| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
danikatia
Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Posts: 653
Location: Cernobbio Italy
Expire: 2013-10-26
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57982
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Do we need Leica ? You did answered, not .. great series , thank you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29545
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Well, 135mm is probably the easiest to build lens. It's typically got the lesser number of elements and the schemes
are (almost) always the tried and true ones, especially in the "affordable" range which very often uses Tessar (if not even triplets)
or Sonnar derivatives. 135mm lenses with double Gauss scheme are rather rare and expensive.
In any case, I do see differences in your lenses 
But like always in photography, subject and light account for 80% of final result, film/sensor for 10%, lens for 10%.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Misha_M
Joined: 08 Oct 2012
Posts: 178
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Misha_M wrote:
135mm lenses are mostly good ones, regardless of manufacturer...
My Tair 11 is 133 and not 135 (so please do forgive me for this "off topic"  ), but it also produces beautiful images, wide open or otherwise...
P.S:
It is very interesting to see in this gallery both the "original" Zeiss Sonar, and the "copycat" Soviet Jupiter 37 lenses...
Don't see that much of a difference between them, at least not as much as you can see in this great comparison between different manufacturers...
_________________
Tair 11 133 f/2.8 1958
Jupiter 9 85 f/2 1959
Helios 44M 58 f/2 1978
Helios 44-2 58 f/2 1977
Helios 44 (13 blades) 1959
Helios 77M4 50 f/1.8
Zenitar-M 50 f/1.7 1986
Industar-61 L\Z 50 f/2.8
Helios 40-2, 85 f/1.5 1974 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nixland
Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Posts: 585
Expire: 2012-07-29
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:52 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
nixland wrote:
All looks great!
My favorite is the rendering of the Pentor ...
_________________
Carl Zeiss Jena: Biotar 58/2 1Q, DDR Pancolar 80/1.8 MC, Biotar 75/1.5, Biotar 10cm/2, DDR Sonnar 135/3.5 MC
Carl Zeiss C/Y: Planar 50/1.4 T*, Planar 85/1.4 T*, Planar 100/2 T*, Sonnar 135/2.8 T*
Leica: Summicron-R 35/2 v1, Summicron-R 50/2, Summilux-R 80/1.4, Summicron-R 90/2
Pentax: A 50/1.2
Minolta: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 85/1.7, Rokkor MC 100/2, MD 200/2.8
Olympus: Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Zuiko MC Auto-T 85/2, Zuiko Auto-T 100/2
Nikon: Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikkor 105/1.8, 300/2.8 ED (Ais)
Canon: FD 50/1.2 L, FD 85/1.2 L
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Jupiter: 85/2 Alu
Cyclop: 85/1.5
Meyer-Optic: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5
Samyang: 8/3.5 FE, 14/2.8, 85/1.4, 85/1.4 UMC
FOR SALE
Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 10cm/2 || Carl Zeiss ZE Distagon 28/2 || Minolta Rokkor MD 35/1.8 || Rokkor-X MC 85/1.7 || Rokkor MD 85/1.7 || Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2 || Olympus 100/2 || Nikon Nikkor 35/1.4 || Canon: FD 55/1.2 || Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 VMC || Tamron: 90/2.5 SP
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 755
Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:14 am Post subject: Re: Some 135mm wide open |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:14 am Post subject: Re: Some 135mm wide open |
|
|
tikkathree wrote:
| danikatia wrote: |
Some samples of 135mm manual focus .... all wide open
Images processed with Lightroom and taken with Sony a580 ...
I got the impression that you may have good pictures with almost all 135mm I've owned. You have had the same impression?
The model is my son (only one I had)  .
|
Lovely portraits all. For me the one's where you've got catchlight in his eye and he's relaxed and smiling (rather than "Oh come on dad!") work best.
_________________
I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
danikatia
Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Posts: 653
Location: Cernobbio Italy
Expire: 2013-10-26
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
danikatia wrote:
| Orio wrote: |
Well, 135mm is probably the easiest to build lens. It's typically got the lesser number of elements and the schemes
are (almost) always the tried and true ones, especially in the "affordable" range which very often uses Tessar (if not even triplets)
or Sonnar derivatives. 135mm lenses with double Gauss scheme are rather rare and expensive.
In any case, I do see differences in your lenses
But like always in photography, subject and light account for 80% of final result, film/sensor for 10%, lens for 10%. |
Surely there are differences between the various lenses ... it seems to me, however, I found a smaller number of lenses bad, compared to other focal lengths.....
_________________
Daniele |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 3468
Location: Northern Ireland
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
It must be great to have a willing, patient subject to conduct a comparison like this! I have yet to find one.
_________________
"I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
std
Joined: 09 Feb 2010
Posts: 1826
Location: Bulgaria
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
std wrote:
The last 2 ( Icarex) look very very good on my monitor.
_________________
Stefan
My lens list:
SLR MD: Rokkor 1,7/50 Exakta: Kilfitt-Makro-Kilar E 3.5/4cm; CZJ 2/50 Pancolar;M42: CZJ 2.8/50 Tessar; Mir-1B 2.8/37; Jupiter-9 2/85 T-mount: Tamron 5.9/200; Tamron 6.9/300; Tamron 7.5/400 C-mount: Cosmicar 1.8/50 Y/S: Sun 3.5/38-90, Sun 4/70-210 RF Contax RF: Jupiter-8 2/50; Contax G:CZ 2,8/21 Biogon T; CZ 2,8/28 Biogon T; CZ 2/35 Planar T; CZ 2/45 Planar T; CZ 2,8/90 Sonnar T |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5018
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
Interesting and thanks, but I would have thought to compare sharpness/resolution you would need crops as a computer monitor is an equalizer for small sized posts of shots.
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SonicScot
Joined: 01 Dec 2011
Posts: 2697
Location: Scottish Highlands
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
SonicScot wrote:
| Excalibur wrote: |
| Interesting and thanks, but I would have thought to compare sharpness/resolution you would need crops as a computer monitor is an equalizer for small sized posts of shots. |
And a perfectly still subject which never moves between shots...with the camera permanently on a tripod in the same position...perhaps?
I think it's impossible to compare those aspects of a lens with human subjects, we can't help but move slightly no matter how hard we try to stay still.
_________________
Gary
Currently active gear....
Sony a7
E-M1 Mkll
Rubinar 1000/10 + 2x matched extender
Tamron 500/8 55BB
Sigma 100-300/4
Vivitar Series 1.... 200/3, 70-210/3.5 (V1 by Kiron), 135/2.3, 105/2.5 macro, 90/2.5 macro (Bokina), 90-180/4.5 Flat Field Macro, 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5
Carl Zeiss.... 180/2.8, 135/3.5, 85/1.4, 35/2.4 Flektagon, 21/2.8 Distagon
Nikon.... 55/3.5 micro, 50/1.2
Elicar 90/2.5 V-HQ Macro
Zhongyi Speedmaster 85/1.2
Jupiter-9 85/2
Helios.... 58/2 44-3
Hartblei 45/3.5 Super-Rotator TS-PC
Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye
Samyang 8/3.5 fisheye
Nodal Ninja 4, Neewer leveling tripod base
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/gazsus/ Website http://garianphotography.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
danikatia
Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Posts: 653
Location: Cernobbio Italy
Expire: 2013-10-26
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
danikatia wrote:
These photos are not born with the intention to compare sharpness or resolution or other parameters were not taken at the same time and in the same condition ...
It 'sa game that I made to see the bokeh wide open for some of the lenses I own (or owned) and I thought I'd share .... I have other samples of other focal lengths ...
Thanks for stopping by here and leaving your opinions
_________________
Daniele |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29545
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
| danikatia wrote: |
Surely there are differences between the various lenses ... it seems to me, however, I found a smaller number of lenses bad, compared to other focal lengths..... |
Yes, indeed. Building a good 135mm of moderate aperture is cheap and easier than other FLs and all manufacturers took advantage of that.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5018
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
| danikatia wrote: |
These photos are not born with the intention to compare sharpness or resolution or other parameters were not taken at the same time and in the same condition ...
It 'sa game that I made to see the bokeh wide open for some of the lenses I own (or owned) and I thought I'd share .... I have other samples of other focal lengths ...
Thanks for stopping by here and leaving your opinions |
Ah! maybe the title should have been "bokeh comparison for my 135mm lenses"
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sonyrokkor
Joined: 24 Sep 2012
Posts: 222
Location: Perù, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sonyrokkor wrote:
Agree with the fact that with almost all lenses the image will be decent, and more with the 135 mm ones.
It seems to me the differences will be more for the sensors and less for the MF lenses, at least for the medium segment consumers.
Perhaps, one day the portraits will not have excesive contrast and saturation. The flower images will not have that kind of saturation (making headache in the viewers). At that time, welcome the lenses with moderated contrast and saturation. Pleasure will return.
danikatia's lenses (some of them) will be appreciated. The no name included specially. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Misha_M
Joined: 08 Oct 2012
Posts: 178
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:55 pm Post subject: Re: Some 135mm wide open |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:55 pm Post subject: Re: Some 135mm wide open |
|
|
Misha_M wrote:
| tikkathree wrote: |
| danikatia wrote: |
Some samples of 135mm manual focus .... all wide open
Images processed with Lightroom and taken with Sony a580 ...
I got the impression that you may have good pictures with almost all 135mm I've owned. You have had the same impression?
The model is my son (only one I had) .
|
Lovely portraits all. For me the one's where you've got catchlight in his eye and he's relaxed and smiling (rather than "Oh come on dad!") work best. |
+1 !
_________________
Tair 11 133 f/2.8 1958
Jupiter 9 85 f/2 1959
Helios 44M 58 f/2 1978
Helios 44-2 58 f/2 1977
Helios 44 (13 blades) 1959
Helios 77M4 50 f/1.8
Zenitar-M 50 f/1.7 1986
Industar-61 L\Z 50 f/2.8
Helios 40-2, 85 f/1.5 1974 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
danikatia
Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Posts: 653
Location: Cernobbio Italy
Expire: 2013-10-26
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
danikatia wrote:
| Excalibur wrote: |
| danikatia wrote: |
These photos are not born with the intention to compare sharpness or resolution or other parameters were not taken at the same time and in the same condition ...
It 'sa game that I made to see the bokeh wide open for some of the lenses I own (or owned) and I thought I'd share .... I have other samples of other focal lengths ...
Thanks for stopping by here and leaving your opinions |
Ah! maybe the title should have been "bokeh comparison for my 135mm lenses" |
I say you're right ....
_________________
Daniele |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008
Posts: 3451
Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
Do you know where the Pentor comes from, who made that lens? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
danikatia
Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Posts: 653
Location: Cernobbio Italy
Expire: 2013-10-26
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
danikatia wrote:
| Minolfan wrote: |
| Do you know where the Pentor comes from, who made that lens? |
Is a Japanese lens but I can't say more .... I did some research and the only thing I've found is quite strange .... all those (or almost) who have a 135mm f2.8 Pentor say that the iris is locked wide open ..... even my lens has the same problem..... 
_________________
Daniele |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jethro Tull
Joined: 31 Dec 2010
Posts: 68
Location: SCOTLAND
|
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:40 pm Post subject: You need a Hoya 135mm f2.8 to go with your collection |
|
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:40 pm Post subject: You need a Hoya 135mm f2.8 to go with your collection |
|
|
Jethro Tull wrote:
Great series of Shots 135mm is a very handy lens, i recently bought a Hoya 135mm f2.8 m42 and amazed at how sharp it is and nice bokeh too.
Here's a couple of close up shots taken with my 550d + the Hoya 135mm f2.8
6th October 2012 016 copy by Rowdy Rebel1, on Flickr
Hoya 135mm f2 by Rowdy Rebel1, on Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
