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

Smallest 135mm - Fujita or Tamron?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2023 6:40 pm    Post subject: Smallest 135mm - Fujita or Tamron? Reply with quote
I've seen reference to an almost mythical Fujita 135mm f/4.5 in M42 mount as being the smallest 135mm slr lens ever produced, but whilst doing a bit of digging around I realised that the Tamron 135mm f/4.5 'Twin-Tele' is not only of very similar dimension but apparently of similar construction, albeit the finish is different.
My Tamron came with not only the case and matching converter but also with the alternative Exakta mount Smile
Has anyone experience of both the Tamron and the Fujita and might confirm (or otherwise) that they are indeed very similar?



PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2023 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My Twin Tele is newer than yours - and 65mm dia x 97mm long open and 81.5 closed
The Super Yashinon - R 135 / 3.5 is 51mm dia ( the T mount is 55m dia ) and 100mm long open and 87.5 closed.

I think I have a preset Takumar that's about the same size as the Yashinon.



PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2023 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fujita 135/4.5 is 65mm long. This is bested by no other lens. The Pentax-M 135/3.5 is 66mm so it comes close, but is much wider than the Fujita. 63mm vs 45mm.The Fujita is also lighter 208 grams vs 270.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2023 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D1N0 wrote:
Fujita 135/4.5 is 65mm long. This is bested by no other lens. The Pentax-M 135/3.5 is 66mm so it comes close, but is much wider than the Fujita. 63mm vs 45mm.The Fujita is also lighter 208 grams vs 270.


My Tamron is 196gm with the M42 mount fitted, 201gm with the Exakta mount fitted Wink
As best as I can measure it with just a ruler, it's 74mm long at infinity with the M42 mount, 78mm with the Exakta mount fitted. Diameter across the focussing grip is 48mm.
So, slightly bigger, but a bit lighter Smile

Thanks for the numbers … I'll settle for similar, but definitely not the same Smile


PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2023 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pretty small as well - Voigtländer Dynarex 4/135mm. About 68mm long and 48mm diameter.



S


PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2023 1:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
the zuiko 135 f3.5 is barely bigger than a 50mm


PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2023 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
philslizzy wrote:
the zuiko 135 f3.5 is barely bigger than a 50mm


Zuiko 3.5/135mm length: 73mm
Zuiko 1.8/50mm length: 31mm
Zuiko 1.4/50mm length: 36mm

S


PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Who'd have thought the Jupiter 11 would get a mention in smallest 135's? it's the same size as the Tamron Twin Tele 135 section at 80.5mm closed,92mm open and 63mm dia. And even more surprising, it's about the same weight.



This Minolta MD Rokkor135 / 3.5 is a nice compact lens - 72.5mm closed, 87.2mm open and 62.5 dia



PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
Who'd have thought the Jupiter 11 would get a mention in smallest 135's? it's the same size as the Tamron Twin Tele 135 section at 80.5mm closed,92mm open and 63mm dia. And even more surprising, it's about the same weight.




I have a J11 the same as that which I use often, just an excellent lens.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2023 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
philslizzy wrote:
the zuiko 135 f3.5 is barely bigger than a 50mm

stevemark wrote:

Zuiko 3.5/135mm length: 73mm
Zuiko 1.8/50mm length: 31mm
Zuiko 1.4/50mm length: 36mm

S



Phil didn't say which 50mm... Wink





PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2023 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Cosina MC Cosinon-T 135mm 1:3.5

61 dia 70 L 311 grams (sans name ring because missing :p)
Cosina MC Cosinon-T 135mm 1:3.5 by The lens profile, on Flickr

There are many compact 135mm lenses but none can beat the Fujita


PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2023 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
philslizzy wrote:
the zuiko 135 f3.5 is barely bigger than a 50mm


Zuiko 3.5/135mm length: 73mm
Zuiko 1.8/50mm length: 31mm
Zuiko 1.4/50mm length: 36mm

S


Phil's right, it's smaller than most of the 50mms on the market today, it's about halfway between the smaller, budget 50s and the larger, premium ones.

Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 S length: 86.5mm
Samyang AF 50mm f/1.4 FE II length: 89mm
HD Pentax D FA* 50mm f1.4 SDM AW length: 80mm
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM length: 100mm
Zeiss Milvus 50mm f/1.4 ZF.2 length: 98mm


PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2023 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Mirrorless 50's are longer than slr ones because they need distance from the sensor. Modern 1.4 50's aren't made for compactness but for ultimate IQ and sharpness across the frame wide open.



PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2023 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:


This Minolta MD Rokkor135 / 3.5 is a nice compact lens - 72.5mm closed, 87.2mm open and 62.5 dia


With sliding hood still light and with excellent IQ.

List of 135mm weights:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51865628

The Mamiya Sekor CS 135 2.8 should also be in the top of that list. Quality varies though.


PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 9:46 pm    Post subject: Re: Smallest 135mm - Fujita or Tamron? Reply with quote
kypfer wrote:
I've seen reference to an almost mythical Fujita 135mm f/4.5 in M42 mount as being the smallest 135mm slr lens ever produced, but whilst doing a bit of digging around I realised that the Tamron 135mm f/4.5 'Twin-Tele' is not only of very similar dimension but apparently of similar construction, albeit the finish is different.
My Tamron came with not only the case and matching converter but also with the alternative Exakta mount Smile
Has anyone experience of both the Tamron and the Fujita and might confirm (or otherwise) that they are indeed very similar?



I wouldn't say these are mythical, I had two copies of each in the past Smile

They are very cool, narrow looking lenses though, worth keeping an eye out for!


PostPosted: Fri Mar 17, 2023 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
stevemark wrote:
philslizzy wrote:
the zuiko 135 f3.5 is barely bigger than a 50mm


Zuiko 3.5/135mm length: 73mm
Zuiko 1.8/50mm length: 31mm
Zuiko 1.4/50mm length: 36mm

S


Phil's right, it's smaller than most of the 50mms on the market today, it's about halfway between the smaller, budget 50s and the larger, premium ones.

Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 S length: 86.5mm
Samyang AF 50mm f/1.4 FE II length: 89mm
HD Pentax D FA* 50mm f1.4 SDM AW length: 80mm
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM length: 100mm
Zeiss Milvus 50mm f/1.4 ZF.2 length: 98mm



Since this an mflenses forum, I was talking about MF lenses from the same time frame as the Zuiko 3.5/135 (say 1970 to 1990) ... of course when you include modern AF standard lenses, you are right.

S


PostPosted: Sun Mar 19, 2023 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
Who'd have thought the Jupiter 11 would get a mention in smallest 135's? it's the same size as the Tamron Twin Tele 135 section at 80.5mm closed,92mm open and 63mm dia. And even more surprising, it's about the same weight.

The physical length may be comparable but the weight is in a different league.
I have both lenses, the Tamron is 195gm, the Jupiter (in slr "grenade" configuration, as shown) is 354gm … the slimmer ltm version is "only" 272gm.
Not sure where your figures come from … mine come from the scales in the kitchen Wink


PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Jupiter 11 is a Sonnar design so it features a big chunk off glass.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kypfer wrote:
Lloydy wrote:
Who'd have thought the Jupiter 11 would get a mention in smallest 135's? it's the same size as the Tamron Twin Tele 135 section at 80.5mm closed,92mm open and 63mm dia. And even more surprising, it's about the same weight.

The physical length may be comparable but the weight is in a different league.
I have both lenses, the Tamron is 195gm, the Jupiter (in slr "grenade" configuration, as shown) is 354gm … the slimmer ltm version is "only" 272gm.
Not sure where your figures come from … mine come from the scales in the kitchen Wink


Ahhhh.... mine came from one in my right hand and the other in my left Wink I was too lazy to go to the kitchen. Laughing


PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
How about this one?

Roeschlein-Kreuznach 135mm Telenar f/5.6

Image from lens-club.ru.



PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
One for sale here if anybody is interested:
https://www.ebay.nl/itm/324154020471

even cheaper and it comes with it's own storage condom:
https://www.ebay.nl/itm/225150652013



PostPosted: Mon Mar 20, 2023 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
blotafton wrote:
How about this one?
Roeschlein-Kreuznach 135mm Telenar f/5.6

Cute Smile
For the Braun Paxette, I believe … not going to adapt to my Pentax cameras, but could be useful on another system.


PostPosted: Wed Mar 22, 2023 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kypfer wrote:
blotafton wrote:
How about this one?
Roeschlein-Kreuznach 135mm Telenar f/5.6

Cute Smile
For the Braun Paxette, I believe … not going to adapt to my Pentax cameras, but could be useful on another system.


on the same mount you can get the tele-ennalyt 135mm f/3.5 which is about the same size and faster. but overall if size is that important i rather use my orestor 100mm f2.8 instead of any 135ish lens. its sharp enough to crop the hell out of the picture and get a narrower fov, and its adaptable to almost any system (even nikon) and it has a nicer bokeh imo.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2023 9:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Raxar wrote:
kypfer wrote:
blotafton wrote:
How about this one?
Roeschlein-Kreuznach 135mm Telenar f/5.6

Cute Smile
For the Braun Paxette, I believe … not going to adapt to my Pentax cameras, but could be useful on another system.


on the same mount you can get the tele-ennalyt 135mm f/3.5 which is about the same size and faster. but overall if size is that important i rather use my orestor 100mm f2.8 instead of any 135ish lens. its sharp enough to crop the hell out of the picture and get a narrower fov, and its adaptable to almost any system (even nikon) and it has a nicer bokeh imo.


That is 81mm and 260 grams. 100mm can't play in the category smallest 135mm


PostPosted: Thu Mar 23, 2023 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
As an exercise in creating confusion about sizes I could mention that the Schneider Tele-arton 85mm measures less than 30mm fitted on a suitalble retina to EF adapter, but the length doubles when fitted to the EF-NZ adapter which I use it on.

Adapted lens dimensions should be referred to the mount that they will be used on. And given the varying total size and weight, the rules of the "smallest competition" must be clerly defined before a winner can be declared.

p.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2