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

Steinheil Quinar 135mm F2.8 VL on NEX 5N
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you! Smile


PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2016 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I tested my copy on A7 today on a distance about 50 meters. A F2.8, it is sharp up to the middle of the frame. At F4, most part of the frame is sharp enough but not the corners. At F8, the corners looks OK to me but it is never sharp. In comparison, my Vivitar 135/2.8 CF has OK corner start from F2.8. So, this may not be the choice for those who care about corner sharpness but those who likes its bokeh, color and the build quality. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2016 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The water lily just popped out of my screen! Brilliant colour! Like Dog


PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2016 11:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
I tested my copy on A7 today on a distance about 50 meters. A F2.8, it is sharp up to the middle of the frame. At F4, most part of the frame is sharp enough but not the corners. At F8, the corners looks OK to me but it is never sharp.


Maybe the softness in the corners is intrinsic to the lens (off-axis aberrations), but before blaming the lens have you checked the parallelism of adapter, lens mount, etc.?


PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Gerald wrote:
calvin83 wrote:
I tested my copy on A7 today on a distance about 50 meters. A F2.8, it is sharp up to the middle of the frame. At F4, most part of the frame is sharp enough but not the corners. At F8, the corners looks OK to me but it is never sharp.


Maybe the softness in the corners is intrinsic to the lens (off-axis aberrations), but before blaming the lens have you checked the parallelism of adapter, lens mount, etc.?

Yes. I think you might be right that the off-axis aberrations is the main cause of the softness. The result of my Steinheil 35/3.8 is similar but my Topcor 300/5.6 works fine. I will buy a better adapter and test again later.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
I will buy a better adapter and test again later.


You can easily test the parallelism of an adapter/mount. All you need is a camera with liveview and magnification of at least 10 times. The procedure is as follows:

1) choose a very detailed subject at a distance of 100 to 200 times the focal length of the lens.
2) with the lens wide open, frame the subject in the center of field, focus carefully with the maximum magnification of the screen, and record the distance on the lens focusing scale
3) Repeat 2 for all four corners

If all the five distances are equal, congratulations! You have a perfect lens!

If the four distances for the corners are equal, but there is a discrepancy in relation to the distance for the center, then the lens suffers from field curvature, but the adapter/mount is in perfect parallel with the sensor.

If the distances for the corners are discrepant from each other, and the difference is greater than the depth of field, then the adapter/mount is not parallel or the lens is decentralized.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@grainy
Thanks you!

@Gerald
Thanks for the head-up. I had did something similar with NEX 5N but I think I need to test some of the lenses again with the A7. Some lenses looks OK on the APS-C censor but show difference sharpness in each side when test on a FF camera.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ugh I hate seeing these pictures, knowing I just sold mine last night.
I loved the image quality and build, but it was just too heavy for me. I found myself never taking it with me.
However, I already kind of regret it :/
Lovely images by the way, especially of the birds.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
A monopod should help if you think it is too heavy for handheld. It is not very heavy in my standard(more or less the same weight as a 70-200/4).


PostPosted: Sat Jan 23, 2016 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Steinheil Quinars (and Macro Quinars) were about the finest SLR lenses around in the late 1960's. The problem was the Exakta range of SLR cameras was falling out of favor with the western buying public at that time (Nikon, Pentax, Minolta dominance), and these lenses are mostly available only in Exakta mount. As fine a camera a VX IIa or VX IIb was, people wanted "modern" cameras with instant return mirrors, and the VX1000 and RTL 1000 Exaktas were a step down in reliability, which added to the obscurity of these fine lenses.

If I were to acquire a set of Macro Quinars, I would want to shoot them with a full frame camera-I don't think the high pixel pitch of 24mpx aps-c cameras do these any justice.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 23, 2016 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Macro series is on the other league. I wish to buy a copy of 100/2.8 but the price is always over my limited budget.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 25, 2023 1:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
I tested my copy on A7 today on a distance about 50 meters. A F2.8, it is sharp up to the middle of the frame. At F4, most part of the frame is sharp enough but not the corners. At F8, the corners looks OK to me but it is never sharp. In comparison, my Vivitar 135/2.8 CF has OK corner start from F2.8. So, this may not be the choice for those who care about corner sharpness but those who likes its bokeh, color and the build quality. Wink


I don't have the Steinheil Quinar 2.8/135mm, but the 4.5/200mm. It has similar properties.

And yes, your images are really nice!



anscochrome wrote:
The Steinheil Quinars (and Macro Quinars) were about the finest SLR lenses around in the late 1960's. The problem was the Exakta range of SLR cameras was falling out of favor with the western buying public at that time (Nikon, Pentax, Minolta dominance), and these lenses are mostly available only in Exakta mount. As fine a camera a VX IIa or VX IIb was, people wanted "modern" cameras with instant return mirrors, and the VX1000 and RTL 1000 Exaktas were a step down in reliability, which added to the obscurity of these fine lenses.


I acutally got two of my three Steinheil lenses when I bought my Minolta SR-2 (the rather rare first Minolta SLR from 1958).
Said Minolta had belonged to a Swiss professional photographer. According to the documents included, he had bought the Minolta SR-2 in 1960, in New York (no Minolta representatives in Europe, let alone in Switzerland back then). Interestingly, he had bought it not with additional Minolta glass, but with Steinheil lenses plus Exakta=>Minolta SR adapter.

It would take another few years until people in Europe would recognize how good the Minolta lenses actually were (compared to contemporary German glass).

S


EDIT: Some interesting (albeit in German) here: https://photobutmore.de/exakta/steinheil/
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2