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

Lens choices around 100mm
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 11:23 pm    Post subject: Lens choices around 100mm Reply with quote

I hate to admit it but I have too many lenses around 100mm. The reason is partly that I wanted to collect a number of Macro lenses in order to compare them, document it here on the forum and keep the best ones. I have still to do that as I haven't bought all the necessary adapters yet.

Lenses around 100mm can have many uses. Macro, portrait, landscape, reportage and general short tele etc. Of the lenses below, would you consider some of them specialist lenses and some of them general use lenses. Weaknesses and strenghts. Which ones would you keep if you could choose only a few.

FD 85/1.2 SSC Asph
Samyang 85/1.4
Contax G 90/2.8
Olympus OM 90/2 Macro (1:2)
Tokina 90/2.5 Macro (1:2)
Olympus OM 100/2
Yashica ML 100/3.5 Macro (1:2)
Nikon AI-S 105/2.5
CV 125/2.5 Macro (1:1)

The FD is fast and sharp but very large and heavy. The OM 90/2 is relatively fast, does macro and works well as a general purpose short tele. The OM 100/2 is quite close focusing and does transitions from foreground to background extremely well. The Yashica has Zeiss pop according to what I have read, but haven't been able to test it out yet. The Samyang is a wonderful portrait lens. The Tokina is famous for its smooth bokeh and its crispness, it's also does well as a portrait lens wide open. The Contax is very sharp and small, good at infinity as well. The Nikon is the classic reportage lens and a cult classic in it's own right. The CV 125/2.5 is a bit long to fit into this group but it does everything with ease, but it's very expensive and it could be a wise move to sell it and keep a few of the other lenses instead.


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Adapters are cheap. Buy them and make your own decisions based on your preferences.

I suspect most people will tell you to keep the CV yet you have already expressed an intention to sell it.

JJ


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FD 85/1.2 SSC Asph
CV 125/2.5 Macro (1:1)


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
FD 85/1.2 SSC Asph
CV 125/2.5 Macro (1:1)


+1


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 6:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DanielT74 wrote:
Orio wrote:
FD 85/1.2 SSC Asph
CV 125/2.5 Macro (1:1)


+1

+2
+ OM 2/100 as small walk around lens.


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 7:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the FD 85/1.2 L (newer than ssc asph, same optical). Yes heavy, but worth the weight in low light or indoor.
Contax G 90/2.8, relatively small/compact on the nex. Focus can be tricky.

Lenses I don't have for the moment:
Samyang 85/1.4 has focus shift, but still for 295usd new, it's the best choice when use at f1.4.
Olympus OM 90/2 Macro (1:2). This lens will cost me an arm, approx 900usd.
Tokina 90/2.5 Macro (1:2), I have the Tamron adaptall with 2x tc. heavy but allow longer working distance with the tc 2x.
Olympus OM 100/2: no experience, but have the 100/2.8.
Yashica ML 100/3.5 Macro (1:2): no experience, but have all MF 100mm macro from pentax
Nikon AI-S 105/2.5: No experience, but trying to get the nikkor ais in f1.8
CV 125/2.5 Macro (1:1): This lens will cost me another arm.

Lenses I can recommend:
SmsTak85/1.8, pentax K85/1.8, pentax M85/2, pentax M100/2.8, Konica AR 100/2.8.
SuperTak85/1.9 (not as sharp as Smc wide open, but still very sharp, and one click down won't see different)
Soligor 105/2.8 (not as sharp wide open, but compact, good step down)


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 7:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I can't afford such lenses as OM 90/2 or the CV 125/2.5 but I'm totally pleased with my Rokinon (Samyang) 85/1.4, also have J-9.


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From your list, the only one I've tried, and it's not exactly the same lens, is the Nikkor-P 105mm 2.5 in non-Ai. I really like this lens. I like it for different applications, from portrait to landscape to still life.

I also have a Panagor PMC 90mm 2.8 Macro (1:1) that I acquired recently and am still testing out but which looks promising so far.


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BRunner wrote:
DanielT74 wrote:
Orio wrote:
FD 85/1.2 SSC Asph
CV 125/2.5 Macro (1:1)


+1

+2
+ OM 2/100 as small walk around lens.


This would be a very nice solution and I might actually end up with these lenses only. The FD is nice and fast but it is heavy and large and I have other f1.2 lenses that do well in low light. I have shorter macros as well so the long focal lenght of the CV doesn't bother me. The OM 100/2 is quite small and it is close focusing. I just wonder if it is any better than the OM 90/2 at anything. The smart thing to do would probably be keeping only the OM 90/2 which can do almost anything I need. I have the Contax S-Planar 60/2.8 which can do 1:1 macro if needed.

But I rarely do the smart thing, I go on emotion. So I will probably keep a fun combination and not only the OM 90/2.


Last edited by Pontus on Thu May 17, 2012 9:50 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It strikes me, Pontus, that you're bunching too wide a range, with the CV to your own admission. Also, from reading your comments, it sounds as if you will have a difficult time yourself parting with any of them, and certainly it doesn't make sense to sell one you haven't even experienced yet. I've been preaching to myself that one lens in a focal length is enough, but then I end up negotiating with myself when their are significant enough differences, like macro.

I only have experience with one of those - the Tokina 90/2.5, and mine is the Vivitar version. I will not sell it. When looking over your lenses again, I myself might make a case to keep them all, but if the Contax offers no better than the Tokina, I sell it. How about the OM 90/2 vs. the Tokina?

My list looks like this:
Cyclop 85/1.5
Konica 85/1.8
Series 1 90/2.5 (Tokina)
Kalejnar 100/2.8
Pentor 100/2.8
Komura 105/2.5
Tamron 105/2.5

My own rules suggest I need to make a choice between the Kalijnar and Pentor, and Komura and Tamron. I can justify, at least to myself, keeping the others, although I would sell the Cyclop if I ever find an affordable Helios.


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
FD 85/1.2 SSC Asph
CV 125/2.5 Macro (1:1)


The FD definitely but not the CV, because its FL is too close to 135mm, and there are f1.8 135mm lenses about.
The Nikon 105mm f2.5 Ai-S is a keeper too.


PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All are great (FD 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical and
CV 125/2.5 maybe the best) but for NEX would definitely recommend the Contax G 90/2.8 Sonnar T* as it's the most compact lens.

It's as said compact, contrasty, sharp like hell and has also a comparable fair price for such a good lens.
Look at a 100% crop from it

100% crop from 16 megapixel 5N sensor:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54671350@N02/6890427734/sizes/o/in/photostream/


PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just came across Nikon 105 2.5 AI-s and Samyang 85 1.4, both in good condition and very nearly the same price. Which one would you recommend, provided there is little more to choose from locally?


PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2012 5:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Both are good but very different. The shorter focal lenght of the Samyang is welcome for most shooters (if you only have one lens in this range) and it is a lot faster. The Samyang is actually very sharp even at f1.4 The Samyang is a much larger lens though and it is nowhere as well built as the Nikon. The Nikon is an absolute joy to use and the built in lens shade comes handy. The Nikon will probably hold it's value better than the Samyang. I would say that you can't go wrong with either lens but I think I would choose the Nikon.

Btw, I just remembered that I have the X-fujinon 100/2.8 as well. How does this lens fit in with the already long list of quality lenses. Is it a keeper because of its quality or is it more of a collectors item as it is so rare. People have mentioned this lens as a standout in the Fujinon line.


PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2012 6:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My first thought was Nikon too, all I worry about is how it will manage in relatively dark places. I used to use my AF Nikkor 50 1.8 for this purpose and it was not really performing if closed to say 2.8. AF got totally crazy so I tried manual focus on a few occasions and 50mm was a bit too short.


PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2012 6:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you are looking for a low light lens, I guess you should choose the Samyang. Just remember that the depth of field is extremely thin at 85mm and f1.4 though and depending on your camera it will be difficult to focus correctly. Focus peaking helps, if your camera supports it. If you rely on a traditional viewfinder, you would benefit from a focusing screen optimised for MF. These are available for some cameras.


PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2012 9:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pontus wrote:
BRunner wrote:
DanielT74 wrote:
Orio wrote:
FD 85/1.2 SSC Asph
CV 125/2.5 Macro (1:1)


+1

+2
+ OM 2/100 as small walk around lens.


This would be a very nice solution and I might actually end up with these lenses only. The FD is nice and fast but it is heavy and large and I have other f1.2 lenses that do well in low light. I have shorter macros as well so the long focal lenght of the CV doesn't bother me. The OM 100/2 is quite small and it is close focusing. I just wonder if it is any better than the OM 90/2 at anything. The smart thing to do would probably be keeping only the OM 90/2 which can do almost anything I need. I have the Contax S-Planar 60/2.8 which can do 1:1 macro if needed.

But I rarely do the smart thing, I go on emotion. So I will probably keep a fun compination and not only the OM 90/2.


Well, if you want small and money is no object, you can get the new Leica Macro-Elmar 90/4 which is very small and as sharp as they get, plus with the macro adapter and Hawk's M-Nex adapter you might get close to 1:1 macro. But you'll be out of pocket by 3k if you are lucky.

Alternatively you could get the old Leica Elmar 9cm collapsible which is a very nice lens but prone to flare like anything. It's pretty small and cheap but not really light though - they didn't skim on the metal in those days!


PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2012 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DanielT74 wrote:


Alternatively you could get the old Leica Elmar 9cm collapsible which is a very nice lens but prone to flare like anything. It's pretty small and cheap but not really light though - they didn't skim on the metal in those days!

On digital bodys most collapsible lenses are not really colapsible. But the Elmar(-C) lenses are indeed very small, useful and compact

I have both Carl Zeiss Sonnar 90/2.8 T* (Contax G Mount, ~1994) and Leitz Elmar-C 90/4 (Leica M Mount, ~1974)
The Elmar-C is very good but but the younger Sonnar is a tack better and the length and the price both lenses is almost identical.
The Sonnar gives you an extra stop and slightly better image quality for the same money but the Elmar gives you better haptics when used an an digital camera (and a very different bokeh bye the way).

Overall I would clearly choose the Sonnar for use on mirrorless digital camera like NEX, MFT etc. while I would choose the Elmar if you maybe wan't to use a rangefinder in future or you can get it much cheaper than the Sonnar.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What I ever wonder: Does it really make sense at all selling lenses?
First you will never get the time you invested (for researching before buying and then for testing it after) out in term of money. But let's say that is already wasted time.
Asking yourself which one to sell, only the time invested into this process is more expensive (in terms of what you can gain in the same period in your regular job) than what you will get out as fluidities from the selling.
Ofcourse this all apply to lenses you found to suit you.

So when I look at my lenses and think I have too much of them I better go and work an hour supplimentary and the problem is solved. Why to think about it, lenses don't need to be fed. Almost paradoxally they consume less financial investment if I let them sit than trying to sell them.