 09:41

This is the cheapest lens I've used on dear body, so far, although I had two Industar 26's from memory that I got for a pound the pair and used them as well...





Regards, David

raydm6 06-03-2019 11:28


Leica M6 | Winder-M | Finney Pinhole Body Cap f/128 @30mm
by rdc154, on Flickr

capitalK 06-03-2019 11:39

I have been loaned an M10-P for a few days, I'll attach my Industar-61 when I get home. :P

Gabriel M.A. 06-03-2019 11:43

I can't mount my 50mm Summilux on my Kiev! :D

Huss 06-03-2019 11:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabriel M.A. (Post 2891562)
I can't mount my 50mm Summilux on my Kiev! :D

Youíre not trying hard enough

Huss 06-03-2019 11:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by raydm6 (Post 2891559)

Let’s see some pics taken w that lump! Seems awfully large opening for a pinhole lens

raydm6 06-03-2019 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huss (Post 2891565)
Letís see some pics taken w that lump! Seems awfully large opening for a pinhole lens


Lol... :)



Rear View by rdc154, on Flickr

On my wall (Ok i took it down for this carpet shot - too many reflections)

Framed Pinhole Image - Leica M6 | Finney Pinhole Body Cap f/128 @30mm
by rdc154, on Flickr

raydm6 06-03-2019 12:06

The angle is misleading. Here is the body cap:



Kevin Finney Pinhole Body Cap
by rdc154, on Flickr

raydm6 06-03-2019 12:31

I have one of his rare 4x5 pinhole/zone-plate field cameras. Shot film with a Polaroid 545i holder in the past. Hope the film comes back some day. I could shoot 4x5 negatives but too lazy at the moment to buy backs and develop etc...


Kevin Finney 4x5 Pinhole/Zoneplate Field Camera by rdc154, on Flickr

Huss 06-03-2019 14:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by raydm6 (Post 2891570)
The angle is misleading. Here is the body cap:



Kevin Finney Pinhole Body Cap
by rdc154, on Flickr


[quote=raydm6;2891569]Lol... :)



Rear View by rdc154

On my wall (Ok i took it down for this carpet shot - too many reflections)
[url="https://flic.kr/p/2g8fLo1"]



That is so good! Thanks for posting.
Zeiss shmeiss - all u need is a pinhole!


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 19:48.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.