Komura 135mm f3.5 preset

[MalcolmL]

Lens Review Date: November 23, 2011 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $24.00 | Rating: 9


Pros: Great image quality. Great Bokeh
Cons: focus ring wobble
Sharpness: 10 Aberrations: 10 Bokeh: 10 Handling: 8 Value: 10

This was my last ditch attempt to buy a legacy M42 portrait lens. I paid 30 NZ dollars for this locally. Pricing on Ebay is variable. In 1998 the average second hand price was 166 USD. Originally this lens sold at a RRP of 60 USD which was the cheapest in the Komura range (that does not imply poor optical quality as 135mm are easy to design and make).
This lens is quite sharp at f3.5 wide open and VERY sharp stopped down just a little. Colours and contrast are just great. Bokeh is great as it has a 16 blade iris. No CA detectable and no other aberrations found. The lens is small but solidly built. My only gripe is that the focus ring wobbles a lttle but this has no effect on precise focusing. My copy has some oil on the blades but being a preset this matters not at all.
Made for Leica rangefinder cameras in the 1960's and 70's these lenses are good value. The less common Komuras with wider apertures are asking big dollars on Ebay. This lens I highly recommend as a portrait / short telephoto
lens.

PHOTO OF LENS





This taken at f3.5

this taken at f8

this taken at f3.5

[Kathmandu]

Beautiful lens and great images- lovely bokeh , color and sharpness. Thanks for sharing.

G'day

[Tervueren]

Clicked through to the larger images. Bargain

[scsambrook]

Hi Malcolm,

I especially like pic number 1 - not a bad investment at 30 NZ dollars I think.

What camera did you use?

[Attila]

[iangreenhalgh1]

I really like the bokeh, I can see why people love Komura lenses.

[woodrim]

Hello Malcolm. Komura was a pretty decent choice for a first 135mm. You'll find that there are a few of us Komura fans here. The prices are high, as you stated, and I tend to believe unreasonably high. While very good lenses, they aren't quite tier 1. I have both the f/2.8 and f/3.5 and while results are mixed, mainly due to my focusing, I think the f/3.5 may be a tad sharper... maybe. They do handle CA amazingly well for a lens from that period, and the bokeh is unquestionably good.

A couple of things about your post... Nice pictures. The lenses you pictures, while different, are both f/2.8 versions while your post is about the 135/3.5. I suspect your report may have been copied from available information, so you should know that while they did make lenses for rangefinders, yours and other M42 versions were for SLRs. Oh, they also made lenses for medium format.

[woodrim]

I forgot to mention... Komura is also a very well built, solid lens, so I wonder about that wobble. Is there evidence of having been dropped?

[MalcolmL]

I will change the picture - I will shoot my own to replace - this one from stock. The images are shot with a Sony a850. No evidence lens being dropped - just fair wear and tear I think. Yes I did get a bargain YAY !

[erkie]

This was my first 135 lens, And the only one I will never part with. But I don't want to say how many years ago that was A Real bargain !

[MalcolmL]

Erkie - the ONLY one you will never part with ! that says heaps. It is a great lens

[D1N0]

A few with this one:

1
Polekeh by The lens profile, on Flickr

2
Grasscarkeh by The lens profile, on Flickr

3
Weedkeh by The lens profile, on Flickr

4
Fence by The lens profile, on Flickr

5
Kitty by The lens profile, on Flickr

6
Canned by The lens profile, on Flickr

[Ultrapix]

Very good samples! I have a LTM 135 2.8, and I like it, but not wide open...