| Greg's camera equipment |
| Greg's photography pages |
| Greg's photo albums |
| Greg's photos |
| Greg's photo index |
|
|
|
|
In the 60s I was really interested in photography, and spent a lot of my parents' money on cameras. Much of the following list is based on notes I made some time round 1967. Starting round 1956, I had
(Old Jap1201276×94×6 camera ca. 1945).
My first real camera, which I used from April 1964 until July 1965, was a Voß Diaxette, with a 45 mm f/2.8 fixed Steinheil Cassar lens and a Pronto shutter. It probably looked identical to this one, which I bought on 25 June 2022:
More details about this camera on its own page.
This model was made between 1953 and about 1957, so my guess is that it was a hand-me-down from my father after he bought his Canon IV rangefinder camera in about April 1956. Some of the photos were taken with a screw-on “telephoto” lens that doubled the focal length and caused serious vignetting. I can't remember much else about the camera.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
On 14 March 1966 I took a photo with it using a 2½x4" sheet of film, so I assume this used 120 film with a 6x9 format.
It seems that this was a particularly rare combination. Most of the Vollendas were model 48, and from the image size this would have been a 70 or 72. But most of those were supplied with Schneider-Kreuznach Radionar 105/4.5 lenses. It's possible, though, from the link above, that the Tessar didn't actually come with the camera, though the only other reference on 3 June 1966 suggests that it did.
As to your Ikonta, it might have been a Nettar, as that's not just the name for some lenses but also a range of Zeiss cameras similar to Ikontas but generally lower spec, Ikontas usually had Tessar lenses.
So it looks as if the camera could be something like this Nettar 515/2 from Kees-Jan's collection:
In contrast to my camera, this one takes the smaller 120 film and has a Novar-Anastigmat 110/4.5.
In July 1965 I got an Asahi Pentax SV SLR, serial number 940962. It came with a 55 mm f/1.8 Super Takumar, serial number 1214486:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Like nearly all SLRs of the time, it didn't have through-the-lens metering, but I did have a clip-on external meter (seen on the photo above) which conveniently made it impossible to attach a flash unit at the same time. Here's a photo of a similar camera from an eBay auction:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
This camera has the 55 mm f/2 Super-Takumar, which was normally supplied with the cheaper S1a model.
On 26 June 1966 the camera developed shutter problems, and I sent it in for repair. I then sold it to a schoolmate and never used it again.
In 1966, I started carrying two cameras with me. The first “second” camera was a FED, a copy of a Leica II<something> with a genuine Leica top plate, serial number 212408, which I bought in Plymouth on 2 April 1966. It came with a 50 mm f/2.0 (Leitz) Summar lens, serial number 217679. It was sold to me as a Leica, and I didn't find out that it was a Fed until I tried to sell it to a camera dealer, only 10 days later. It wasn't a very nice camera; bottom loaders are a real pain, whether they're genuine or not. I only took three films in it, and one of those I transferred to another camera before it was finished. On 14 July 1966, only three months later, I gave it to my girlfriend, Jenny Hallett.
According to this serial number list, the top plate would have come from a Leica I made in 1936, and from this list the Summar would have been made in 1934.
Only 10 days after the FED I bought an Edixa-Mat flex S body, serial number 259171. At the time I noted that it was series “E”, though I no longer remember what that means. It came with a pentaprism (code name PRIVI, serial number 230934), a waist-level viewfinder and a plain matte viewfinder screen. It was a “cheap” model with limited shutter speeds (according to the manual 1/500 to 1/25 s, though the photo below shows a top speed of 1/1000 s). It appears not to have had any activation for automatic diaphragms (only the Edixaflex B had that), and of course it had no light meter. On the other hand it had interchangeable viewfinders and screens. It probably looked like this camera, described (in Japanese) here:
It was compatible with the Pentax lenses, and I didn't buy any further lenses for it. I took 26 films with it and sold it on 20 September 1967 to the same (now ex)-girlfriend to whom I had given the “Leica”. Clearly she hadn't liked it either.
In June 1966, I sold the SV, and on 5 August 1966 I got an Asahi Pentax “Spotmatic”, serial number 1182896. This was the first mass-produced SLR with through-the-lens metering. Apart from these details, it is very much like the SV. I still have this camera, though now the serial number on the camera is 1211890: it got damaged in January 1967, and the top plate, including “serial number”, was replaced by Asahi Optical in Hamburg. The serial number of the original lens (50 mm f/1.4 Super-Takumar) is 1591394, but I swapped lenses with my father some time in the late 1960s, and the lens I have now has the serial number 3077746. The original lens was the 8 element version, the “new” one is the 7 element version with the radioactive rear element.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
It's interesting to look at pricing then. My father bought the camera in Singapore, before the Malaysian and Singapore currencies split, and I paid MYR 370.00 for it, at the time equivalent to UKP 44.60. At the time the British price was £150. It's difficult to calculate the modern equivalent, but my take is that a British shilling then was worth the equivalent of £1.50 today, in other words a devaluation of about 97%. That would make the prices equivalent to £1,338 (USD 2,200) and and £4,500 (USD 7,400) today.
Also in 1966, I think, I inherited my father's Bolex B-8 standard 8 mm ciné camera. It had two lenses on a rotor. They appear to have been a 13/1.9 Yvar (serial number 322 945) and a 36/2.8 Yvar (serial number 296 345), not quite the 12.5 mm and 36 mm mentioned in the instruction manual. I didn't use it much, and I no longer have it or any films I took with it.
On 15 September 1967 I bought an Edixa-Mat Reflex D, serial number 273 753. This camera had better specs than the Edixaflex, including shutter speeds to 9 s and automatic diaphragm control, but still no light meter. It also came with another PRIVI pentaprism, serial number 544155. With this camera I had some difficulty with the automatic diaphragm actuation, as described here. It was a body only. The only photo I have of it is a crop from an unrelated image, but the second image looks pretty similar. The lens might be the 135 mm f/3.5 Super Takumar, and it looks as if it has the waist-level viewfinder connected.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
I didn't use this camera much, and in 1970 I gave it to my girlfriend, Sue Fortescue. I also bought a 90 mm f/4 Leitz Elmar to go with it. It was stolen from Sue some time in 1971.
After the 1960s my photographic activity dwindled. Most of my equipment, including the second Edixa and the 28/3.5 and 135/3.5 Asahi lenses, was stolen from my car in Milano in September 1976, and I was left only with the Spotmatic and the 50/1.4 Super Takumar. Things didn't change until over 25 years later:
In August 1992, I bought a Pentax Z1, serial number 5858549, with a 28/85 mm f/3.5-f/4.5 zoom, serial number 3262646. Somehow I have never used it much. It's strange that over the years cameras have become effectively less sensitive. In the mid-60s I used films with sensitivities between ISO 64/19° and 400/27°, with a maximum aperture of f/1.4. With the Z1 I would have needed film sensitivities between ISO 500/28° and 3200/36° to make up for the much smaller aperture.
In June 1998 I bought my first digital camera, a Casio QV-5000 SX, one of the first affordable cameras with 1 megapixel. It lasted about 8 months before failing. I sent it for guarantee repairs, which took 6 months; it arrived back unrepaired. The second time I sent it off was the last I ever saw of it. It never came back. I won't forget Casio for that treatment.
In retrospect, the camera wasn't much good anyway. Take a look at the photos I took with it: the lens was of very poor quality.
In October 2000 I bought a Nikon “Coolpix” 880, with 3 megapixels and a decent lens. It is quite a nice camera, but slow, and it is particularly bad at rendering skin tones: it makes people look as if they have been drinking excessively the previous night.
In November 2004 I bought a Ricoh Caplio R1 digital camera with 4 mexapixels. The advantages it had were that it had a real wide angle lens (corresponding to 28 mm on a 35 mm camera), and that it was very fast. On the down side the flash exposure was pretty terrible, to the point of being useless on some occasions. Still, I was happy with it until on 19 March 2006 I dropped it on the floor in the cathedral in Amalfi, which it didn't survive.
The next camera is a 6 megapixel Nikon “Coolpix” L1, which I bought in a hurry on 19 March 2006 in Amalfi after accidentally destroying the Ricoh. It has many advantages, but also the slowness and poor skin tone resolution of the Coolpix 880. It doesn't have any wider angle lens than average, either, and strangely, it also doesn't have any way of adjusting the sensitivity: it's stuck at ISO 100. It also seems to get through batteries very quickly. It came with four Sony NiMH batteries (two pairs), and they were the only NiMH batteries that worked with it: all others give up after less than 10 exposures.
In July 2007 I retired and finally had time to play with cameras again. In August 2007 I bought an Olympus E-510 with 10 megapixels, serial number D64504995:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
At the time of purchase it was very new on the market—the examples in the instructions show dates a couple of days after I paid for it—and it was the only SLR camera on the market with both image stabilization and composing via the LCD monitor (which they call “live view”). It's amusing how times have changed: 50 years ago SLRs showed images through the viewfinder until the photo was taken, and then it went dark. I sold this camera on 1 August 2009 after replacing it with the E-30.
In September 2007 I bought an Olympus OM-10 camera with a 50 mm f/1.8 Zuiko standard lens and an 80-210 mm f/3.8-4.0 Tamron telephoto lens, mainly for the latter. I only ever put one film through the camera, and I sold it again after I got a replacement telephoto lens.
In May 2009 I bought another Olympus, an E-30, serial number G67502432 to replace the E-510. I sold it again on 8 July 2015.
On 1 August 2010 I bought an Asahi Pentax SV, serial number 610300. That's right, the same model that I bought 45 years earlier. Judging by the serial number, it's considerably older than the first SLR.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Clearly it was second-hand, and I don't intend to use it (it doesn't even have a light meter!), but it came bundled with the SMC Macro-Takumar 50 mm f/4 shown in the photo, which I wanted to use for macro photos that my Olympus equipment can't do.
On 3 December 2013 I received an Olympus OM-D E-M1, serial number BHP228512. I kept an experiences and opinions page on this one. This camera died on me with what appears to be a failure of the image stabilization mechanism on 20 May 2024. It didn't seem worth repairing, so I bought a used replacement.
On 4 January 2017 I received a used Olympus E-PM1, serial number BBP501084, internal serial number (MCS on page 3 of the secret menus) 4134109018403103, indicating that it was made in September 2011. It's intended for backup use only, and has a problem with the on-board buffer battery: when I remove the battery, it forgets the date. It's unlikely to see much service, but the price was right.
On 23 May 2018 I took delivery of an Edixa Reflex, serial number 152145. with pentaprism and waist level viewfinders, two focusing screens and a Steinheil Cassar 50 mm f/2.8 lens, serial number 1670265. The pentaprism has the serial number 231469.
On 1 August 2019 I took delivery of an Olympus E-30 DSLR, serial number G69501426. That's the same model that I bought on 12 May 2009 and sold again in July 2019. Why a new one? For shots pointing into the sun, where I don't want to risk sensor damage.
On 10 January 2020 I took delivery of an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III, serial number BJ8A08587, for Yvonne.
On 22 May 2020 I took delivery of a particularly tatty Nikon F body, serial number 7075271, with Photomic FTn viewfinder, serial number 755418:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
According to this list, it was made between January and March 1970.
On 24 September 2020 I took delivery of a Nikon FM2 body (serial number N 7623634), five lenses and yet another mecablitz flash unit, in steel box:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
I had really only been looking for a lens for the Nikon F, but the price I paid for the lot was unbeatable: $150 Australian, about US $105, and it appears almost unused. More details in my diary.
On 19 March 2021 I took delivery of an Asahi Pentax S3, serial number 427116, with a clip-on exposure meter and Yashica Auto-Yashinon DS-M 50 mm f/1.7, serial number 20126364.
On 29 April 2021 I received the oldest SLR I had ever seen, an Asahiflex 1a, serial number 45328, along with a Takumar 50 mm f/3.5, serial number 50344, both made in about 1953:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
This was the very first Japanese SLR, and it looks surprisingly like (East) German SLRs such as the Praktiflex.
On 20 May 2021 I received a Praktica Nova body, serial number 23428:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
It's not very interesting, but it has a defective shutter, and I got it for $5. The lens in the photo is the Steinheil Cassar that came with the Edixa.
On 25 May 2021 I received an Exakta II body, serial number 651435.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
According to Andrzej Wrotniak's listing, it's subtype 1, made in 1949. This page states that the model was made between February and June 1949, and based on the serial number, probably March or April. This is now my oldest camera, about 4 years older than the Asahiflex. Interestingly the serial numbers overlap with the original Kine Exakta.
On 13 July 2021 I received an Olympus E-1 DSLR, serial number 15490. It was made in December 2004, and when I received it it had had only 425 shutter releases. It has firmware release 1.1, but the software that can update it is no longer available.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
On 30 July 2021 I received an Olympus E-330, serial number B91501815, along with a Zuiko Digital 14-45 mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, serial number 102421030. Again, it's a collector's item and interesting because it is the very first DSLR to have “live view”, a viewfinder display on the rear panel.
On 6 September 2021 I received a Contax D body, serial number 67469, though the rear cover has the number 246688.
On 11 December 2021 I took delivery of an Olympus E-300, serial number 623531061, along with another 14-45 mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Digital lens, serial number 180002977. The camera was made in June 2005, and it still had firmware 1.0. Shutter count was 9239, not very much, but considerably more than the other old Olympus cameras that I have bought. The serial number of the lens is very different from that of the other 14-45 mm f/3.5-5.6, suggesting that the camera and lens were originally sold in the USA.
On 10 June 2022 I took delivery of a FED 1, serial number 415393 with a 50 mm f/3.5 Fed lens with no apparent serial number:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
It's a copy of a Leica II, and it brings home just how primitive the old Leicas are.
On 23 June 2022 I took delivery of a Kiev 3a, serial number 5729174, with a Юпитер-8 (Jupiter-8) 5 cm f/2 lens, basically a rebadged Sonnar, serial number 5746458:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
On 25 July 2022 I received another Diaxette, which as far as I can tell is identical to the one I used in 1964: More details about this camera on its own page.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
I had bought it for the Tessar, which I wanted to put on the Contax D, but it proved to be too big and ugly.
On 4 January 2024 I received a used Olympus E-PM1, serial number BB5503840, internal serial number (MCS on page 3 of the secret menus) 4134111003806103, indicating that it was made in November 2011. This is almost the same camera as I received exactly 7 years before, except that it has been converted for full spectrum sensitivity.
On 27 May 2024 I received another (used) Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark I, serial number BHP252611, to replace the first one that had failed the week before. It had 9,564 shutter releases.
On 12 November 2024 I received a (used) OM System OM-1 Mark II, serial number BJRA15001. Despite claims to the contrary (“unused”), it had 920 shutter releases and had taken 1,357 photos. After some dispute with the seller, I ended up paying $2,047 for it.
On 25 November 2024 I received my third Ukrainian camera: a Kiev 80, apparently better known as Салют C (Salyut S), serial number 7803327, with a Vega 12B 90 mm f/2.8 lens, serial number 781113 and two backs, serial numbers 7800670 and 7811378. The first two digits of the serial numbers show that the components were made in 1978. In contrast to all the other cameras I have so far, this camera uses 120 film (6×6 cm) and resembles a Hasselblad 1000F. I paid $180.50 for it.
On 18 December 2024 I received a Voigtländer Bessa „Singlo“ camera, probably made before the Second World War. It's remarkably primitive: a 10,5 cm f/7.7 Voigtar (Cooke Triplet) and a self-cocking shutter that offers speeds of only 1/25 and 1/75 s.
Most of my cameras have had interchangeable lenses, and I've had a number of them. The list can't be exhaustive, of course: it's easy and interesting to try other people's lenses, and I can't recall all the lenses I have used. Here are the 20 lenses of various descriptions that I had on 10 May 2014. Only 13 of the lenses can be used on my Olympus cameras, and only 9 of them are intended for that system.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Since then I have added many more.
The Asahi Pentax SV that I got on 24 July 1965 came with a 55 mm f/1.8 Super Takumar standard lens, serial number 1214486.
Apparently at the same time I also bought a 135 mm f/3.5 Super Takumar, serial number 1317865.
On 6 September 1965 I bought a 400 mm f/8 Soligor telephoto lens, serial number T 393329 and a 3× Soligor teleconverter. I don't know what happened to the lens; I think that it must have been stolen from our house.
On 8 January 1966 I bought a Super-Takumar 28 mm f/3.5 wide angle lens, serial number 1364964.
With the Spotmatic I received a 50 mm f/1.4 Super Takumar lens, serial number 1591394. I later swapped this lens with my father's newer version of the same lens, serial number 3077746.
Of these, I still have the second 50 mm Super Takumar, now with yellowed glass. The 28 mm and 135 mm lenses were stolen in Milano (see above), and the 400 mm lens disappeared some time round 1997, possibly when we moved back to Australia.
After the loss of the lenses in Milano, I immediately bought a 28 mm f/2.8 wide angle lens, and later my wife Doris and I bought some relatively cheap lenses with the surprising name “Exaktar”, a 35 mm f/2.8 and a 135 mm f/2.8. The serial number of the latter is 6132867. When we split up, Doris kept the 28 mm and 35 mm lenses and I kept the 135 mm lens. I also bought an 18 mm f/2.8 Sigma extreme wide angle lens, which I sold again in July 2009.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
As if that wasn't enough, in September 2002 I bought another lens, a Hanimex 300 mm f/5.5 telephoto. Unlike the Soligor decades before, it has an automatic diaphragm:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Then in August 2010, I bought an SMC Macro-Takumar 50 mm f/4 macro lens, serial number 4417366, along with the second Pentax SV mentioned above. It's clearly much later and presumably works (possibly with adaptor) in newer Pentax bodies:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
On 16 June 2017 I received another M42 lens, again as a bundle with an Asahi Pentax bellows unit. The lens is a Raynox 35 mm f/2.8, serial number C52650. It's interesting because it's the first lens I have seen that specifies an angle (63°), the diagonal field of view when mounted on the full-frame cameras for which it was intended. It also has the text Ww, which might indicate German „Weitwinkel“ (wide angle). It also has a defective focus ring or mechanism, something that is of little concern when mounted on bellows.
On 19 March 2021 I took delivery of a Yashica Auto-Yashinon DS-M 50 mm f/1.7 lens, serial number 20126364.
On 23 May 2018, with the Edixa Reflex, I received a Steinheil Cassar 50 mm f/2.8 lens, serial number 1670265.
On 27 July 2022, with the Praktica super TL, I received a 50 mm f/2.8 Tessar, serial number 8318338.
As I mentioned, I never used the Pentax Z1 much, but I did buy one lens for it, along with the Hanimex, a 80-240 mm f/4 Sun Zoom. I bought it mainly because the price was right: there's something mechanically wrong with it, and it no longer focuses to ∞ at shorter focal lengths, but I got it for $10 as a result, and it still works at the longer lengths.
On 14 July 2018, along with the Asahi Pentax KM, I received an SMC Pentax 55 mm f/1.8 lens (presumably the same optics as the 55 mm Super-Takumar that I got with my first Pentax SV), serial number 1245598.
The Olympus E-510 came with the standard Zuiko Digital ED 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, serial number 212197195. Since then I've been adding gradually:
As mentioned above, in September 2007 I bought a 80-210 mm f/3.8-4.0 Tamron telephoto lens, along with the Olympus OM-10 camera. I used it via an adapter. I sold this lens on 20 November 2008.
With the OM-10 I also got a 50 mm f/1.8 Zuiko standard lens. I used it a couple of times, but it had nothing to offer that the 50 mm f/1.4 Super-Takumar didn't.
In May 2008 I replaced the Tamron telephoto with a Zuiko Digital ED 70-300 mm f/4.0-5.6 long telephoto lens (equivalent to 140-600 mm on a full frame camera), serial number 825610007. I sold it exactly 9 years later, on 1 May 2017.
In September 2008 I replaced the Zuiko Digital ED 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 standard lens with a Zuiko Digital ED 12-60 mm f/2.8-4.0 SWD (equivalent to 24-120 mm on a full frame camera), serial number 230033616.
In May 2009, along with the E-30, I bought a Zuiko Digital ED 9-18 mm f/4.0-5.6 ultra wide angle lens, serial number 300102323. Hugin calculates the minimum focal length at about 8.8 mm, though I'm not sure whether this isn't due to incorrect assumptions based on the aspect ratio.
In August 2009 I bought a Zuiko Digital ED 50 mm f/2.0 Macro lens, serial number 192054704.
On 6 November 2012 I bought a second-hand Olympus Zuiko Digital 18-180 mm f/3.5-6.3, mainly for convenience, since the 12-60 and 70-300 lenses already cover just about all this range. I didn't note the serial number, and the EXIF data doesn't report it. It proved to be quite useful, though. Unfortunately, the focus speed with the E-PM2 was not very impressive, so I replaced it with the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150 mm f/4.0-5.6, and sold it on 14 July 2015.
On 4 December 2013, the day after receiving the E-M1, I received the new M.Zuiko 12-40 mm f/2.8 Pro lens, serial number AC5218267. I sold it on 28 April 2017.
With Yvonne's Olympus E-PM2 came an Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 II R lens, serial number ABH956018.
On 2 May 2014 I received a Olympus BCL-1580 15 mm f/8 Body Cap Lens, apparently without a serial number. It's a tiny bare-bones lens intended mainly for Yvonne to use when she's riding. I sold this lens on 27 December 2015.
On 9 May 2014 I took delivery of an Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150 mm f/4.0-5.6 lens, serial number AAK208277. Unfortunately, this lens proved to be defective, and I returned it a few days later.
Instead I bought a new Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150 mm f/4.0-5.6 lens, serial number AAK263738, which arrived on 16 May 2014.
On 4 July 2014 I received a second-hand Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 8 mm f/3.5 fisheye lens, serial number 156003301. The EXIF data doesn't include the number (which it reports as 000000000).
The body cap lens is really not a very good lens, but Yvonne likes it because it's small. So on 17 October 2014 I got her a second-hand M.Zuiko Digital 17 mm f/2.8 Pancake lens, serial number AB9202060. It's barely larger than the body cap lens, but has much better image quality. But Yvonne didn't use it much either, so I sold this lens on 27 December 2015.
The 17 mm pancake still wasn't enough for Yvonne. She had a rather valid issue that she wanted to be able to put the camera in her pocket, pull it out again and take photos. With the pancake she could put the combination in her pocket, but on taking it out she first had to remove the (tiny) lens cap, and that's not easy when riding. On 30 September 2015 we received a M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 EZ lens, serial number AC4B13531. It's only marginally larger than the 17 mm lens, but an automatic lens cap is available for it. We bought one of them too, a JJC Z-O14-42S aftermarket version, only half the price of the Olympus part. It jammed when we got it, but after a bit of washing it seems to be working OK. Others have confirmed that they have had no trouble.
On 17 October 2015 I took delivery of a second-hand Olympus Zuiko Digital 35 mm f/3.5 Macro lens, serial number 192054704. Why? I already had the Zuiko Digital ED 50 mm f/2.0 Macro, a better lens. But its focal length is frequently a problem, and it has a maximum magnification of 1:2 (area 37.6×26.0 mm), while the 35 mm macro has a maximum magnification of 1:1 (area 17.3×13.0 mm). Both make it convenient for a number of applications, including taking photos while walking the dogs.
On 16 December 2015 I received a Zuiko Digital ED 14-35 mm f/2.0 SWD lens, the world's fastest standard zoom lens. The serial number is 180002977.
At the same time I also received an EC-20 2× teleconverter, serial number 272012348. I never really used it except for experiments, and I sold it again on 4 May 2017.
On 7 January 2016 I received a Zuiko Digital ED 35-100 mm f/2.0 telephoto lens, serial number 170001015.
On 21 January 2016 I received an Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60 mm f/2.8 Macro lens, serial number ABQ227050.
On 21 September 2016 I received an Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45 mm f/1.8, serial number ABSA46896. It's as fast as any lens I have bought in the last 50 years, and it's tiny, making a surprising difference from the Zuiko Digital ED 35-100 mm f/2.0 zoom lens. It's difficult to think that, at its focal length, it outperforms the zoom.
On 12 October 2016 I received a M.Zuiko Digital ED 30 mm f/3.5 Macro lens, serial number ACBA04378.
On 27 October 2016 I took delivery of the first non-Olympus lens for my camera, a Leica Summilux 25 mm f/1.4 lens, which Panasonic perversely call a H-X025E. The serial number is 13091100310.
On 18 January 2017 I received a Panasonic Lumix G 20 mm f/1.7 (H-H020AE in Panasonic jargon), serial number 09LG3074803. This is the older of two almost identical lenses, but it scores (marginally) higher ratings in DxOmark's tests.
On 31 January 2017 I received a Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15 mm f/1.7 ASPH., or H-X015E in Panasonic-speak, serial number 75SIC307120N. It is rebadged as a DJI for one of their drones. The EXIF data report it as DJI MFT 15mm F1.7 ASPH, but apart from cosmetics it appears identical to the Summilux.
On 28 April 2017 I received a Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400 mm f/4.0-6.3 telephoto lens, serial number 27CIF16G019P.
On 8 May 2017 I received a Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 12-60 mm f/2.8-4, serial number 07DX6132475D.
On 16 June 2017 I received a Raynox 35 mm f/2.8 lens with M42 mount, serial number C52650, free with a set of M42 bellows. The focus does not work, but that is probably not an issue with the bellows.
On 15 September 2017 I received a Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 8 mm f/1.8 Fisheye PRO, serial number 347009963. Yes, I already had the Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 8 mm f/3.5 fisheye lens, but there are reasons to believe that the image quality of the new lens is better.
On 17 October 2017 I received a used M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-100 mm f/4.0 IS PRO lens, serial number ACC214354.
On 25 June 2018 I received a used M.Zuiko Digital ED 75 mm f/1.8 lens, serial number 344018628.
On 1 July 2019 I received a M.Zuiko DIGITAL ED 7-14 mm f/2.8 PRO lens, serial number AC8A22385.
On 1 August 2019, the E-30 came with a Zuiko Digital ED 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, serial number 212721917.
Also on 1 August 2019, I received a second lens with the E-30, a Zuiko Digital 40-150mm f/3.5-4.5 lens, serial number 136252981.
On 11 November 2019 I received a used Voigtländer Nokton 25 mm f/0.95 lens, serial number 8140610. Why? GAS is one thing, and maybe the satisfaction of being able to show the Nikon users that they're not by any means the first with a standard lens with an f/0.95 aperture. And of course, for more practical reasons, the reduced depth of field.
On 30 July 2021, along with the Olympus E-330, I received a Zuiko Digital 14-45 mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, serial number 102421030. For some reason I can't find any useful web reference for this lens.
On 11 December 2021, along with the Olympus E-300, I took delivery of another 14-45 mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Digital lens, serial number 180002977. The serial number of the lens is very different from that of the other 14-45 mm f/3.5-5.6, suggesting that the camera and lens were originally sold in the USA.
With the Nikon FM2 that I received on 24 September 2020 came no fewer than 5 lenses:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
They are:
A Nikon lens 28 mm f/2.8 series E, serial number 1958113. This is apparently the cheapest of the set, not worthy of the Nikkor name. The lens was manufactured some time between May 1981 and 1985. With the Viltrox NF-M43X adapter it becomes a 20 mm f/2 lens, clearly not in the same league as the Panasonic Lumix G 20 mm f/1.7.
A Nikkor 35 mm f/1.4 lens, serial number 410408. This lens was manufactured between 1977 and November 1981. It's the only one not in perfect condition: the diaphragm sticks open at apertures below f/8. With the Viltrox NF-M43X adapter it becomes a 25 mm f/0.99 lens, offering no advantage over the Voigtländer Nokton 25 mm f/0.95.
A Nikkor 50 mm f/1.4, serial number 4285307. This lens was made some time before June 1981. With the Viltrox NF-M43X adapter it becomes a 35 mm f/0.99 lens.
A Nikkor 85 mm f/1.4, serial number 198627. This is a behemoth of a lens, made some time after March 1981. With the Viltrox NF-M43X adapter it becomes a 60 mm f/0.99 lens.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
A Nikkor 105 mm f/2.5, serial number 935469. This lens was made some time after March 1981. With the Viltrox NF-M43X adapter it becomes a 75 mm f/1.8 lens, which makes it pretty useless compared to the M.Zuiko Digital ED 75 mm f/1.8.
Much of the information about these lenses came from this excellent lens list
On 29 April 2021 I received a Takumar 50 mm f/3.5, serial number 50344, with 39 mm thread, along with the Asahiflex 1a.
On 28 October 2021 I took delivery of a Schneider Xenar 50 mm f/2.8 lens, serial number 1148489, for my Exakta II.
On 10 June 2022, with the FED 1, I received a 50 mm f/3.5 Fed lens with no apparent serial number. It appears to be an Elmar copy.
On 23 June 2022, with the Kiev 3a, I received a Юпитер-8 (Jupiter-8) 5 cm f/2 lens, basically a rebadged Sonnar, serial number 5746458.
On 12 June 2024 I received a Ernst Leitz Wetzlar GmbH [German, no English version available] Hektor 13.5 cm f/4.5, serial number 855598, and a 20 cm f/4.5 Telyt, serial number 1367108:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
According to the serial numbers and this serial number list, the Hektor was made in 1951, and the Telyt was made in 1956. This makes the Hektor the oldest lens I have had so far.
The good thing about the Micro Four Thirds system is that it's easy to use SLR lenses on them. Early on I bought an adapter for Four Thirds system lenses, and even before that I had an adapter for M42 lenses (from Pentax and similar). When I got the Nikon lenses, I bought not one, but two adapters: on 29 October 2020 I bought a normal adapter, and then on 18 November 2020 I bought a Viltrox NF-M43X optical adapter, which reduces the focal length by 0.71, and thus increases the aperture by the same factor.
| Lens | Focal length | Aperture | Serial number | Purchased | Until | |||||
| Tessar | 105 mm | f/4.5 | 1423185 | 1964? | 26 September 1976 | |||||
| Super Takumar | 55 mm | f/1.8 | 1214486 | 24 July 1965 | 12 July 1966 | |||||
| Super Takumar | 135 mm | f/3.5 | 1317865 | 24 July 1965 | 26 September 1976 | |||||
| Soligor | 400 mm | f/8 | T 393329 | 6 September 1965 | round 1997 | |||||
| Super Takumar | 28 mm | f/3.5 | 1364964 | 8 January 1966 | 26 September 1976 | |||||
| Summar | 50 mm | f/2.0 | 217679 | 2 April 1966 | 14 July 1966 | |||||
| Super Takumar | 50 mm | f/1.4 | 1591394 | 5 August 1966 | 1 May 1967 | |||||
| Super Takumar | 50 mm | f/1.4 | 3077746 | 1 May 1967 | ||||||
| 28 mm | f/2.8 | 26 September 1976 | 27 November 1982 | |||||||
| Exaktar | 35 mm | f/2.8 | 1978 | 27 November 1982 | ||||||
| Exaktar | 135 mm | f/2.8 | 6132867 | 1978 | ||||||
| SMC Pentax-FA | 28-80 mm | f/3.5-4.7 | 3262646 | 2 August 1992 | ||||||
| Sun-Zoom | 80-240 mm | f/4 | 343866 | 12 September 2002 | ||||||
| Hanimex | 300 mm | f/5.5 | H694154 | 12 September 2002 | ||||||
| Canon EF-5 | 18-55 mm | f/3.5-5.6 | 052055883 | 1 June 2006 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 14-42 mm | f/3.5-5.6 | 212197195 | 23 August 2007 | 31 October 2008 | |||||
| Tamron | 80-210 mm | f/3.8-4.0 | 6 September 2007 | 20 November 2008 | ||||||
| Zuiko | 50 mm | f/1.8 | 6 September 2007 | 20 November 2008 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 70-300 mm | f/4-5.6 | 825610007 | 1 May 2008 | 1 May 2017 | |||||
| Zuiko Digital | 12-60 mm | f/2.8-4 | 230033616 | 8 September 2008 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 9-18 mm | f/4-5.6 | 300102323 | 12 May 2009 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 50 mm | f/2 | 192054704 | 12 August 2009 | ||||||
| SMC Macro-Takumar | 50 mm | f/4.0 | 4417366 | 1 August 2010 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 18-180 mm | f/3.5-6.3 | 6 November 2012 | 14 July 2015 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko | 12-40 mm | f/2.8 | AC5218267 | 4 December 2013 | 28 April 2017 | |||||
| M.Zuiko | 14-42 mm II R | f/3.5-5.6 | ABH956018 | 23 April 2014 | ||||||
| Olympus | 15 mm | f/8 | 2 May 2014 | 27 December 2015 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko | 14-150 mm | f/4-5.6 | AAK208277 | 10 May 2014 | 15 May 2014 | |||||
| M.Zuiko | 14-150 mm | f/4-5.6 | AAK208277 | 16 May 2014 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital Fisheye | 8 mm | f/3.5 | 156003301 | 4 July 2014 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko | 17 mm | f/2.8 | AB9202060 | 17 October 2014 | 27 December 2015 | |||||
| M.Zuiko EZ | 14-42 mm | f/3.5-5.6 | AC4B13531 | 30 September 2015 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 35 mm | f/3.5 | 192054704 | 17 October 2015 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 14-35 mm | f/2 | 180002977 | 16 December 2015 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 35-100 mm | f/2 | 170001015 | 7 January 2016 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko | 60 mm | f/2.8 | ABQ227050 | 21 January 2016 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko | 45 mm | f/1.8 | ABSA46896 | 21 September 2016 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko | 30 mm | f/3.5 | ACBA04378 | 12 October 2016 | ||||||
| Leica Summilux | 25 mm | f/1.4 | 13091100310 | 27 October 2016 | ||||||
| Lumix | 20 mm | f/1.7 | 09LG3074803 | 18 January 2017 | ||||||
| Leica Summilux | 15 mm | f/1.7 | 75SIC307120N | 31 January 2017 | ||||||
| Leica Vario-Elmar | 100-400 mm | f/4-6.3 | 27CIF16G019P | 28 April 2017 | ||||||
| Leica DG Vario-Elmarit | 12-60 mm | f/2.8-4 | 07DX6132475D | 8 May 2017 | ||||||
| Raynox | 35 mm | f/2.8 | C52650 | 16 June 2017 | ||||||
| Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO | 8 mm | f/1.8 | 347009963 | 15 September 2017 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko Digital IS PRO | 12-100 mm | f/4 | ACC214354 | 17 October 2017 | ||||||
| Steinheil Cassar | 50 mm | f/2.8 | 1670265 | 23 May 2018 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko Digital ED | 75 mm | f/1.8 | 344018628 | 25 June 2018 | ||||||
| SMC Pentax | 55 mm | f/1.8 | 1245598 | 14 July 2018 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko DIGITAL ED PRO | 7-14 mm | f/2.8 | AC8A22385 | 1 July 2019 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 14-42 mm | f/3.5-5.6 | 212721917 | 1 August 2019 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 40-150 mm | f/3.5-4.5 | 136252981 | 1 August 2019 | ||||||
| Voigtländer Nokton | 25 mm | f/0.95 | 8140610 | 11 November 2019 | ||||||
| Nikon | 28 mm | f/2.8 | 1958113 | 24 September 2020 | ||||||
| Nikkor | 35 mm | f/1.4 | 410408 | 24 September 2020 | ||||||
| Nikkor | 50 mm | f/1.4 | 4285307 | 24 September 2020 | ||||||
| Nikkor | 85 mm | f/1.4 | 198627 | 24 September 2020 | ||||||
| Nikkor | 105 mm | f/2.5 | 935469 | 24 September 2020 | ||||||
| Yashinon | 50 mm | f/1.7 | 20126364 | 19 March 2021 | ||||||
| M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-200 mm f/3.5-6.3 | 12-200 mm | f/3.5-6.3 | 350104535 | 16 April 2021 | ||||||
| Takumar | 50 mm | f/3.5 | 50344 | 29 April 2021 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 14-45 mm | f/3.5-5.6 | 102421030 | 30 July 2021 | ||||||
| Schneider Xenar | 50 mm | f/2.8 | 1148489 | 28 October 2021 | ||||||
| Zuiko Digital | 14-45 mm | f/3.5-5.6 | 180002977 | 11 December 2021 | ||||||
| Fed | 50 mm | f/3.5 | 10 June 2022 | |||||||
| Jupiter-8 | 50 mm | f/2 | 5746458 | 23 June 2022 | ||||||
| Tessar | 50 mm | f/2.8 | 8318338 | 27 July 2022 | ||||||
| Hektor | 13.5 cm | f/4.5 | 855598 | 12 June 2024 | ||||||
| Telyt | 20 cm | f/4.5 | 1367108 | 12 June 2024 | ||||||
| Vega 12B | 90 mm | f/2.8 | 781113 | 25 November 2024 | ||||||
To summarize: I've had a total of 69 interchangeable lenses, of which I still have 51, 28 of them compatible with the Micro Four Thirds system (11 Four Thirds, 17 Micro Four Thirds, of which 11 are from Olympus, 5 from Panasonic/Leica and 1 from Voigtländer), and another 16 that can be adapted (5 Nikon mount, 8 M42 mount, 3 Leica screw mount). In addition, the Viltrox focal length adapter gives me effectively 2 for 1 with the Nikon lenses, so I have 49 different lens possibilities on the μFT cameras, not all of which make sense.
I also have had a number of electronic flash units:
The first was a Kakonet, about which I have no further information. I appear to have got rid of it some time in December 1965.
Then on 17 August 1966 I bought a Sunpak 7d, serial number 309844. I modified this one to be able to use a smaller condenser, only 16 μF—in those days the power output was not regulated, and the smaller condenser was useful for close-ups. With the small condenser recycle time was under a second.
On 24 October 1967 I bought a second-hand Mecablitz 300, an enormous, old shoulder-pack job:
I'm not sure why I even wanted it, though it seems that it had a guide number of 46 with the reflector in “normal” position, making it the most powerful portable flash unit I have ever had. But it was clumsy, and I never used it much.
Round 1980 I bought a mecablitz 40 CT 4. I still have this unit. Despite its age, it has a power output comparable with the most powerful of modern flash units. The 40 is an indication of the guide number, but it's at a relatively wide angle setting. One of the issues with this flash is that the contact voltage is 150 V, enough to damage most modern digital cameras.
On 9 October 2008 I got a studio flash setup with two 110 J (“Ws”) flashes, umbrellas and stands.
On 12 May 2009 I received a mecablitz 58 AF-1 O digital, which understands the Olympus/Panasonic/Leica flash protocol. Metz seems to have disowned this unit: all that remains on their web site is the firmware download page.
This unit has a guide number specified as 58. That looks a lot more than the 40 of the 40 CT 4, but it's measured at “105 mm”, a silly way to refer to 52.5 (!) mm in the Four Thirds format for which it is intended. At “50 mm” the guide number drops to 42, and at 35 mm it drops to only 35, less than the 40 CT 4.
In January 2013 the flash tube exploded. Repair quotes were a minimum of half the new price, so I bought a new tube and tried to repair it myself. What a disaster! I got most of the way and couldn't get it back together again. I haven't given up, but it's on the back burner.
On 9 December 2009 I got a clip-on ring flash adapter for my new mecablitz:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
I was quite happy with it at the time, but it was dimensioned for the E-30, and after getting the E-M1 the ring was positioned too low. In the meantime I've decided that it was just too clumsy, so I won't replace it.
My Olympus OM-D E-M1 camera came with a bundled “flash”, the FL-LM2 with a guide number of 7! It's pretty useless.
To make up for the FL-LM2, I bought a Meike MK-300, a cheap flash unit which understands the Olympus/Panasonic/Leica protocol. It has the advantage of being a lot smaller than the mecablitz:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
It has a claimed guide number of 32 (and no focal length adjustments), though I have my doubts. Still, for many things it does the trick. It has proved unreliable, unfortunately: sometimes it doesn't trigger. I have a suspicion that the trigger voltage is too low to work reliably with my cameras.
Despite my reservations, on 27 March 2014 I got a new mecablitz 58 AF-2, effectively the same flash with a few new features that I don't need. If I get the 58 AF-I repaired, they can communicate with each other.
Yvonne's new Olympus E-PM2 came with another toy flash, this time called FL-LM1. It has the same low guide number of 7 as the FL-LM2, and the other specifications are also identical. Possibly it's just the same flash with different cosmetics to match the appearance of the camera.
The Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II came with another toy flash, the FL-LM3, this time not quite as much a toy: it can do a few additional things that the older ones can't. It also has a guide number of 9.
On 28 October 2014 I received a “Viltrox JY-670 Macro Ring Lite”. I'm still not sure whether that means “light” as in flash, or “light” as in “not the full quantity”?.
On 17 March 2018 I received a used Olympus STF-8 macro flash unit with two flash heads very similar in appearance to the toys delivered with recent cameras. They have the lowest guide number yet: 6.5. It's a nightmare to use, and for some reason it doesn't work with Olympus' focus stacking.
On 21 August 2019 I took delivery of a mecablitz 15 MS-1 ring flash unit, my latest attempt at macro flashes. It's a slave flash, which put me off, but it's so much easier to use than the Olympus STF-8.
Yvonne's Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III came with yet another toy flash, the FL-LM3.
On 24 September 2020, with the Nikon FM2, I received a yet another mecablitz, a 45 CL-1, also the largest since my old 1950s mecablitz 300.
My wife Yvonne also uses a camera, though not to the extent I do. For a while she used my Nikon L1, but in June 2009 we bought her a Kodak M1093 IS digital camera. The price was right, and it was relatively easy for her to use. It has a ridiculously high resolution (the same as for the E-510), but of course the picture quality can't hold up, as my sensor test page shows. It also has an annoying habit of locking up the USB interface, requiring a full reset of the camera before a computer will recognize it again. Kodak agreed to replace the unit, but I have no reason to believe that this isn't a design issue.
That problem seems to have gone away, but another, worse one occurred after the one year warranty expired: the camera can no longer focus. I can't imagine it's worth repairing, so after a lot of investigation on bought her a Canon IXY 200F (one of three names by which this camera is known). In Asia that's the name, in Australia it appears to be called IXUS 105, as it is in Europe, and in the USA it's called a PowerShot SD1300 IS Digital ELPH (what a mouthful of mumbo-jumbo!). Why do people have to obfuscate names so much?
In the course of time, the IXY 200F developed similar problems; I assume it's related to the dusty environment in which Yvonne takes many of her photos. It seems that cheap digital cameras aren't designed to cope with that. I've taken to trying to use the camera as a replacement for my Nikon, but it's not clear whether I can get the focus issues sorted out.
On 23 April 2014 I bought her an Olympus E-PM2, serial number BGT501312, with an M.Zuiko Digital 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 II R lens, serial number ABH956018. This is quite closely related to my Olympus OM-D E-M1, but it's much smaller. Unfortunately, it's still not as small as the Canon it replaces:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
That's particularly an issue while taking photos from horseback. As a result I bought first the 15 mm body cap lens and then the M.Zuiko Digital 17 mm f/2.8 Pancake lens, but Yvonne was still not satisfied. Finally I bought the M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 EZ, though I personally didn't like it because of the electric zoom. More details about all these lenses above
In the course of time, Yvonne found limitations with the E-PM2. After buying a PIXIO “Robot Cameraman”, it seemed a good idea to get a camera with better video capabilities, so on 10 January 2020 we took delivery of an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III, serial number BJ8A08587, mainly because it had a microphone input. She still uses almost the smallest lens that she can—the original M.Zuiko Digital 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 II R. She, too, has gone off the EZ lens.
|
|
|
There's lots of other stuff that goes towards camera equipment, of course. This section is a work in progress itemizing some of it.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
In the 1960s I gradually stopped needing exposure meters, since even then the cameras had them built in. But as a result of problems with flash exposure, on 11 November 2014 I received a new Sekonic L-308S exposure meter, mainly for flash exposures. It works well, and it shows significant differences in the automatic exposure offered by flash units. I'm still trying to understand what is happening.
This meter has a strange way of displaying apertures. I have a conversion table.
| Greg's home page | Greg's diary | Greg's photos | Copyright |
