| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
handz
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 8
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:51 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
handz wrote:
Of course, Im going to make comparsion photo this evening. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
blende8
Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 260
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
blende8 wrote:
Post your ser.no, too.
I once had three, two with the more "agricultural" focus ring and the smooth surface, ser.no. 90.. and 91..
The one I kept, with the better focussing ring and the matt finish has a ser.no. 93..
Images here.
_________________
Best wishes, Wieland
K-1, K-5IIs
Pentax, mysterium quod absconditum fuit ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
handz
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
handz wrote:
So here are the pics!
As you can see, there are lot of differences!
The "Cyrylic" one have:
Bluish coating.
Thiner focusing grip.
Lighter font and logo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blende8
Joined: 29 Sep 2007
Posts: 260
Location: Bremen, Germany
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
blende8 wrote:
Thanks!
Any difference in the smoothness of the focussing ring?
_________________
Best wishes, Wieland
K-1, K-5IIs
Pentax, mysterium quod absconditum fuit ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
handz
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
handz wrote:
The Cyrylic one is much much smoother, maybe too mcuh, from using. The Cyrylic have bit of matt finish. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 3693
Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Splendid specimens! It's still yellow glass though some blue truly reflects.
_________________
---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
handz
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
handz wrote:
Yeh still yellow, camera wont take it, but it is much more blue when seen by your eyes.
I must test if the added blue layer added something good or bad to the lens.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TBaker
Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 344
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
TBaker wrote:
Would you sell one?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
handz
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
handz wrote:
Sure! But Im very expensive  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 4060
Location: Charleston
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 1:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
handz: Is the rear glass loose on either one? My rear most glass is loose and I don't know how to get to it.
_________________
Regards,
Woodrim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pulatom
Joined: 01 Dec 2010
Posts: 109
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
pulatom wrote:
Which version (Cyrillic or Latin) do you think was better build, mechanically and optically?
_________________
"Any good modern lens is corrected for maximum definition at the larger stops. Using a small stop only increases depth..." Ansel Adams
My photos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 3693
Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
The difference between these two samples is much smaller then variation that happens between two specimens of the same type due to factors like storing, handling, year of production etc. So information would be irrelevant by my opinion.
_________________
---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pulatom
Joined: 01 Dec 2010
Posts: 109
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pulatom wrote:
I've found a site where someone posted a photo made with the 85/1.2 version. He converted it to DSLR by simply sawing off the protruding element  .
http://photoholic.110mb.com/lenstest1.html
Ain't the sharpest one, and the CA is huge, but it gives kind of dreamy Imagon-like effect, don't you think?
_________________
"Any good modern lens is corrected for maximum definition at the larger stops. Using a small stop only increases depth..." Ansel Adams
My photos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
handz
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
handz wrote:
Yeah I found that too, IQ is very low. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 4713
Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
Interesting test indeed 
I find most lenses above f1.4 expensive and overrated. They often suffers from bloom, purple fringing and low contrast wide open, but this particular lens in the test (85mm f1.2) can be purchased for a pretty good price.
_________________
Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pulatom
Joined: 01 Dec 2010
Posts: 109
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pulatom wrote:
If I get my hands on a 85/1.2 I'll try with sawing off the rear element, it should work alright for B&W photos, some sharpening can always be applied .
_________________
"Any good modern lens is corrected for maximum definition at the larger stops. Using a small stop only increases depth..." Ansel Adams
My photos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 4713
Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
Clever one at Click here to see on Ebay.de, look it's a helios!
_________________
Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scheimpflug
Joined: 06 Feb 2010
Posts: 1888
Location: New Zealand / USA
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Scheimpflug wrote:
| pulatom wrote: |
| If I get my hands on a 85/1.2 I'll try with sawing off the rear element, it should work alright for B&W photos, some sharpening can always be applied . |
Before you take the saw to it, try it without. The majority of the rear protrusion just unscrews and comes off, and the rear element drops out as well, leaving a much shorter protrusion from the lens barrel. I was able to use just a very short extension ring to space this out to a safe distance, and since the lens becomes a "focus with your feet" design anyway, the reduction in maximum focus distance isn't really a problem.
Keep in mind though that without the rear element, it is just a single-element lens... So don't get your hopes up too high, it is really more of a novelty than anything.
_________________
Sigma DP1, Nikon D40 (hers ), Polaroid x530, Pentax P30t, Pentax P50, (P30t/P50 K-A to Nikon F body mount conversion)
Nikon: 18-55/3.5-5.6 "G ED II DX" (F) Soligor: 28/2.8 (FL->F converted), 135/3.5 (F), 3x TC (F, modified) Kalimar: 28-85/3.5 (F)
Vivitar: 70-210/2.8-4.0 Version 3 (F), Tele 500/6.3 Preset (F), 19/3.8 (F) Minolta: 300/5.6 (SR/MC/MD pending F conversion)
Tamron: 28/2.8 (Adaptall) Panagor: 28/2.5 (FD) Aetna: 300/5.6 (F) Osawa: MC 28/2.8 (F)
Vintage Lenses: Dallmeyer: 1940s A.M. 14in 356mm f4 (ULF->M42) 1930s Adon Telephoto Taylor, Taylor & Hobson: 1880s Rapid Rectilinear 8 1/2 x 6 1/2 11.31in f/8 (LF->?)
Parts Lenses: Nikon 35-135/3.5-4.5 (F), Sigma 70-210/4.5 (F), Nikon 50/1.8 Series E (F) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
handz
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 8
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
handz wrote:
Nothing new, there is H3T-1 with cheap m42 lens on ebay every week... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pulatom
Joined: 01 Dec 2010
Posts: 109
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
pulatom wrote:
| Scheimpflug wrote: |
| pulatom wrote: |
| If I get my hands on a 85/1.2 I'll try with sawing off the rear element, it should work alright for B&W photos, some sharpening can always be applied . |
Before you take the saw to it, try it without. The majority of the rear protrusion just unscrews and comes off, and the rear element drops out as well, leaving a much shorter protrusion from the lens barrel. I was able to use just a very short extension ring to space this out to a safe distance, and since the lens becomes a "focus with your feet" design anyway, the reduction in maximum focus distance isn't really a problem.
Keep in mind though that without the rear element, it is just a single-element lens... So don't get your hopes up too high, it is really more of a novelty than anything. |
We'll see, after all it's always fun to try something like this, it's probably the only M42 85mm lens with such a big aperture.
| handz wrote: |
Nothing new, there is H3T-1 with cheap m42 lens on ebay every week... |
I was thinking about selling mine with Helios 44-2, maybe I'll get some of the lens price back .
_________________
"Any good modern lens is corrected for maximum definition at the larger stops. Using a small stop only increases depth..." Ansel Adams
My photos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 4060
Location: Charleston
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
I'll ask again... Has anyone had a loose rear element in the Cyclop? Do you know how to open the back to secure the rear element?
_________________
Regards,
Woodrim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pulatom
Joined: 01 Dec 2010
Posts: 109
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pulatom wrote:
Didn't disassembly that lens yet, but looks like you have to unscrew the three screws that show up when you set the closest focus distance, maybe then you'll have access to the rear element.
_________________
"Any good modern lens is corrected for maximum definition at the larger stops. Using a small stop only increases depth..." Ansel Adams
My photos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Farside
Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 6549
Location: Ireland
Expire: 2013-12-27
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Farside wrote:
There's going to be some really disappointed buyer if they're hoping for a Monster 
For what it's worth, I've fitted other M42 lenses on my Cyclops and they've all worked well enough as night sight lenses, even a crappy plastic Cosinon.
_________________
Dave - Moderator
Camera Fiend and Biograph Operator
If I wanted soot and whitewash I'd be a chimney sweep and house painter.
The Lenses of Farside (click)
BUY FRESH FOMAPAN TO HELP KEEP THE FACTORY ALIVE ---
Foma Campaign topic -
http://forum.mflenses.com/foma-campaign-t55443.html
FOMAPAN on forum -
http://www.mflenses.com/fs.php?sw=Fomapan
Webshop EU
http://www.fomafoto.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 4713
Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
Have anyone tested with a zoom lens?  Could be handy with a little bit of magnification on the nightvision
_________________
Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pulatom
Joined: 01 Dec 2010
Posts: 109
Location: Wroclaw, Poland
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pulatom wrote:
If you only could find a zoom lens with F2 aperture... .
BTW - just sold the body with Helios 44-2 for $55, looks like I spent only $35 on the lens itself  .
_________________
"Any good modern lens is corrected for maximum definition at the larger stops. Using a small stop only increases depth..." Ansel Adams
My photos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
