| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dimitrygo
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 561
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 3:15 pm Post subject: Petri CC Auto 55mm/f1.4 |
 |
|
dimitrygo wrote:
Who is the maker and what IQ can be expected from it?
  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Laurentiu Cristofor
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Posts: 524
Location: WA, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
Maker is Petri - they were making their own stuff. See more history here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petri_Camera
I have a 55/1.8 and I can't see a lot of difference in output comparing it to the SMC Takumar 55/1.8 - the Petri might be a bit softer wide open, but other than that I'd have to do targeted tests to find differences. The build feels more fragile, but it works smoothly. Mine has similar lettering on the front as the 55/1.4 depicted there, but the barrel is styled differently. It's a lesser known brand so prices are still small.
_________________
http://www.ipernity.com/home/2419272
https://laurphoto.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patrickh
Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Posts: 8551
Location: Oregon
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
patrickh wrote:
As a matter of interest how do you adapt them, and what camera do you mount them on? I have one put away somewhere purchased in error for nothing 
patrickh
_________________
DSLR: Nikon D300 Nikon D200 Nex 5N
MF Zooms: Kiron 28-85/3.5, 28-105/3.2, 75-150/3.5, Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AIS // MF Primes: Nikkor 20/4 AI, 24/2 AI, 28/2 AI, 28/2.8 AIS, 28/3.5 AI, 35/1.4 AIS, 35/2 AIS, 35/2.8 PC, 45/2.8 P, 50/1.4 AIS, 50/1.8 AIS, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 AIS micro, 55/3.5 AI micro, 85/2 AI, 100/2,8 E, 105/1,8 AIS, 105/2,5 AIS, 135/2 AIS, 135/2.8 AIS, 200/4 AI, 200/4 AIS micro, 300/4.5 AI, 300/4.5 AI ED, Arsat 50/1.4, Kiron 28/2, Vivitar 28/2.5, Panagor 135/2.8, Tamron 28/2.5, Tamron 90/2.5 macro, Vivitar 90/2.5 macro (Tokina) Voigtlander 90/3.5 Vivitar 105/2.5 macro (Kiron) Kaleinar 100/2.8 AI Tamron 135/2.5, Vivitar 135/2.8CF, 200/3.5, Tokina 400/5,6
M42: Vivitar 28/2.5, Tamron 28/2.5, Formula5 28/2.8, Mamiya 28/2.8, Pentacon 29/2.8, Flektogon 35/2.4, Flektogon 35/2.8, Takumar 35/3.5, Curtagon 35/4, Takumar 50/1.4, Volna-6 50/2.8 macro, Mamiya 50/1.4, CZJ Pancolar 50/1,8, Oreston 50/1.8, Takumar 50/2, Industar 50/3.5, Sears 55/1.4, Helios 58/2, Jupiter 85/2, Helios 85/1.5, Takumar 105/2.8, Steinheil macro 105/4.5, Tamron 135/2.5, Jupiter 135/4, CZ 135/4, Steinheil Culminar 135/4,5, Jupiter 135/3.5, Takumar 135/3.5, Tair 135/2.8, Pentacon 135/2.8, CZ 135/2.8, Taika 135/3.5, Takumar 150/4, Jupiter 200/4, Takumar 200/4
Exakta: Topcon 100/2.8(M42), 35/2.8, 58/1.8, 135/2.8, 135/2.8 (M42), Kyoei Acall 135/3.5
C/Y: Yashica 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, Zeiss Planar 50/1.4, Distagon 25/2.8
Hexanon: 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 40/1.8, 50/1.7, 52/1.8, 135/3.2, 135/3.5, 35-70/3.5, 200/3.5
P6 : Mir 38 65/3.5, Biometar 80/2.8, Kaleinar 150/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8
Minolta SR: 28/2.8, 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 45/2, 50/2, 58/1.4, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, 200/3.5
RF: Industar 53/2.8, Jupiter 8 50/2
Enlarg: Rodagon 50/5,6, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, Vario 44-52/4, 150/5.6 180/5.6 El Nikkor 50/2,8,63/2.8,75/4, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, 135/5.6 Schneider 60/5.6, 80/5.6, 80/4S,100/5.6S,105/5.6,135/5.6, 135/5.6S, 150/5.6S, Leica 95/4 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 6602
Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
It is certainly possible that Petri made lenses, or at least participated in the collective production of lenses among the Japanese network of parts suppliers.
I suspect though that they did not, or at least not for most of them. Several Petri lenses even of the classic 1960's period are obviously made by third parties, much like lenses of the same period from Mamiya, Ricoh, etc.
The 55/1.4 however does not seem to be a variant of the "Tomioka" (alleged) 55/1.4 that is commonly found in Mamiya, Ricoh, Yashica styling. Maybe they did make that one.
Conversion - there is no Petri mount-anything else converter that I know of (I do have an original Petri made M42-Petri adapter ! But thats not what anyone wants)
The Petri register is just 43.5mm apparently, like Minolta MD, so conversion to most popular mounts may be difficult. Possibly helping the case is that this measurement may be from the back of the bayonet flange, as there seems to be space in front of the flange. It would be interesting to try anyway.
_________________
I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Posts: 524
Location: WA, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
I missed that the OP lens has Petri bayonet mount. Petri did make some M42 lenses as well. The 55/1.8 I have is M42 and I've seen a 135/2.8 in M42 mount as well.
Also, on second look, this 55/1.4 has the same aperture ring style as my 55/1.8.
_________________
http://www.ipernity.com/home/2419272
https://laurphoto.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dimitrygo
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 561
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dimitrygo wrote:
| Laurentiu Cristofor wrote: |
| Maker is Petri - they were making their own stuff. |
Of course Petri is the most obvious choice but most obvious doesn't always mean correct 
| luisalegria wrote: |
The 55/1.4 however does not seem to be a variant of the "Tomioka" (alleged) 55/1.4 that is commonly found in Mamiya, Ricoh, Yashica styling. Maybe they did make that one. |
I also hope this one is different from Tomioka. But I saw this style of DOF scale on some other lenses so I am pretty sure this is some 3rd party made lens (unless I saw it on another Petri lens  ).
| luisalegria wrote: |
The Petri register is just 43.5mm apparently, like Minolta MD, so conversion to most popular mounts may be difficult. Possibly helping the case is that this measurement may be from the back of the bayonet flange, as there seems to be space in front of the flange. It would be interesting to try anyway. |
This is exactly what I am counting on. It seems there is plenty of space between an aperture ring and bayonet to play with. I thought for $15 it worth a try.
| patrickh wrote: |
As a matter of interest how do you adapt them, and what camera do you mount them on? |
No idea. I hope it is possible to convert it. I prefer to convert it to M42. In the worst case - to Canon EF.
Last edited by dimitrygo on Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:10 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 17633
Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
I used to have a Petri Auto C.C. 1.7/50. Optically it was rather good (not stellar, though) but its built was terrible. I was afraid to mount it on the cam, because I expected it to fall apart. 
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator 
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
When Petri send to the marlet the MF1, it was in the expensive side of M42 cams.
the lenses were 28 mm, 1,8 and 2,8 normal lenses and 135 mm. At least in this way was anunciated in Italy at the end of the 70's magazines.
The 55 lenses seems to be a 60's one. With the characteristics of the mamiya, riocoh, etc.
So, I can wait:
1- Lens prone to flare.
2- medium contrast-
3- coma till 5,6
4- shift focus from 0,03 to 0,05
5- better apertures: 5,6-8. The second group 11 and 4 (better contrast at 11 because not MC lens).
6- Something flat images wide open.
I hope than in the 90% will stay between that items.
Show us your pics.
Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dimitrygo
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 561
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dimitrygo wrote:
| LucisPictor wrote: |
| I used to have a Petri Auto C.C. 1.7/50. Optically it was rather good (not stellar, though) but its built was terrible. I was afraid to mount it on the cam, because I expected it to fall apart. |
Yes, I think I saw this lens on ebay. It even looks fragile. This 55/1.4 looks rather solid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dimitrygo
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 561
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dimitrygo wrote:
| estudleon wrote: |
| The 55 lenses seems to be a 60's one. With the characteristics of the mamiya, riocoh, etc. |
I still hope it is different from Tomioka lenses. I already have 3 Tomioka's, don't need another one
| estudleon wrote: |
So, I can wait:
1- Lens prone to flare.
2- medium contrast-
3- coma till 5,6
4- shift focus from 0,03 to 0,05
5- better apertures: 5,6-8. The second group 11 and 4 (better contrast at 11 because not MC lens).
6- Something flat images wide open.
|
I don't find pictures from my Mamiya 55/1.4 flat at 1.4. Not very contrast, yes, but not flat.
| estudleon wrote: |
Show us your pics. |
I need to receive it and convert to some usable mount. I am afraid it will take too long as I have other projects in my list. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
| dimitrygo wrote: |
| estudleon wrote: |
So, I can wait:
1- Lens prone to flare.
2- medium contrast-
3- coma till 5,6
4- shift focus from 0,03 to 0,05
5- better apertures: 5,6-8. The second group 11 and 4 (better contrast at 11 because not MC lens).
6- Something flat images wide open.
|
I don't find pictures from my Mamiya 55/1.4 flat at 1.4. Not very contrast, yes, but not flat. |
Hi.
In my opinion, the level of contrast is a comparative question.
If you compare your mamiya 1,4 pic with a takumar one, yes, you will be right. Not flat.
But if you do the same with the planar, AI nikon, Summilux, perhaps your mamiya image can be flat (or very low contrast if you prefer that word).
I can be wrong, of course. But i see the question in that way.
Regards,
Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dimitrygo
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 561
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dimitrygo wrote:
| estudleon wrote: |
Hi.
In my opinion, the level of contrast is a comparative question.
If you compare your mamiya 1,4 pic with a takumar one, yes, you will be right. Not flat.
But if you do the same with the planar, AI nikon, Summilux, perhaps your mamiya image can be flat (or very low contrast if you prefer that word).
I can be wrong, of course. But i see the question in that way.
Regards,
Rino. |
Sure, contrast is not just comparable but measurable characteristic. And I can readily believe you that the lenses you mention are cotrastier than Mamiya.
Personally I think the high contrast lenses on digital cameras are not so desirable because of a relatively limited dynamic range of the sensor. Low contrast picture (well, may be not too low) can be boosted in editor to a desirable level but too conrast picture cannot be rescued. Of course this depends also on a subject and shooting conditions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
| dimitrygo wrote: |
| estudleon wrote: |
Hi.
In my opinion, the level of contrast is a comparative question.
If you compare your mamiya 1,4 pic with a takumar one, yes, you will be right. Not flat.
But if you do the same with the planar, AI nikon, Summilux, perhaps your mamiya image can be flat (or very low contrast if you prefer that word).
I can be wrong, of course. But i see the question in that way.
Regards,
Rino. |
Sure, contrast is not just comparable but measurable characteristic. And I can readily believe you that the lenses you mention are cotrastier than Mamiya.
Personally I think the high contrast lenses on digital cameras are not so desirable because of a relatively limited dynamic range of the sensor. Low contrast picture (well, may be not too low) can be boosted in editor to a desirable level but too conrast picture cannot be rescued. Of course this depends also on a subject and shooting conditions. |
Sorry Dimitrygo. I'm speacking about your lens but I did not say that I only use film.
And I agree about the contrastier lenses effect and the digital process.
Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Posts: 524
Location: WA, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
| dimitrygo wrote: |
Of course Petri is the most obvious choice but most obvious doesn't always mean correct
|
Right. But it doesn't always mean incorrect either.
I didn't say Petri is the maker because it was obvious to me. I said it because I never saw a mention of Petri lenses being made by someone else and the lens I have does not look like anything else I've seen around.
One characteristic I've seen only for Petri is the lettering that looks as if it was engraved by hand. Your lens has the same style of aperture ring as mine. The focusing ring and the dof scale are different, but the front looks again very similar. I bet that if you hold the front and the mount and you twist the front counterclockwise, it will unscrew.
Unfortunately, there isn't enough information available to settle this one way or another. There's an older thread on this topic that didn't get further:
http://forum.mflenses.com/who-is-petri-cosinon-t7897.html
_________________
http://www.ipernity.com/home/2419272
https://laurphoto.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 3705
Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Did you find any new info on Petri lenses perhaps? I just wanted to open new topic but found this one already existed.
In my opinion Petri (bayonet, till 1976) lenses are genuine and carefully designed. One may say delicate.
List of Petri models with sample photos: http://www.pbase.com/cameras/petri
Here 1.8/55mm (Iangreen being a great promotor). Found at http://www.chrisfisherart.com
2.8/35mm
Possible adaptation (butchery) to PK: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/112238-petri-c-c-auto-55mm-1-8-goes-under-knife.html
C.C. refers to 'Color Corrected'.
A posible clue connecting them with Tamron: Click here to see on Ebay.de
_________________
---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2011 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I like Petri lenses, no idea who made them though.
The 1.8/55 is a cracking lens, sharp wide open, swirly bokeh, nice colours and contrast, a personal favourite.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2011 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
Yes. Very nice lens.
I found the rendering similar to the rokkor.
Rino
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mos6502
Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 960
Location: Austin
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2011 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mos6502 wrote:
I'm pretty sure Petri made all of their "normal" lenses themselves. At least until the M42 era. They may have relied on a number of manufacturers for wide and long lenses, although I don't know who. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I also have 2.8/35 and 4/200 Petris, both good lenses, the 35 is very similar to the 50 in looks, the 200 could be a third party lens, not sure. The later M42 and PK Petris are third-party, the PK ones are Cosina made, in fact just Cosine products rebadged, same lenses appear with Cosina branding. I wonder if Tomioka made the 1.8/55 as it is very similar in many ways to other 1.8/55s of the same era from Pentax, Yashica etc.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jimmy637
Joined: 02 Aug 2011
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 5:53 pm Post subject: Petri 55mm f2.8 M42 |
|
|
Jimmy637 wrote:
Got this at a yard sale
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dimitrygo
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 561
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:50 pm Post subject: Re: Petri 55mm f2.8 M42 |
|
|
dimitrygo wrote:
| Jimmy637 wrote: |
Got this at a yard sale
|
Welcome! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
I saw this tessar type Petri lens near begining of the 70's. The cam was Petri Ft1 or similar.
A combo with 1,8/55, 2,8/135 and 2,8/35 or 3,5/28.
One italian magazine of that time said that was a very expensive camera to be a M42 one. I saw the same camera with Carena brand.
Rino
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
Ahh...I forgot....it's nice to see a tessar lens in 55 mm.
Rino
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taunusreiter
Joined: 20 Mar 2007
Posts: 127
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
taunusreiter wrote:
Any 55/1.4 of the late seventies is suspect to be a Zeiss (Contarex) Planar copy, which patent (Johann Berger, 1959) ran out back in 1975.
Examples were Mamiya and Rollei (7 elements/ 5 groups)
Zeiss Oberkochen didn't prolongated it, because with the new 50/1.4 Planar (Glatzel), close to an Ultron type, Zeiss had a lens which runs circles around its predecessor and was even more compact.
_________________
My flickr Gallery
My Classic Camera Website |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5017
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
This POS came with the camera they couldn't even get the aperture scale in the middle, but one day I'll check it out to see if the pictures are crap too.
Petri 45mm f2.8
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
