| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 8:13 pm Post subject: Unexpected desappointing lens |
 |
|
papasito wrote:
with a lot of expectative, i have purchased some lenses that were desappointing to me.
Among them
1- Nikkor Ais 50/1,8. lost some contrast and saturation. Borders no good.
2- Angulon 35/2,8 for QBM. Centerr from 2,8 excellent, but corners....till F/11 is not sharp
3- MDII 28/2,8. (7/7). A lot of CA and the borders never sharo till F/11.
4- Rolleinar MC 200/3,5. Low contrast, not sharp till F/5,6 in the center. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009
Posts: 9097
Location: Houston, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
OK, I'll play.
Back in 1985, I got a sizable tax refund check and I decided to buy camera gear with the funds. This included a brand new Canon nFD 200mm f/2.8 and an nFD 300mm f/4.
First time I took them out, I was shooting in a high-contrast situation, and when I got my slides back, I couldn't believe my eyes. There was so much magenta and green CA that I felt the lenses were unusable. I was crestfallen. Eventually, I learned that one just did not use either of those lenses in high-contrast situations, especially where hard lines are evident because there will be color -- of the wrong kind.
A more recent acquisition was because of an associate's recommendation. Now, this recommendation went back about 35 years, but still I was curious. This fellow had a Soligor 95-310mm f/5.6 push-pull zoom that he often spoke highly of. Back then, I had bought the Soligor 85-300mm f/5, mostly I guess because it was a 2-ring zoom, which I thought might have been superior, and also because it was about a third of a stop faster. I don't recall anymore what the price differential was. So anyway, I stumbled across one of the 95-310's on eBay, mint in original box, for dirt cheap and I bought it. Tried it out on both a digital and a film camera, shooting slides. And all I can say about it is it was unbelievably horrid. I don't think I've ever owned a worse lens.
So, anybody wanna buy a Soligor 95-310 for cheap? Mint condition. I'll make you a great deal  You can have it for the cost of postage.
_________________
Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/
Last edited by cooltouch on Thu Dec 03, 2020 4:20 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex TG
Joined: 13 Oct 2019
Posts: 221
Location: Ukraine
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alex TG wrote:
My entry would be Miranda 24 mm f/2.8 MC Macro (made by Cosina).
Quite highly praised lens in general, but my copy is just awful.
Horrible field curvature, blurry corners (on APS-C!) under f/8, heavy blue color cast, poor contrast. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 7785
Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
Any Sigma Mini Wide...I think I've had most of them, still got two 28 / 2.8 Macro's and I use them as body caps.
I've got all manner of third party wide lenses and the Vivitar's rule, even the Tefnon and Hoya's are better than the Sigma's. The only lens that comes close to the awfulness of the Sigma Mini Wide is the Japanese made Carl Zeiss 28 / 2.8 .
_________________
LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
| Lloydy wrote: |
Any Sigma Mini Wide...I think I've had most of them, still got two 28 / 2.8 Macro's and I use them as body caps.
I've got all manner of third party wide lenses and the Vivitar's rule, even the Tefnon and Hoya's are better than the Sigma's. The only lens that comes close to the awfulness of the Sigma Mini Wide is the Japanese made Carl Zeiss 28 / 2.8 . |
That zeiss made in Japan was a Sigma lens, was not? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2020 11:16 pm Post subject: Re: Unexpected desappointing lens |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 6:17 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phalbert
Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 359
Location: Namibia
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Phalbert wrote:
Hi Loydy. I'm a bit surprised. The german magazine Color foto tested the sigma mini wide 24 against a couple of others, and found it to be the best. It had on the front cover "Sigma beats Leica ! " ... to many people's surprise, I think. Besides I've read other good reviews of the 24. You may have struck a bad copy ? Actually I'm still looking for one... 
_________________
🙋 My wishlist: Titan or Idaho 135/1,8 Nikon Df Nikkor 105/1,8 35/1,4 85/1,4
My dream lenses: Zuiko 180/2 Prototype Zuiko 85/1,4
Zeiss CY: 55/1,2 85/1,2
Astro Berlin 250/2 Canon EF 50/1,0 85/1,2
Nikkor 105/1,4 28/1,4
My stolen stuff: Zuiko 24/2 #106874; Zuiko 35-80/2,8 #102180; Zuiko 35/2 #119168; Zuiko 90/2 macro #102858; Zuiko x1,4 converter #102019; Tamron 17/3,5 #400567; Tamron 400/4 #80407; Soligor 135/2 #17506600 Sigma 28/1,8 #1001124 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 3462
Location: Northern Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
| Phalbert wrote: |
| Hi Loydy. I'm a bit surprised. The german magazine Color foto tested the sigma mini wide 24 against a couple of others, and found it to be the best. It had on the front cover "Sigma beats Leica ! " ... to many people's surprise, I think. Besides I've read other good reviews of the 24. You may have struck a bad copy ? Actually I'm still looking for one... |
The Sigma Mini-Wide is a 28mm lens. The 24mm is a Super-Wide.
_________________
"I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alun Thomas
Joined: 20 Aug 2018
Posts: 631
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alun Thomas wrote:
The best early Sigma 24mm I have tried is the Super-Wide II, the AF version. I have also tried the original super wide, and several earlier 24mm versions include the filtermatic, and in other badges such as Upsilon, Aetna, and Quantaray, probably about 5-6 lenses total. Of them all, the super-wide II stands apart to an extent, all of the others with the exception of the Aetna could only be described as poor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 8:55 pm Post subject: Re: Unexpected desappointing lens |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| Blazer0ne wrote: |
Wide angle lenses mostly.
The Landscape photos with my copies have a blurry corner (at the tree line) even stopped down Sony APC-S mirrorless! So, I compose with that in mind, otherwise they work perfectly fine for less than distance photos.
Rokkor-HH 35mm f1.8 (Top Left) I may have tried to rotate the rear group to move to the bottom corner but I think the power issue was not in the lens group but the mechanism which the front and rear groups thread together. Maybe it was tilted because I didn't see any sign of decenter with the wagon wheel chart. |
What the f*** are you doing with your lenses ?!?  They are precision instruments, and sometimes a few dozen micrometers of shifting/tilting a single element can seriously impact the perfomance!
| Blazer0ne wrote: |
Rokkor-X NL 21mm f2.8 (All Corners and CA) |
Corners should be quite good (24 MP FF) for a 1960s vintage 20mm, comparable to e. g. the Sony Zeiss ZA 2.8/16-35mm! However if someone has f****ed around with its floating focusing mechanism, a lot of additional field curvature (and other aberrations) may be introduced ...
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
benadamx
Joined: 25 Feb 2019
Posts: 329
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2020 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
benadamx wrote:
i was very excited to find a rollei SL35 with a german-made zeiss planar 50/1.8 (as i understand it, production moved to singapore in 1975 and quality declined) at a very reasonable price, my first "real" zeiss; shot with it for a few days, and the results were... fine? but just not very interesting in any particular way.. was really expecting to have my mind blown for some reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018
Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2020 7:45 am Post subject: Re: Unexpected desappointing lens |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 6:16 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phalbert
Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 359
Location: Namibia
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2020 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Phalbert wrote:
| DigiChromeEd wrote: |
| Phalbert wrote: |
| Hi Loydy. I'm a bit surprised. The german magazine Color foto tested the sigma mini wide 24 against a couple of others, and found it to be the best. It had on the front cover "Sigma beats Leica ! " ... to many people's surprise, I think. Besides I've read other good reviews of the 24. You may have struck a bad copy ? Actually I'm still looking for one... |
The Sigma Mini-Wide is a 28mm lens. The 24mm is a Super-Wide. |
Oops. Yes. My bad...
_________________
🙋 My wishlist: Titan or Idaho 135/1,8 Nikon Df Nikkor 105/1,8 35/1,4 85/1,4
My dream lenses: Zuiko 180/2 Prototype Zuiko 85/1,4
Zeiss CY: 55/1,2 85/1,2
Astro Berlin 250/2 Canon EF 50/1,0 85/1,2
Nikkor 105/1,4 28/1,4
My stolen stuff: Zuiko 24/2 #106874; Zuiko 35-80/2,8 #102180; Zuiko 35/2 #119168; Zuiko 90/2 macro #102858; Zuiko x1,4 converter #102019; Tamron 17/3,5 #400567; Tamron 400/4 #80407; Soligor 135/2 #17506600 Sigma 28/1,8 #1001124 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2020 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
| benadamx wrote: |
| i was very excited to find a rollei SL35 with a german-made zeiss planar 50/1.8 (as i understand it, production moved to singapore in 1975 and quality declined) at a very reasonable price, my first "real" zeiss; shot with it for a few days, and the results were... fine? but just not very interesting in any particular way.. was really expecting to have my mind blown for some reason. |
I have some copies. 3 hace aperture problems, two have haze (fixed now, but it returns).
The IQ is very good. But not the contrastier, nor the sharpest
Is not the best in any department.
The c/y planar 1,7/50 should be better, but has it own defects. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 3693
Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2020 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Seriously I don't know of a disappointing lens. Over time i managed to get a good copy of all those with bad first impression or on the other hand was able to make successful repairs. If a lens must be singled out: Pentacon 2.8/29mm shouldn't be bought for panorama usage by newbie. Too many are decentralized and even if proper, edges aren't impressive. Still cool lens though for specific use and cannot be auto discredited.
_________________
---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 2926
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2020 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
I was never too impressed with the Kiron 105mm macro. The Tokina 90/2.5 is much better in my opinion, especially wide open or as a portrait lens. Not that the Kiron is bad, it just didn't live up to my expectations after having read all the rave reviews. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2020 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
Another disappointing Lens.
MD MINOLTA 300/4,5.
CA as never seen before |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 7785
Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2020 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
| Phalbert wrote: |
| Hi Loydy. I'm a bit surprised. The german magazine Color foto tested the sigma mini wide 24 against a couple of others, and found it to be the best. It had on the front cover "Sigma beats Leica ! " ... to many people's surprise, I think. Besides I've read other good reviews of the 24. You may have struck a bad copy ? Actually I'm still looking for one... |
I know....it's why I've had six of the damn things over the years. I keep trying to like them, I really do, but I hate them. I've given two away, sold two and use two as body caps on my Contax RX and Rollieflex SL35 ! 
_________________
LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 7785
Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2020 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
[quote="papasito"]Another disappointing Lens.
MD MINOLTA 300/4,5.
CA as never seen before[/quote
Damn......I've just bought one of those! 
_________________
LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2020 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
Lloydy.
Sure was a bad copy.
Yours will be fine!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
benadamx
Joined: 25 Feb 2019
Posts: 329
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2020 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
benadamx wrote:
| papasito wrote: |
Another disappointing Lens.
MD MINOLTA 300/4,5.
CA as never seen before |
i've that one too, and had the same experience with it, unusable wide open |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
