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

Siclass 135mm 2.8
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2017 10:44 am    Post subject: Siclass 135mm 2.8 Reply with quote

Hello!

Do anyone know anything about this lense? Cant find any information at all.

Thanks in advance!






This was shot wideopen at f2.8 with noticeable CA.




And stopped down to f4 its much better.



At f5.6 its really sharp



PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Let's ask again.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's a Chinon.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gardener wrote:
It's a Chinon.


It certainly looks like the Chinon 200 / 3.5 that I've got, lots of similarities.


But who made the Chinons ? Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had this one labelled as a Derek Gardner, it was okay from f4.

Whatever it is, it's not a Chinon as Chinon didn't make lenses.

It's impossible to work out who made a lot of these off-brand Japanese lenses, there were so many small companies in the 70s.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks like my Chinon.

I still haven't seen any concrete proof the Chinon didn't make lenses. That debate is old and never ending. I'll leave it at that, I have been round and round on this subject countless times. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had one as a Sears, or so similar as makes no difference.
And Sears did sell rebranded Chinons, for what its worth.

And its true about so many generic Japanese makers in the 1970's.

A 1970's 135 like this can be very difficult to positively ID.

"Siclass" was of course just an importers brand.

Just enjoy it I think. Seems to work rather well. Nice bird shot there.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

spiralcity wrote:
Looks like my Chinon.

I still haven't seen any concrete proof the Chinon didn't make lenses. That debate is old and never ending. I'll leave it at that, I have been round and round on this subject countless times. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs.


Yeah, that debate really is never-ending. I have never seen any proof Chinon did make lenses either and I really doubt we will ever really know for sure.

I also have a very strong feeling that some companies made barrel components that they then sold to many other small companies, and also that companies sold glass elements to many other small companies, which all muddies the waters even further.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But they began as manufacturer of barrels and lens holders, according to http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Chinon


PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Its is unfortunate that we have no historians of the Japanese optical industry as members. I'm sure the ins and outs of industry shenanigans
and intrigue would be quite interesting for antique lens aficianados.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Left one's body (perhaps later even glass) was made by CHINON. No other company in play:

casualcollector wrote:
Myth busted? Maybe. Here's pics of my five M-42 f-1.4 normals. Look them over. From left to right; Chinon 55mm, Fujinon 50mm, Mamiya 55mm, Rikenon 50mm, Yashinon 50mm.


Overall length from mounting face to filter ring; 48.5 mm, 43.7, 44.1, 39.3, 41.7.


Marked minimum focus and measured extension; .5m/8mm, .46/7.3, .5/8.1, .5/7.5, .6/5.4


Rear elements; Chinon and Mamiya, flat. Fujinon and Yashinon, flat or very nearly so. Rikenon, convex.


From the front; Chinon, Fujinon iris tips rearward. Mamiya, Rikenon, Yashnon tips forward.
A - M switch: Chinon at 2:00 o'clock. Fuji, none. Mamiya 7:00, Rikenon, none. Yashinon 7:00.


From the rear; Fujinon is obviously different in construction. Chinon differs from other three. Mamiya, Rikenon and Yashinon are similar but not identical in detail.

To my mind, five lenses made to five different specifications. The Fujinon has no mechanical similarity to the others. The Rikenon is a later 50mm lens from the Auto TLS model and not the usual Singlex 55mm unit. The Mamiya and Chinon are marked as 55mm F.L. and share the flat and protruding rear element but differ significantly in mechanical detail. The Yashinon differs from the others in its close focus limit.

Note that the Yashinon lens is marked 50mm F.L. vs the 55mm F.L. of the Chinon and Mamiya that are usually attributed to Tomioka. Also note that the lenses marked as 55mm require .5mm to .8mm more extension to reach the nominal .5m near focus distance, an indication that the focal lengths are indeed different and not just marked differently.

In addition to Tomioka we may want to consider Cosina and Nittoh as suppliers of these lenses.

Eager to hear your thoughts.

Bill


In my opinion whole Pentax PK line bellow was also CHINON's work (anyone familiar with Cosina products knows Cosina made different body and focusing grease):
TrueLoveOne wrote:


One other thing: i get the feeling some people are mixing up 2 quite different lenses: the well-known 55mm f/1.4 Chinon aka Revuenon, Porst and so on, and the less known 50mm f/1.4 with PK mount, which is a very different lens and much smaller and lighter than the 55mm lens.
This is the 50mm (pic from Alf Sigaro):
Auto Revuenon MC 1.4/50 mm by Alfred, on Flickr