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

The Best and Worst of Cosina-made Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Jan 01, 2023 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
Tord55 wrote:
scsambrook wrote:
I have a 20mm f3.5 Cosina which is an interesting mix of good and not good. Compared to my other lenses, it's seemingly wider than 20mm, which is good. It doesn't show an objectionable amount of vignetting nor is it particularly susceptible to flair. It's actually better than my Voigtlander 21mm Leica mount lens in that respect, but it hasn't as much contrast. It's nicely made, as far as I can tell without seeing it dismantled and in pieces.

The not-so-good good part is the de-centering which makes the definition fall away considerably towards one side of the image. Quality control as Messrs Cosina seemingly wasn't a priority when it was made. It's not particularly sharp wide open, but then it's an inexpensive ultra-wide angle lens - let's not forget it's a film-era design meant for 24x36 format. And it isn't ever as sharp at any aperture as my Voigtlander 21mm is wide open. At least, not on film or on my Leica M8. But used on my Lumix M4/3 camera it actually makes images that look better on screen than the Voigtlander ones. So . . . not brilliant, but not bad for what it cost when new.


Agree about all said about this little wonder, excellent for focus-stacking, manually, but not the sharpest lens ever made.

Original poster posted in 03, very soon 20 years ago! How time flies! I was around 50 in those days! Sigh.

By the way, mine is a 20/3.5 not a 3.8, bought new in 2015, or so.


Welcome to the forum Tord
Actually the original post was in 2014, but it's still a ways back.
Of course many of the current Voigtlander MF lenses are made by Cosina and are quite special as well. The 58mm f1.4 is exceptional

pics


Welcome Tord!

@Oldhand -- nice wave! (just curious, how long a wait?)


PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2023 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Oldhand -- nice wave! (just curious, how long a wait?)[/quote]

Thank you.
Not long, if the swells are far enough apart - the swell hits the cliffs and the backwash collides with the next swell.
Cheers
Tom


PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2023 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

When the first generation of the 28-200s were marketed, Vivitar sold its first being a MF 3,5 - 5,3 (not 5,6) which I think was made y Cosina. Solid and heavy. That specific lens had very good reviews and is still used today by many. Now let's consider it for what it is. A cheap all around, better reaching improvement over a kit zoom of the time. In that category, this lens was probably the best. (that is, before the Tamrons and others with special glass)
It is not to be confused with the later not-so-good 28-210 f 3,8-5,6. and should only be compared with lenses in the same league. I have read things like: "My 100 macro is much better... etc..."
I wouldn't mind having a mint copy of one of these early Viv but with time those still around are plagued by haze and dust.

EDIT:
OK guys. I just see websites claiming that lens was made by Kobori, not Cosina. I'm leaving the posting for now. It might be helpfull still. 🤷‍♀️


PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2023 7:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phalbert wrote:
When the first generation of the 28-200s were marketed, Vivitar sold its first being a MF 3,5 - 5,3 (not 5,6) which I think was made y Cosina. Solid and heavy. That specific lens had very good reviews and is still used today by many. Now let's consider it for what it is. A cheap all around, better reaching improvement over a kit zoom of the time. In that category, this lens was probably the best. (that is, before the Tamrons and others with special glass)
It is not to be confused with the later not-so-good 28-210 f 3,8-5,6. and should only be compared with lenses in the same league. I have read things like: "My 100 macro is much better... etc..."
I wouldn't mind having a mint copy of one of these early Viv but with time those still around are plagued by haze and dust.

EDIT:
OK guys. I just see websites claiming that lens was made by Kobori, not Cosina. I'm leaving the posting for now. It might be helpfull still. 🤷‍♀️


Yes there were several versions of the early super zooms from Vivitar.
Cosina did make one, but you are right - the best of them came from Kobori
Tom


PostPosted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The fifties made by Cosina are decent to good. The most interesting is the 1.2/55mm (also sold as Porst), but I strongly prefer the Tomioka design (available in different brands/versions, mine is marked Revuenon and is one of my favourite lenses).
The Vivitar/Cosina 3.8/19mm is also more than decent, and even better is the 2/28mm (mine is branded Petri and is in PK mount).
All the Cosina-made zooms I tried were forgettable. Including the 100-500mm marked Vivitar, that does not deserve the "Series 1" moniker.


Cheers
Paolo


PostPosted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cyberjunkie wrote:
The fifties made by Cosina are decent to good. The most interesting is the 1.2/55mm (also sold as Porst), but I strongly prefer the Tomioka design (available in different brands/versions, mine is marked Revuenon and is one of my favourite lenses).
The Vivitar/Cosina 3.8/19mm is also more than decent, and even better is the 2/28mm (mine is branded Petri and is in PK mount).
All the Cosina-made zooms I tried were forgettable. Including the 100-500mm marked Vivitar, that does not deserve the "Series 1" moniker.


Cheers
Paolo


I agree.
The Revuenon is excellent
Tom


PostPosted: Sat Mar 18, 2023 6:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote



Cosina made "Image" store branded 70-210mm f4.5-5.6 second from right in photo above.

It's small size is convenient.

Performance wise, it's a bit of a mix.



At 210mm and f8 here, at minimum focus distance.
The razor thin depth of focus is quite apparent.



Much improved at 70mm and f8.



Exhibiting a bit of "character" here at 210mm and f5.6.
Good performance on moderately distant subjects- about 55 meters here.
This is already in the very short end of the short focus throw, and quite time consuming to focus precisely.



At f8 and 70mm here. This image heavily corrected in post~ the lens wants to over-expose a bit at -15C. It clears up and shoots normally at -10C.



At 210mm and f8 with the same corrections in post as the image above.



Pushing the camera to the "vivid" I/Q setting helps boost things a lot when contrast is flat and muddy.

210mm wide open.

A good all-around lens if one is patient and has time to focus at moderately long distances.
The slow over-all speed of this lens is no real detriment in good daylight.
The long minimum focus distance is a bit of a let down, but at the time this was made, that was the trade-off for the compact size.

-D.S.