Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Meyer-Optik Domigor 135mm f/4
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:51 pm    Post subject: Meyer-Optik Domigor 135mm f/4 Reply with quote

Perhaps this lens has one of the worst close focusing distance 2.8 m!



PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To help you see the bright side of it, this can also mean that it was optimized at best for long portrait distances, and therefore may work better than other comparable lenses for the task.

It's also important to keep in mind that the concept of "do-it-all+macro" lens is relatively modern. Often many people who don't know a thing about photography ask to a seller "does this lens have macro"? even if they have no clear idea of what this is.
So all producers of lenses today make all lenses to carry the word "macro" in some way beacuse it helps the sales. They of course don't tell you that this also affects the quality on the normal and infinite focal lenghts.

In the case of old lenses I think that wisdom is, to buy a macro lens for macro, and forget about the other lenses, which are not optimized.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Other old lenses like Meyer-Oreston , CZJ Sonnar avarage close focusing distance is 1,5 m. This one has double distance don't know why, strange. Perhaps the reason what you say , but I am not sure. Might be this lens was a budget lens ...


PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
Other old lenses like Meyer-Oreston , CZJ Sonnar avarage close focusing distance is 1,5 m. This one has double distance don't know why, strange. Perhaps the reason what you say , but I am not sure. Might be this lens was a budget lens ...


It may have surely been a budget lens. It is not fast for sure, although in those days a f/4 was not that slow, either. Rather average, I would say.