Porst Color Reflex 55/1.2 [135USD]

[BobDodds]

http://search.pbase.com/search?q=porst+55mm+f1.2
not much Noktonish to see there or flickr

[yalcinaydin]

I get it, a really cleans lens, there a few dust in it but no problem I guess. My Pentax adapter will be here 2 weeks later but I guess the mirror will definitely touch the rear metal parts of the lens as there is a few mm longer part than the rest of the mount.
_________________
My name is "Yalcin", and exactly "Yalçın" and here you can find my MF samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yalcinaydin/sets/
Right now switching back to AF because of work needs but I still love the MF lenses

[BobDodds]

I have three of these. Watch http://fotist.com and one will be there soon. I could remove all the parts that stick out, because they don't do anything for us.

Actually two out of three do not have working diaphragms. I hope I don't have to pay $100-$125 for that fix on each.

Other 50/55's come very close to the mirror. These may have to have a lump ground off as well as clipping the aperture pin. That would mean grinding close to the glass. I will try to test it against a pancolar 50, and fix the Porst to focus to infinity on my Sigma SD14.

[Flor27]

[yalcinaydin]

[yalcinaydin]

Can this be the cause? I removed the black metal from back of the lens.

_________________
My name is "Yalcin", and exactly "Yalçın" and here you can find my MF samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yalcinaydin/sets/
Right now switching back to AF because of work needs but I still love the MF lenses

[F16SUNSHINE]

Sorry Brew
It's time to make lemonade
_________________
Moderator

[no-X]

I believe this glare is mostly caused by sensor reflections. The optical design seems to be good (text is not blurred, but the glare only removed all contrast). This is why many manufacturers highlight importance of special MC layers for digital cameras, esp. for fast lenses. From all M42 lenses I have tried, S-M-C from Asahi resisted sensor reflections best. Thats why i prefer good MC layers to sharpness for fast lenses...
_________________
(almost) complete list of Helios lenses

[yalcinaydin]

Whole set:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yalcinaydin/sets/72157608422358642/
@F16SUNSHINE
I'm really sad to hear that, does this mean that I've a bad copy or a common problem? I need to know this cause I will give a sale ad tomorrow.

@no-X
This is also MC: PORST COLOR REFLEX MC AUTO 1.1.2/55mm Nr.002368
_________________
My name is "Yalcin", and exactly "Yalçın" and here you can find my MF samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yalcinaydin/sets/
Right now switching back to AF because of work needs but I still love the MF lenses

[no-X]

Yes, but there are big differences in MC quality between various manufacturers. I already posted this:

f/1.8 - MC Pancolar / SMC Takumar:



Pancolar is sharper, but its MC is not effective agains sensor reflections, which caused glare and lack of contrast around the text and edges. Takumar is not as sharp, but SMC works and suppresses most of them.
_________________
(almost) complete list of Helios lenses

[yalcinaydin]

Takumar is clearly better.
_________________
My name is "Yalcin", and exactly "Yalçın" and here you can find my MF samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yalcinaydin/sets/
Right now switching back to AF because of work needs but I still love the MF lenses

[yalcinaydin]

Here is the sample that is enough to curse the lens:
1-Porst 1.2/55@1.2, center 100% crop
2-Porst 1.2/55@1.8 (roughly), center 100% crop
3-Porst 1.2/55@2, center 100% crop
4-Canon Ef 1.8/50 II@1.8, center 100% crop


the suspicious thing is I see from the image much more cleaner on the optical visor but there is something else messing around. I'll try it with K100D super before judging the seller. If it's faulty then I'll give it back to the seller and request my money back.
_________________
My name is "Yalcin", and exactly "Yalçın" and here you can find my MF samples:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yalcinaydin/sets/
Right now switching back to AF because of work needs but I still love the MF lenses

[F16SUNSHINE]

It could be copy variation or it could be the simple personality of the lens or even a potential problem.
If it does become sharp eventually. Likely it is not a mis-aligned element.
The internal reflection problem is not usually so pronounced in low light.
Anytime you have a big flat rear element you can get reflections from it.
When I use the 1.4/55 Tomioka or 1.2/55 Tomioka this can come up.
It rarely is so troublesome as your samples.
I think this is simply the personality of the lens.
Fast f.1.2 lenses can be like this. The shots remind me of the Canon 50mm .95 that I had a few years ago.
It gathered lots of light but was glowing until f2.
My honest advise is. Try using the lens on a real subject in the way it is intended.
Go out tonight and shoot at some subject in minimal light and with varying distances.
Don't be too disappointed Yalcin. It will be easy to sell if you don't love it.
People love fast lenses.
_________________
Moderator

[no-X]

[Attila]

My copy was excellent.
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/japenese/othermaker/ports_55mm_f1_2/
_________________
Attila - admin
Items on sale on Ebay


35mm: Konica A4, Konica IIIA, Konica FC-1
MF: Konica Pearl I,II,III 6x4,5 Konica Semi Pearl
Film: Foma,Kodak, Fuji DIY development C41, FOMA LQR
Scan: Epson V500, scanassist (http://www.scanassist.org)
Shutter tester: LCD tester from member vfmoto
Digital: Panasonic G1, Sony Nex-3, Samsung NX100
Lenses: Konica Hexanons,Carl Zeiss,Carl Zeiss Jena,Meyer-Optik,Minolta MD,Yashica ML,Nikon,Olympus OM
DIY E-6,C41 and B&W