MFlenses - A new life in a digital age
MFLenses 2026

Manual Focus Lenses Forum

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.
logovectorizer.com
Spotlight

Featured partner placement for the forum front page.

LENS WITH VERY LOW CONTRAST - RINGFOTO 400mm F/5.9
Post new topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  


Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:11 pm
Post subject: LENS WITH VERY LOW CONTRAST - RINGFOTO 400mm F/5.9
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:11 pm
Post subject: LENS WITH VERY LOW CONTRAST - RINGFOTO 400mm F/5.9
Reply
Hello Fellow members:

This is my first post, and this is to ask for some help/suggestions.
I bought the above old lens in Ebay, and, when testing it in my Canon Digital Rebel (300D), the results are complete rubbish - very foggy images, even when stopped down (it improves, but still useless).
Looking thru the viewfinder, I seem to see fog in the inferior part of the image - but looking at the glass, from front and back of lens, I caanot see anything wrong.
Will the lens improve much by having it professionaally cleaned?
Any suggestions?
Thanks very much.
Alberto+
14/11/22008[img][/img]


Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:31 pm
Post subject: Re: LENS WITH VERY LOW CONTRAST - RINGFOTO 400mm F/5.9
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:31 pm
Post subject: Re: LENS WITH VERY LOW CONTRAST - RINGFOTO 400mm F/5.9
Reply
ACOSTAFORUM wrote:
Hello Fellow members:

This is my first post, and this is to ask for some help/suggestions.
I bought the above old lens in Ebay, and, when testing it in my Canon Digital Rebel (300D), the results are complete rubbish - very foggy images, even when stopped down (it improves, but still useless).
Looking thru the viewfinder, I seem to see fog in the inferior part of the image - but looking at the glass, from front and back of lens, I caanot see anything wrong.
Will the lens improve much by having it professionally cleaned?
Any suggestions?
Thanks very much.
Alberto+


Perhaps lens crap itself, can you show us picture from lens.


Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:36 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:36 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Alberto,
if you don't give us the name of the lens, how can we help you??


Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:04 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:04 pm
Post subject:
Reply
I guess this lens is branded as Ringfoto. I expect low quality maker.


Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:47 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:47 pm
Post subject:
Reply
It may be an early preset Tokina (Tokyo Koki). They had a 400/5.9, which was probably the pride of the line back in those days.

There can't be too many other 400/5.9's around ! This thing is a collectors item. I think they were also sold under the Accura label, as "Ultratel".

The problem may be flare. Some lenses deal badly with this on DSLR's. Are you using a good hood ? Do you have the same problem shooting with the sun behind you ?

Sometimes the problem goes away on a different camera also. Member Haksawbob had an Arco 135 (rare third party lens) that had this bad. I got the same lens and I have no problems at all on my Pentax.


Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 11:37 pm
Post subject: LENS WITH VERY LOW CONTRAST - RINGFOTO 400mm f/5.9
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 11:37 pm
Post subject: LENS WITH VERY LOW CONTRAST - RINGFOTO 400mm f/5.9
Reply
Thanks to all members.
It is indeed as per subject line

. Made in Japan. Very big, and heavy.
I read somewhere (after googling the name) Ringfoto is the company who owns now Cosina/Voigtlander. The lens must be at least 3 decades old.
I'll try again to post one image (original, plus auto-corrected).
I did make a black hood and used it for the photos.
The sun in the back does not solve the problem.


Post
Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:32 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 2:32 am
Post subject:
Reply
Maybe you are overexposing the picture, Aren't you?
Which mode of shooting are you using?.

Kind regards,
Jes.
Post new topic Reply to topic
Page 1 of 1