[robgski]

Practice removing that pin on a lens you can afford to live without, or have a pro do it, of course.

[Sagitta]

Some better examples of the Ricoh pin

This is a type that is likely to get stuck. It is a Ricoh 50mm F/2 P

Attachment 234382

Attachment 234383

This is a type that is well known to get stuck. Don't let this one anywhere near a Pentax AF camera until it is removed. From a Sears 60-300mm F/4.0-5.6

Attachment 234384

Notice the vertical edges. Most Ricoh pins are a wide rounded nub. They pose no danger.

That's just cruel - that lens doesn't even have aperture contacts yet it sports a pin. I always assumed those pins went in tandem with A lenses - now I know better.

[boriscleto]

That's just cruel - that lens doesn't even have aperture contacts yet it sports a pin. I always assumed those pins went in tandem with A lenses - now I know better.

That's why I always look for Ricoh XR lenses.

[johnyates]

There are a lot of us here who really enjoy older lenses. You might want to visit:
The Takumar Club
The M Club
The K Club

[Kerrowdown]

Worth my time to get started with old lenses?

An interesting question to ask here, but I'm guessing you got some pretty predicable answers.

There's a lot of affection here for older glass, I guess all my glass is considered old by some folk.

[robthebloke]

That's just cruel - that lens doesn't even have aperture contacts yet it sports a pin. I always assumed those pins went in tandem with A lenses - now I know better.

As I understand it, they were ricoh's own implementation of the 'a' contacts. Unfortunately they located the pin in the same place as the pentax AF screwdrive hole

[edwardra3]

Thanks for the input. I had read about the Ricoh pin. The two lenses he had were the stock 50mm f/1.7 lens and a Sears zoom. He can't remember the exact model as it's been in storage for a decade.

Any recommendations on a good starter camera, keeping in mind I plan on using those older lenses?

[Sagitta]

Thanks for the input. I had read about the Ricoh pin. The two lenses he had were the stock 50mm f/1.7 lens and a Sears zoom. He can't remember the exact model as it's been in storage for a decade.

Any recommendations on a good starter camera, keeping in mind I plan on using those older lenses?

FWIW, a lot of the old Sears lenses (especially any with an "A" setting) are rebadged Ricoh's, and could have the pin as well.

[robthebloke]

K30 or k50 are the best bet. The k500 is basically the same, but lacks weather sealing.

[nkull]

I'm going to go ahead and disagree somewhat with many in this thread, and not for lack of trying... I have some old manual glass, and I have gotten some good photos, but for me focusing has proven very difficult. These lenses were used when different viewfinder technology was common (split prism etc.) and modern DSLRs do not have the same technology for manually zooming. I can zoom this old glass on my old film cameras with no issue, on the DSLR I get a lot of out of focus images... Yes, you can replace your focus screen but that has other impacts on the camera from what I understand and I'm not willing to cripple my camera for newer glass to use the older glass...

Just my experience with it and 1 cent opinion...

[tibbitts]

I'll disagree with many of the responses, although it depends exactly what lenses are included in the supposedly "several hundred dollar" lens collection, and what other "older" lenses you might acquire. Many older lenses were simply not as good - particularly for use on digital sensors - as modern equivalents. And especially if the food photography is some kind of production work for you, you don't want irritating features like lack of open-aperture metering, or the need to use an adapter (for M42 lenses, for example), slowing down your work.

Obviously if cost is an overriding consideration, then new lenses might not be affordable, so you need to make do with what you have.

[Sagitta]

I'm going to go ahead and disagree somewhat with many in this thread, and not for lack of trying... I have some old manual glass, and I have gotten some good photos, but for me focusing has proven very difficult. These lenses were used when different viewfinder technology was common (split prism etc.) and modern DSLRs do not have the same technology for manually zooming. I can zoom this old glass on my old film cameras with no issue, on the DSLR I get a lot of out of focus images... Yes, you can replace your focus screen but that has other impacts on the camera from what I understand and I'm not willing to cripple my camera for newer glass to use the older glass...

Just my experience with it and 1 cent opinion...

Not picking on this post in particular, but I've seen people complain (repeatedly) about the focus screen issues all the time.

It boils down to "Lets buy a modern digital camera with a huge LCD that allows you to magnify in on a shot specifically so you can nail focus... then ignore the LCD."

Most of my manual shooting involves me flipping over to using the LCD. If I'm using a manual focus lens, I'm obviously not overly concerned with the time involved with taking my shot, so there is absolutely no need to use the viewfinder at all.

Flip to the LCD, compose there. Especially with the newer generation of cameras that involve focus peaking there is little to no excuse to blow a shot unless its something where you have a fast-moving target.

Even then, you just do as in the old days and prefocus or trap focus and you're usually going to be good. Once you approach f/8 or so your depth of field increases enough that if you do insist on using the viewfinder the focus notification will generally tend to be on the money unless you're shooting in a dark environment.

There are a lot of cons about using old manual glass (mostly in the fringing category), but lack of being able to focus is definitely not one of them if you use the tools the camera provides for you.

[Dieterson]

I'll disagree with many of the responses, although it depends exactly what lenses are included in the supposedly "several hundred dollar" lens collection, and what other "older" lenses you might acquire. Many older lenses were simply not as good - particularly for use on digital sensors - as modern equivalents.

This is a good point. Even though I recommend to try old lenses and like using them myself; this does not mean that every old lens is automatically a good lens (yes, there are a lot of horrible old lenses out there). However, the Lens Reviews on this forum are quite helpful to find the good ones. If you, like the OP, have already some old lenses, I don't see any reason why you shouldn't give them a try and find out for yourself if you like it or not.

[Oldbayrunner]

That's just cruel - that lens doesn't even have aperture contacts yet it sports a pin. I always assumed those pins went in tandem with A lenses - now I know better.

Firstly let me dispel some of the myths going on regarding Ricoh pins, I own and have owned both Ricoh and Pentax film cameras for a considerable amount of time and use/used some of my lenses on both cameras. The Ricoh Rikenon/Sears lens pins were used to communicate with Ricoh/Sears cameras and simply are in a different location on this branded K mount then what the pins are for Pentax, hence you couldn't/can't communicate aperture etc. using them on Pentax. There are basically 3 pin types. A round flat topped pin, non spring loaded which will get stuck and be very difficult to remove the lens on a Pentax mount, a thin spring loaded rounded top such as Kozlof has pictured which can get stuck but with wiggling usually can release itself or be easily released using a thin feeler gauge or the spring loaded round pin such as all of Borisclitos examples, sorry Borisclito none of those should stick unless there is something wrong with the spring. So if you plan on using them look to see if the pin will retract into the mount easily or simply remove the pin by taking the mount off. OR simply don't buy them and leave more of a selection available for us who appreciate them. Someone did mentioned people hack sawing them off which is totally laughable to me and not something I would recommend. If you want to know more about Ricoh cameras and lenses this is the best site I have found. The Unofficial Guide to Ricoh SLR Cameras and Rikenon Lenses

I do agree with you on your latter post... I don't find using a spit focus screen as effective on a digital camera vs using the LCD. However I do like using catch in focus for moving shots. Plus I am not a fan of focus peaking either not saying using either is wrong. It's just not what I have found works the best for me with manual lenses. One of the most effective ways for me to focus a manual lens is to use the LCD and Live view zoom to focus effectively.

[micromacro]

Let me ruin a bit manual lenses parade
There is unclear if edwardra3 has any experience with DSLR, software, what price range we are talking about, and the main thing: for what he or she is going to enter or re-enter DSLR field.

Without all that information it's hard to tell for sure if it's a good idea, or not. I can tell that I got lots of frustration with entering DSLR world, on my own. And I'm glad that I have not started with old manual lenses from the start, but learned at least basics with modern lenses (it was Canon newest kit lens, and I still think that one is pretty good).
So, for total novice I would recommend kit lens at least, and start learning camera with modern lenses first. Talking from own experience.

For manual lenses, if you not planning upgrade, it's better to buy good low light performance camera, imo. I'm going to upgrade my K200, because for some dark, but great lenses (like Pentax 100mm f/4 or Takumar 200mm f/5.6) CCD sensor limits shooting in dark. I will keep K200, because it's good to have different sensors for different purposes.