[reeftool]

Old film lenses are no good for the photo market. They would like to sell the new lenses. If I would have enough money I certainly will buy some new lenses. Most profs will tell you that they use a state of the art equipment, even when the take old lenses for some reason. I've excellent results with lenses from the 50s, 60s and 70s.

Maybe but Nikon released the Df camera body a couple of years ago. While sporting a the retro look of a film camera, it also added the mechanical hardware necessary to use a lot of old manual Nikkor lenses that can't be used on other bodies.

Most camera manufacturers have changed their mounts through the years so using old film lenses isn't an option. They want us to buy new lenses. The business of selling cameras is cutthroat. By convincing people that their old lenses that do mechanically and electrically work aren't good enough, it's certainly to their advantage. They never come out and say it of course but this "general wisdom" gets spread all around the internet. Even here in the forum, the "general wisdom" is being spread that if you really want good shots from your K1, you need to buy new glass . I wonder if this "professional portrait photographer" is actually buying her own gear. It also surprises me that she recommends a 50mm lens as most prefer a longer lens as 50's can still display some unflattering distortion. That statement alone makes me suspicious that she is nothing more than a parrot spouting out the same information you can get from any one of dozens YouTube videos.

[Fogel70]

They capture nothing, but let light pass through distorting it in the process.

But only if you remove the lens cap first.

[wildman]

Old film lenses are no good for digital

She said it wouldn't be as good as a digital lens as the design wasn't optimized for digital.

Where's the problem?

She didn't say "Old film lenses are no good for digital" simply that they "wouldn't be as good as a digital lens as the design wasn't optimized for digital".
Isn't that generally accepted by optical people as being true, pixie dust myths aside?

In any case pick up a new DA 50 for a 100 bucks take some pics and decide for yourself - where's the problem?

[wildman]

It depends on what you consider "good" to be.

Precisely.

[Pioneer]

Another tempest in a teacup.

Technically, new lenses designed to work with digital ARE better.

A lot of what attracts people to older designs is not that they are better, it is that the aberrations (or faults) of the older lenses produce a different result. Some people like it, some don't.

However, it is her class, they are her requirements and I assume you were informed of these requirements up front. You may not agree and you can do as you like when you are on your own. But in her class, simple respect dictates that you abide by her rules. If this is really worth falling on your sword over, then ask for your money back and do not attend the class.

[victormeldrew]

Even this site says the same in the lens reviews section:

SMC Pentax-DA lenses [...] are optimized for use with Pentax Digital SLRs

It's true. The only part that is controversial is the 'wouldn't be as good' part of what she said, which is clearly a subjective statement and can be neither right nor wrong. I personally prefer the A 50 1.7 to the DA50, and MUCH prefer the Helios 44-2. But there are plenty of people who would disagree...after all it is the faults of these lenses that give them the character I like.

I would have stuck to my guns and explained what it was I liked about the rendering and showed her the results that can be had.

[joergens.mi]

Pure BS. There are many vintage lenses, which perform much better than modern plastic lenses and there are some expensive modern lenses which perfom better. I would have understood it, if he sells photographic equipment. But this type of guy is no pro.

If he would have been a real pro, he had taken some shoots with the the lens, has a look on the result and would have shown you the difference to his lens ( I' shure on a different Brand - the next will be with this camera you can't do good photographs ) - if there where any. The pentax A 1.7 isn't that bad.

I teach and in a portrait class we'd be talking about light properties, lighting ratios, consequences of aperture settings, shutter speed and focal length, composition, clothing, background, interacting and relationships with the client, mood and purpose. As far as gear, I'd want people to know how to control what they have and maybe see the difference in what the others in class had.

I can't even imagine telling someone a film era lens wouldn't be as good as a digital design. It would certainly be hypocritical when I put a 645 FA 80-160 on a rental 645z instead of my 645N.

Due to the nature of my work, all my lenses are constant aperture zooms with autofocus except for an M 50/1.7 Iwas given. Thought I'd sell it until I used it on a K5Iis body. It is good glass.

[macman24054]

She can buy her expensive glass. I will shoot my 50 1.7 and 135 2.4 all day long.

[Alex645]

When she asked what lens I was using I said an old manual lens from my film days. It was a Pentax-A 50mm f1.7. She said it wouldn't be as good as a digital lens as the design wasn't optimised for digital. I didn't have another 50mm with me so I went with the Sigma 30mm f1.4 DC for the first couple of shots.

The best lens for any situation is the lens that is with you. Period.

Yes, there are some compromises with a film designed lens on a digital sensor, but if you don't have the alternative, it's a mute point.

Would love to see a side-by-side comparo between the two equal focal length primes in a portrait setting. If we're talking objective analysis the digital will win. If we're looking at subjective analysis, I wouldn't be surprised that the film lens would win.

[normhead]

In this comparison, the Suoer Tak was the most popular lens.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/312892-your...mm-images.html

[rawr]

Canon...they can only shoot their film era lenses through glass adapters or on other cameras.

You probably hit the nail on the head.

Often shooters with a lot of experience with just one brand will assume that how things work in their system applies to all systems.

[UncleVanya]

You probably hit the nail on the head.

Often shooters with a lot of experience with just one brand will assume that how things work in their system applies to all systems.

To be fair, I have seen differences in the way some situations are rendered using older vs. newer lenses. This is often related to CA or Purple fringing etc. Correcting this is "easy" but there are mild penalties to resolution. The "cheap camera challenge" and various lens shootouts using blind testing seem to tell us that the improvements are not so fantastic that it snaps out at you like a sore thumb. You can absolutely shoot with old lenses - some older than 35mm film - and easily produce fantastic professional results.

[Kerrowdown]

Old film lenses are no good for digital

Oh dear that's me buggered then...

[p38arover]

KD, that's been quite obvious for sometime from looking at your images over the past few years!