Who has the oldest lens?

JMS · 04-18-2008, 04:28 PM

It's 55mm.

woof · 04-18-2008, 04:31 PM

I have and use a c. 1953 28mm f3.5 P. Angénieux Retrofocus wide angle lens (screwmount).

Prior to 1950 there were no wide-angle lenses for the slr 35mm format, because the mirror got in the way. P. Angénieux designed his original 35mm retrofocus lens as a reversed telephoto design whose effective focal length is less than its backfocus (distance between the rear lens element and the image plane). This was in 1950. In 1953 a 28mm f3.5 version of the Retrofocus was introduced. This is the lens I have and use.

The following was taken in March of this year with that lens, though I admit that it was not on my K10D at the time. Still, I do use it occasionally on the K10D.

woof

roy · 04-18-2008, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by Fritz

Check out this site and see if you can reference any of the numbers or information on your lens. This should help you to identify about when it was made. For Takumars only of course.

fred,
thanks a lot for the link. looks like this 300mm is from 1965 w/o the tripod collar. that makes this lens 43 years old and it's in practically like new condition.. thanks again.

roy · 04-18-2008, 06:10 PM

Originally posted by madisonphotogrl

so what is the focal lenth in mm?

just take the decimal point out of ''cm'' and you will have ''mm''... 5.5cm = 55mm.. that's so easy it hurts.. i certainly wish the US would change to metric..

ryan s · 04-18-2008, 10:50 PM

My oldest is from '77, but that doesn't matter right now...

I love seeing so many pix from old lenses, as a devotee of manual lenses

little laker · 04-18-2008, 11:28 PM

For me it would be a 1966 35mm f2, and I took this pic with it yesterday.

Some members pointed out that that grain might be because the glass has yellowed, which I suppose is possible although I can't see it physically.
And I understand that I can wrap it in tinfoil, and leave it in the window for a couple of weeks, until it clears. Which would give me normal results.

However I like it just the way it is

Plus I have a 1965 300mm f4.
Which is in excellent shape, and even came with the leather pouch all for $75.00 delivered to a campsite where I was at

I took this eagle pic with it.

konraDarnok · 04-19-2008, 05:59 AM

Originally posted by little laker

And I understand that I can wrap it in tinfoil, and leave it in the window for a couple of weeks, until it clears. Which would give me normal results.

However I like it just the way it is

Nice country scene.

I was thinking about the radioactive glass the other day. If you set your white balance manually, wouldn't that compensate for any cast the (decaying) thorium doped glass might induce? (even if it is a pleasant effect with the cast, I'm just curious if manual white balance gets rid of it.)

Also does the lens give you any powers? X-ray vision or super strength as a consequence of the radiation?

fearview · 04-19-2008, 06:08 AM

for me maybe my 50mm Super-Multi-Coated MACRO-TAKUMAR f/4, from the web i read, circa 1971

a test

KjetilH · 04-19-2008, 06:23 AM

It is 5,5 cm, which is 55mm.

Proof:
5,5 cm to mm - Google Search

(Is someone just too lazy to actually multiply by ten?

)

(Okay, forgot the quote, and didn't see that the thread had reached two pages.)

Nesster · 04-19-2008, 06:56 AM

Little Laker - my 50 is also yellowed, I love the effect too. Nice pic.

Fearview - that's a 'test'!?!? I'd love to be able to make such a fantastic macro.

fearview · 04-19-2008, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by Nesster

Fearview - that's a 'test'!?!? I'd love to be able to make such a fantastic macro.

thank you. its really a test, from me, either my lens capability, and my patience.

having this lens for week, and i just knew doing macro with manual lens is really..really workout-excercise-sport. LOL.

---

k100d · 04-19-2008, 07:55 AM

Originally posted by fearview

thank you. its really a test, from me, either my lens capability, and my patience.

having this lens for week, and i just knew doing macro with manual lens is really..really workout-excercise-sport. LOL.

---

how did you get so close with the 50mm? did you use extension tubes?

fearview · 04-19-2008, 08:10 AM

Originally posted by k100d

how did you get so close with the 50mm? did you use extension tubes?

first, FYI. me do resize and crop with the photo.

but indeed, when i am taking this photo (if memory serve) it's about ten cm only from this creature.

the secret is, you have to take the pic in the morning when the sun havent set up high. at that time the dragonfly seem to have their wings still wet, and moist, with last night dew. they seem didnt fly so often.

and funyy behaviour of them, unlike another insect. they tend to get back to the previous place. so all u have to do is waiting for them to got back.

**G_Money** · 04-19-2008, 08:29 AM

1965 Super-Takumar 55mm f/1.8. But it's kind of nasty. Set to Manual, the diaphragm opens and closes slightly when the focusing ring rotates. I've had my Spotmatic since the early '80s and the thing that brought me to the Pentax digital SLRs was the promise of using my old M42 lenses. Unfortunately I didn't anticipate that the camera wouldn't stop down the aperture and I find working with the lenses in manual mode just too cumbersome. I just found it easier to buy K-mount M series lenses to replace them. I don't mind the manual metering, but working stopped down is a nuisance. I didn't feel comfortable trying to sell the 55mm with its diaphragm problem so it functions as a body cap for the Spotmatic, which functions as a paper weight. I dragged that camera everywhere for 20 years, but I've since put it out to stud.

dantuyhoa · 04-19-2008, 10:38 AM

Pentax : Auto-Takumar 55/1:1.8 . Comes with the K 1958 . This lens went down to F22 . Chrome app ring .

Graflex : Optar 101/4.5

Zeiss Ikon : Novar-Anastigmat 75/3.5 .

Of all three I think the Zeiss is the oldest ! 30's-40's ( ? ) .

04-19-2008, 06:23 AM	#24
KjetilH Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Oslo Photos: Gallery Posts: 309	It is 5,5 cm, which is 55mm. Proof: 5,5 cm to mm - Google Search (Is someone just too lazy to actually multiply by ten? ) (Okay, forgot the quote, and didn't see that the thread had reached two pages.) Last edited by KjetilH; 04-19-2008 at 07:13 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Night Australia's Oldest Casino	Yaro	Post Your Photos!	2	09-06-2010 04:56 AM
Oldest family photo	autumnsbliss	Photographic Technique	2	11-03-2009 09:32 AM
My oldest in Mont st Michel church.	bisolet	Post Your Photos!	2	07-31-2009 06:13 AM
Who has the oldest Pentax SLR ?	lesmore49	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	40	03-11-2009 11:39 PM
The 16-45 Visits The Oldest Bar In Queens, New York	Mike Bokeh	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	12-24-2007 06:44 PM

04-18-2008, 04:28 PM	#16
JMS Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 273	It's 55mm.

04-18-2008, 04:31 PM	#17
woof Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: In the present Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,870	I have and use a c. 1953 28mm f3.5 P. Angénieux Retrofocus wide angle lens (screwmount). Prior to 1950 there were no wide-angle lenses for the slr 35mm format, because the mirror got in the way. P. Angénieux designed his original 35mm retrofocus lens as a reversed telephoto design whose effective focal length is less than its backfocus (distance between the rear lens element and the image plane). This was in 1950. In 1953 a 28mm f3.5 version of the Retrofocus was introduced. This is the lens I have and use. The following was taken in March of this year with that lens, though I admit that it was not on my K10D at the time. Still, I do use it occasionally on the K10D. woof

04-18-2008, 06:01 PM	#18
roy Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: D/FW area, Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,710	Originally posted by Fritz Check out this site and see if you can reference any of the numbers or information on your lens. This should help you to identify about when it was made. For Takumars only of course. fred, thanks a lot for the link. looks like this 300mm is from 1965 w/o the tripod collar. that makes this lens 43 years old and it's in practically like new condition.. thanks again.

04-18-2008, 06:10 PM	#19
roy Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: D/FW area, Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,710	Originally posted by madisonphotogrl so what is the focal lenth in mm? just take the decimal point out of ''cm'' and you will have ''mm''... 5.5cm = 55mm.. that's so easy it hurts.. i certainly wish the US would change to metric..

04-18-2008, 10:50 PM	#20
ryan s Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,383	My oldest is from '77, but that doesn't matter right now... I love seeing so many pix from old lenses, as a devotee of manual lenses

04-18-2008, 11:28 PM	#21
little laker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,697	For me it would be a 1966 35mm f2, and I took this pic with it yesterday. Some members pointed out that that grain might be because the glass has yellowed, which I suppose is possible although I can't see it physically. And I understand that I can wrap it in tinfoil, and leave it in the window for a couple of weeks, until it clears. Which would give me normal results. However I like it just the way it is Plus I have a 1965 300mm f4. Which is in excellent shape, and even came with the leather pouch all for $75.00 delivered to a campsite where I was at I took this eagle pic with it.

04-19-2008, 05:59 AM	#22
konraDarnok Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Photos: Albums Posts: 969	Originally posted by little laker And I understand that I can wrap it in tinfoil, and leave it in the window for a couple of weeks, until it clears. Which would give me normal results. However I like it just the way it is Nice country scene. I was thinking about the radioactive glass the other day. If you set your white balance manually, wouldn't that compensate for any cast the (decaying) thorium doped glass might induce? (even if it is a pleasant effect with the cast, I'm just curious if manual white balance gets rid of it.) Also does the lens give you any powers? X-ray vision or super strength as a consequence of the radiation?

04-19-2008, 06:08 AM	#23
fearview Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Jakarta Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,067	for me maybe my 50mm Super-Multi-Coated MACRO-TAKUMAR f/4, from the web i read, circa 1971 a test

04-19-2008, 06:56 AM	#25
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Little Laker - my 50 is also yellowed, I love the effect too. Nice pic. Fearview - that's a 'test'!?!? I'd love to be able to make such a fantastic macro.

04-19-2008, 07:48 AM	#26
fearview Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Jakarta Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,067	Originally posted by Nesster Fearview - that's a 'test'!?!? I'd love to be able to make such a fantastic macro. thank you. its really a test, from me, either my lens capability, and my patience. having this lens for week, and i just knew doing macro with manual lens is really..really workout-excercise-sport. LOL. ---

04-19-2008, 07:55 AM	#27
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	Originally posted by fearview thank you. its really a test, from me, either my lens capability, and my patience. having this lens for week, and i just knew doing macro with manual lens is really..really workout-excercise-sport. LOL. --- how did you get so close with the 50mm? did you use extension tubes?

04-19-2008, 08:10 AM	#28
fearview Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Jakarta Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,067	Originally posted by k100d how did you get so close with the 50mm? did you use extension tubes? first, FYI. me do resize and crop with the photo. but indeed, when i am taking this photo (if memory serve) it's about ten cm only from this creature. the secret is, you have to take the pic in the morning when the sun havent set up high. at that time the dragonfly seem to have their wings still wet, and moist, with last night dew. they seem didnt fly so often. and funyy behaviour of them, unlike another insect. they tend to get back to the previous place. so all u have to do is waiting for them to got back.

04-19-2008, 08:29 AM	#29
G_Money Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: London, Ontario, Canada Posts: 598	1965 Super-Takumar 55mm f/1.8. But it's kind of nasty. Set to Manual, the diaphragm opens and closes slightly when the focusing ring rotates. I've had my Spotmatic since the early '80s and the thing that brought me to the Pentax digital SLRs was the promise of using my old M42 lenses. Unfortunately I didn't anticipate that the camera wouldn't stop down the aperture and I find working with the lenses in manual mode just too cumbersome. I just found it easier to buy K-mount M series lenses to replace them. I don't mind the manual metering, but working stopped down is a nuisance. I didn't feel comfortable trying to sell the 55mm with its diaphragm problem so it functions as a body cap for the Spotmatic, which functions as a paper weight. I dragged that camera everywhere for 20 years, but I've since put it out to stud.

04-19-2008, 10:38 AM	#30
dantuyhoa Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,245	Pentax : Auto-Takumar 55/1:1.8 . Comes with the K 1958 . This lens went down to F22 . Chrome app ring . Graflex : Optar 101/4.5 Zeiss Ikon : Novar-Anastigmat 75/3.5 . Of all three I think the Zeiss is the oldest ! 30's-40's ( ? ) .