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

Soligor MC 200mm F/2.8 - Optical Formula [non C/D version]
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Nov 28, 2014 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That seems to have the same shiny paint and same focusing grip. Mine has a different grip... I wonder if there is any hope.

Mine may be up for sale real quick. I was most interested in comparing it to my Series 1 3/200 which is fractionally slower, but razor sharp.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 28, 2014 11:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

woodrim wrote:
That seems to have the same shiny paint and same focusing grip. Mine has a different grip... I wonder if there is any hope.

Mine may be up for sale real quick. I was most interested in comparing it to my Series 1 3/200 which is fractionally slower, but razor sharp.


Do you have the C/D version?

"Auto" version (Sun?):
http://olypedia.de/static/images/2/2d/OM-Soligor_200_2.8_3rdpartylens-om.JPG

C/D version (Tokina):
http://olypedia.de/static/images/d/de/OM-Soligor_200_2.8_CD_3rdpartylens-om.JPG


Even if you have the Tokina version, I'd still expect the Vivitar to be better. I've never had a Soligor 200/2.8 but I've had the Vivitar S1 135/2.3 & 200/3 and the Soligor C/D 135/2. The Viv 135/2.3 is a lot better than the Soligor 135/2, especially at close distances. The Komine and Tokina designs each seem to have a lot in common (i.e. the floating elements for close focus in the Komine lenses).

I've posted detailed comparisons a while back (Warning: lots of 100% crops, may take a bit to load):

Soligor C/D 135/2 -vs- Vivitar Series 1 135/2.3
Vivitar Series 1 200/3 -vs- Pentax-M 200/4


I've had all 4 of the early Series 1 primes (28/1.9, 90/2.5, 135/2.3, 200/3) at one point, the 90/2.5 is the only one left.
The Komine lenses are quite good but the Rokkors were better... except at close range perhaps, the Viv 200/3 blew my Pentax-M 200/4 out of the water at 2-5m distance but the Vivitar coatings (VMC, mine didn't even have that) are probably worse than the OEM-coatings of their time.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Boris_Akunin wrote:
woodrim wrote:
That seems to have the same shiny paint and same focusing grip. Mine has a different grip... I wonder if there is any hope.

Mine may be up for sale real quick. I was most interested in comparing it to my Series 1 3/200 which is fractionally slower, but razor sharp.


Do you have the C/D version?

"Auto" version (Sun?):
http://olypedia.de/static/images/2/2d/OM-Soligor_200_2.8_3rdpartylens-om.JPG

C/D version (Tokina):
http://olypedia.de/static/images/d/de/OM-Soligor_200_2.8_CD_3rdpartylens-om.JPG


Even if you have the Tokina version, I'd still expect the Vivitar to be better. I've never had a Soligor 200/2.8 but I've had the Vivitar S1 135/2.3 & 200/3 and the Soligor C/D 135/2. The Viv 135/2.3 is a lot better than the Soligor 135/2, especially at close distances. The Komine and Tokina designs each seem to have a lot in common (i.e. the floating elements for close focus in the Komine lenses).

I've posted detailed comparisons a while back (Warning: lots of 100% crops, may take a bit to load):

Soligor C/D 135/2 -vs- Vivitar Series 1 135/2.3
Vivitar Series 1 200/3 -vs- Pentax-M 200/4


I've had all 4 of the early Series 1 primes (28/1.9, 90/2.5, 135/2.3, 200/3) at one point, the 90/2.5 is the only one left.
The Komine lenses are quite good but the Rokkors were better...


There is much in your post that I must comment. My version looks more like the Sun than the Tokina, although the grip is different...

I look forward to checking out your comparison posts. Most people here probably know that I've been real big on the Series 1 lenses - the three that I have. I recently picked up a Rokkor 4/200 to see how well it compared to the 3/200. The Vivitar is superior. I have been watching for the right 2.8/135 based on its reputation and will compare it to my 2.3/135. As of today, my Tair-11 is the only 135mm that has come close. The 2.5/90 is in a class of its own and the only reason I have other lenses in the range is because of unique image characteristics. The Bokina is just technically perfect.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="woodrim"]
Boris_Akunin wrote:
There is much in your post that I must comment. My version looks more like the Sun than the Tokina, although the grip is different...


Yeah, the Tokina-made C/D primes have a rather distinct look. I'd be very surprised if that one comes even close to the Vvitar/Komine.

woodrim wrote:
I look forward to checking out your comparison posts. Most people here probably know that I've been real big on the Series 1 lenses - the three that I have. I recently picked up a Rokkor 4/200 to see how well it compared to the 3/200. The Vivitar is superior. I have been watching for the right 2.8/135 based on its reputation and will compare it to my 2.3/135. As of today, my Tair-11 is the only 135mm that has come close. The 2.5/90 is in a class of its own and the only reason I have other lenses in the range is because of unique image characteristics. The Bokina is just technically perfect.


There are 3 different Minolta 200/4 designs, the late MC and early MD version (520/535g, ~65x130mm) seems to be the best, which one do you have? And at what distance did you compare them? The Viv 200/3 may be hard to beat at close range but long distances and backlighting are a different story...

Among the affordable options (excluding the Nikon/Minolta/Canon/Zeiss/Pentax 135/2's and 135/1.8's), the Pentax-K 135/2.5 might be your best option (the second version of the Takumar 135/2.5 is optically identical).

Artaphot.ch is a good source for Minolta lens comparisons:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche

Here's the comparison of Minolta's 200s:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/338-nex-5n-und-minolta-200mm-teleobjektive

Dennis Lohmanns list is useful to identify the different versions:
http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/


PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 12:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I actually referenced all those sites before purchasing. I have the MD Tele Rokkor. It is a good lens. I found it to be no better than my Topcor 5.6/200.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

woodrim wrote:
I have the MD Tele Rokkor.

Which one?


PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 1:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was speaking of the 4/200.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

woodrim wrote:
I was speaking of the 4/200.

I know, there are two different 200/4 designs under the name MD Tele Rokkor, one ~520g and ~65x130mm, one ~400g and ~65x117mm. The heavier version is considered to be better (same as the 4/4 version for the 135s), I sold my Viv 200/3 before I got my MD 200/4 (the early, heavy version) so I never tested them head-to-head. Im wondering whether you did.

I'll compare my MD200/4 with my Canon FD 200/2.8 when I find the time.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:

C/D 105/2.8 Macro (6XXXXXXX): definitely Kiron/Kino

I've got a Soligor Auto 17/4.0 (1172XXXX) here that seems to be made by Norita Kogaku.


1- I did not know that the kiron 105 was sold under soligor name
2- 17/4.0 is Tokina made (same lens than the 17/3.5 even if f: is indicated different)
3- Who knows you manufactured on the very first c/d batch (1975/1976)
    50mm macro ? (komine ??)
    100mm macro ? (no idea on my side)
    80/200mm (also sold as miranda ec 80/200) (makinon ??)


Last edited by PBFACTS on Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:53 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PBFACTS wrote:

1- I did not know that the kiron 105 was sold under soligor name
2- 17/4.0 is Tokina made (same lens than the 17/3.5 even if f: is indicated different)


1. I've got one right here.
2. I'm quite sure it isn't, I've got both and they don't exactly look similar:






The Noritar however does look rather similar to the Soligor.

Noritar:
http://www.kevincameras.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=80769&g2_serialNumber=2
http://www.kevincameras.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=80775&g2_serialNumber=2

Soligor:
http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20116/big_3922_PICT0022_1.jpg
http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20116/big_3922_PICT0027_1.jpg

Rikenon:
http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20119/big_4709_IMG_9667_1.jpg
http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20119/big_4709_IMG_9668_1.jpg


I know there's an older version of the Tokina 17/3.5 but the Noritar still seems like the closer fit:
http://digicamclub.de/dunkelnetz.de/images/objektivvergleiche/17er_tokina_vivitar/3_17mm.jpg


PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PBFACTS wrote:

1- I did not know that the kiron 105 was sold under soligor name
2- 17/4.0 is Tokina made (same lens than the 17/3.5 even if f: is indicated different)


Boris_Akunin wrote:

1. I've got one right here.
2. I'm quite sure it isn't, I've got both and they don't exactly look similar:



1- Tks for the pics ..rare beast under soligor name .. so the kiron was sold under kiron + vivitar + soligor + ricoh + which other (worth a new discussion) ?
2-The only thing i spoke about was the optical parts of the 2x versions of tokina's (not the soligor/not the barrel, mount..)

On your pics you have on left the old soligor (tokina?) 17/4 and on the right the newer tokina rmc 17/3.5
    IF soligor 17 is tokina AND if the size of front and back lens is same this mean
    soligor = is tokina AND 2x versions of tokina's are really the same
    If the size of front and back lens are not same this can mean 2x things

    Soligor is NOT tokina (you are right)
    OR
    Soligor is Tokina BUT Tokina's 2x versions are not optically same


Patrick


    Last edited by PBFACTS on Sat Nov 29, 2014 6:33 pm; edited 3 times in total


    PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2014 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

    PBFACTS wrote:
    Boris_Akunin wrote:
    PBFACTS wrote:

    1- I did not know that the kiron 105 was sold under soligor name
    2- 17/4.0 is Tokina made (same lens than the 17/3.5 even if f: is indicated different)


    1. I've got one right here.
    2. I'm quite sure it isn't, I've got both and they don't exactly look similar:



    1- Tks for the pics ..rare beast under soligor name .. so the kiron was sold under kiron + vivitar + soligor + ricoh + which other (worth a new discussion) ?
    2-The only thing i spoke about was the optical parts (not the barrel, mount..)

    On your pics you have on left the old 17/4 and on the right the newer rmc 17/3.5
    Pls can you tell if the size of front and back lens is same (i was right) or not (you are right) ?

    Patrick


    The back lenses are both 13mm, the new Tokina's front lens is 38mm and the Soligor's front lens is 50mm.

    I haven't found many pictures of the old Tokina 17/3.5, the front lens seems to be larger than on the new one but still smaller than on the Soligor:
    http://digicamclub.de/dunkelnetz.de/images/objektivvergleiche/17er_tokina_vivitar/3_17mm.jpg

    The old Tokina 17/3.5 and the Soligor might be related (for all I know, Tokina might have build the Noritar...) but the Soligor seems more similar to the Noritar and Rikenon.

    My Soligor has a yellow tint (UV treatment has almost cleared it), it might have radioactive lens elements.


    PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2014 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

    Boris_Akunin wrote:
    woodrim wrote:
    I was speaking of the 4/200.

    I know, there are two different 200/4 designs under the name MD Tele Rokkor, one ~520g and ~65x130mm, one ~400g and ~65x117mm. The heavier version is considered to be better (same as the 4/4 version for the 135s), I sold my Viv 200/3 before I got my MD 200/4 (the early, heavy version) so I never tested them head-to-head. Im wondering whether you did.

    I'll compare my MD200/4 with my Canon FD 200/2.8 when I find the time.


    Mine weighs 517g on my postal scale. Don't get me wrong, it's a good lens. The Vivitar is faster, has much shorter MFD, and I believe is sharper. Another factor is the CA; the Rokkor exhibits red while the Vivitar is blue. I prefer blue to correct more easily.


    PostPosted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

    Made some SUN Soligor 2.8/200mm shots with A7: http://forum.mflenses.com/mc-soligor-2-8-200mm-serial-37-on-sony-a7-t69422.html


    PostPosted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

    They don't look bad to me.


    PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2014 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

    A bit better then Tokina version i had. Less chroma, more contrast.


    PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2014 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

    Pancolart wrote:
    A bit better then Tokina version i had. Less chroma, more contrast.


    That would be one of the SUN CD line that we learned of earlier in this thread? You have given it respect.


    PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

    woodrim wrote:
    Pancolart wrote:
    A bit better then Tokina version i had. Less chroma, more contrast.


    That would be one of the SUN CD line that we learned of earlier in this thread? You have given it respect.


    Thanks. Tokina is CD. Sun supposed to be GS or auto. Mine was just like bellow (SUN):
    Oldhand wrote:
    This might be the one.
    OH



    I am sure grip was replaced here:
    woodrim wrote:

    There is much in your post that I must comment. My version looks more like the Sun than the Tokina, although the grip is different...


    PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

    You are correct, I confused the two. It is the GS that I have.


    PostPosted: Sun Mar 29, 2015 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

    Although I received the lens several weeks ago, it wasn't until just today that I got the C/Y adapter. Immediately went out around the yard to take some test shots. GS version serial number 38...

    NEX-5N. All test shots are wide open at f/2.8.

    1


    2


    3


    4


    5


    6


    7


    8


    9


    10


    11


    12


    13


    14


    15


    PostPosted: Sun Mar 29, 2015 6:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

    I just sold my SUN 2.8/200. I did put some wide open samples here: http://forum.mflenses.com/sun-optics-200mm-f-2-8-y-c-mount-t69526,highlight,%2Bsun+%2B200mm.html