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

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


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2020 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just took delivery of a Steinheil Tele-Quinar 200mm 4.5 in M42 mount. Yes, it is quite heavy (660 gr). But I am blown away by how sharp it is, even wide open. And the build quality is second to none. My Schneider Kreuznach 200mm 5.5 has just lost its place as the best 200mm lens that I own. Although when I go to the zoo for example I will still be carrying something a little less heavy (the Minolta MDIII 200mm is nice and light weight for such purposes).

This is my first Steinheil, but probably not the last one.

Regards, C.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2020 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:



vivaldibow wrote:
Mamiya sekor f.c. 35mm 2.8 for Prismat NP

Interesting! The only Mamiya with the Exacta bayonet I have is the 1.7/58mm ... Any hints about the optical contruction of the Sekor F.C. 2.8/35mm?


Not sure about yet. I might try shining some light into the lens and count the reflection. Would that work?

stevemark wrote:

vivaldibow wrote:

Rikenon 55mm 1.4, Nikon F mount, for Ricoh Singlex, that comes with the lens. (not identical Nikon F mount). May need to file one of the lugs or find a Nikon to NEX adapter to file the flange.

I got a Rikenon 1.4/55mm as well, some days ago, abeit with a Pentax M42 screw mount. It's filter ring is dented, but the lens seems to perform well. Not yet thoroughly tested, though!


Those Auto Rikenon 55/1.4s together with Sears' I own, seem to have flat rear element. This Rikenon 55/1.4 Nikon F mount's rear element has some visible ring patterns. Will have to test it later.


stevemark wrote:

vivaldibow wrote:
I guess the lens is essential a Mamiya 55/1.4. But this one is non radioactive.

I only have the Mamiya SX 1.4/55mm. That lens certainly has a different optical construction than my Rikenon 1.4/55mm (M42): Similar, but clearly not identical reflexes, and a different diameter of the last lens.


I don't own either Mamiya versions (the non SX and SX). I guess the two Mamiya's are different, are they?


Last edited by vivaldibow on Fri Oct 16, 2020 5:57 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2020 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
aidaho wrote:

My copy of MD-III 35/2.8 is a bit glow-ish wide open.
No idea why: even a flashlight test shows clear glass.
Have you noticed anything along the lines with yours?


Difficult to say ... of course also the MD 2.8/35 has a slightly lower contrast wide open, compared to f5.6 or f8. But even on 43 MP FF sensors it certainly does perform as well as the Sony/Zeiss E-mount Sonnar 2.8/35mm:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektiv-vergleiche/434-sony-a7rii-and-summilux-1-4-35mm-asph-sony-zeiss-fe-2-8-35mm-and-minolta-md-2-8-35mm

S


Hmm... No glow on mine. To a certain extent and setting aside field curvature one could think it is better wide open than stopped down. Not the case but there is some focus shift that must be taken into account to achieve best performance somewhat closed. Typically if I am close to infinity wide open, maximum sharpness at f5,6 would be around 4,5 meters on the focus ring.

Check yours.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2020 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:

I only have the Mamiya SX 1.4/55mm. That lens certainly has a different optical construction than my Rikenon 1.4/55mm (M42): Similar, but clearly not identical reflexes, and a different diameter of the last lens.



SORRY - I've messed it up!! I have the "AUTO mamiya / sekor ES 1:1.4 f=55mm", as written on the front ring. The one for the Auto XTL / Auto X1000 bayonet mount SLRs! It's a beautiful heavy beast (365 g without lens caps!):



S


PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2020 2:42 am    Post subject: CZJ Sonnar 13,5cm 1:4 Contax RF Reply with quote

Hi, a new member here. I bought this one about a month ago, finally got some time to clean the focus helicord and aperture ring, the glass is clean, and online databases pointed to a 1937 ~ 38 build. What I find strange about the lens is that all the images on the web of CZJ Sonnar 13,5/4 have the serial numbers as "Nr", instead of "No" like this one. And, in the 2nd picture, the aperture markings (4 ~ 22) have an opposite orientation. The only one I found that has the similar "No" and aperture markings is a picture of an Rodenstock Eurynar 4.5/13.5cm. Could this be a fake Sonnar?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2020 4:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I stumbled into manual lenses after coming from the world of telescopes. Autofocus is useless there so manual lenses seemed right for me after picking up a DSLR.

I went a bit off the deep end and have picked up the following in the last few months:

Super Takumar 50mm 1.4
Super Takumar 135mm 3.5
Jupiter 37A MC
Helios 44-3 MC
Helios 44 (13 bladed version)
Industar 50 (Red 'P')
Mir 1V
Jupiter 21M (still on its way)

Everything that's arrived so far has needed some kind of repair work or at least cleaning. I've built refractor and reflector telescopes but I've had a lot to learn about lenses. Everything is so tiny!


PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2020 4:25 am    Post subject: Re: CZJ Sonnar 13,5cm 1:4 Contax RF Reply with quote

1925ls@sg wrote:
Hi, a new member here. I bought this one about a month ago, finally got some time to clean the focus helicord and aperture ring, the glass is clean, and online databases pointed to a 1937 ~ 38 build. What I find strange about the lens is that all the images on the web of CZJ Sonnar 13,5/4 have the serial numbers as "Nr", instead of "No" like this one. And, in the 2nd picture, the aperture markings (4 ~ 22) have an opposite orientation. The only one I found that has the similar "No" and aperture markings is a picture of an Rodenstock Eurynar 4.5/13.5cm. Could this be a fake Sonnar?


This might help
T


PostPosted: Sun Oct 18, 2020 4:30 am    Post subject: Re: CZJ Sonnar 13,5cm 1:4 Contax RF Reply with quote

1925ls@sg wrote:
Hi, a new member here. I bought this one about a month ago, finally got some time to clean the focus helicord and aperture ring, the glass is clean, and online databases pointed to a 1937 ~ 38 build. What I find strange about the lens is that all the images on the web of CZJ Sonnar 13,5/4 have the serial numbers as "Nr", instead of "No" like this one. And, in the 2nd picture, the aperture markings (4 ~ 22) have an opposite orientation. The only one I found that has the similar "No" and aperture markings is a picture of an Rodenstock Eurynar 4.5/13.5cm. Could this be a fake Sonnar?

Looks like a fake one.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A Zuiko auto-T MC 100mm f/2.8. A brilliant lens really. It has the size of an average 50mm lens, so it's ideal for travel.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I got this Tokina 70 - 150 F 3,8 one touch zoom. Aperture is 6 blades, min focus is about 1,4 m. The condition of the lens is like new and this is why I bought it. I already have the Zuiko 75 - 150 F 4 and the Vivitar 70 - 150 F 3,8.
In short, this lens is useless. Nothing is sharp until F 8 and then only the center. Corners and edges are annugly blur even on APS-C. Just bad. I suspect the previous owner must have made the same experience and didn't use it until the sale. I picked it very cheap in a pawn shop and didn't test it. I've seen similar lenses branded Vivitar with generally good reviews. So I'm wondering if my copy has a specific problem or if someone else had the same experience.
By the way, the Zuiko is the one to have. Sharp all over, and much better WO than the Vivitar 2 touch. Only min focus is obviously much better with the Viv. Thanks for reading.
[img]


PostPosted: Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phalbert wrote:
I got this Tokina 70 - 150 F 3,8 one touch zoom. Aperture is 6 blades, min focus is about 1,4 m. The condition of the lens is like new and this is why I bought it. I already have the Zuiko 75 - 150 F 4 and the Vivitar 70 - 150 F 3,8.
...
By the way, the Zuiko is the one to have. Sharp all over, and much better WO than the Vivitar 2 touch.


Strange - I have two samples of the Oly Zuiko 75-150mm, and both are abysmal (on 24 MP FF). Which camera are you using?

Stephan


PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Today I have purchased a Zuiko 38/1,8 and (one more time) a summicron R 50/2.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phalbert wrote:
I got this Tokina 70 - 150 F 3,8 one touch zoom. Aperture is 6 blades, min focus is about 1,4 m. The condition of the lens is like new and this is why I bought it. I already have the Zuiko 75 - 150 F 4 and the Vivitar 70 - 150 F 3,8.
In short, this lens is useless. Nothing is sharp until F 8 and then only the center. Corners and edges are annugly blur even on APS-C. Just bad. I suspect the previous owner must have made the same experience and didn't use it until the sale. I picked it very cheap in a pawn shop and didn't test it. I've seen similar lenses branded Vivitar with generally good reviews. So I'm wondering if my copy has a specific problem or if someone else had the same experience.
By the way, the Zuiko is the one to have. Sharp all over, and much better WO than the Vivitar 2 touch. Only min focus is obviously much better with the Viv. Thanks for reading.
[img]


Interesting. I didn't know this version. Thought there was only the 75-150mm which is more compact and focusses closer. http://allphotolenses.com/lenses/item/c_2647.html#prettyPhoto


PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
Phalbert wrote:
I got this Tokina 70 - 150 F 3,8 one touch zoom. Aperture is 6 blades, min focus is about 1,4 m. The condition of the lens is like new and this is why I bought it. I already have the Zuiko 75 - 150 F 4 and the Vivitar 70 - 150 F 3,8.
...
By the way, the Zuiko is the one to have. Sharp all over, and much better WO than the Vivitar 2 touch.


Strange - I have two samples of the Oly Zuiko 75-150mm, and both are abysmal (on 24 MP FF). Which camera are you using?

Stephan

Canon 600D / Rebel T3i, Film is completely dead in our country 😕😕😕.
My zuiko is indeed sharp all over and the tokina is terrible. If I read reviews of the tokina I'm pretty sure mine has a problem, which is a pity given its pristine condition. The zuiko is as good WO as the 135/3,5 which I also have.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had the vivitar (tokina made and Kiron made). Both good lenses. Also the konica (tokina made) is good too.
But the best I had was the Canon nFd.
Sharp from wide open and in both extreme. At 150 mm the rendering is very good without CA.
I had not the Minolta MDIII, another winner.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phalbert wrote:
stevemark wrote:
Phalbert wrote:

By the way, the Zuiko is the one to have. Sharp all over, and much better WO than the Vivitar 2 touch.


Strange - I have two samples of the Oly Zuiko 75-150mm, and both are abysmal (on 24 MP FF). Which camera are you using?

Stephan

Canon 600D / Rebel T3i, Film is completely dead in our country 😕😕😕.
My zuiko is indeed sharp all over and the tokina is terrible. If I read reviews of the tokina I'm pretty sure mine has a problem, which is a pity given its pristine condition. The zuiko is as good WO as the 135/3,5 which I also have.


Ah Ok, that explains it! I'm using only FF cameras, and the Zuiko has really bad borders/corners on full frame, especially when comparing it to the best vintage zoom lenses in the 75-150mm range (e. g. Canon nFD, and Minolta MD-III). Thanks for the clarification!

S


PostPosted: Thu Oct 22, 2020 7:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikon H.-C. 50mm f/2 and -S. 35mm/2.8 non AI version. Package unopened...

I guess 35mm/2.8 AI has a better design. I'll see how this non-AI version performs.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For less than the tax limit from Japan. Good looking but it probably needs an internal cleaning. A lot of dust inside. It came in a case with a lot of volcanic ashes or maybe someone's deceased in it.... Can't imagine why you would ship a lens in such a dirty container. The lens was covered in dust, which it was not on the seller pics. SMC Pentax-M 150mm 1:3.5
SMC Pentax-M 150mm 1:3.5 by The lens profile, on Flickr

SMC Pentax-M 150mm 1:3.5 by The lens profile, on Flickr