View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674
|
Posted: Fri Jan 14, 2022 1:36 pm Post subject: Mir-1 2.8/37 Grand Prix Brussels |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
I finally got this lens (produced in 1969, still in alu barrel) and it lets me enchanted. Besides giving a gentle corners faloff w/o, it slightly mutes colours rendering the image not even in a vintage style but in a kind of slight noir aesthetics. Its colour scheme recalls me by far the unusual ISCO triplet rendering I reported here.
Here are some samples from Mir-1 taken at f2.8 to f5.6, with the contrasts corrected
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 3225 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Fri Jan 14, 2022 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
The images certainly look very pleasing! _________________ For Sale:
Steinheil Auto D Tele Quinar 135mm f/2.8 (Exa)
ISCO Isconar 100mm f/4 (Exa)
Steinheil Cassarit 50mm f/2.8 M39 (Paxette)
I'm always interested in trading lenses! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2537
|
Posted: Fri Jan 14, 2022 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
Looks very contrasty in an old fashioned way _________________ pentaxian |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mr_tibbs2004
Joined: 23 Jul 2021 Posts: 141 Location: United States
|
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2022 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
mr_tibbs2004 wrote:
This lens is on my wish list. Thank you for the images! What is the minimum focus distance of the lens? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2022 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
mr_tibbs2004 wrote: |
This lens is on my wish list. Thank you for the images! What is the minimum focus distance of the lens? |
The minimum focus on mine is 0.7metres.
If your M42 adapter has a heicoid, it will focus closer - or you could use rings.
One of its strengths is its sharpness up close and pleasing bokeh for a wide lens.
Here are a couple to show that
Tom
#1
#2
#3
#4
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Indigo82
Joined: 30 Dec 2018 Posts: 61
|
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2022 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Indigo82 wrote:
I wanted this lens to be a wide angle companion to my Helioses, but after trying it I found out that its ergonomics are worse than Helios 44-2. It is smaller, focusing ring is smaller too and it was wobbling on original Pentax m42 adapter, same as 44-2. Too fiddly and uninspiring. Yes, minimum focusing distance is 0.7m in case there isn't any modification done to the lens. That is simply too much. At some mid distances it has certain glow around the subjects. After some shooting, I found Flektogon 35mm f2.4 to be a better lens in all parameters. Even Auto Revuenon 35mm f2.8 was better than Mir 37mm. In fact it was surprisingly good, sharp and focused close to the subject. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
D1N0
Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2537
|
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2022 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
D1N0 wrote:
In a pinch you can decrease the mfd of a m42 lens by screwing it out a bit. Most effective with wide angles of course. It won't do much for tele's. _________________ pentaxian |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dejan
Joined: 05 Jan 2021 Posts: 152 Location: Belgrade, Serbia
|
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2022 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dejan wrote:
Indigo82 wrote: |
I wanted this lens to be a wide angle companion to my Helioses, but after trying it I found out that its ergonomics are worse than Helios 44-2. It is smaller, focusing ring is smaller too and it was wobbling on original Pentax m42 adapter, same as 44-2. Too fiddly and uninspiring. Yes, minimum focusing distance is 0.7m in case there isn't any modification done to the lens. That is simply too much. At some mid distances it has certain glow around the subjects. After some shooting, I found Flektogon 35mm f2.4 to be a better lens in all parameters. Even Auto Revuenon 35mm f2.8 was better than Mir 37mm. In fact it was surprisingly good, sharp and focused close to the subject. |
Technically Mir is closest to the first Flektogon F2.8 version, since it's based on it. The results are pretty similar, no doubt. I agree, it's not the best performer in terms of sharpness (speaking of across the frame sharpness, it's actually very sharp where it is in focus, but there's field curvature and the edges are visibly lagging behind even at F11 in my experience). Flare resistance is... Well, we shall rather call it flare acceptance. Still, for 200 eur you can buy a modern Tamron that is extremely above any Flektogon or any other vintage 35mm, not to mention on high res sensors. I like Mir's rendering in certain situations, and very much, it's a nice artistic tool when I want to convey a certain mood. It's also very nice for macro since mdf with M42 lenses is irrelevant. I use a helicoid with 30mm movement from infinity to close focus mounted on a thin "flange" M42 adapter, instead of a classic adapter. I also appreciate the small size of this lens, especially after taking Samyang 35mm F1.4 for a walk in comparison. We'll all agree that there's no perfect lens, especially in vintage category. That's why I prefer lenses with specific traits, which makes choice more exciting. For "classic" landscape I'd prefer Minolta MD 35mm F2.8. For some "moody" shots I'd prefer Mir. Still, in most situations I'd get a fine shot from either really. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674
|
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2022 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
Thank you, fellows, glad you like or wish this lens!
I confirm that the MFD of mine is 0.7m. It's flare prone without hood (and I learned that this is the condition should be mentioned as a real game changer). I haven't tried it with a hood yet.
Here is an example w/o (with contrast corrected)
And at f5.6
Looking at the flare spot, I presume my copy could benefit from internal cleaning, but I prefer not to open the lens without a real urge.
Agreed for a good central sharpness and "curved" corners. It may still work in complex landscapes even at f5.6 if you don't run for each pixel but need an impression.
I this shot taken at f5.6 both contrast and saturation are boosted
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
serkol
Joined: 26 Aug 2012 Posts: 926 Location: Belarus
|
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2022 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
serkol wrote:
_________________ Regards,
Sergey |
|
Back to top |
|
|
serkol
Joined: 26 Aug 2012 Posts: 926 Location: Belarus
|
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2022 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
serkol wrote:
_________________ Regards,
Sergey |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2022 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
alex ph wrote: |
Thank you, fellows, glad you like or wish this lens!
I confirm that the MFD of mine is 0.7m. It's flare prone without hood (and I learned that this is the condition should be mentioned as a real game changer). I haven't tried it with a hood yet.
I this shot taken at f5.6 both contrast and saturation are boosted
|
Very good results for sure.
Mine is not as good as this in landscape shots.
Congratulations.
Here is one taken with a close up ring attached, where my copy seems to shine
Taken at f2.8
Tom
#1
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dejan
Joined: 05 Jan 2021 Posts: 152 Location: Belgrade, Serbia
|
Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dejan wrote:
I can confirm that it works really nicely with a close up lens (I've used it with a +4 achromatic lens and some other strengths), and it also works well with extensions (I didn't really see any noticeable difference in sharpness between Mir 1 and Flektogon 35mm F2.4 for close ups). I always add a lens hood, but even then sometimes extra shading with a hand helps a lot; since I can't use longer hoods with this 37mm FL (which is, again, same as Flektogon, it is 37mm lens with a rounded number for marketing purposes). A couple "extra" aperture blades compared to most similar lenses can't hurt for macro (the only thing I really dislike about MC Flektogon is having 6 straight aperture blades). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3666 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2022 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
Indigo82 wrote: |
I wanted this lens to be a wide angle companion to my Helioses, but after trying it I found out that its ergonomics are worse than Helios 44-2. It is smaller, focusing ring is smaller too and it was wobbling on original Pentax m42 adapter, same as 44-2. Too fiddly and uninspiring. |
I had considered it to pair with my Helios 44's, but I have 35's that are hard to beat and is usually with me anyway (Yashica Tominon), so I've never pulled the trigger
I remember wondering why there were no 28mm & 35mm to go with the 58mm & 85mm Helios line, I searched off and on for months to see if there were any candidates, nothing really stood out, a shame, a wasted opportunity, they were swimming in normals, but very few wides. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2022 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Yes, the ergonomics of the lens take some getting used to.
The results can be quite pleasing
Tom
#1
Here is a crop from above
Click for larger view
#2
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 895
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2022 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
Nice!
Is this on APSC or 24x36?
I had one and found it weak in the corners on EOS M. But center sharpness was very pleasing. _________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6950 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
Good shots above.
I have this lens and it's one I used to use a lot, but has been a victim of other lenses in this range moving it down the queue. I remember the colours having a unique look, being of a colder WB or enhanced blues. Very atmospheric nonetheless. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
lumens pixel wrote: |
Nice!
Is this on APSC or 24x36?
I had one and found it weak in the corners on EOS M. But center sharpness was very pleasing. |
Shot on Fuji X-E2s, so APSc
Cheers
Tom |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19, 2022 6:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Some rainy day images with the Mir-1B Grand Prix Brussels
Tom
#1
#2
#3
#4
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Indigo82
Joined: 30 Dec 2018 Posts: 61
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19, 2022 8:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Indigo82 wrote:
In hands of good photographer there are no bad lenses.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6950 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19, 2022 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
Oldhand wrote: |
Some rainy day images with the Mir-1B Grand Prix Brussels
Tom
|
I love the B&W images Tom! Really impressive!! _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 895
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
_________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674
|
Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
Some very fine close-up shots, Tom! You make clearly seen the advantage that close-up rings give with the old Mir-1.
As for my current state of mind, I really appreciate the lens rendering in BW, postprocessed in NIK.
#1
#2
#3
#4
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6005 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
alex ph wrote: |
Some very fine close-up shots, Tom! You make clearly seen the advantage that close-up rings give with the old Mir-1.
As for my current state of mind, I really appreciate the lens rendering in BW, postprocessed in NIK.
|
Alex, your images also show how this lens can shine in B&W.
Some lenses excel in monochrome for some reason.
Nicely done
Tom |
|
Back to top |
|
|
alex ph
Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674
|
Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2022 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
alex ph wrote:
Thank you, Tom! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|