Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

What's the latest lens you added to your collection?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

visualopsins wrote:

The UV requirement remains unproven. ...



That's interesting. I hadn't known the jury was still out.


PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fed4 camera and Industar И-61 lens

I won't use the camera bit I love the lens

Bought at a vintage market, with lovely leather case and original instruction manual


Russian Camera and Glass photographed with Russian Glass by Phil Howcroft, on Flickr


PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sciolist wrote:
visualopsins wrote:

The UV requirement remains unproven. ...



That's interesting. I hadn't known the jury was still out.


The mechanism whereby Thoriated glass "browns" is also unknown. If we knew that the method to clear could be trivial.


PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 8:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

visualopsins wrote:
Sciolist wrote:
visualopsins wrote:

The UV requirement remains unproven. ...



That's interesting. I hadn't known the jury was still out.


The mechanism whereby Thoriated glass "browns" is also unknown. If we knew that the method to clear could be trivial.



I thought it had been established why it 'browns', hasn't it? For example -

"When glasses are subjected to purely ionizing radiation, such as X-rays or gamma rays [Thorium (oxide) produces gamma when decaying - Sciolist], the principal effects will result from purely electronic processes. Specifically, these effects will occur because the electrons are excited sufficiently to leave their normal positions and move through the glass network. In some glasses these ionization processes will be purely transient and after the radiation field is removed the electron distribution will be the same as it was originally, especially if the specimen is of sufficiently high temperature. In other glasses the electron distribution will be permanently altered…The addition or removal of one or more electrons from defect or impurity centers results in the formation of a center that can absorb light, i.e. a color center... "


www.sealandair.fr/pdf/birns-nucleaire/camera-lights/radiation-induced-discoloration.pdf


Is this now disputed?


PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="mmoro"]
stevemark wrote:

smk2 -> it's you!!! Shocked

I was hoping nobody saw the 85mm and possibly confused it with a 50/55mm 1.7 and keep the price low of the auction...
well now I know it's you, I don't mind I bidded too low haha

keep us informed then!


I was hoping the same, of course ... and then you came in Laugh 1

Anyway, i now have to machine my M42=>NEX adapter (the SX lenses have a small metal pin for "open aperture measuring" which inhibits using them on most M42 adapters). And to clean the exterior of the lenses ... (the feet distance engravings, originally whit in color, were overpainted by the previous owner with black ink).

Stephan


PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bwfcnottingham wrote:
I won't use the camera bit I love the lens


I bought an early Industar-61 off ebay for peanuts and I was blown away by how great it turned out to be. It's one of my favorites. It's very, very sharp with lovely smooth bokeh and soap-bubble highlights.


PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

KEO wrote:
bwfcnottingham wrote:
I won't use the camera bit I love the lens


I bought an early Industar-61 off ebay for peanuts and I was blown away by how great it turned out to be. It's one of my favorites. It's very, very sharp with lovely smooth bokeh and soap-bubble highlights.


You are right , the lens is fabulous, very sharp and looks really cool on my Sony A6000 too.

I will post some pics in this forum tonight .

I have some on my flickr account Smile

Have a nice day


PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sciolist wrote:
visualopsins wrote:
Sciolist wrote:
visualopsins wrote:

The UV requirement remains unproven. ...



That's interesting. I hadn't known the jury was still out.


The mechanism whereby Thoriated glass "browns" is also unknown. If we knew that the method to clear could be trivial.



I thought it had been established why it 'browns', hasn't it? For example -

"When glasses are subjected to purely ionizing radiation, such as X-rays or gamma rays [Thorium (oxide) produces gamma when decaying - Sciolist], the principal effects will result from purely electronic processes. Specifically, these effects will occur because the electrons are excited sufficiently to leave their normal positions and move through the glass network. In some glasses these ionization processes will be purely transient and after the radiation field is removed the electron distribution will be the same as it was originally, especially if the specimen is of sufficiently high temperature. In other glasses the electron distribution will be permanently altered…The addition or removal of one or more electrons from defect or impurity centers results in the formation of a center that can absorb light, i.e. a color center... "


www.sealandair.fr/pdf/birns-nucleaire/camera-lights/radiation-induced-discoloration.pdf


Is this now disputed?


Not by me. Smile Thanks for reference! Explained for me how browning occurs, and why sometimes can be cleared other times no. Most importantly UV is NOT required!


PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So the DDR lens collection grows even more...



Not had much chance to use it yet but in terms of colour and contrast...



Shot at f/11 with no PP other than crop and exposure upped about a stop


PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

^^ Oooo… that's a nice shot, Gott Like 1 .


PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sciolist wrote:
^^ Oooo… that's a nice shot, Gott Like 1 .



Thanks!


Did require a bit of contortionism given the 1m minimum focal distance, a cramped room and using a tripod... Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

KEO wrote:
bwfcnottingham wrote:
I won't use the camera bit I love the lens


I bought an early Industar-61 off ebay for peanuts and I was blown away by how great it turned out to be. It's one of my favorites. It's very, very sharp with lovely smooth bokeh and soap-bubble highlights.


The one I tried did not impress me. I compared it to a Color Skopar 50mm 2.8 salvaged from a Voigtländer Vito, The Skopar did win hands down at max aperture and beyond. Both Tessar inspired designs so not an unequal contest.

Ernst Dinkla


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
After a long bidding fight i won this set of Mamiya SX lenses (image taken by the seller):


Among them probably the 2.8/35mm (or the 2.8/28mm??), certainly the 3.5/200mm and the 2.8/135mm, and obviously the very rare Mamiya Sekor SX 1.7/85mm. The latter is of particular interest, since it is the only ever Mamiya 1.7/85mm. There's nearly no information aboout it; even the three most important websites for Mamyia 35mm stuff (Ron Herron, Roland Stauber and Jörg Mück), only Ron Herron lists the lens (the others don't even mention it). And Ron Herron doesn't give any further information as well ...


Stephan


No mention of the SX 55mm 1.8 that is on the camera ? It should not be neglected in my opinion, one of the better standard lenses of that period. The bayonet type ES has the same optical design and showed excellent resolution in the center as tested in 1971. https://www.mikeeckman.com/2018/07/mamiya-auto-xtl-1971/
I have the SX converted to EF mount and use it together with a converted CS 35mm 2.8 (differs in design from the SX 35mm 2.Cool, https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62663426

Ernst Dinkla


PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

#1


Tamron 2.5/105mm

#2


the first Photografic Yearbook of 1935 with works of Man Ray


PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2019 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That Tamron's pretty cool. Never heard of that one before.

After I got over the distraction of my recent Pancolar acquisition, I started looking more closely at the other stuff in the box. There's a really shoddy looking Focal 28mm lens, a generic old 135mm 2.8 with no name on it and an inoperable aperture, and this lens. I decided to clean it up and give it a try, but I discovered it really doesn't need any cleaning as it's in the original case and in great shape (as is the nice old Hoya Skylight filter) . It looks barely ever used.



It has 15 aperture blades, and they have a little bit of oil on them, but not enough to affect operation of the iris.



I've tried it and it's better than I expected, but my research leads me to believe it's a Tokina, so that's not too surprising.

The only problem is the mount, which looks exactly like a standard M42 screw, but is not. It's very slightly bigger. It will screw into my adapter, or accept an M42 cap, but only turn a single revolution or so before it stops. I read something about a strange Hanimex M44 mount, so maybe that's it.


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 11:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

KEO wrote:
The only problem is the mount, which looks exactly like a standard M42 screw, but is not. It's very slightly bigger. It will screw into my adapter, or accept an M42 cap, but only turn a single revolution or so before it stops. I read something about a strange Hanimex M44 mount, so maybe that's it.

Possibly it's a T mount. Same thread diameter as the M42 but a different pitch. Many of the long telephoto lenses used it.


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wolfhansen wrote:




the first Photografic Yearbook of 1935 with works of Man Ray



Ooo that's a nice find. Lee Miller had left for home in 1932, so you'd imagine the works attributed to Ray in this yearbook will be all his.


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sounds interesting - please tell more


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wolfhansen wrote:
Sounds interesting - please tell more



I'm going to be lazy. Apologies. From Wiki -


"...While she was in Paris, she began her own photographic studio, often taking over Ray's fashion assignments to enable him to concentrate on his painting.[citation needed] In fact, many of the photographs taken during this period and credited to Ray were actually taken by Miller...."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Miller


The period above was from 1929 to 1932 only, and critics often contain that his best work followed their relationship breakdown. So 1935 prompted me to comment.


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks a lot for the information Smile


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Riggson wrote:
KEO wrote:
The only problem is the mount, which looks exactly like a standard M42 screw, but is not. It's very slightly bigger. It will screw into my adapter, or accept an M42 cap, but only turn a single revolution or so before it stops. I read something about a strange Hanimex M44 mount, so maybe that's it.

Possibly it's a T mount. Same thread diameter as the M42 but a different pitch. Many of the long telephoto lenses used it.


Thanks! I hadn't even thought of that, though it seems very likely now that you mention it.

I think I have a couple old T-mount to Exakta adapters somewhere, but I'll probably just get a new one. They're quite inexpensive as I recall.


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's the Mamyia DSX1000 with the five Sekor SX lenses mentioned before - the whole set was in a rather nice state, including a nice set of lenses from 28mm to 200mm:



There's 2.8/28mm, the normal 1.8/55mm, the rare 1.7/85mm, and the two tele lenses 2.8/135mm and 3.5/200mm.

Even though the lenses are M42, i haven't yet tested them: There's a small additional pin (<1mm) protruding from the mount,
preventing the use of standard M42 adapters ...

Does anyone have any information on the lens sections??



From the same seller i got also a nice little XD-11 set with two "Rokkor-X" lenses (all three items are rather rare here in Switzerland).
The MD 4/24-50mm and the MD 4/200mm were among the very best of their class. Also this 4/200mm Rokkor-X is amazingly sharp
even at f4, and even in the FF corners. CAs are less pronounced than with the conteporary Canon FD / Nikkor / Hexanon / Takumar
lenses, and corner resolution is quite a bit better. Only the Leitz Apo Telyt 3.4/180mm has less CAs ...

Stephan

Then a simple Canon EF SLR from 1973 - with a beautiful chrome nose Canon FD 3.5/135mm. I have just a handful chrome nose FD
lenses, among them the 2.8/24mm and the 1.2/55mm. This small tele lens (a Sonnar construction!) is a nice addition to them:



Finally, today on a local flea market, for a rather modest CHF 7.--, I found a Konica Hexanon AR 1.8/85mm with metal focusing grip.
This lens nicely complements my small collection of Konica 1.8/85mm lenses:



While A. Buhl (buhle.de) and others report that all Konica 1.8/85 mm lenses (including the F-Version) would have the same optical construction,
i can say that at least the F-Hexanon is a different computation (different shape of reflections on the lens surfaces, compared to the later AR).

Since i don't have an adapter for the Konica F lenses, i couldn't yet take meaningful photos with the Hexanon F 1.8/85mm (left).
The metal grip Hexanon AR 1.8/85mm (middle) however is distinctively sharper, especially in the corners, than the later rubber grip AR
1.8/85mm. I have no idea whether this is sample variation or an "adapted computation" with slightly different glass. Did anyone here
compare these two versions of the AR 1.8/85mm?

Stephan


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2019 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Congrats


PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am going to try to attach a K-mount to this lens at the right flange focal distance.
Nikkor-Q auto 1:4 200mm by The lens profile, on Flickr


PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 11:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
Here's the Mamyia DSX1000 with the five Sekor SX lenses mentioned before - the whole set was in a rather nice state, including a nice set of lenses from 28mm to 200mm:


There's 2.8/28mm, the normal 1.8/55mm, the rare 1.7/85mm, and the two tele lenses 2.8/135mm and 3.5/200mm.

Even though the lenses are M42, i haven't yet tested them: There's a small additional pin (<1mm) protruding from the mount,
preventing the use of standard M42 adapters ...

Does anyone have any information on the lens sections??

Stephan


The pin is one obstacle, the rim on the aperture ring another one. A modified M42 adapter is needed.

For the SX 55mm 1.8 this discussion suggests 3 separate elements in front of the aperture: http://forum.mflenses.com/mamiya-sekor-55mm-f1-8-t64464.html

I have the lens diagrams of the CS, EF and TL lenses but none for the Mamiya SLR SX. ES, lenses that appeared before the CS range. However of the SX and CS range several were cloned for the Rolleinar range. I think there are lens diagrams for that brand. An improvised list of lens design linking is here: http://forum.mflenses.com/rollei-hft-rolleinar-28-2-8-t79537.html