Three good 100mm lenses

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

I have taken three of my four best 100MM lenses and made comparisons. The fourth lens has a diaphragm problem and won't open fully. It's a shame because it impressed me as very sharp when I first used it.

These are all f/2.8 lenses and all shots were at f/2.8. I will not name the lenses yet so as not to influence opinions. I focused pretty accurately, although a very minor movement can change the precise point focused. Oddly, one lens shot faster in two of the three exposures.

To my eye, while I can see slight difference at 100% and 200% crop, I think it matters very little and any of these lenses can be used with equal results. However, these type tests do not show the character as well as normal picture taking and handling are also not represented.

I have uploaded the full size images with only an auto-contrast to compensate for my camera setting. The order is the same in all three sets; call them 123 or abc.

Pancolart · Expire: 2013-11-18

Indeed all three perform great. Even bokeh is hard to distinguish.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Same thing as when I tested a load of 50mm lenses together - the differences are too small to draw any meaningful conclusions.

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

I tend to say that no. 1 performs best for my taste followed by no. 3 and no. 2 is last.
However, that's only in pixel peeping mode and in terms of bokeh my personal taste.
I am curios to see the outcome.
Is no. 2 maybe the Orestor? Wink

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

thanks for the test and bit of fun.

My very wild guess is:
1) nikkor 105
2) orestor 100
3) zuiko 100

I can't see Trioplan there Very Happy

Rado

p.s to my eye No1 is the best (at least from the bush pics)

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

kansalliskala · Expire: 2016-12-30

Thing you have three this good 100mm lenses is a sign of apocalyptic consumerist/industrial well-being.

Just like I had the throw away some perfectly good food to fit 5kg of strawberries in the firdge. Smile

Pontus · Expire: 2016-08-25

Good performers all three with the busyest bokeh in #2. I've done my fair share of testing 100mm lenses and what I learned was that most are very good and almost impossible to name. Which is why I'm letting ergonomics decide when it comes to 100mm lenses.

glaebhoerl · Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary

#2 has considerably noisier bokeh than the other two, as well as worse CA in the first picture.

#3 has slightly smoother bokeh than #1 I think, but otherwise they're hard to distinguish.

radissimo77 · Joined: 20 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: Glasgow

pdccameras · Expire: 2014-08-11

Interesting comparison.

As almost everyone else has stated, all three are very close.

In my opinion, #3 has the smoothest, most pleasant bokeh. All other points of comparison such as differences in sharpness, contrast, CA, etc. are all within the limits for which a little benign post processing would easily mask completely. My guess is that these are all cooke-triplet derived designs with some level of spherical aberration left uncorrected.

P.

JJB · Joined: 02 Oct 2014 Posts: 424 Location: USA

All very nice and very close but then again, woodrim is a great photographer and can show each lens to its best advantage.

My own very subjective eye would rank them 3, 1, 2 but I'd be delighted to own any one of them. What a dilemma, to have 3 to choose from!

I'd hazard a guess that # 3 might be a Meyer-Gorlitz?

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

Okay, was hoping to hear from MIR sine he knows about my lenses, but I'll answer the riddle.

First I will provide some background and personal impressions. I generally get a certain feel for a lens after first reviewing results. Some few lenses I have really impress me with their results, which I've found may not be the same when doing these side by side comparisons. That's why I give much more consideration to actual use and results.

I left out the names, as I said, to not influence the assessment based on preconceived values. I myself am disappointed because I would have ranked these lenses differently, at least in terms of sharpness, until doing this comparison. Although I will say that I'm not surprised at the bokeh being smoother from number three, as others have also pointed out.

The lens I sidelined is a Meyer Orestor, but the later version with fewer blades and funky stop down button. Although I got it in mint condition, it soon after stopped opening fully. Time for a repair. However, I was very impressed with its sharpness wide open and throughout the aperture scale.

The lenses in the test are, in order, Kalejnar, RE Topcor, and Meyer Orestor. The Orestor is the earlier preset version that I most recently acquired in mint condition. The Kalejnar is very good condition and the Topcor had servicing to clean.

I would have predicted the Topcor to outperform, thus my surprise and disappointment. The Meyer did not surprise me by having the smoother bokeh. The Kalejnar had always impressed me as being very sharp. I had recently compared Kalejnar with Topcor in a quick couple of snaps, and thought I saw more sharpness out of Kalejnar. This test confirmed. So I guess based on my experience with those two lenses, I was more disappointed than surprised. Disappointed only because I have such a high opinion of Topcor.

I have, in addition to the Diaplan, three other 100mm lenses. A Pentor, Aragon, and Sonnar T*. I suspect the first two are identical lenses, but the Sonnar is f/3.5, so was not included.

When the other Orestor gets fixed, I will want to repeat this exercise for my own benefit and will post results again here if others would like to see a second round. Perhaps any minor focusing differences will average out. I am prediction the sharpest to be between the newer Orestor and the Kalejnar. I'm also wondering if the optics in the two Orestor styles are interchangeable, which I would consider to get the best optical together with the many bladed diaphragm.

woodrim · Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston

Real life pictures from the lenses...

Kalejnar

Topcor

Orestor (Just got it - not many images to choose from)

Sidelined Orestor

pdccameras · Expire: 2014-08-11

Great shots! The fiddle head fern is my favorite. Of the three lenses you tested, I have just the Topcor - a fine performer by any standard - interesting how it fared in this grouping - that Kaleinar looks like a fine lens. After reading your post, I did a quick inventory of my 100's - only a few of them are faster than f/ 3.5 - one is a Vivitar and the other is a Trioplan - soon to return from service by Marc Jensen - so I really can't complain Wink

pdccameras · Expire: 2014-08-11

Great shots! The fiddle head fern is my favorite. Of the three lenses you tested, I have just the Topcor - a fine performer by any standard - interesting how it fared in this grouping - that Kaleinar looks like a fine lens. After reading your post, I did a quick inventory of my 100's - only a few of them are faster than f/ 3.5 - one is a Vivitar and the other is a Trioplan - soon to return from service by Marc Jensen - so I really can't complain Wink

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

The last group of photos is excellent. Every shot is a winner, IMO. And I'm not familiar with any of those lenses -- I haven't even seen one before. If it isn't Japanese or German (as in Leitz and Zeiss), then I'm usually pretty ignorant.

The 100mm focal length is one I'm rather soft in. I have a hodgepodge consisting of three macros and a portrait lens: a Tamron SP 90/2.5 macro, a Canon FD 100/4 macro, a SMC-Tak 100/4 macro, and a 105/2.5 Nikkor.

newst · Joined: 21 Oct 2014 Posts: 617 Location: Troy, MI USA

Of the three lenses you tested I only own the Kaleinar. I fully agree with your evaluation of that lens. One additional lens you might want to test is the Konica Hexanon AR 2.8/100.

Pancolart · Expire: 2013-11-18

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

The Orestor has the same schema as the Meyer/Pentacon 2.8/135:

The CZJ Sonnar 3.5/135 is broadly similar:

So the Meyer lenses are not Sonnars, but they can be called Sonnar types.

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Woodrim,

thanks for that very informative thread which surprised me to a large extent.

The Kaleinar is obviously one lens which I should also consider to acquire. It fit's in my overall impression of the quality of the Russian lenses which I rate as rather high. So far I luckily got always only very good copies and I never ever had any problem with those lenses up to now. Some of them are really exceptional good and still the best you can get for your money.

I was already considering the servicing of my defective Orestor (obviously the similar problem like you mentioned before with your copy, most likely the lubricant issue) when I saw Nordentro's pictures recently published here. However, as I also have the Topcor lens which is also in need of some CLA activities I can certainly safe the money for the reactivation of this lens as obviously the rather low optical quality does not justify any further investment in this lens.

I would have guessed exactly the opposite before and expected the Topcor to be superior to the Orestor.

Anyway, it's somehow a "happy end" for me as the Orestor (M42) is usable on all of my cameras incl. FF and the Topcor (Exakta) is only limited to my mirrorless crop sensor cameras.

Any experience out of your planned CLA activity for the Orestor would be highly welcome too. Wink

pdccameras · Expire: 2014-08-11

[quote="Pancolart"]