Hello and welcome to New Old Glass, a short little show where I take a look at the vintage lenses I’ve recently picked up, or as my justification calls it: a “valid business expense.”

Today, we’re looking at the Olympus Zuiko 50mm f/3.5 Auto-Macro. This is a bit of a rarity for me, as I don’t have many macro lenses in my collection.

My only other one is the Canon 100mm f/2.8 L, which has been my workhorse for years.

Originally, I was eyeing a different Olympus lens in an auction, but the price went absolutely ballistic.

Fortunately, I managed to scoop this 50mm Macro for a decent price.

I’ve been looking to expand my Olympus lineup lately, as I don’t have nearly enough OM glass in my collection.

• Release Date: Originally introduced in 1975

• Optical Design: 5 elements in 4 groups

• Aperture Blades: 6 blades

• Filter Thread: 49mm

• Weight: 221 grams

• Mount: Olympus OM mount

The build quality is exactly what you’d expect from vintage Olympus, featuring a solid metal body and a rubber focusing ring.

The focus ring on my copy is surprisingly smooth for a lens that’s nearly 50 years old.

The aperture ring is quite small and sits right at the front of the lens.

It’s an interesting design choice, as I usually prefer the ring at the back near the mount, but it’s certainly not a dealbreaker.

Honestly, this lens has given me some of the most fun I’ve had with vintage glass in years.

On the camera, the lens feels great. It’s light and easy to carry all day.

The focus ring is nice and large, which is helpful because the focus throw is about two football fields long!

As the name suggests, the macro capability is impressive.

Shooting wide open at f/3.5, the performance is reasonably good; your subjects stay quite sharp while the background melts away.

But stopping down for true macro work is where this lens really shines.

Take a look at this Hoverfly, for example. I think I shot this around f/8 or f/11.

Looking at the 100% crop, the detail is fantastic, especially around the eyes.

I definitely stopped down here because the background is more visible, yet the fine details are much crisper.

Another great example is this Zebra Blue butterfly.

At a 100% crop, you can see the tiny dots on the antennae, the texture of the wings, and even what looks like fine little hairs.

When it comes to the bokeh, things get interesting.

In close-up macro work, the background is incredibly smooth.

You don’t get much of that “vintage character” like bubble bokeh or busy specular highlights.

But when you use this for portraits, that changes.

You get these beautiful little “bubble” bokeh balls in the highlights.

It almost looks like someone took a bubble brush and painted the background.

However, a word of caution: while you can use this for portraits, you have to get uncomfortably close to your subject to get any real background separation.

It works for family and friends, but I wouldn’t use this for a paying client.

There are far better vintage lenses for dedicated portrait work.

The color rendering is another standout.

I noticed during editing that the colors are very deep, the greens especially are rich and dark.

Look at the edges of the mushroom in the samples; the rendering is just striking.

So, was it worth it? Absolutely.

Even though my Canon 100mm L is my professional workhorse, the Olympus 50mm has actually become my favorite of the two for pure enjoyment.

It’s made me want to take macro photos again, which is something I haven’t done in a long time.

Where does it fit in my collection?

I would say for now, it’s my go-to for macro photography and videography.

Because it can handle portraits in a pinch, it’s a perfect “walk-about” lens.

You can capture the tiny details and the larger world without switching lenses.

If I had to choose one, get the Olympus if you’re looking for a manual focus macro lens, and get the Canon 100mm f/2.8 L if you’re looking for a workhorse that can do macro and portraits equally well.

I’d recommend the Olympus Zuiko 50mm f/3.5 to anyone who finds a good copy at a fair price.

If you have any interest in macro or just want a sharp, portable lens that can shoot anything, this is a fantastic choice.

Thanks for reading, and I will see you next time!

Hello and welcome to New Old Glass, a short little show where I take a look at some of the “new” old glass I’ve picked up. Or, as I like to call it: my badly planned retirement plan.

Today, we’re looking at the Soligor 135mm F2.8 in the M42 mount.

The Soligor 135mm was actually one of the lenses that originally ignited the spark that turned into a full-blown vintage gear wildfire. Unfortunately, I didn’t know much about optics when I first got it.

The front element wasn’t secured properly, and as you might know from my other videos, I don’t have the best track record with repairs. This lens is a prime example of that, it’s currently tucked away while I use this working copy for the review.

Soligor didn’t actually build their own lenses, they were a distributor that contracted Japanese factories. I actually have two versions of this lens.

My original one, the one that’s currently in pieces, has a completely different body style. Looking at the serial numbers, I found out why: that one was made by Sun Optical, while this working copy was made by Tokina.

It’s one of the quirks of the Soligor brand, you never quite know which Japanese factory’s character you’re getting until you check the code.

• Aperture: 12-blade design

• Optical Construction: 4 elements in 4 groups

• Filter Thread: 55mm

• Weight: 410g

• Mount: M42

The build quality is pretty solid. The entire body is metal, including the focus ring.

The focus ring is still nice and smooth, which is a massive plus for me considering this glass is probably 60 years old. Then we have the aperture ring, which is a bit of an oddity.

The aperture ring looks like it runs both ways. Going to the left it runs from F2.8 to F22, and it goes the same way the other way, from F2.8 to F22.

I have never seen an aperture ring like this, which is a real oddity for me.

The lens produces some nice rendering, though it isn’t quite as “wild” as some other vintage glass I’ve reviewed. It feels a bit more subdued compared to the extreme “bubble bokeh” lenses out there.

There are some bubbles, but they tend to stay tucked away in the background. Looking through the test photos, I didn’t experience much flaring, except for one specific shot.

In that one, a flare looks almost like a massive bubble. I actually really like the look!

As is usually the case with vintage glass, you’ll see those defined bubbles most when the background is very busy. The color rendering looks great.

The reds are punchy and saturated, and the yellows come across very well too. As you’d expect, once you stop the lens down, the images sharpen up significantly.

On the camera, the lens feels good, even if it is a bit hefty. On a modern mirrorless body, it might feel a little bulky compared to a DSLR, but it balances well enough.

So, in the end, was it worth picking up another Soligor 135mm F2.8? The honest answer is: maybe.

I have a lot of 135mm lenses in my collection because it’s a focal length I truly enjoy. But even though this model inspired my love for vintage glass, I’m not sure how often I’ll reach for it.

It will always have a special spot in my heart for starting this journey, but optically, it feels very middle-of-the-road. It’s not bad, but it’s not world-changing either.

Who would I recommend this to? If you’re looking for a fast, affordable 135mm lens with that “all-metal” vintage feel, go for it. There are much worse ways to spend your money than on a Tokina-built classic like this.

If you’re trying to figure out who actually manufactured your vintage Soligor lens, matching Soligor serial numbers to specific manufacturers isn’t always straightforward.

However, thanks to extensive research by lens enthusiasts, a reliable decoding system has been uncovered for several confirmed manufacturers.

To keep things accurate, this guide only lists manufacturer codes that have been firmly confirmed, skipping the guesswork.

For standard numerical serial numbers, Soligor utilized a simple three-digit date and manufacturer code system. You can read it by looking at the first three digits of your lens’s serial number:

• First number: Indicates the Maker/Manufacturer.

• Second number: Indicates the Decade.

• Third number: Indicates the Year.

Check the first number or letter prefix of your serial number against this table to identify the manufacturer.

Soligor lenses were widely rebranded and sold under many different names depending on the distributor or region. If you have a lens with one of the following brand names, it may actually be a Soligor:

• Reflex
• Super Carenar
• Prinzflex
• Weltblick
• Mirage
• Infotar
• Hanimar
• Flexar
• Elicar
• Derek Gardenar
• Porst
• Bushnell (Bausch & Lomb)
• J.C. Penny
• Pallas
• Berroflex
• Aetna

Hello and welcome to “New Old Glass,” a little show where I take a look at some of the new old glass I’ve bought. Or, as my impulse control calls it: “What’s that one?”

Today, we are looking at the Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 50mm F/2.8.

Now, some of you might think this is my first Carl Zeiss lens, but it’s actually my third. I’m fortunate to own two other lenses in the Carl Zeiss Jena lineup, specifically the 50mm F/2.8 Tessar “Red T” version and the Carl Zeiss Jena Triotar 135mm F/4 “Red T” version, both in the Exakta mount.

Originally, on the site where I buy most of my lenses, there was a camera with this Carl Zeiss lens on it for sale, but I didn’t have the money at the time.

Fortunately for me, the camera and lens later went on auction without a reserve, and I was able to scoop up both for quite cheap.

This version was introduced around 1966 and came in both the Icarex mount and the M42 mount. Here are the quick technical details:

• Mount: M42 (my copy)

• Optical Design: Classic Tessar (4 elements in 3 groups)

• Aperture Blades: 5

• Build: Solid, all-metal construction

The lens feels great in the hand, and the aperture ring itself is nice and smooth.

I wasn’t sure where to drop this in, but I think right before the photos is the perfect spot. At the time of this review, I actually don’t know how to get the lens to stop down.

When I was out taking photos, I thought the aperture was working. I was happily stopping down, going “Wow, it has great bokeh even stopped down!” It was only during the stop-down test I realized something was up.

Holding the aperture lever down doesn’t engage the blades, and pushing in the M42 pin at the back does, well, even less.

A quick Google during the writing of this post shows me this is a pretty common problem with this version of the lens. I suspect I might need to try and repair it, but considering my history with that, I’m a bit reluctant. So for now, this lens is stuck at F/2.8.

Onto the photos and the bokeh, all taken at F/2.8, obviously. The lens loves to make bubbles in the background, especially when close-focusing. And considering it was stuck wide open, the photos are still pretty damn sharp.

Bokeh-wise, I love how it renders the background. With a lot of specular highlights, you will get a ton of those “bubble” bokeh balls. Now, depending on your taste, you’ll either hate this or love it. For me, I really like the character and the bubbles you get with these older lenses.

But, you can also get some nice smooth bokeh in a background without too much movement or highlights. So the lens is able to do both: nice smooth bokeh and wild, crazy bubble bokeh, all depending on the background.

Flaring-wise, I took photos in bright sunlight, and I didn’t see much flaring, if any. I think this is probably due to the front optical element being so recessed, it acts like a built-in lens hood.

The color rendering of the lens is pretty good, in my opinion. I know with another lens I tested on the same day, the reds came out almost pinkish on my Canon, but on this Zeiss, they look pretty good and natural.

It feels good on the camera. Due to its light weight, it’s a very easy walk-around lens. Something I didn’t mention earlier is that you can focus incredibly close with this lens.

I was really surprised. I stood at my usual distance for these types of lenses and then realized I could get much, much closer.

So in the end, was it worth it to buy the Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 50mm F/2.8? I would say yes. Even though it’s not one of the more sought-after Carl Zeiss lenses, they are still pretty desirable, well, to me, anyway. Even if the aperture doesn’t work, I think it has a nice place in my collection.

As to who I would recommend it to, I don’t know. With a non-functioning aperture, it’s difficult to say. But I love the bokeh and I love the rendering you get with this lens. How it performs stopped down, I have no idea.

It is a classic vintage lens with vintage problems

Hello and welcome back to Shelf to Mount, the show where I take a look at the vintage gear I’ve bought and promptly forgot I ever owned.

Or, as my bank account prefers to call it, “The Ongoing Financial Crisis.”

Today, we are looking at the Yashica Yashinon-DS 50mm F1.9. It’s quite a mouthful to say, and honestly, it’s a lens that leaves me with more questions than answers.

The biggest one being: Why did I buy this?

Looking at my shelf, I see I already own the Yashinon 50mm F1.7. Compared to this F1.9 version, the 1.7 is significantly heavier.

I have a vague memory of wanting the DS model after watching a video from Simon’s Utak, but for the life of me, I can’t remember exactly which video sparked the urge.

Despite my memory gaps, the specs on this piece of glass are quite interesting for those who love the technical side of things:

• Mount: M42 screw mount

• Optical Formula: 6 elements in 5 groups

• Aperture Blades: 6 blades

• Weight: A featherlight 203 grams

• Filter Size: 52mm

Back to the lens itself. Originally announced in 2014, here is what is going on under the hood:

• Optics: 14 elements in 11 groups.

• Special Elements: Two Aspherical elements and one Low-Dispersion element.

• Aperture: 7 aperture blades.

• Weight: 240 grams.

With its entirely plastic body, that feather-light weight makes perfect sense.

The build of the lens features a rubberized focus ring. Usually, on lenses of this age, these rubber rings dry out or loosen up, but this one feels surprisingly tactile.

The focus throw on my copy was a bit stiff when I first picked it up, but it’s smoothed out nicely with use. It’s dampened, but responsive.

The aperture clicks distinctly from F1.9 all the way down to F16. The aperture feels smooth and clicky, which is always a plus in my book.

When shooting wide open, this lens has a habit of rendering “cat’s eye” bokeh towards the edges of the frame. However, once you stop it down, those highlights turn into distinct hexagons.

It’s interesting for me because with a lot of modern lenses, we usually look for backgrounds which are not busy and will give a smoother appearance.

But with vintage glass like this, I actually prefer finding backgrounds that are busy and filled with specular highlights. I find it helps to bring the lens to life, whereas flatter backgrounds will deliver a more boring result instead of giving you a bokeh festival.

Speaking of the bokeh, there is something unique happening here I didn’t see when I was originally taking the photos.

If you look at the curve of the tree and the texture on the right in some of these shots, that almost looks like swirling bokeh.

It’s not quite a Helios 44-2, but there is definitely something giving it that swirl effect. I noticed an odd curve on some frames where the tree looks distorted on the left side.

I am tempted to go back to where I took these and see if it’s just my imagination or if the area is just like that. Let me know in the comments what you think, do you see it too, or am I just imagining things?

On the flaring front, it’s interesting. At certain angles, you get these surprisingly straight lines of light.

I suspect this is internal reflection bouncing off the straight edges of the aperture blades. I kind of like it, it’s very weird, as I don’t think I have seen flaring like this before.

In terms of sharpness? It punches above its weight. Wide open at F1.9, it’s surprisingly usable.

Yes, you can see the Chromatic Aberration, specifically the purple fringing around the subject, but the focal plane itself is sharp. As you’d expect, stopping down cleans up that fringing and sharpens the frame significantly.

So, in the end, was the Yashinon-DS F1.9 worth digging out of my lens collection and taking for a spin?

On the whole I would say… maybe. It renders beautiful imagery, and for a “walk-around” lens, the light weight is fantastic.

However, with the other glass at my disposal, I’m not sure this is the one I’d grab first if I was looking for a vintage lens to take with me on a walkabout or a holiday.

But, if you are just getting into the world of vintage lenses and want that specific rendering you get with older glass, this is a solid entry point.

The real question for me remains: how does it stack up against its big brother, the F1.7? Does that fraction of a stop in aperture actually make a difference? I think we need a shootout or a review video to decide.

That was the Yashica Yashinon-DS 50mm F1.9, a vintage lens with a lot of vintage character.

Let me know in the comments, do you prefer the clean look of modern glass, or the character of these old lenses? Or are you like me and you prefer both, as both have a place in the world?

Thanks for reading, and I will see you next time!

Hello and welcome to Shelf to Mount!

This is the show where we dig out a lens that’s been gathering dust to figure out if it’s a hidden gem or just gathering dust for a good reason.

Or as my lens addiction calls it, “step one is admitting you have a problem.”

Today’s winner is this little guy, the Canon EF-S 10-18mm.

I honestly can’t remember the last time I used it, so the big question is simple. Have I been sleeping on a brilliant, affordable wide-angle, or is there a reason it’s been stuck on the shelf?

Let’s find out.

I honestly can’t remember why I bought it years ago.

I already had a few wide-angle lenses in my collection, so I think the original idea was to use it for landscapes.

But looking at my collection of photos tagged with this lens, I have barely anything with it.

Which is odd, since I’ve had this for a long time now. I’m wondering if my software just isn’t picking it up from the EXIF data.

The lens comes in the Canon EF-S mount. Now, if you don’t know, Canon’s old EOS line had two mounts.

There was EF for full-frame camera bodies, and EF-S for crop-sensor bodies.

EF stands for Electronic Focus and EF-S stands for Electro-focus short back focus.

I don’t know why, but I kind of feel bummed out by that. I mean, sure it makes sense, it’s just bland.

But those of us who have been taking photos for years know the real meaning behind EF.

It actually stands for “Effectively Broke.”

And EF-S? That just stands for “Effectively Broke, Slightly cheaper.”

Back to the lens itself. Originally announced in 2014, here is what is going on under the hood:

• Optics: 14 elements in 11 groups.

• Special Elements: Two Aspherical elements and one Low-Dispersion element.

• Aperture: 7 aperture blades.

• Weight: 240 grams.

With its entirely plastic body, that feather-light weight makes perfect sense.

For a plastic lens, it’s not bad.

Granted, you won’t be winning any awards for build quality, but its light weight makes it easy to carry along in your camera bag.

The focus ring is quite small, but it makes up for that by having image stabilization. This is incredibly odd, considering how wide this lens can go.

I think it makes the most sense for video work, especially if you need to run-and-gun with the widest view possible.

I can see it being useful for skateboarding videos or similar action shots where you need a stabilized wide-angle lens.

As you would suspect, this lens is a bokeh monster.

Just kidding. I couldn’t keep a straight face writing that.

No, you would be lucky to find any bokeh here.

For those who don’t know, bokeh is determined by a few factors, with lens speed and focal length being two parts of the equation.

Given this lens is incredibly wide and not very fast, bokeh is off the menu.

Surprisingly, I didn’t see any flaring on the photos I took, which I definitely expected considering how wide this lens is.

Now, I did notice something a little weird with the colours.

But a quick heads-up, I’m adapting this Canon lens onto my Fuji camera.

My editing software was throwing a bit of a fit with the RAW files, making them look a bit odd straight out of the camera.

I’m 99% sure that’s a quirk of my specific camera-and-adapter combo, not the lens itself.

Just wanted to mention it in case any other ‘Frankenstein’ shooters out there see something similar.

Anyway, back to performance. To get the most detail, I made sure to stop down to f/16 on some shots.

The lens is so lightweight it was a breeze to carry along with me on my walk.

Now, for those who don’t know, I love taking panoramas, and this lens is pretty much built for landscapes and panos.

Panoramas with this lens are quite nice.

At a 100% crop, the images are somewhat soft, but when you view the whole image, it looks great.

I don’t think this lens was made with super high-resolution sensors in mind, as even at f/13, the images aren’t perfectly sharp.

But again, scale the image down to half-size, and it looks pretty good.

So, if you’re thinking of getting this lens, just know it probably won’t resolve perfectly on a brand new, high-resolution sensor.

Lastly, you don’t realize just how wide 10mm is until you use it.

To put it in perspective, take the view from a normal 18mm lens. Now imagine it being so wide that if you’re not careful, your own feet will end up in the shot.

It’s really wide.

So in the end, where does the Canon EF-S 10-18mm fit in my collection?

The honest answer is, it doesn’t, really.

Between my pro-grade L lenses and all the vintage lenses I’ve collected, it’s become redundant for me.

BUT, and this is a big but, that doesn’t mean it’s a bad lens.

Far from it.

I know exactly who this lens is for.

If you’re shooting with a Canon crop-sensor camera and you want to get into those epic ultra-wide shots for landscape, or even real estate, without completely destroying your bank account?

This lens is an absolute no-brainer.

It’s lightweight, the image stabilization is surprisingly useful for video, and you can find it for a great price on the second-hand market.

It might not have a place on my shelf anymore, but it’s the perfect ‘step one’ lens for anyone diving into the world of wide-angle photography.

So that was the Canon 10-18mm, a wide-angle for the masses, as they say.

Hello and welcome to Shelf to Mount, a show where we take a look at some of the vintage lenses I bought before I started this YouTube channel.

Or as it’s also known: “Hey, I forgot I had this! I hope I can cancel the order I just placed for the same lens…”.

This is the Ricoh Rikenon 50mm F2, and I have no idea why I originally bought it.

I think I purchased this at the height of my lens addiction, where if I saw a fast vintage lens that was affordable, I jumped on it faster than you could say, “Wait, don’t I have other expenses!”.

There are quite a few versions of the Rikenon 50mm F2 out there, but mine is from 1982.

Here is what you can expect from this specific version:

• Optics: 6 elements in 5 groups
• Aperture: 6 aperture blades
• Weight: 135g
• Filter Size: 52mm screw-in thread

I’m not sure if it’s just my eyes, but I noticed some yellowing on the lens.

Now, this doesn’t necessarily mean the lens is radioactive and uses thorium.

Fortunately, I recently got a Geiger counter.

I have a DIY lens database for my collection, and about 11 lenses got marked as radioactive, so let’s test this lens and see whether it’s radioactive or if it’s just the coatings turning yellow.

I’m glad to say this lens is not radioactive.

It’s safe from “The Bunker” (the name for the metal box where I keep radioactive lenses), so it’s just the coatings turning a bit yellow with age.

The lens comes in a Pentax K mount.

I had the usual problem I experience with Pentax mount lenses on the Canon, which is the lens getting stuck.

Fortunately, I was able to remove it, but still, this isn’t something I enjoy when it happens.

The build quality of the lens is pretty good.

The body feels plastic, but the focus ring is nice and wide, especially if you have large fingers.

My copy’s focus is pretty smooth.

The aperture ring feels a bit stiff, making it difficult to change when handholding, but on my adapter it feels pretty good.

Still very stiff, though.

Being so lightweight at 135g, it’s a nice walk-around lens.

With the maximum aperture of F2, you can get some nice bokeh.

On the subject of bokeh, this is a very interesting lens indeed.

When I was using the lens on my Canon 6D, I originally thought it produced regular bokeh in the background.

It was only about halfway through my shoot that I discovered the lens has a bit of a quirk in the bokeh department.

It can make pretty smooth bokeh when the background isn’t busy.

For example, in photos of a flower, there aren’t any bubbles to be seen.

But the moment you have some movement or complex shapes in the background, the bubbles start to appear.

You can even see both variations in one photo: a wall giving you nice smooth bokeh, and the other side of the garden being out of focus, giving you bubble bokeh.

This lens isn’t as bubble-crazy as some of the other lenses I’ve tested, and I do like the oddball bokeh.

Smooth out-of-focus areas intermixed with bubbles is a very interesting look.

Close focus on the lens is approximately 30 to 40cm, so you won’t be doing any macro photography anytime soon, but it does allow you to get some nice close-up photos.

I even managed to photograph a bee with this lens.

In the stop-down test, wide open the lens loves to make its weird mix of bokeh.

Complex items in the background create bubbles, and less busy areas make a pleasing bokeh.

There’s some chromatic aberration when shooting wide open, and it does look like some glowing is prominent in this lens.

Stopping down, the chromatic aberration seems to go away.

Stopping down further, the bubble bokeh seems to be replaced with hexagon bokeh.

As always, the center is reasonably sharp when taking photos.

So in the end, was this lens worth it?

I’d say yes.

It’s an interesting lens for sure, and the plastic build makes it very lightweight when taking photos.

When shooting wide open, yes, some bits of the photo will be soft in comparison to the rest, but it can be really surprisingly sharp considering it’s wide open.

When comparing it to the other bubble bokeh lenses in my collection, this lens is interesting because I like the fact that the bokeh changes based on the background.

– Have a complex background? BOOM, bubble bokeh.
– Have a simpler, flatter background? BOOM, smooth background bokeh.
– Have both in a scene? Boom, you get both.

So the big question: where does it fit in my collection?

I’d say it fits somewhere between the need for bubble bokeh and regular bokeh.

This is an interesting lens, especially considering how sharp the center is.

As to who I’d recommend it to, I think I can see this lens being used for portraits or even just as a good walk-around lens.

The lightweight, fast aperture makes it pretty good for this, provided you don’t have problems with the Pentax K mount.

And once again, thank you so much for reading, and I’ll see you next time.

There’s a special kind of thrill in discovering a piece of “new old glass” that punches way above its weight. The Super-Takumar 55mm f/2, a vintage lens first released in 1962, is one of those gems. It’s a lens with a fascinating history, a unique rendering style, and a rather spicy secret: it’s likely radioactive.

For photographers who love character, unique bokeh, and the tactile feel of vintage gear, the Takumar 55mm f/2 offers a compelling package. Let’s dive into what makes this surprisingly lightweight lens a standout choice for your collection.

One of the first things you’ll notice about the Super-Takumar 55mm f/2 is its build quality. Despite weighing only 164 grams, it features an all-metal body that feels solid and durable in the hand. It uses a standard 49mm filter thread and comes with the ubiquitous M42 mount, making it incredibly easy to adapt to almost any modern DSLR or mirrorless camera.

But its most talked-about feature isn’t the metal body—it’s the glass itself. Like many high-performance Takumar lenses from the 1960s, this one incorporates rare-earth elements. In this case, that’s a polite way of saying it uses radioactive thorium in its glass elements to improve the refractive index. While I don’t have a Geiger counter on hand, it’s a well-known characteristic of this lens family, including its famous cousin, the 50mm f/1.4. Don’t worry, it’s generally considered safe to use, but it’s a fascinating quirk of photographic history!

Where this lens truly shines is in its image rendering. If you’re tired of clinically perfect lenses, the Super-Takumar 55mm f/2 will be a breath of fresh air.

The bokeh is the star of the show. Instead of producing aggressive “bubble bokeh,” this lens creates a background that feels incredibly painterly and subdued. The out-of-focus areas resemble an impasto-style painting, blending beautifully with the scene rather than dominating it. It’s perfect for portraits where you want the background to be a soft, artistic canvas that complements your subject.

When stopped down, the 6-bladed aperture produces another unique quirk: pentagon-shaped bokeh balls. It’s a distinct look that adds another layer of character to your images.

When shot wide open at f/2, the lens is reasonably sharp in the center, but the edges are quite soft. However, I discovered its secret to incredible performance. The sweet spot for this lens is between f/2 and f/2.8. In this narrow range, it retains the beautiful bokeh character while delivering exceptional sharpness that can resolve fine detail, as seen in the 100% crop of the Calla lily photo below.

To put the f/2 version to the test, I compared it against two other legendary Takumar lenses: the 55mm f/1.8 and the 50mm f/1.4. Here’s a quick breakdown of how they performed.

• Lens A (Super-Takumar 55mm f/2): Produced a pleasing bokeh with a mix of oval and its signature pentagon shapes.
• Lens B (Super-Takumar 55mm f/1.8): Very similar at first glance, but with slightly smoother bokeh in the corners and a subtle color difference.
• Lens C (Super-Takumar 50mm f/1.4): The most distinct of the three, creating bright “ring bokeh” or “soap bubble” effects on the outside of the bokeh balls, along with some cat-eye shaping.

While my initial preference in the wide-open shootout was the 55mm f/1.8 (Lens B), I found that the 55mm f/2 shot in its “sweet spot” produced my favorite image overall. Its rendering was more subdued and refined, making it a more versatile portrait tool.

Absolutely, yes. This lens is a must-have for anyone looking to add a unique, character-rich prime to their collection without breaking the bank.

I would recommend this lens for photographers who:

• Are looking for a fantastic portrait lens.
• Appreciate a more subdued, painterly bokeh style.
• Enjoy the history and quirks of vintage gear (including thorium glass!).

The main challenge is finding a copy in good condition, as older lenses can have issues like sticky aperture blades or stiff focus rings. But if you can find one in mint condition, you will be rewarded with a truly special piece of glass.

In the vast world of vintage glass, some lenses are known for their clinical sharpness, while others are cherished for their unique character. The Fuji Photo Film FUJINON 55mm F/2.2, first introduced in 1975, falls squarely into the second category. This isn’t a lens you buy for technical perfection; you buy it for one explosive reason: bubble bokeh.

I recently rediscovered this lens on my shelf and was reminded of its wild, unpredictable charm. If you’re a photographer who hunts for the most dramatic and interesting out-of-focus backgrounds, then this forgotten gem might just be your new favorite tool.

Weighing in at a feather-light 150g, the Fujinon 55mm f/2.2 is a mix of plastic and metal. While it doesn’t have the tank-like feel of some of its contemporaries, the build quality is perfectly functional and feels surprisingly nice in use.

Here are a few key characteristics:

• Mount: It primarily comes in the highly adaptable M42 mount. Be aware that a later 1979 model used the old Fujica X mount, which is not compatible with the modern Fuji X-mount system without a specific adapter.
• Filter Thread: It uses a standard 49mm screw-in filter thread.
• Ergonomics: The focus ring is a bit small, but the focusing action on my copy is smooth and pleasant. One major quirk to get used to is the focus direction—infinity is on the left side of the barrel, with close focus on the right, the opposite of many other M42 lenses.

Let’s be clear: the number one reason to own this lens is for its bokeh. It doesn’t just create bokeh; it creates an explosion of perfectly defined, hard-edged bubbles. I’ve started calling it a “bubble bomb” because even in scenes where you expect a smooth background, this lens finds a way to render countless specular highlights as distinct bubbles.

This is a love-it-or-hate-it characteristic.

• If you love bubble bokeh, this lens is a dream come true. It’s an effect that can turn a mundane background into a sparkling, dynamic part of your composition.
• If you dislike bubble bokeh, this is absolutely not the lens for you.

Even when you stop the aperture down, the lens’s character shines through. Thanks to its 5-bladed aperture, the bokeh balls take on a distinct pentagon shape, adding another layer of geometric interest to your shots.

Optically, the Fujinon 55mm f/2.2 is a fascinating contradiction. When shooting wide open, the overall image is very soft, with a dreamy glow around high-contrast edges. It’s a classic vintage look that can be beautiful for portraits or atmospheric shots.

However, calling it “soft” isn’t the full story. While the majority of the image is soft, the actual plane of focus can be incredibly sharp. I noticed this in a photo of a Calla lily; the flower as a whole looked soft, but zooming in to 100% revealed that the interior of the blossom was perfectly crisp and detailed. This unique combination allows you to have a sharp subject that seems to float in a dreamy, soft-focus world.

As a lightweight and compact lens, the Fujinon 55mm f/2.2 is an excellent choice for a walk-around lens. The joy of using a fully mechanical, manual focus lens is a tactile experience that never gets old.

For practical use, I’d recommend it for:

• Creative Portraits: The bubble bokeh can create a stunning, high-energy background that makes your subject pop.
• Nature & Floral Photography: The lens can transform foliage and light into a magical, sparkling backdrop.

Keep in mind that, like many lenses from this era, the images can benefit from some post-processing. A little bit of added contrast or dehazing in your editing software will really make the photos shine.

The FUJINON 55mm F/2.2 is a lens I bought and promptly forgot I owned. Rediscovering it has been a genuine delight. While it may not win any awards for clinical sharpness, its personality is off the charts.

It’s a strong competitor to other famous bubble bokeh lenses like the Pentacon Auto 50mm F1.8. While the Pentacon has long been my go-to, this Fujinon has certainly earned its place right next to it in my collection. It’s a “bubble bomb” with a charmingly weird soft-sharpness and a look all its own. If that sounds like fun, you won’t regret hunting one down.

The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM is a lens of contradictions. Its features can be annoying, its body is plastic, and its autofocus has quirks. But its optical performance is simply fantastic. It delivers sharp, beautiful images and incredibly stable video in a lightweight package.

In a world of countless 70-300mm lenses, Canon created something special with this one. It’s a true “Plastic Fantastic” and a worthy final entry in the legendary EF lineup.

In the crowded world of telephoto zooms, it’s easy for a lens to get lost in the shuffle. But the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM has earned a special nickname from me: the “Plastic Fantastic.”

Its body is mostly plastic, it’s loaded with some questionable features, and it has its fair share of quirks.

So, why the “fantastic” part? Because despite its flaws, this lens delivers where it counts—in the final image. Let’s break down the good, the bad, and the fantastic about this modern EF-mount swan song.

As the nickname suggests, the lens barrel is constructed primarily of high-quality plastic. While this keeps the weight down, it doesn’t feel cheap, and thankfully, Canon opted for a durable metal lens mount. However, the lens is packed with “features” that feel more like gimmicks than practical tools for a photographer.

The most prominent feature is a digital LCD panel that can display focal length, lens stabilization movement, or depth of field. While this might be theoretically useful for videographers using an external monitor, for everyday photography, it’s largely pointless. Your eye is in the viewfinder, not on the lens barrel.

Other frustrating design choices include:

A limited zoom lock: The lens has a switch to lock the zoom, but only at the 70mm position to prevent zoom creep during travel. You can’t lock it at 300mm, which would have been far more useful.

No Manual Focus Override: This is a major downside. If you’re in autofocus mode, turning the manual focus ring does absolutely nothing. You must physically flip the AF/MF switch on the lens to make any manual adjustments, which can slow you down at critical moments.

If you’re thinking this lens is all flaws, think again. The reason it earns its “fantastic” title is its outstanding performance.

Image Stabilization (IS)

The built-in lens stabilization is incredibly effective. This is a lifesaver when shooting handheld at 300mm, allowing you to get sharp shots at slower shutter speeds. When paired with a camera that has In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS), it becomes a videographer’s dream, producing remarkably steady telephoto footage.

Incredible Sharpness for a Non-L Lens

Optically, this lens is a powerhouse for its price. While it’s sharpest at 70mm, it is by no means a slouch at 300mm. The real surprise is how sharp it can be with close subjects. I took a photo of my cat at 300mm, and the level of detail captured in a 100% crop is staggering for a non-L zoom lens. It also has a respectable close-focusing distance (about 1 meter at 300mm), adding to its versatility.

No lens is perfect, and the “Plastic Fantastic” has two significant issues to be aware of.

The first is the autofocus, which can be a bit of a “doozy.” On both my Canon 6D and an adapted Fuji X-T5, the lens sometimes struggles to lock focus, especially at 300mm. While the focus speed is snappy on the Canon when it hits, the inconsistency can be frustrating.

The second is its performance with high-resolution sensors. On a Fuji X-T5 (40MP), the lens just doesn’t resolve enough detail to make those massive files worthwhile when cropped. Images look soft at 100%. However, on a sensor around 24MP (like the Canon 6D), it’s a perfect match, delivering beautiful, crisp results.

So, who is this lens for?

I would recommend it to: Hobbyist wildlife, bird, and sports photographers who want telephoto reach without taking out a second mortgage. The performance is excellent for the price.

I would also recommend it to: Videographers looking for a lightweight, stabilized telephoto zoom. The combination of IS and IBIS is fantastic.

I would NOT recommend it for: Dedicated portrait photographers (the f/4-5.6 aperture is too slow) or photographers using very high-megapixel cameras.

The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM is a lens of contradictions. Its features can be annoying, its body is plastic, and its autofocus has quirks. But its optical performance is simply fantastic. It delivers sharp, beautiful images and incredibly stable video in a lightweight package.

In a world of countless 70-300mm lenses, Canon created something special with this one. It’s a true “Plastic Fantastic” and a worthy final entry in the legendary EF lineup.