View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Lloydy
 Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7699 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:01 am Post subject: Do I need a 135 / 1.8 MF Lens? |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
I've just seen a Soligor 135 / 1.8 with a serial No that indicates its a Sun Optical lens for £360 ( UK Pounds = 407 Euro = 483 $ US ) I can buy a new Samyang AF 135mm F1.8 FE for £670 - which is roughly twice the price, and I'm sure there are new manual focus Chinese / Korean lenses out there for less?
The fastest 135 I've got is my Takumar Bayonet 135 / 2.5 which I like, I think it has a bad reputation. I like 135mm lenses, my most used are probably my Pentacon 2.8, Rokkor 2.8 and my Yashinon - R 3.5.
Do I need this Soligor 1.8 ? talk me out of it..... _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
calvin83
 Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7103 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
I found focusing with my Vivitar 135/2.3 is a challenge for me. So, I bought a Samyang AF 135mm F1.8 FE. The Samyang focus fast and accurately on my A7RII. The sharpness and bokeh are excellent compare to any manual 135mm I have tired.
 _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you.
Last edited by calvin83 on Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:33 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stevemark
 Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3000 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:29 am Post subject: Re: Do I need a 135 / 1.8 MF Lens? |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Lloydy wrote: |
I've just seen a Soligor 135 / 1.8 with a serial No that indicates its a Sun Optical lens for £360 ( UK Pounds = 407 Euro = 483 $ US ) I can buy a new Samyang AF 135mm F1.8 FE for £670 - which is roughly twice the price, and I'm sure there are new manual focus Chinese / Korean lenses out there for less?
The fastest 135 I've got is my Takumar Bayonet 135 / 2.5 which I like, I think it has a bad reputation. I like 135mm lenses, my most used are probably my Pentacon 2.8, Rokkor 2.8 and my Yashinon - R 3.5.
Do I need this Soligor 1.8 ? talk me out of it..... |
Some years ago - actually many years ago - I compared "all" those 1.8/135 lenses with the Sony Zeiss ZA 1.8/135 which back then was pretty much the only "new" 1.8/135mm. We also the MD-III 2/135, the Nikkor 2/135 and the Canon nFD 2/135, along with some 2.3/135 lenses (actually three collectors contributing with their stuff to do the tests).
All the common 1.8/135 vintage MF lenses were extremely low contrast, and pretty much crap compared to the ZA 1.8/135mm. After having seen that, I never felt the need to buy a vintage MF 1.8/135mm for about CHF 150-200 (typical price here in Switzerland). Let alone for >400 EUR!!
I hope that clarifies it. Better look for a good used 2/135mm (nFD, MD, AI/AIS) or (best!) a modern Zeiss APO. Sigma should be good as well, but I don't know them personally. Samyang might be good as well, but manufacturing issues with the 2.8/14 (still not solved after >10 years of production) are a big caveat.
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
philslizzy
 Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4697 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
i had one in the 70s shooting concerts. that stop made a difference _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
D1N0
 Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2270
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
I wouldn't bother unless under a 100. Get a SMC Pentax 135mm 1:2.5 instead. It totally outclasses the Takumar Bayonet and is usually cheaper than the S-M-C Takumar version these days. _________________ pentaxian |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Lloydy
 Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7699 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 1:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
D1N0 wrote: |
I wouldn't bother unless under a 100. Get a SMC Pentax 135mm 1:2.5 instead. It totally outclasses the Takumar Bayonet and is usually cheaper than the S-M-C Takumar version these days. |
Yeah, I like the Bayonet 2.5 but appreciate the SMC Pentax version is better. I got the Bayonet version in a complete kit of Pentax stuff, so it wasn't a deliberate buy. I'm just intrigued by a 1.8 _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stevemark
 Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3000 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
philslizzy wrote: |
i had one in the 70s shooting concerts. that stop made a difference |
Back then, when 100 ISO (?) was the highest you could get for color slides, it cetainly was cool to have f1.8.
Agfa started their "Chrome CT 200" in 1982; before it was ISO 50 only (CT 1 as fa as I remember.
There was the Fujicolor 400, starting around 1975, and the Fujichrome 400 (about 1980).
Kodacolor 400 started in 1977 (before max ISO 100), and the sensational Kodacolor VR 1000 in 1983.
Konica 1600 color negative was very good as well, but only around 1986 (?).
But these limitations have gone ...
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
vivaldibow
 Joined: 23 Jun 2018 Posts: 797
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 4:46 am Post subject: Re: Do I need a 135 / 1.8 MF Lens? |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
Lloydy wrote: |
I've just seen a Soligor 135 / 1.8 with a serial No that indicates its a Sun Optical lens for £360 ( UK Pounds = 407 Euro = 483 $ US ) I can buy a new Samyang AF 135mm F1.8 FE for £670 - which is roughly twice the price, and I'm sure there are new manual focus Chinese / Korean lenses out there for less?
The fastest 135 I've got is my Takumar Bayonet 135 / 2.5 which I like, I think it has a bad reputation. I like 135mm lenses, my most used are probably my Pentacon 2.8, Rokkor 2.8 and my Yashinon - R 3.5.
Do I need this Soligor 1.8 ? talk me out of it..... |
I wouldn’t go beyond $200 for a third party 135/1.8 or 2. I also wouldn’t go for a modern equivalent as I will probably never go back to a manual focus lens. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
caspert79
 Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 2180 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
I remember having an old 135/1.8, don’t even remember which one. I played with it for a while, and then sold it. It’s definitely not worth the usual asking price IMO.
I also had a Nikkor ai 135/2. The Nikkor was significantly better, but at f/2 still nothing to write home about compared to modern glass. The Nikkor’s stiff double helicoid I had serviced but focusing never became really smooth. Closed down to f/2.8 the lens became much better; comparable to the Nikkor (135/2.8 ). But it’s a heavy lens: I sold it after a month or so.
If it’s bokeh you’re after I heard good things about the Nikkor 105/1.8, a lens that’s actually still on my wish list. It’s supposed to be sharp wide open (with low contrast). A lens I can recommend, if you don’t mind plastics, with similar speed/ focal length is the Canon EF 100mm f/2. I use it on my Sony (with AF!) using a K&F adapter. The Canon can (still) be found for good prices (under 200€) and has SPEC-TA-CU-LAR optics, also wide open. Of course it won’t give you that MF feel. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
cbass
 Joined: 27 Jul 2019 Posts: 364
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cbass wrote:
We are looking at a financial collapse in Europe and with USA with possibly Canada as well. At this time it is better to be in physical assets. Things like precious metals. Gold, Silver, Lead, Brass (last two only allowed in certain free countries), and lenses. Whether the 135/1.8 is the right choice others can answer better. But the time of your purchasing power may be limited or may increase substantially if you are one of the few with some cash left. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
calvin83
 Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7103 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
From my experience in collecting lenses for 15 years, sought after vintage lenses in excellent condition are unlikely to become cheaper. The commonly available lenses are likely to become cheaper and cheaper when the demand becomes lower. I regret selling my biotar and primoplan 58 in the past. Now, I can no longer find them for the price I sold them.  _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Alun Thomas
 Joined: 20 Aug 2018 Posts: 444 Location: New Zealand
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alun Thomas wrote:
Old lenses don't generally pass a cost/benefit analysis when compared to modern alternatives, unless the cost is very low. It shouldn't need to be pointed out, that's not why most people like old lenses. So IMO, only you can answer for yourself. I do have to say, it seems odd that few people mention the same cost/benefit considerations for other older lenses where they would also without doubt fail, it seems to mainly be reserved for fast 135mm lenses.
I tried all 4 of the older F/1.8 designs. My favourite was/is the Soligor with the cemented triplet, followed by the Sigma with the cemented triplet. For reasons completely unrelated to IQ, and more related to cemented triplets. None of them were objectively terrible, nor were they outstandingly great. All can isolate a subject as well as any other lens with the same size effective aperture, and that seems to be the reason you might want to try one with a modern camera.
Having said all that, I am of the opinion it could be had for somewhat cheaper if you lurk in wait for an opportunity. The identical lens badged as Polaris is available for a little less on Ebay currently, although I am not sure how that would work out in terms of import tax considerations. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
visualopsins
 Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 9854 Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Do you need 135/1.4?
https://m.dpreview.com/news/6873913619/mitakon-speedmaster-135mm-f1-4-lens-relaunched-with-7-mount-options _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200
Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300
Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm
Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element),
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100
Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100
SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH) |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Oldhand
 Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 5940 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 10:03 pm Post subject: Re: Do I need a 135 / 1.8 MF Lens? |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Lloydy wrote: |
I've just seen a Soligor 135 / 1.8 with a serial No that indicates its a Sun Optical lens for £360 ( UK Pounds = 407 Euro = 483 $ US ) I can buy a new Samyang AF 135mm F1.8 FE for £670 - which is roughly twice the price, and I'm sure there are new manual focus Chinese / Korean lenses out there for less?
The fastest 135 I've got is my Takumar Bayonet 135 / 2.5 which I like, I think it has a bad reputation. I like 135mm lenses, my most used are probably my Pentacon 2.8, Rokkor 2.8 and my Yashinon - R 3.5.
Do I need this Soligor 1.8 ? talk me out of it..... |
I'm not sure what you look for in the lenses that you own or want to acquire David.
Perhaps a 1.8/135 will have that magic that excites in some way - if so, then go for it.
I have owned a Soligor 135mm f2 made by Sun in the past, and it was really quite good, but it was so heavy, and in use I found the very large front focusing ring to be tiring to hold for long periods while the camera was up to my eye.
It spent longer periods on the shelf, as I would shy away from it and choose a more manageable lens, so I eventually sold it.
There is a huge advantage in buying a modern autofocus lens in these specs, and that is the percentage of images in "nailed focus", and the ease of holding a large piece of glass that you don't need to wrestle with to focus.
Good luck with your decision
Tom
Last edited by Oldhand on Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
calvin83
 Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7103 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
If it has the same weight as my 135/1.8, I may consider it.  _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RokkorDoctor
 Joined: 27 Nov 2021 Posts: 926 Location: Kent, UK
|
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 12:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RokkorDoctor wrote:
calvin83 wrote: |
If it has the same weight as my 135/1.8, I may consider it.  |
TBH, at that size & weight I struggle to think what I would use that for. DOF on my 135/2 is already thin enough.
If that image is of a production sample than that tripod mount looks very flimsy for a $3,000 lens; looks nowhere near stiff enough...?
And what is this about a "clickless manual focus ring" as a sales point? Stating the bloody obvious for a MF lens; why would anyone want clicks on a manual focus ring?? _________________ Mark
SONY A7S, A7RII + dust-sealed modded Novoflex/Fotodiox/Rayqual MD-NEX adapters
Minolta SR-1, SRT-101/303, XD7/XD11, XGM, X700
Bronica SQAi
Ricoh GX100
Minolta majority of all Rokkor SR/AR/MC/MD models made
Sigma 14mm/3.5 for SR mount
Tamron SP 60B 300mm/2.8 (Adaptall)
Samyang T-S 24mm/3.5 (Nikon mount, DIY converted to SR mount)
Schneider-Kreuznach PC-Super-Angulon 28mm/2.8 (SR mount)
Bronica PS 35/40/50/65/80/110/135/150/180/200/250mm |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
DConvert
 Joined: 12 Jun 2010 Posts: 879 Location: Essex UK
|
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DConvert wrote:
RokkorDoctor wrote: |
calvin83 wrote: |
If it has the same weight as my 135/1.8, I may consider it.  |
TBH, at that size & weight I struggle to think what I would use that for. DOF on my 135/2 is already thin enough.
If that image is of a production sample than that tripod mount looks very flimsy for a $3,000 lens; looks nowhere near stiff enough...?
And what is this about a "clickless manual focus ring" as a sales point? Stating the bloody obvious for a MF lens; why would anyone want clicks on a manual focus ring?? |
I assumed they meant clickless aperture ring, but it didn't inspire confidence
I won't be tempted to but it as I already have a 150mm f1.3, which is without an aperture ring so quite enough of a pain. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
calvin83
 Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7103 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
Yes. Aperture ring is clickless on the Mitakon 135/1.4. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
D1N0
 Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2270
|
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
calvin83 wrote: |
Yes. Aperture ring is clickless on the Mitakon 135/1.4. |
Who needs an aperture in a 1.4 lens. If a wanted to stop down I'd just use a 2.8 or 3.5  _________________ pentaxian |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RokkorDoctor
 Joined: 27 Nov 2021 Posts: 926 Location: Kent, UK
|
Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RokkorDoctor wrote:
DConvert wrote: |
RokkorDoctor wrote: |
calvin83 wrote: |
If it has the same weight as my 135/1.8, I may consider it.  |
TBH, at that size & weight I struggle to think what I would use that for. DOF on my 135/2 is already thin enough.
If that image is of a production sample than that tripod mount looks very flimsy for a $3,000 lens; looks nowhere near stiff enough...?
And what is this about a "clickless manual focus ring" as a sales point? Stating the bloody obvious for a MF lens; why would anyone want clicks on a manual focus ring?? |
I assumed they meant clickless aperture ring, but it didn't inspire confidence
I won't be tempted to but it as I already have a 150mm f1.3, which is without an aperture ring so quite enough of a pain. |
Looks like DPReview got its knickers in a twist; the original Japanese description indeed mentions a clickless aperture ring.
Is your 150/1.3 manageable to focus accurately at f/1.3 using the focus ring? (tele-lens focus helicoids tend to be steep) Or do you move the camera/lens combo a bit forward/back to fine-tune? _________________ Mark
SONY A7S, A7RII + dust-sealed modded Novoflex/Fotodiox/Rayqual MD-NEX adapters
Minolta SR-1, SRT-101/303, XD7/XD11, XGM, X700
Bronica SQAi
Ricoh GX100
Minolta majority of all Rokkor SR/AR/MC/MD models made
Sigma 14mm/3.5 for SR mount
Tamron SP 60B 300mm/2.8 (Adaptall)
Samyang T-S 24mm/3.5 (Nikon mount, DIY converted to SR mount)
Schneider-Kreuznach PC-Super-Angulon 28mm/2.8 (SR mount)
Bronica PS 35/40/50/65/80/110/135/150/180/200/250mm |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
philslizzy
 Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 4697 Location: Cheshire, England
|
Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2023 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
philslizzy wrote: |
i had one in the 70s shooting concerts. that stop made a difference |
Back then, when 100 ISO (?) was the highest you could get for color slides, it cetainly was cool to have f1.8.
Agfa started their "Chrome CT 200" in 1982; before it was ISO 50 only (CT 1 as fa as I remember.
There was the Fujicolor 400, starting around 1975, and the Fujichrome 400 (about 1980).
Kodacolor 400 started in 1977 (before max ISO 100), and the sensational Kodacolor VR 1000 in 1983.
Konica 1600 color negative was very good as well, but only around 1986 (?).
But these limitations have gone ...
S |
I mostly used GAF 500 slide film, it was around long before the fast ektachromes, I never used neg film for gigs, you could never het a decent print.
My go to exposure was around EV10 with Gaf 500 based on opportune meter readings over the years. I had about 90% success rate.
now it's LEDs, i have no idea if EV10 would work with film. _________________ Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Lloydy
 Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7699 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2023 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
Very interesting discussion, and I seem to have my doubts confirmed. The Soligor is overpriced for me, whether it's over valued is a different view? If it sells, then I guess that sets the value for an uncommon lens.
And more importantly, would it deliver what I hoped it might? Which is actually something I don't know. Other than curiosity, and the chance it might be a stellar lens, I don't actually need it. But your comments and the discussion has been very illuminating in so many ways. Without getting technical, pixel peeping and test charts I think we've concluded that the lure of the extra few wide open stops might not be the holy grail we think it might be.
Anyway, it's sold. I hope the buyer enjoys it, whatever it's worth? _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
iangreenhalgh1
 Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 16036
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2023 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Keep your eye out for a fast data projector lens, you can find those dirt cheap sometimes, made by companies like Minolta and Olympus and originally costing thousands, they have all the latest tech in terms of fancy glass types and aspherical elements, IQ is usually stunning if you can focus the damn things! _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
stevemark
 Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3000 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2023 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
Keep your eye out for a fast data projector lens, you can find those dirt cheap sometimes, made by companies like Minolta and Olympus and originally costing thousands, they have all the latest tech in terms of fancy glass types and aspherical elements, IQ is usually stunning if you can focus the damn things! |
Interesting suggestion. Thanks.
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|