I wonder if wizards obsess over old wands or knick-knacks. I’ve been on a vintage lens acquisition kick. I really like the Fotasy 35mm 1.7F, but when opened wide, it’s pretty blurry in the corners.

When I was younger, my dad gave me his Olympus OM10 and lens collection. They currently decorate my apartment, but I purchased a lens adapter to use the OM mount on my Sony a6000. Most of the lenses are pretty cheap, or don’t produce a magical bokeh. My dad mostly did landscapes or infrared photography.

The first lens major lens I went for was the Helios 44-2. It’s has a notable “swirly” bokeh similar to the Fotasy 35. The Helios allows for a non-centered subject, where the Fotasy has more lens distortion.

After receiving my Helios and reading up on it more, another lens kept being named. This led to my impulse buy of the Jupiter-3. I purchased an “old” Jupiter-3 off of eBay for much cheaper than the one from Lomography. I like the size of the Jupiter-3. Attached to my camera, the Jupiter-3 feels like it was made for my Sony a6000. My gripe with the old Jupiter-3 is the closest it can focus is 1 meter. The Helios 44-2 can focus up to 0.6 meters. The Jupiter-3+ can focus at 0.7 meters, but I only have so much money. I’d recommend the Helios 44-2 as a fun manual lens. It’s great for portraits, and useful in small areas like the kitchen. The Jupiter-3 is more expensive, but I’ve found a lot of enjoyment with it for portraits and close-ups with macro rings.

A Manual Affair

I’m still a n00b when it comes to photography, but I really like using manual lenses. With my lenses that support all the bells and whistles, I notice my photos lack depth or emotion. It’s easy to click, click, click and trust you “got the shot.” Modern lens lack character and emotion. The bokeh is too perfect. The focus and blur is too on point.

Vintage lens can get a crisp focus, and as you move out, the “swirly” bokeh distorts the image in a unique way. This photo of my niece expresses emotion and feels like there’s a story behind it—but she was just chasing after the “puppy.”

When shooting with these lenses, I find myself more in the moment. What am I capturing? What’s do I want in focus? Where can I place the subject of my photo? These are questions I should be asking whether I’m shooting on a nice camera or my phone (and I swear I try), but they’re questions I’m forced to ask when using a manual lens. I’m also not fighting with my camera on what it thinks should be in focus, and what I want in focus.

Using a wide aperture and some fairy lights, it’s possible to create some interesting shots like the cool tumblr kids.

What’s cool is also the cost of some of the lenses. Some can be had for a little as $4. Lenses with a lot of positive reviews can be found for $20. I received a cheap teleconverter and a 70-210mm lens. It’s been fun trying to shoot different things with it. I tried to take a picture of the moon, but I still need to figure everything out.

My top 5 highlights were:

1. Reusing my dad’s old lenses. Film is expensive to process, and being able to use them for more than decoration is awesome.
2. The bokeh. New lenses are too perfect, not enough character.
3. Story telling. Vintage lenses offer a lot in their character. A simple photograph obtains so much more depth without any editing.
4. Appreciating the moment. Thoughts on focus and composition aren’t things you can slack off on.
5. Mechanical feeling. Nothing is “on the wire.” I get full control of most aspects of the end result.

Chasing and photographing a toddler is a tad tougher when a vintage lens, but once I get “in the zone,” the results are deep and filled with emotion. Modern lenses feel like they capture a frozen frame of time. Vintage lenses capture a story.