| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2931
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:30 pm Post subject: Marvelous Mirotar vs Magnificent Minolta battle of the 500 R |
 |
|
jamaeolus wrote:
I mentioned I would compare these two lenses in the thread on the Mirotar. This is not a scientific test with charts and lines of resolution and all that stuff. Just my thoughts on the two lenses in use in the same or similar conditions. All shots taken with a tripod and remote shutter release.
 [/url]
Infinity.[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09107_1.jpg]
[/url][url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09106_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09129_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09131_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09109_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09110_1.jpg]
 [/url]
Ostensibly the same FL and speed but the Zeiss obviously has a a bigger mirror. This clearly translates to more light which makes the Mirotar images about one notch of shutter speed brighter for the same effective image exposure. It also means the lens is bigger and quite a bit heavier. It is a bit longer overall. It has a bit better contrast. It focuses about 8 inches closer. The colors are a bit closer to what my eye sees. Both have razor thin depth of field. When shooting the "Infinity" shot the cell tower, while not truly Infinity, is about a mile and a a half distant and I could focus at different depths of equipment with miniscule focus ring adjustments, both of these lenses are very, very good. A few more comparisons.
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09175_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09180_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09189_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09190_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09191_2.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09192_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09191_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09196_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09197_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09213_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09214_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09211_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09212_1.jpg]
 [/url]
Some shots with Mirotar handheld with the Techart AF adapter. (Sony A7rii to Techart LM, LM to EF, EF to C/Y)
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09236_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09096_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09169_1.jpg]
 [/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09191_2.jpg]
[/url]
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20229/big_7980_DSC09192_1.jpg]
[/url]
If I could only have one and the three hundred fifty or so dollar differential wasn't that big a deal, sure get the mirotar. It is, as predicted, better in every category, optically speaking. But not by much. But if kit size and the money are more important the Minolta will work quite well!
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10543
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2022 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
  I like the comparison; the lenses and photo examples are quite different, aren't they? Clearly one is optically better than the other, at least to my eyes and brain. Kudos on the two nearly identical Sleepiong Duck photos taken with two different lenses -- skillful camera kung-fu to change lenses quick enough and not awaken the sleeper. 
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., 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, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, 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, 1:3.5/28, 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, 1:4/300, 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
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount 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), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raxar
Joined: 25 Mar 2014
Posts: 222
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 10, 2022 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Raxar wrote:
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Posts: 7554
Location: Hong Kong
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2022 2:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
You results are consistent with the other test i have seen: the winner is the Zeiss. 
_________________
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: 1271
Location: Kent, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2022 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
RokkorDoctor wrote:
The Zeiss performs better; the Minolta is perhaps more practical.
Minolta's philosophy probably went along the lines that if someone needs a long 500mm lens but practical limitations on size & weight they can carry means that they are prepared to put up with the drawbacks of a catadioptric mirror lens in the first place, then perhaps they would be better served with a lens truly aimed at compactness rather than an optically less compromised lens that is still reasonably bulky and heavy compared to a normal 500mm lens.
_________________
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 |
|
|
blotafton
Joined: 08 Aug 2013
Posts: 1554
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2022 9:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
blotafton wrote:
Thanks for posting! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 16544
Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2022 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
_________________
Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 12, 2022 11:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
I have a few books on the Contax/Yashica system (1978-85 time frame), as well as a few leaflets on the Zeiss CY lenses (dating early 1990s). Sure enough, they don't mention the Mirotar 8/500mm.
Is there any relation between the Yashica ML 8/500mm and the Zeiss Mirotar 8/500mm?
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Posts: 7554
Location: Hong Kong
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
I have a few books on the Contax/Yashica system (1978-85 time frame), as well as a few leaflets on the Zeiss CY lenses (dating early 1990s). Sure enough, they don't mention the Mirotar 8/500mm.
Is there any relation between the Yashica ML 8/500mm and the Zeiss Mirotar 8/500mm?
S |
They might be both made by Kyocera but they are completely different. The Yashica is much lighter than the Zeiss and focus one meter closer.
Source: Zeiss
Source: https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00804/00804.pdf
_________________
https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you.
Last edited by calvin83 on Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:28 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 16544
Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2022 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
Thanks Calvin, very helpful!
_________________
Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Posts: 7554
Location: Hong Kong
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
| kds315* wrote: |
| Thanks Calvin, very helpful! |
My pleasure.
_________________
https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 4060
Location: Charleston
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2022 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
| calvin83 wrote: |
| stevemark wrote: |
I have a few books on the Contax/Yashica system (1978-85 time frame), as well as a few leaflets on the Zeiss CY lenses (dating early 1990s). Sure enough, they don't mention the Mirotar 8/500mm.
Is there any relation between the Yashica ML 8/500mm and the Zeiss Mirotar 8/500mm?
S |
They might be both made by Kyocera but they are completely different. The Yashica is much lighter than the Zeiss and focus one meter closer.
Source: Zeiss
Source: https://www.pacificrimcamera.com/rl/00804/00804.pdf |
My understanding is that both lenses were made by Tomoika but definitely are different, despite some rumors. I've used both and while both are capable of good images, the Mirotar is superior in use.
_________________
Regards,
Woodrim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2931
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
I forgot to mention the odd color cast in the photos was not down to a white balance selection but due to significant atmospheric wildfire smoke. Dramatic yellowing of images is the result. These are all straight from the camera JPG's with no modification whatsoever aside from selecting the 190000 resize in the upload widget.
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10543
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
| jamaeolus wrote: |
| I forgot to mention the odd color cast in the photos was not down to a white balance selection but due to significant atmospheric wildfire smoke. Dramatic yellowing of images is the result. These are all straight from the camera JPG's with no modification whatsoever aside from selecting the 190000 resize in the upload widget. |
What was camera white balance set to, auto?
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., 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, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, 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, 1:3.5/28, 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, 1:4/300, 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
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount 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), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2931
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
Daylight sun.
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2931
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
The smoke from a nearby forest fire was quite variable. The first day the east winds blew it over the top of the valley. It was OK to be outside. Some of the photos were taken underneath that pall but the cloud was so thick I probably should have switched to overcast. The lenses were compared with no changes to settings though. The 2nd and the early part of the 3rd day it was not good to be outside for long at all but the available light was actually better. The bird photos were taken later in the afternoon after particulates had fallen to "moderate" It still put a bit of a color cast on the photos.
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Posts: 1571
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2022 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
Thank you for sharing, jamaeolus! I am impressed by your both 500mm and their powerful rendering. No sign of blurry softness and really rich colours. Quite an opposite to what I sometimes saw in this forum when a mirror lens was tested. Congrats! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2931
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2022 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
Thanks . I used a tripod on all the comparison shots. Even so, I excluded many shots at the pond near the canal where the duck photos were taken. There was a gusty wind of say 4 to 11 which I could see in were shaking the camera enough to blur the image. I tried to adjust film speed up, so some pretty high ISO were used.
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gerald
Joined: 25 Mar 2014
Posts: 1196
Location: Brazil
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2022 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gerald wrote:
Very interesting article by Marco Cavina about the various versions of Zeiss Mirotar, including Zeiss Jena Spiegelobjektiv:
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Zeiss_cute_DFR_DDR_lenses/00_pag.htm
_________________
If raindrops were perfect lenses, the rainbow did not exist. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 4060
Location: Charleston
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2022 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
That f/4.5 is a beauty!!!
_________________
Regards,
Woodrim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Posts: 7554
Location: Hong Kong
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2022 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
It will be interesting to compare the Jena Spiegelobjektiv 500/4.0 to the Zeiss Mirotar 500/4.5 and Sigma 500/5.0.
_________________
https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kds315*
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 16544
Location: Weinheim, Germany
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2022 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
kds315* wrote:
| calvin83 wrote: |
| It will be interesting to compare the Jena Spiegelobjektiv 500/4.0 to the Zeiss Mirotar 500/4.5 and Sigma 500/5.0. |
_________________
Klaus - Admin
"S'il vient a point, me souviendra" [Thomas Bohier (1460-1523)]
http://www.macrolenses.de for macro and special lens info
http://www.pbase.com/kds315/uv_photos for UV Images and lens/filter info
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kds315/albums my albums using various lenses
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/ my UV BLOG
http://www.travelmeetsfood.com/blog Food + Travel BLOG
https://galeriafotografia.com Architecture + Drone photography
Currently most FAV lens(es):
X80QF f3.2/80mm
Hypergon f11/26mm
ELCAN UV f5.6/52mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f4/60mm
Zeiss UV-Planar f2/62mm
Lomo Уфар-12 f2.5/41mm
Lomo Зуфар-2 f4.0/350mm
Lomo ZIKAR-1A f1.2/100mm
Nikon UV Nikkor f4.5/105mm
Zeiss UV-Sonnar f4.3/105mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f1.8/45mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f4.1/94mm
CERCO UV-VIS-NIR f2.8/100mm
Steinheil Quarzobjektiv f1.8/50mm
Pentax Quartz Takumar f3.5/85mm
Carl Zeiss Jena UV-Objektiv f4/60mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha II f1.1/90mm
NYE OPTICAL Lyman-Alpha I f2.8/200mm
COASTAL OPTICS f4/60mm UV-VIS-IR Apo
COASTAL OPTICS f4.5/105mm UV-Micro-Apo
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f4.5/85mm
Pentax Ultra-Achromatic Takumar f5.6/300mm
Rodenstock UV-Rodagon f5.6/60mm + 105mm + 150mm
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
