[Jome]

First LBA for 2021:

A Pentax 18-270 with a Lowepro 1W case for 50$ shipped
The 18-270 was sold as 'defect' as there was some cleaning to do. Was 'repaired' in 2 minutes with a simple cleaning.

---

Last edited by Jome; 03-04-2021 at 12:38 AM.

[Jome]

Second LBA for 2021:

a Tamron PKA adapter that was attached to a 'tele' for 37$ (shipping included).

That 'tele' is a Tamron 19AH and the contacts of the adapter were not working. After a slight cleaning, works perfectly.

[D1N0]

New arrival from Japan Would have been cheap if the yen had behaved and stayed low, but it didn't so 17 euro's mark up from customs and handling. Annoyingly I saw another one go for 1300 yen less a few days after I got this one. Glass is clean except for minor haze on the rear element. Some people think this is the same lens as the Auto-Takumar 55mm 1:2. It isn't.

[stevebrot]

Second LBA for 2021:

a Tamron PKA adapter that was attached to a 'tele' for 37$ (shipping included).

That 'tele' is a Tamron 19AH and the contacts of the adapter were not working. After a slight cleaning, works perfectly.

Wow! Deal of the day! The 19AH looks to be in good shape. I like mine.


Steve

[stevebrot]

I have the Tokina version of this lens in M/SR mount (which I think is for Minolta). Focus and aperture rings are smooth and the glass looks crystal clean, but I can't mount it onto any of my camera's. Would it be worth putting on Ebay or here?

Yes, the proper name for the manual focus Minolta mount is SR. The mount has three major variants (Pre-MC, MC, and MD with sub-variants of each) and is widely forward/backward compatible through their range of cameras with various differences related to exposure metering/automation support. The Wikipedia article is help helpful:

Minolta SR-mount - Wikipedia

Given its appearance, your lens is probably MD (supports Av, Tv, and P) and given the example photos posted to Flickr by @Marcus Rowland; the lens is probably very good to shoot with.

Mitsuki (Tokina) 75-260 f4.5 | Flickr


Steve

[luftfluss]

Second LBA for 2021:

a Tamron PKA adapter that was attached to a 'tele' for 37$ (shipping included).

That 'tele' is a Tamron 19AH and the contacts of the adapter were not working. After a slight cleaning, works perfectly.

That's a wonderful deal. The 19AH is, IMO, a very good lens.

[ivanvernon]

My latest acquisition is a vaccination for the Covid-19 virus, and I get a second shot three weeks from now.

---

Last edited by Unregistered User 8; 04-04-2021 at 02:31 AM. Reason: political title

[Gary H Perth]

M42 Telephotos

Latest tele acquisitions - I have not yet posted with AusMU, so does not count until now. These AusMU are the double-choc Tim Tams - I limit myself to one or two a day. This photo was taken with another recent pickup, Konica Hexanon 50mm/f1.7 (collected in January).

Jupiter 9, 85mm, since I am not sure I will ever find a Tak 85mm (picked up locally in early December).

Super Multi Coated Takumar 150mm f4 (collected end of December). I have posed it beside the Super-Takumar 135mm f3.5 for size comparison

[carlb]

M42 Telephotos

Latest tele acquisitions - I have not yet posted with AusMU, so does not count until now. These AusMU are the double-choc Tim Tams - I limit myself to one or two a day.

Now that is self-restraint Gary!!!! Nice looking lenses BTW

[Marcus Rowland]

I have the Tokina version of this lens in M/SR mount (which I think is for Minolta). Focus and aperture rings are smooth and the glass looks crystal clean, but I can't mount it onto any of my camera's. Would it be worth putting on Ebay or here?

It's the same mount, though there can be minor differences that don't affect mounting it on non-Minolta cameras. Unfortunately there are problems with selling MD/SR lenses in the modern market. They're difficult to mount onto most conventional SLRs because Minolta used a fairly short flange focal distance (43mm) and most current cameras are deeper - PK is 45.5mm deeper, Canon EF is 44mm, Nikon is 46.5mm and so forth. So for e.g. Pentax you need a special MD-PK adapter that's basically a x1.1 teleconverter with a corrective lens, and that is usually expensive and not wonderful optically; I'm seeing prices around £30, £22 for MD to Canon EF, £24 for MD to Nikon, and so forth.

Mirrorless cameras have much smaller flange focal distances, so it's much easier to use these old lenses with a simple cheap adapter that doesn't have any glass to mess things up - I think I paid £10 for mine, which is fairly typical - and they're gradually becoming popular to an extent. The down side is that they're huge and heavy compared to any lens that's actually designed for mirrorless cameras, and at the moment that seems to be keeping prices fairly low. If you can afford to hang on to it for a while prices might improve - unfortunately I'm rapidly running out of storage space and can't really take that option. I probably wouldn't have bought this lens if I'd seen it for sale on its own, and I expect to make most of my money from the other lenses in the lot.

[stevebrot]

Jupiter 9, 85mm, since I am not sure I will ever find a Tak 85mm (picked up locally in early December).

I have thoroughly enjoyed my J-9, though it is currently out of commission due to the aperture blades jumping track. It is on my list of gear that must see service.


Steve

[carlb]

It's the same mount, though there can be minor differences that don't affect mounting it on non-Minolta cameras. Unfortunately there are problems with selling MD/SR lenses in the modern market. They're difficult to mount onto most conventional SLRs because Minolta used a fairly short flange focal distance (43mm) and most current cameras are deeper - PK is 45.5mm deeper, Canon EF is 44mm, Nikon is 46.5mm and so forth. So for e.g. Pentax you need a special MD-PK adapter that's basically a x1.1 teleconverter with a corrective lens, and that is usually expensive and not wonderful optically; I'm seeing prices around £30, £22 for MD to Canon EF, £24 for MD to Nikon, and so forth.

Mirrorless cameras have much smaller flange focal distances, so it's much easier to use these old lenses with a simple cheap adapter that doesn't have any glass to mess things up - I think I paid £10 for mine, which is fairly typical - and they're gradually becoming popular to an extent. The down side is that they're huge and heavy compared to any lens that's actually designed for mirrorless cameras, and at the moment that seems to be keeping prices fairly low. If you can afford to hang on to it for a while prices might improve - unfortunately I'm rapidly running out of storage space and can't really take that option. I probably wouldn't have bought this lens if I'd seen it for sale on its own, and I expect to make most of my money from the other lenses in the lot.

Thanks for the detailed reply Marcus - that's very helpful to know. My wife had the lens when we met but I don't know where it came from because she used Pentax gear. I had noticed that it seemed to fetch fairly low prices on Ebay which to my mind made selling a barely worthwhile exercise. I might just put it on Ebay when I can be bothered just to get a few dollars and free up a bit of space.

[dbs]

M42 Telephotos

Latest tele acquisitions - I have not yet posted with AusMU, so does not count until now. These AusMU are the double-choc Tim Tams - I limit myself to one or two a day. This photo was taken with another recent pickup, Konica Hexanon 50mm/f1.7 (collected in January).

Jupiter 9, 85mm, since I am not sure I will ever find a Tak 85mm (picked up locally in early December).

Super Multi Coated Takumar 150mm f4 (collected end of December). I have posed it beside the Super-Takumar 135mm f3.5 for size comparison

Hi Carl

Only 6 Tim Tams is a bit short ........ c;mon what happened to the rest.........

[carlb]

Hi Carl

Only 6 Tim Tams is a bit short ........ c;mon what happened to the rest.........

Haha Dave, you'll need to ask Gary. We don't have Tim Tams in our house because they would have a life expectancy that could be measured in minutes

[Gary H Perth]

Hi Carl

Only 6 Tim Tams is a bit short ........ c;mon what happened to the rest.........

To be honest, not because they have been eaten. Unfortunately it's midsummer and the chocolate-chocolate surfaces had become slippery, so this is as many as I could stack unsupported.