Can’t have a lens category here without mentioning Legendary Lenses.
One of the very best was the Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f/3.5 Macro zoom. And, if I’m not mistaken, it was the very first macro zoom lens. Made in mounts for many cameras, this Vivitar lens was sought after my many and still remains a top performer today.
"My first was the original Vivitar Series 1 70 - 210mm Macro Focussing Auto Zoom. It is rated at f3.5 throughout its zoom range and it is. At a time when almost all close focussing zooms were called macro, none of them were. But the Vivitar came much closer at 1:2.2 than did any other zoom lens of the time. At 7" in length and weighing almost 2 lb. it is not a lightweight but I still use it occasionally on my T90. I believe I bought it in 1980 for my Canon Ftb QL."
The Vivitar is not a true macro lens. It would have to give 1:1 or greater magnification to be considered macro. But it surely is great for close ups. And how many zooms have you ever seen that retain the same aperture throughout their zoom range as does the Vivitar?
True, the Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f/3.5 did not go to 1:1. However, as you may recall, most macro lenses of that age didin't either, at least not by themselves. They were 1:2, needing an additional attachment to get to 1:1 (life size).
Looking at in in that regard, with the Vivitar getting 1:2.2 one would just about have to call it a macro lens of its day.
I agree there have been some wonderful zoom lenses, but IMHO the most legendary lens of all time has to be the Carl Zeiss Tessar.
It was designed by Paul Rudolph in 1902 as an f/6.3 lens and made traditional lenses like Rapid Rectilinears old hat. It's been modified over the years by Wandersleb in 1904 as an f/4.5 lens, by Merte in 1932 as an f/3.5 and later as f/2.8. It's been made in focal lengths from 40mm to 500mm.
It was the standard lens on many legendary cameras like the Super Ikonta, Rolleiflex and Hassselblad and is still being developed. The latest I can think of is standard on the i4R digital Contax by Kyocera, and it got rave reviews.
Carl Zeiss has made or licensed more than 150 million Tessars over the years, and almost every other manufacturer has used its four-glass, three group layout at one time or another, including Leitz.
104 years of continuous development and production. It HAS to be THE legendary lens.
I've never had the good fortune to work with one, but there is no doubt that it has the rebutation. Could very well be deserving of the honor of THE legenday lens.
One of Nikon's legendary lenses is the 180mm f/2.8 prime. As good as it is, the newer autofocus version seems to be even better.
I'm fortunate to have both a manual and the newer autofocus versions, and I believe it deserves its legendary status. It a very sharp lens, which, in my opinion, does best at f/8.
This has been a very popular lens with Nikon owners since it was first introduced in 1970.
I had the Vivitar Series One 70-210mm zoom along with all my sharp primes. Tried to be a professional landscape photographer for a while, but all I could muster was enough money to pay for my mailing costs. I found it boring anyhow, so just started doing only what I loved....take pictures...& don't sell them. Three years after I quit, one company set me my biggest check for reuse of a previous photo...$400. It was a photo taken with the zoom. Oh, well...litesong
Last Edit: Jan 21, 2006 11:51:19 GMT -5 by litesong
Of course all lenses which have gained legendary status might not always have done so because of its quality, but perhaps of its perceived quality. Case in point being the Nikon Series E 75-150mm f/3.5 lens. The Series E 75-150mm is notorious for its one touch looseness, and there are differing opinions as to its photo quality. However, it has legendary status and is still sought after my Nikon enthusiasts. Personally, I have no experience with this lens.
Hi folks, Questions, What about Leica (Leitz), Rollei, Voightlander, Canon and Hassy glass? I mean that there is probably no one legendary lens but probably a top 5 or 10.
My favorites are the Zeiss 50/1.5 Sonnar and the Leica 50/2 Summicron (Type 1 Rigid). Both offer the unique look that personified their classic RF families. Early on the Contax vs Leica debate was tilted towards the house of Zeiss based on the excellence and speed of the Sonnar. This balance was arguably not shifted until the the M3 and Summicron were introduced by Leitz in 1954. Both lenses offer a unique signature look that to this day define the classic cameras they were used on.
Hmm, I think I can make do with the cameras that I have, or not.
I have a Nikon EM body and 3 lenses; almost got the series E 75-150 but did not based on the fact it was a 1-touch and comments by owners that it definately did not have the optical quality of the single focal length E lenses.
The Nikkor 105/2.8 Micro is in my bag and quite a sharp producer!!! Would have to vote also for the Nikkor 20-35/2.8 lens as a quality/legendary one.
In my Minolta stable I would say the MC 58/1.4 gets my vote.
Yes, that's the controversy. Some swear by the 75-150mm, while others say it's just an average lens of no special quality.
Speaking of Series E lenses. One I have found to be exceptional is the Series E 100mm. It has performed very well for me.
Denis
kamera said:
I have a Nikon EM body and 3 lenses; almost got the series E 75-150 but did not based on the fact it was a 1-touch and comments by owners that it definately did not have the optical quality of the single focal length E lenses.
Ron Head Kalamazoo, MI
Last Edit: Jan 26, 2006 1:37:17 GMT -5 by litesong
I've got an f/1.5 Sonnar on my 1936 Contax II and it's a lovely lens. Its serial number indicates that it's slightly younger than the Contax, early 1938, and it has an early Zeiss light blue coating.
The only lens Leitz had to offer against the Sonnar for quite a time was the f/2 Summar. I've also got one of those on a Leica IIIb and it wasn't one of Leitz' best. At full aperute it's a little soft at the edges even though it sharpens up well when stopped down. The f/2 Summitar was better, but still not quite as good as the Sonnar.
In general, Leitz lenses usually had slightly better definition in terms of lines per millimetre, but Zeiss sacrified a little of this to get much better contrast which gave their lenses more bite and made them appear sharper.