$5 Vintage lens VS. $1000 NEW Lens

[@donaldmfalls]

This is a great example of why I invested in vintage manual focus lenses for years.

[@Pleezath]

Same

[@Durio_zibethinus]

The swirly characteristic on macro shots really gives us a clue, more than that I wouldn't able to tell the differences. But again, story is a king and should be our top priority, plus a good lighting setup will be far more useful rather than one piece of expensive glass especially for starters 😊

[@elams1894]

The swirly bokeh of the vintage Revuenon was very pleasing indeed and gave away many of the 5$ shots. The vintage lens gets my pick. Nice video, thanks.

[@seanmullin1393]

Hey Mathieu, great content again! I honestly thought that the $5 lens at points had better artistic quality for some things. The Egg shot looked much better IMO with the inexpensive lens. Of course there are other considerations. The larger lens allows for the follow focus to be more granular due to the larger width of the lens; the Cine lens also was T2 which at times can be invaluable. So overall I liked your final say, it depends. Recommendation: A short series on how to clean vintage lenses, tools required, etc. Keep up the good work.

[@MathieuStern]

I am planning to do a video about how to fix stuck appetite blades !

[@MrShanePhoto]

The cheaper lens is incredible for the price. And it has a very stylised look and feel. Definitely the option for someone wanting to start in macro photography. Or for a project that needs very unique look.

[@kruno7150]

Enna (rebranded as Revuneon in this case) had amazing lenses, unfortunately they went downsides with plastic-fantastic bodies (while keeping amazing optics). But, regardless, $5 even with the haze, is a steal

[@angelgrace1175]

Great video, thank you! The only way I was able to spot the difference is the vintage lens footage had a bit of wobbles? ripples? around the edges of the frame. Other than that I was pretty surprised at how well it kept up with such a beefy modern competitor!

[@SatanSupimpa]

I could actually differentiate most of the footage, but not in a way that I would classify as best or worst. I probably prefer the softer look of the vintage glass.

[@deltacx1059]

3:11 only a bad focal ratio if your aperture is already tiny. My biggest is a giant homemade prime with a 128mm aperture at a ratio of ~f/5.5. It blows away my off the shelf sigma lens in terms of light gathering despite the sigma being half the ratio.

[@mich8261]

Thank you Mathieu, that was a fun video.

[@astralshore]

Beautiful performance on the vintage. But also kind of reassuring that a lens that is literally 200x more expensive is actually better on technical aspects 😉

[@anecro]

Vintage lenses are a serious hack in the photography space few people focus on. I bought a Topman 75-200mm (MC version) and it's so fucking sharp and consistent it's left me speechless. It has built in macro capabilities and it's a consistent minimum f/3.5 throughout the zoom range. That thing cost 50€. Imagine how much I'd have to spend for something like that in modern terms. There are 2 negatives with this lens and it's the lower contrast and chromatic aberration, both of which can be corrected or at least improved digitally.

[@helmetcam2484]

I have the same Revue lens, also in dusty-fungi condition, bought it in an auction for $20.

[@jirosaves_theworld]

as vintage lens lover, i love both still much fog and non fog type look hahaha

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

There are probably 50 lenses between these two. Buying a slightly aging premium lens is a good investment. That's the best part of progress, it makes nice things cheaper.

[@alexlindstrom9971]

The lens costs a minimum of $75 for poor copies on eBay and goes up fast. Not particularly relevant to a wide audience that you got it for $5 at a yard sale, not should anyone think of it as a '$5 lens.' They still often cost roughly as much as many Helios copies.

[@MathieuStern]

still $75 is way less than $1000

[@SurrealExposure12]

@@MathieuSternyes, but 5 is way lesser than 75. So?

[@anandarochisha]

75 dollars is a 20 pack carton of cigarettes in Canada..or a pair of new jeans. 1000 is a months rent in a basement...in a small City..or a Harry Potter understair closet in Vancouver..big difference..

[@dongyo69]

​@@anandarochisha rent is so high? I live in austria vienna and pay 1000€ for 90qm + heat + electricity.. And we say its expensive. Salary's are between 1500- 3500 euro.

[@anandarochisha]

@@dongyo69 Vienna ? One of the world's great cities..I would pay 1000 to live In my van there.

[@francoiscoulombe-giguere4024]

Les images de la guêpes sont incroyables.

[@MathieuStern]

je crois que c'était un Frelon asiatique vue la taille, mais oui, on vois meme sa ... langue ?

[@larsltj]

Those spanner wrench tools are dangerous, an accident with scratches to the lens would sooner or later happen. Rubber pads in different sizes are much safer and a better tool.

[@MathieuStern]

Sure but sometimes you need the extra grip of the wrench I will add the rubber pads in the description

Do you have information about universar vintage lens?

[@MathieuStern]

cool design but not a very interesting lens as it's not fast at all.

[@randyk1919]

$5 lens has that swirly bokeh goodness!

[@mavfan1]

I dishonestly thought the same.

[@analoogje]

differences? YES! +995$ worth of difference? (for me) no!

[@interestings7866]

$1000 isn’t really too expensive for a lens, likes it’s expensive but for a lens it’s pretty standard

[@dovbaeb]

Can you transform a gun scope into a lense ? Would be fun to see Day 2

[@kruchaibedroommusic1214]

Wow

[@ДенисКавунов]

❤🙌

[@asdsad17]

$1000 for a china lens? yikes

[@FrankP83]

i want the lens sucker for this black friday!!! PS: Mat, why my Helios 44-2 doesn't have that swirly effect?

[@MathieuStern]

did you try at F2 ?

[@FrankP83]

@@MathieuStern i've tested the lens at F2, is very saddle the effect...i've tested with an image of multiple spot lighs on the screen, i don't have actually at home a correct background to unfocus :/

[@MathieuStern]

@@FrankP83 test it outside with a big tree far in the background, the swirl will appear with the light behind the leaves.

[@KNAPPAID]

@@MathieuStern the effect is less pronounced on apsc