Which 'old' lenses are as good as the 'new' lenses?

[Bob Gentile]

"... SRV... played that same old beat to crap guitar, had that same exact SRV signature sound... I just don't hear Hendrix being replicated by any guitarist today... Carlos Santana... always had that signature sound from the 60's/70's..."

SRV, Hendrix, Santana, et al., would have their signature sounds no matter what guitar/amp combo they used (within reason). Their "sound" comes from their hands, not their equipment. SRV, playing through Carlos's rig, would still sound like SRV -- not Carlos.

Same with photographers, except it comes from their eyes, not their equipment.

All my opinion of course...

[erie patsellis]

... but if I bid early on some lens on ebay, it will invariable go for several times my "max reasonable price"!

There are two more important secrets:

Most of the "great pictures" were taken with lenses which today would definitely be "substandard". Like most of Ansel Adams' pictures...

Some old lenses have "personalities", so that for some subjects they are actually better than any new Super XX Rally GT.

and a third one as well for good measure: For the price of one brand new 210mm SXXRGT you can get at least five old 210mm's of wildly varying characters. And money left over for enough film to try them all out, and sell the ones you don't like on ebay.

And I'll add, made with cameras that, by today's standards, are "worthless unless that's all you can afford, but you'll want to upgrade".

Amazingly, I don't get what part of dark box with lens at one end and film at another is responsible for this attitude. That (oversimplified, of course) is what it boils down to.


erie

[Nick_3536]

And I'll add, made with cameras that, by today's standards, are "worthless unless that's all you can afford, but you'll want to upgrade".

All true but

50-70 years ago the cameras and lenses they were using were new or at least newish. If they didn't like the camera they would have had it modified.

Today the sample variation on a 50 year old camera or lens can be pretty wide.

Throw in different needs and it gets worse.

Only way to know if a lens fills the need is to stick it on a camera and take a photograph.

[Rodney Polden]

Thanks for all the interesting opinions on this thread. One comment by Bob Salomon of HP Marketing regarding Rodenstock Apo Sironar S lenses caught my eye: "Go try an Apo Sironar S vs. an older lens or most modern ones. Under the same conditions with the same subject with the same processing and the same lighting and the same film. Then you won't have to ask this question."
That comment, together with the later reference to Chris Perez' & Kerry Thalmann's valuable lens-testing work (http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html) prompted me to see what results showed up for them, when they did exactly that task on numerous lenses.
I had read so many opinions re the Sironar S versions while I was learning about various lenses, that I was really surprised to see that the Apo Sironar S had actually come in with results sometimes above, sometimes equal AND SOMETIMES BELOW a variety of others available, including the cheaper Apo Sironar N, Fuji NSW, Sironar N, Apo Symmar, Symmar S, Apo Lanthar, Geronar..... the list goes on.
Now of course, this is only one set of tests, and it comes with caveats and provisos concerning comparisons of one lens with another. However, in the absence of any other similarly comprehensive review of this many lenses, it seems foolhardy to ignore the numbers, and waste all that careful and intensive testing that Chris P. and Kerry T. worked long and hard over.
I guess in the end it shows that there are many fine lenses out there, of all ages and in quite a wide price range. Maybe the actual resolving characteristics of the lens that's in your hand, rather than either a particular manufacturer, a particular lens design or a particular date of manufacture, is the detail for us to focus one. As the lens tests show, there are good and not-so-good examples of great designs from great manufacturers, even when they're doing all the quality control they can. When one lens gives 76 lppm, and the adjacent one off the assembly line gives 54 lppm, it's time to test a dozen examples before buying!

[Glenn Thoreson]

Erie, being the bottom feeding old grouch that I am, I don't think you're over simplifying anything. All the old time "idols" of the photographic community made famous photographs with what is now considered by some to be nothing more than doorstops. I say -- doorstops forever!

[Dan Fromm]

Please, Glenn, doorstops are too big and heavy to carry far. Paperweights forever!

[erie patsellis]

Oh, I'd have to disagree Glenn, those old worthless cameras, geez, these people should just give them away....(ulterior motives, nope...)


erie

[archivue]

Which 'old' lenses are as good as the 'new' lense ?

Iv'e bought two second hand apo sironar S 150 and 240, and they are as good as the new ones ;-)

[archivue]

While my xenar 150 is very sharp, the apo sironar S is as sharp but with a bigger IC, and better coating.

If you compare two pics made with this lenses (no movement, good light, F22, and the sun in your back, you won't see a big difference... but when you need movements, or if you shoot with a light in the scene...

[Shen45]

Which 'old' lenses are as good as the 'new' lense ?

Iv'e bought two second hand apo sironar S 150 and 240, and they are as good as the new ones ;-)

You do need to define your version of "as good". If it is pure sharpness probably as has been indicated most modern glass will be better than just about any older lenses in that sense. I can take photographs with very old Rapid Rectilinears that viewed from a correct viewing distance will have 100% more character and the appearance of detail that makes modern super sharp glass seem clinical and flat. However both images viewed apart and on their own merits will be excellent images.

If I was still shooting products I doubt I would use a Petzval from the late 1800's, but if the shoot demanded something unusual in that sense I would choose the lens that performed best based on the requirements of the end shot regardless of technical specs.

I have some of the old lenses used by photographers at the turn of the 1900's but I cannot produce work that is anywhere near as pleasing as they did, it is not just the lens. I wish it was