Kyoei, aka Vernon Edonar

Univer · Joined: 30 Jun 2009 Posts: 282

Hi All,

Thanks to Luis (and other colleagues), we know the following things:

1. The very interesting Kyoei SLR lenses were occasionally sold under other brand names; and

2. Vernon, a photo distributor, marketed at least one Early-ish Tamron lens as an Edonar - "Edonar" being, presumably, Vernon's "house brand" for lenses.

What I didn't know until recently is that there were also some Kyoeis sold as Vernon Edonars. Here's a group shot: left to right, the 35/3.5, the 105/3.5, the 135/3.5 and the 180/3.5. These are all T-mount lenses; I gather, from posts here, that Kyoeis have heretofore been seen only in fixed mounts. The 35, 105 and 180 use the early T-mount adapter that attaches with three screws that fit into a channel at the end of the lens body; the 135 uses a "standard" screw-on T-mount adapter.

One way to identify these Edonars is to look for the decidedly odd focus ring, which looks for all the world like three aperture rings stacked together. (There isn't room for such a contrivance on the diminutive 35mm.)

The 105mm is the odd duck in this group - for several reasons. For one thing, I absent-mindedly neglected to set its focus to infinity, so the lens appears longer, relative to the 135 and the 180, than it should. More significantly, when I compare the 105/3.5 Edonar to the 105/3.5 Orikkor (made by Kyoei) in this thread, I'm not so sure this Edonar is a Kyoei product at all. The Edonar lacks the pull-back aperture-setting mechanism found on the 135 and the 180, and the aperture ring turns in a direction opposite to that of the Orikkor. On the one hand, it would seem odd for the other Edonars to be Kyoeis, and for there to be a 105/3.5 Edonar in the line-up that isn't the Kyoei 105/3.5. On the other, the 105's design differences clearly argue against its being a Kyoei product. And we know, because of the Tamron Edonar, that Vernon sourced lenses from more than one manufacturer.

Anyway, there it is: another brand name under which some Kyoeis were sold. And confirmation that at least some Kyoeis were in fact sold as T-mount lenses.

Cheers,

Jon

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Thanks Jon !

The 135 and 180 at least seem indisputably Kyoei designs.

Very interesting indeed, and quite a coup to get the lot of them.

I have seen this odd design of focus grip on other lenses, maker still unkown, including some weird old "zebra" zooms in Soligor and Miranda brand, and some 100-200mm T-mount zooms.

Vernon sold several makers lenses indeed. I have seen some Tokinas also in that brand, besides the Taisei/Tamrons.

Univer · Joined: 30 Jun 2009 Posts: 282

Hi Luis,

I wish I could take credit for accumulating this lot over time, but much of the credit goes to the anonymous individual who bought the 180, the 105 and the 35 together, many years ago, along with a Yashica J-5 and its silver 5.5cm/1.8 normal lens. The salesman obviously did a marvelous job of talking him/her into buying some additional focal lengths along with the camera - maybe a package deal too good to pass up.

Interestingly, however, the 135 - by all odds the most common second-lens purchase back in the day - arrived separately. So either the sales pitch for the 135 wasn't as convincing, or the lens was sold out. Smile

Cheers,

Jon

mo · Expire: 2016-07-30

Nice set Jon.
I am glad you have got around to showing these beautiful lenses off.

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

Hi, Folks

I am new to the forum and I am here to seek some help on using the edonar lens on pentax k-01. I've just acquired a edonar 180 3.5 lens off the flipbay intended mainly for ultraviolet fun. The lens came in almost like new with a 3x extender. However, I was not able to focus on anything with my K-01 and a pentax K to T-mount adapter which worked perfect with my telescope. Basically I can't see any sharp object on the LCD be it near or far, with or without extender. I start to wonder if I am missing something or the lens is faulty even it looks like new as 47 years ago. Any ideas what could be wrong? Thanks a lot!!!!!

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

How near a focus have you tried ?

Easiest thing to check for is what sort of back focus this thing wants.
I suggest removing extenders, T-mounts, etc. and holding the lens inside the camera mount until you start seeing something sharp.
When you have that, try figure out where infinity is.

Sometimes we can be surprised by what mount a lens actually is.

Pictures of the lens and mount/mounts would also help, a lot.

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

Thank you Luis, it was cloudy this morning but now it's really sunny outside and I removed the extender, set it roughly to infinity and tried to get the sunlight to focus. It turns out it does not focus at all! It feels like diverging. And I took out my 180/2.8 nikkor to make sure I am not daydreaming and yes the nikkor focus to a bright little spot to where it should be.

Can anybody tell me what could be wrong? Missing elements or somebody mistakenly swapped elements with other lens? The lens looks pretty new and comes with a certificate with negative. Very likely, I guess, I am screwed. I am hoping the seller be honest or ebay can help me out. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks!

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Beautiful looking lenses, congrats!

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Its possible that some element may be reversed or missing, yes.

I would generally suspect the rear elements, but who knows, all are worth checking.
Best to check if the rear group is in place and/or any signs of tampering there.

The front cell looks like it comes off as a block. Is there a missing setscrew on the barrel ? that could be a sign that someone previously removed the front cell.

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

Thanks, Luis! I did not intentionally screw off the front block. In fact, it came in loose and I had to rotate roughly a quarter turn to get it tightened. That's make it very suspecious to me as I have had multiple russian lenses coming with quite a bit international traveling and poorer packaging and nothing like that happened. I am at work right now can't get the details. But I remember seeing one suspicious setscrew a few mm in front of the aperture that does not hold on to anything. Maybe that is a sign that one element in between the front block and the aperture blades is missing. Can anybody own this lens confirm? Thanks for your help!

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

Ah, thanks! Better send congrats to the guys who lose the auction to me. They are lucky that they don't have to go through this mess.

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

The front cell may not have been properly inserted when you tried it.
It looks like it may be held in place by setscrews.
If it was not fully inserted the cell spacing may have been off, and that may the a cause of what you have been seeing.

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

I can't see any problem with the front block except a tiny spot in the center indicating that somebody had ground the interface between two elements in the front block before. The set screw I remembered was actually just some thing coupling the outer aperture ring to the inside. Don't know how to get to the rear group, can't tell much other than a possible lens separation near the edge. I still have no clue of what is wrong with the lens. And of course the seller did not respond. It seems that he re-listed this item multiple times this year with a different id.

Any suggestions? Can somebody own this lens please help? Thanks!

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Very hard to help without very detailed pictures at least.
I have a version of this lens but I havent had to disassemble it.
I would be happy to have a look at yours if you feel it is worthwhile to mail it to me.
This is a very uncommon lens btw.

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Very hard to help without very detailed pictures at least.
I have a version of this lens but I havent had to disassemble it.
I would be happy to have a look at yours if you feel it is worthwhile to mail it to me.
This is a very uncommon lens btw.

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

Thank you, Luis. That would be great if you can take a look. Since the seller responded. Let me dispute with him first.

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

Here's what the seller responded, he tried to fooling around and treats me as idiot.

Dear XXX,

The lens was listed as a pre set lens. The lens functions properly as such. There are two rings on the lens, you set one ring as the aperture the other you open to focus, once you focus you close the aperture down. It also states "fits most camera with an adapter" If you had any questions regarding the lens you should have asked. Also listed is all sales are finall!!!

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

I hope you did not pay too much for it.

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

I paid $145 for it. Not bad if it works. Now it kinda sucks since I am not able to throw away 150 bucks without a blink. Will you be able to PM me your address so I can send you the lens for compare? Or should I take more detailed pictures first? Thanks!

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

Many thanks to you folks, especially Luis. The seller refunded finally. It is a pity the lens did not work for me. The good news to cheer my self up is that I finally got my first working Kyoei lens the W. Acall 35/3.5. Here's my first try with a full spectrum modded K-01 and a reverse mounted Baader U venus filter. I am still learning how to process the images from the K-01 but I am quite happy with the test result. Cheers,

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

Here's my new UV setup with full spectrum K-01 (thanks to eeassa from the flipbay, he is the hero and the first one I know who can mod K-01 without screwing up the SR system) plus Kyoei w. Acall 35/3.5 and Baader U venus filter reverse mounted.

[quote="futurekey"]Many thanks to you folks, especially Luis. The seller refunded finally. It is a pity the lens did not work for me. The good news to cheer my self up is that I finally got my first working Kyoei lens the W. Acall 35/3.5. Here's my first try with a full spectrum modded K-01 and a reverse mounted Baader U venus filter. I am still learning how to process the images from the K-01 but I am quite happy with the test result. Cheers,

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

So the point of the Kyoei business is to use with UV ?
I know they are supposed to be particularly suited for that, but I'm guessing not all of the variants necessarily, because the coatings may not be the same from version to version.
Hmm.
I have a pile of Japanese lenses from the same period.
Kyoei could not have been unique in its coating tech. I suspect a lot of these small outfits sent them out for coating, as they also probably ordered the glass lenses themselves from specialist lens grinders.
If there were some easy way to check I suspect I could find a few more types.

futurekey · Joined: 05 Mar 2013 Posts: 12

Yes. I wanted to use them for UV. Dr. Klaus Schmidt and Enrico Savazzi's websites got me interested in these particular type of lenses. Although nothing is guaranteed, Kyoei type lenses do seem to have excellent UV transmission that goes quite deep down to below 340nm. The 35/3.5 I just acquired is indeed as good as if not better than the old gold standard noflexar 35/3.5 I have for many years since I got interested in UV photography. I am glad to know that you have got a pile of jp lenses from that period. I wouldn't mind to test a few if you ever want to off load them a bit. It is said that Dr Klaus once had tested hundreds of old lenses and only three turned out to be useful. Smile

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

Klaus has a an even bigger pile of lenses, but unlike me he has good taste and high standards.