[Jeff Lopez]

If you had the resources to reboot a old lens provider, what would it be?
Of course , it would have to provide lens 2017 specs..

Vivitar( I know they sourced, but they also provided its own designs),
Soligor, Makinon,Itorex,Sun,etc?

[lytrytyr]

I'm confused by the question.

How would a vintage lens provide 2017 specs?

Do you mean an old optical formula,
but with new coatings and baffles to eliminate stray light?

[photoptimist]

It depends on how "2017" you want to be. If it's a simple reboot that simply adds better coatings (better flare resistance but no change in sharpness, distortions, aberrations, aperture, etc.) to the old lens then it will be easier. But if you want better optical performance or to add AF, then the only thing an old lens provider can offer is the brand name.

You might do a few searches on eBay to see which of the old third-party lens makers are popular or holding value. Then you'd need to find who owns the trademarks or any remaining assets and negotiate with them.

Or you could look for expired lens patents by your favorite third party, hire an optical engineer to check/tweak the design a bit, and find a contract manufacturer to build them. Instead of trying to buy/license the brand name, you could just make up your own brand name for rebooted lenses (eg., Rebootogon, Chronoplan, Classitar, etc.)


Good luck!

[Jeff Lopez]

I'm confused by the question.

How would a vintage lens provide 2017 specs?

Do you mean an old optical formula,
but with new coatings and baffles to eliminate stray light?

I meant like if for example Soligor decided to remake lens for current dslrs with its trademark coatings and stuff..imagine a Vivitar Series 1 design with at least screwdrive built in

[pathdoc]

LOL "Rebootogon".

Otherwise known as "Lomography + Kickstarter". Say what you like about them, they do bring out some interesting stuff. I wonder if they would ever do a Takumar reboot - it might be interesting to see some of those old auto-Taks or Takumar Presets brought back as new builds. A tight rein might be needed to keep Lomo from injecting any of their funky hipster influence, though.

Half the fun of these old lenses was the way they handled (or rather, didn't handle) flare and contrast issues - put HD coatings on them and their character might change completely. What you're really after, I think, is old designs newly built to eliminate all the fungus and haze issues the originals bring with them (oily aperture blades can either be fixed at CLA or don't count for presets unless they're so sticky they fail to move at all).

[Jeff Lopez]

Yea, like that..all metal bodies, perfect focusing and aperture rings, not like these plastic rings that tend to stick a lot, nice vintage bokeh, metal mounts, etc.
Right now I have this Pentax M 40-80 Macro 2.8 in my hand and I was wondering if this thing had a PLM, and built in hood, Sigma wouldnt stand a chance against it..

[tvdtvdtvd]

I believe the OP is asking:

Which historic lens manufacturer would you like to see return with the production of modern lenses?

Yea, like that..all metal bodies, perfect focusing and aperture rings, not like these plastic rings that tend to stick a lot, nice vintage bokeh

Or maybe not. Those don't sound like modern, (2017), specs.

So the question is; which historic lens manufacturer would you like to see return to production making lenses with vintage build,
vintage optics AND modern coatings(*)?

* I think

[tvdtvdtvd]

Soligor decided to remake lens for current dslrs with its trademark coatings and stuff

Whoops, missed that bit.

Correction, the question is:

Which historic lens manufacturer would you like to see return to production making lenses with vintage build,
vintage optics, vintage coatings AND auto focus(*)?

* I think

---------- Post added 04-13-2017 at 01:34 PM ----------

You can have the AF, or you can have the well-damped, fine-threaded "perfect" focus helicals. The two are mutually exclusive. Pretty much everything else is describing the FA and DA (without aperture ring) Limited series lenses.

That is my dream lens in a nutshell, physics be damned. You could even forego the modern optical design, though
modern coatings would be nice.

Come on, don't tell me it can't be done; science it!

[Skodadriver]

Well I will try this suggestion;
Tamron to make a modern adaptall SP lens, maybe the 60-300mm, (but would like with better coatings, better made optics and of course a ubiquitous AF adaptall mount enabling use on any DSLR. Especially Pentax!
Wishful thinking.....but could it be done?

[wombat2go]

Right now I have this Pentax M 40-80 Macro 2.8 in my hand and I was wondering if this thing had a PLM, and built in hood,

You can use the plastic -M 49mm hood labelled "SMC Pentax 1:2.8~4 100mm"
On the Pentax MX the vignet at 40mm just grazes the corner and is not apparent beyond about 42mm

[stevebrot]

Which historic lens manufacturer would you like to see return to production making lenses with vintage build,
vintage optics, vintage coatings AND auto focus(*)?

Ha! Ha!

I believe that all quality manufacturers that supported AF are still in business.


Steve

[Jeff Lopez]

I believe the OP is asking:

Which historic lens manufacturer would you like to see return with the production of modern lenses?



Or maybe not. Those don't sound like modern, (2017), specs.

So the question is; which historic lens manufacturer would you like to see return to production making lenses with vintage build,
vintage optics AND modern coatings(*)?

* I think

This is exactly the question..Thanks!

[UncleVanya]

Yea, like that..all metal bodies, perfect focusing and aperture rings, not like these plastic rings that tend to stick a lot, nice vintage bokeh, metal mounts, etc.
Right now I have this Pentax M 40-80 Macro 2.8 in my hand and I was wondering if this thing had a PLM, and built in hood, Sigma wouldnt stand a chance against it..

Plm is only usable with very lightweight focusing elements per Pentax. The cost of that design slightly moderized might make your heart skip a beat. The large manual focus throw is also contraindicated. It would mean very slow focus speeds at the very least.

[Jeff Lopez]

See, now were thinking!
Uncle, that would be limiting, but lets suppose we discard the af speed for now, lets create a lens for purposes that Pentax excels, like for portrait and landscapes.
What DC proposed is a very possible solution, its been done before.
Lets say hmm Kiron came out with a 16-75mm f2.8 macro,Kiron glass, HD muticoated, knurled rings like the old Takumars, all metal body, internal focus like Tamron, and a third party price.
That would be nice..

[tvdtvdtvd]

Modern optics, modern coatings, vintage barrels, no AF required; that would be ideal for so many designs. I suppose Samyang, Irix
and other third parties making modern MF lenses potentially qualify, though I'd still be keen for an updated day SuperTak or K series
prime with modern optics and coatings.

For auto focus, the FA/DA Limited builds are about as near to perfection as I can imagine.

I have very few plastic barreled lenses in my collection. No matter how good the glass, no matter how expensive, they all feel,
very cheap and wanting in my hands.