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

Meyer Orestor 100/2.8 or Trioplan 100/2.8
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:27 pm    Post subject: Meyer Orestor 100/2.8 or Trioplan 100/2.8 Reply with quote
There were two semi-telephoto lens I met in this day. One is Trioplan and one ith Orestor. Both of them having 100mm and f/2.8 and in exakta mount. Because of their mount, they are rather cheaper than that of m42.
I have seen plenty of user support Trioplan but very little on Orestor. Is Orestor performs badly? And what are their differences in construction ?


PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Trioplan: three-element triplet; Orestor: five-element Sonnar derivative.

Over the last few years many forums had made the Trioplan the most spruiked lens driving its price up to unbelievable levels, due to its crazy bokeh characteristics; nobody seems to want to use this lens at anything but full-bore to get that. The Orestor is a later and more corrected design, and is a very well-tempered lens.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Orestor is by no means worse than a Trioplan.
BTW, the Trioplan is not in general terms a "good" lens, it's a very special one. Meaning that a Leica Elmarit 90 is much "better". Wink
But you can shoot photos with a Trioplan that you could hardly ever get from a Elmarit.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Trioplan is "old fashioned" in every way, with all the limitations (difficult wide open, character of lens changes dramatically when stopped down).
Orestor is a more "modern" lens with more predictable, clean results. A manual working horse.

Last edited by mflex-on on Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:26 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Trioplan has unique character as all people said before, not works fine in all situation if you looking for a challenge take it. If you would like to take a good lens what is works like any good one take Orestor.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Trioplan is very good when stopped down.
Orio told me that he was bored to see people using Trioplans only wide open and suggested to test it at F8.
He was right. It's very good at this aperture.

http://forum.mflenses.com/trioplan-100mm-at-different-apertures-t18173,highlight,trioplan+++100.html


PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 12:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Olivier wrote:
Trioplan is very good when stopped down.
Orio told me that he was bored to see people using Trioplans only wide open and suggested to test it at F8.
He was right. It's very good at this aperture.

http://forum.mflenses.com/trioplan-100mm-at-different-apertures-t18173,highlight,trioplan+++100.html

+1

The Trioplan is a good triplet lens that is rather unique among triplets in that it has a maximum aperture of F/2.8. If you look into any manual of photographic optics, you will see that the triplet is a good lens but its main disadvantage is its limited maximum aperture: usually F/4.5, or F/3.5 if pushing things a bit. Making an F/2.8 triplet is a perversion optically speaking. One can imagine that it's one more instance of the marketing department deciding instead of the engineering department.

When used wide open, the Trioplan exhibits so many aberrations that it's almost a catalog of the different aberration types by itself. Of course, this behavior makes it rather unique and many lens maniacs (including myself Embarassed) like to experiment with it. But, as proven by Olivier's post linked above, the Trioplan is also a good telephoto when stopped down.

Usually, owners of crop format DSLRs or 4/3rds format cameras don't dare stopping down a lens more than F/8, because they fear distortion will ruin their picture. Diffraction depends on the diameter of the lens aperture. It's easy to see that a 20mm lens stopped down to F/10 will have an aperture of 20 / 10 = 2mm and therefore will exhibit a fair amount of diffraction, which will blur the image quite a bit. On the other hand, a 100mm lens stopped down to F/10 will have an aperture of 100 / 10 = 10mm, and the diffraction will be so limited that it can be considered invisible. Even at F/22, the aperture will still be 4.5mm, more than twice as much as the 20mm lens at F/10!

So, happy owners of Trioplan lenses and other telephoto users, don't hesitate to take pictures at F/11, F/16, or even F/22. You will be surprised by the quality of the results you'll get!

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 2:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you for the advice! Laughing
I have a triplet lens which is Zeiss Novar and its maxium aperture should be 4.5 (or 3.5? Lens's detail ruined). Same resulf found when wide open and stop. I prefer down to f/5.6 for general photo taking.
I think I woiuld go for an Orestra 100/2.8. However, it seems it is rather rare isn't it? And I was told not to choose Orestra but Biometar 100/2.8, because it performs much better, is that correct?


PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
kl122002 wrote:
Thank you for the advice! Laughing
I have a triplet lens which is Zeiss Novar and its maxium aperture should be 4.5 (or 3.5? Lens's detail ruined). Same resulf found when wide open and stop. I prefer down to f/5.6 for general photo taking.
I think I woiuld go for an Orestra 100/2.8. However, it seems it is rather rare isn't it? And I was told not to choose Orestra but Biometar 100/2.8, because it performs much better, is that correct?


Biometar 80mm f2.8 more less same performer than Orestor.

Pre-war chrome Trioplan 10cm

http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/meyer/trioplan_10cm/

Meyer- Orestor 100mm
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/meyer/meyer-optik-orestor-100mm/

Post war Trioplan 100mm

http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/meyer/trioplan_100mm_f2_8/

Latest Trioplan-N 100mm Exakta

http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/meyer/trioplan_100mm_f2_8_exa/

CZJ Biometar 80mm f2.8 alu M42

http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/meyer/trioplan_100mm_f2_8_exa/

CZJ Biometar 80 f2.8 MC P6

http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/zeiss/Carl+Zeiss+Jena+Biometar/Carl_Zeiss_Jena_Biometar_80mm_MC_P6/


PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I bet no Trioplan can do this wide open. Mr. Green Rolling Eyes



Larger version here: http://juredolzan.deviantart.com/art/Above-in-HD-140491599


PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Trioplan is sharp stopped down and its CA is very low - according to my test of M42 lenses, only Macro APO Lanthar has lower axial CA at this focal length.

Here are some Triiplan (~f/5.6) samples:

http://img3.abload.de/img/sdim7426hrweh8.jpg
http://img3.abload.de/img/sdim7425hrug91.jpg
http://img3.abload.de/img/sdim7285hr9cqz.jpg

At f/5.6 (or similar) Trioplan is acceptably sharp even on extension rings up-to macro 1:2. But I'd prefer 50mm Trioplan for macro shooting - it's significantly sharper Smile


PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Awesome samples, i didn't expect such! Though wide-open is the thing for me. True is, i didn't mention that only one out of my 7 Meyer / Pentacons can behave so good. So one really has to have a lot of luck with picking. Even CLA doesn't necessarily help. Anyway i read that "competition" about slim or fat version. Mine is slim, none of the fat comes close.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2009 2:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you for all great and interesting photos!
The Trioplan looks funny when it is wide open while I must say Orestor is a real performer. I think I would go for Orestor.
The Orestor seems come in Pentagon mount only, is thaere any adapter available for P-6 to exakta?


PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2009 5:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
kl122002 wrote:
Thank you for all great and interesting photos!
The Trioplan looks funny when it is wide open while I must say Orestor is a real performer. I think I would go for Orestor.
The Orestor seems come in Pentagon mount only, is thaere any adapter available for P-6 to exakta?


The Orestor was also made in Exakta mount, RTL version but not the "outrigger" version. It's designed expressly for the 24mmX36mm format, so cannot work with P6.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you for the correction, Seele Razz .


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 2:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi Abbazz

I am curious if wat u says about trioplan applies to triotar 135mm alu, non 1Q or red T ? thanks


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Krisgage wrote:
Hi Abbazz

I am curious if wat u says about trioplan applies to triotar 135mm alu, non 1Q or red T ? thanks

I have a Trioplan, but I have never used a Triotar. Both are triplets and, according to A. Cox's Book Photographic Optics, they share exactly the same optical diagram. Be warned though that there can be a large difference between two triplets, even if they seem optically identical. According to this post and to Allessandro's blog, the old Triotar alu seems quite sharp wide open, I would even say sharper than the Trioplan at F/4.

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pancolart wrote:
True is, i didn't mention that only one out of my 7 Meyer / Pentacons can behave so good. ..


Which is kind of typical for Pentacon and CZJ lenses.

That's why you read so many diverging experiences in the net.
There are some who say that their 2.4/35 is one of the best lenses that they have ever used, others say that this 35mm is a lemon.

There are some that claim that the Distagon 4/20 is a fantastic lens, but my copy is not that good. My copy doesn't stand a chance against the Nikkor-UD 3.5/20 that I had and definitely no chance against the Vivitar 3.5/17.

But due to an engraving it has a high collector's value. That's why I keep it.

Pentacon lenses are a lottery. You can be lucky and win the main prize or...


PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2009 12:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here is a really quick test. I think resolution at f/4 isn't much different. Triotar may look better due the additional 35mm (details are more magnified).

At f/7 triotar is better (maybe I focused slightly more precisely with Triotar, cause it is more difficult to focus with Trioplan on distant subject).

Anyway, difference isn't huge.



Both lenses are sharp stopped down - I think Trioplan is better at f/4 and Triotar at f/7. And both of them have lower CA than many later lenses.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1