MFlenses - A new life in a digital age
MFLenses 2026

Manual Focus Lenses Forum

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.

Explore the world of vintage lenses through repair notes, real test shots, and detailed archive threads packed with images.
logovectorizer.com
Spotlight

Featured partner placement for the forum front page.

Those 3.5 / 23mm lenses...
Post new topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  


Post
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:50 pm
Post subject: Those 3.5 / 23mm lenses...
Reply
Post
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:50 pm
Post subject: Those 3.5 / 23mm lenses...
Reply
I bought one, but can't hardly find any info on them.


Sold under lots of brands. A Japanese page states the maker as Tomioka. Elsewhere it is suggested the maker is Sun. But more importantly, I have found barely any examples of photos taken with these lenses. There used to be a thread on this forum with pics from a Chinon version, but the links are all down.

Has anybody used one of these? I didn't pay very much so I'm not expecting much, but it'd still be educational to see some results from others.


Post
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 4:10 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2012 4:10 pm
Post subject:
Reply
I once had a Hanimex Automatic 3.5/23.



But I have not used it much. At that time I only had my 350D and I did not find the lens very useful those days.
Because I also already had the Nikkor-N.C 2.8/24 and this is a much better lens.


Post
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:05 pm
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:05 pm
Post subject:
Reply
I finally got around to developing a roll I tested this lens on.


Here's a wide open shot. The lens is rather soft wide open, and seems to be afflicted with coma. It has a "glow" wide open, but the glow only appears on the outside edges of objects.

There is noticeable barrel distortion too. It is actually pretty sharp at f8 and f11, but even then the corners are noticeably soft. It could be a fun lens for street photography, but it is not the one to go to for landscapes or other work where corner to corner sharpness is needed. I paid about $25 for my example, and at that price I think it would be worth it, but if you need an ultrawide and are willing to pay more - pay more.


Post
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 12:16 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 12:16 am
Post subject:
Reply
I actually like that picture, technically crap or whatever, it's a good image. Cool


Post
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:50 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:50 am
Post subject:
Reply
Laughing It's not the camera it's the photographer.



Here's another showing flare and distortion.


Post
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 3:07 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 3:07 am
Post subject:
Reply
damn that is a lot of flare and distortion. I never liked inexpensive 24mm lenses.
My SMC Pentax K 24/3.5 lens is extremely sharp, very little flare, and virtually no distortion.
I recommend one of those in m42 (super multi coated takumar) if you would like similar...


Post
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 3:45 am
Post subject:
Reply
Post
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 3:45 am
Post subject:
Reply
I got the flare on purpose, but did not expect the distortion. I kind of like the ghosts it makes. Confused It'll probably stay in my collection because it is kind of fun to play with such a wide lens on my old cameras, and I don't really need one enough that I'd feel like paying for it.
Post new topic Reply to topic
Page 1 of 1