Vintage Lenses - "Super Slow" Set

[BTM_Pix]

7 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Turns out I had the Makinon in a cupboard all along

The cupboard in question

[MrSMW]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

The cupboard in question

And that is just Section 13b in building 21 on site 17.

There’s also an entire empty facility just in case ‘missing’ deliveries from MPB via DHL, turn up.

[kye]

OP asks for lenses that focus the Canon way....

Queue long discussion of lenses from Nikon, Pentax etc.

OP asks for lenses that are slow to use wide-open....     responses include stopping down faster ones!

😆 😆 😆

Lots of people really just waiting for you to finish talking so they can go back to stream of consciousness without any thinking required!

[kye]

Surprisingly, it seems that Minolta didn't make so many slower lenses?

This list here might not be complete, but it barely lists any slower ones: https://www.rokkorfiles.com/Lens Reviews.html and the page on the lens history doesn't include many extras either: https://www.rokkorfiles.com/Lens History.html

Is Flickr still a thing? maybe some searching on there might reveal some other options, and with bonus sample images too.

[homestar_kevin]

8 hours ago, kye said:

OP asks for lenses that focus the Canon way....

Queue long discussion of lenses from Nikon, Pentax etc.

OP asks for lenses that are slow to use wide-open....     responses include stopping down faster ones!

😆 😆 😆

Lots of people really just waiting for you to finish talking so they can go back to stream of consciousness without any thinking required!

Whoops, we did blow right by that focusing direction one didn't we lol. I just automatically go to super takumars when I think of awesome character, slower, and readily available primes for cheap, they're the kings.

To be fair, it's in the list of preferred characteristics, so maybe theres some wiggle room for the right set.

If it's a requirement, I'll double down on my Olympus OM recommendation and also throw out SSC Canon FD lenses,  there's a 17mm 4, 28mm 3.5, 35mm 3.5, and a 50mm 3.5 macro and 100mm f/4 macro.

Bonus/wide lens could be the 24-35mm 3.5 L which might be just over budget. 

[mercer]

Although it's not exactly what you're looking for, I'd have to second the Nikon Series E lenses. They truly are remarkable little lenses. I haven't been able to find a good copy of the 35mm 2.5 but the 36-72, 50mm and 100mm are nice little lenses, especially the size of the 100mm. Also the older non-ai lenses are pretty spectacular as well. One lens I hate to mention because it does get such bad reviews is the 35-70 3.3-4.5 ai-s lens. It's tiny and a lot better than the bad reviews give it. I mean, it isn't great, but there's something very Nikon in its not greatness.

Another zoom lens I love, which I assume you're familiar with is the Canon FD 35-105mm 3.5. This lens is ALMOST parfocal. Obviously constant aperture. Internal zoom. Fairly compact. I've had a few copies over the years, then end up selling it because I didn't use it too often, regret it and seek another one. My most recent copy I put on the Sigma FP and here's a sample of it at 105mm wide open...

 

No mind-blowing image by any means, but fairly sharp wide open and I like the way it handles the highlights. Of course it's a mess in direct light... as I found out last week during a shoot. However, there are rumors that Canon considered putting the L badge onto it because they were so happy with the lens.

As far as primes, other than the Nikons, the Takumar lenses are a personal favorite of mine. I've heard people argue that the 28mm 3.5 is one of the best 28mm lenses they've used. I haven't used that one but the 35mm 3.5 is excellent.

I've used a couple of the wide angle Tokina lenses from the late 70s, early 80s and they were decent, but I think they were f/2.8 lenses. Obviously you could get a cheap Neewer fixed ND to pop on the lens and leave there to give you that slower stop and to protect the front of the lens. Also check out the old Vivitar lenses, I have a set of mostly Tokina made ones in the m42 mount and I have always been very fond of them. The image instantly feels like an old 70s made for TV movie. I'm probably going to sell them though, not because I don't like them, I just have too much stuff and really need to scale back.

I guess you could also look at some of the older Zeiss Jena lenses... even the MF ones would give you the slower apertures you were looking for wide open.

Great thread! Wish there were more threads like this on here like it.

[stephen]

Just discovered that Minolta MD 35-70mm f3.5 is parfocal. 🙂 

[Ninpo33]

On 8/18/2025 at 9:46 PM, kye said:

OP asks for lenses that are slow to use wide-open....     responses include stopping down faster ones!

😆 😆 😆

Lots of people really just waiting for you to finish talking so they can go back to stream of consciousness without any thinking required!

Did you even really read my post?

I gave several suggestions and the OP never clarified or said his requirements were set in stone. Soft vs clinical, deep focus and circular bokeh right?

There are a few ways to achieve that look. Most vintage lenses are soft compared to modern lenses. Does OP want REALLY soft? Why? Very easy to take a vintage soft lens and add a desired look in post for anything extreme. My vintage Yashicas and old Vivitars all have many bladed apertures and produce round apertures at f/2.8 so I get some low light benefits as I need it while still being vintage soft. But I can live at f/3.5 or f/4 as desired. So no, I wasn’t just waiting to talk, I was offering a perspective and fostering a discussion. 

[kye]

4 hours ago, Ninpo33 said:

Did you even really read my post?

I gave several suggestions and the OP never clarified or said his requirements were set in stone. Soft vs clinical, deep focus and circular bokeh right?

There are a few ways to achieve that look. Most vintage lenses are soft compared to modern lenses. Does OP want REALLY soft? Why? Very easy to take a vintage soft lens and add a desired look in post for anything extreme. My vintage Yashicas and old Vivitars all have many bladed apertures and produce round apertures at f/2.8 so I get some low light benefits as I need it while still being vintage soft. But I can live at f/3.5 or f/4 as desired. So no, I wasn’t just waiting to talk, I was offering a perspective and fostering a discussion. 

With great interest and care!

As an enthusiast with complex requirements myself I sometimes come upon a new set of requirements and try to find something that will suit my situation but it's hard to find something that meets all the specifics I have.  This is typically when I would post as people who know more than me might know of a particular thing that meets all my needs.

This is why it frustrates me when people just give random thoughts and riff on my carefully set-out requirements.

TBH, now I just ask AI.

[PannySVHS]

I love this thread. Keep em coming. If only the Canon FD 35 105 was not prone to gnarly focussing after several years of use due to ball bearings covered with desolving rubber. There is a very compact 38 to 100mm F3.5 under the Hanimex label, which I really like using for personal filming. Mine has a FD mount. I used to have a video uploaded showing this lens in action, which I shared here before. Vimeo deleted it along with 60 other videos when I canceled my plus account, because they deleted all groups and destroyed the whole community.

I really need to read into Nikon glass. All these different versions leave me puzzled.:) @mercer

[Ninpo33]

Not as easy to find, but the Vivitar Preset lenses made by tokina in the 60’s are pretty sweet. Single coated and have circular aperture blades with smooth movement which work out well for filmmaking. As I mentioned before, stoped down to f/3.5 is fine to keep round bokeh on these but you still have f/2.8 as needed. Soft and dreamlike with great out of focus areas. Bodies are small and light and quite well built.

Threaded T mount so easily adaptable to M42 or other modern mounts. 

 

I have  the

28mm 2.5 (pyramid)

35mm 2.8

85mm 1.8 (rare)

135mm 3.5 and 2.8

200mm 3.5

[Ninpo33]

They are also really, really cheap. I think I paid $35 for the 135mm and $45 for the 35mm. The 85mm 1.8 is a rare one that is fast for a 60’s era lens and i use it to match with other similar era lens sets that never got a fast 85mm. Got that one for $150 so it was a score. There’s even a super rare 135mm f/1.5 “Vivitar Professional” In the set but pretty soft and overpriced, ($2,500) these days.  

The 135mm f/3.5 is super tiny. (pic 2)

 

 

[QuickHitRecord]

9 hours ago, Ninpo33 said:

Not as easy to find, but the Vivitar Preset lenses made by tokina in the 60’s are pretty sweet. Single coated and have circular aperture blades with smooth movement which work out well for filmmaking. As I mentioned before, stoped down to f/3.5 is fine to keep round bokeh on these but you still have f/2.8 as needed. Soft and dreamlike with great out of focus areas. Bodies are small and light and quite well built.

Threaded T mount so easily adaptable to M42 or other modern mounts. 

 

I have  the

28mm 2.5 (pyramid)

35mm 2.8

85mm 1.8 (rare)

135mm 3.5 and 2.8

200mm 3.5

Thanks for sharing. Are you sure these were made by Tokina and not Kino Precision?

I bought that same 35mm f2.8 a few years ago. Within an hour of using it, the helicoid started to have some play in it. A few minutes later, the lens literally came apart in my hands (from completely normal use with my hands, no follow focus). I wasn't able to reassemble it. I think I've probably owned over 100 lenses at this point, and this was the first and only time this has ever happened to me. I hope yours are holding up better than mine did.