Do I need a 135 / 1.8 MF Lens?

[Lloydy]

I've just seen a Soligor 135 / 1.8 with a serial No that indicates its a Sun Optical lens for £360 ( UK Pounds = 407 Euro = 483 $ US ) I can buy a new Samyang AF 135mm F1.8 FE for £670 - which is roughly twice the price, and I'm sure there are new manual focus Chinese / Korean lenses out there for less?

The fastest 135 I've got is my Takumar Bayonet 135 / 2.5 which I like, I think it has a bad reputation. I like 135mm lenses, my most used are probably my Pentacon 2.8, Rokkor 2.8 and my Yashinon - R 3.5.

Do I need this Soligor 1.8 ? talk me out of it.....

[calvin83]

I found focusing with my Vivitar 135/2.3 is a challenge for me. So, I bought a Samyang AF 135mm F1.8 FE. The Samyang focus fast and accurately on my A7RII. The sharpness and bokeh are excellent compare to any manual 135mm I have tired.

[stevemark]

[philslizzy]

i had one in the 70s shooting concerts. that stop made a difference

[D1N0]

I wouldn't bother unless under a 100. Get a SMC Pentax 135mm 1:2.5 instead. It totally outclasses the Takumar Bayonet and is usually cheaper than the S-M-C Takumar version these days.

[Lloydy]

[stevemark]

[vivaldibow]

[caspert79]

I remember having an old 135/1.8, don’t even remember which one. I played with it for a while, and then sold it. It’s definitely not worth the usual asking price IMO.

I also had a Nikkor ai 135/2. The Nikkor was significantly better, but at f/2 still nothing to write home about compared to modern glass. The Nikkor’s stiff double helicoid I had serviced but focusing never became really smooth. Closed down to f/2.8 the lens became much better; comparable to the Nikkor (135/2.8 ). But it’s a heavy lens: I sold it after a month or so.

If it’s bokeh you’re after I heard good things about the Nikkor 105/1.8, a lens that’s actually still on my wish list. It’s supposed to be sharp wide open (with low contrast). A lens I can recommend, if you don’t mind plastics, with similar speed/ focal length is the Canon EF 100mm f/2. I use it on my Sony (with AF!) using a K&F adapter. The Canon can (still) be found for good prices (under 200€) and has SPEC-TA-CU-LAR optics, also wide open. Of course it won’t give you that MF feel.

[cbass]

We are looking at a financial collapse in Europe and with USA with possibly Canada as well. At this time it is better to be in physical assets. Things like precious metals. Gold, Silver, Lead, Brass (last two only allowed in certain free countries), and lenses. Whether the 135/1.8 is the right choice others can answer better. But the time of your purchasing power may be limited or may increase substantially if you are one of the few with some cash left.

[calvin83]

From my experience in collecting lenses for 15 years, sought after vintage lenses in excellent condition are unlikely to become cheaper. The commonly available lenses are likely to become cheaper and cheaper when the demand becomes lower. I regret selling my biotar and primoplan 58 in the past. Now, I can no longer find them for the price I sold them.

[Alun Thomas]

Old lenses don't generally pass a cost/benefit analysis when compared to modern alternatives, unless the cost is very low. It shouldn't need to be pointed out, that's not why most people like old lenses. So IMO, only you can answer for yourself. I do have to say, it seems odd that few people mention the same cost/benefit considerations for other older lenses where they would also without doubt fail, it seems to mainly be reserved for fast 135mm lenses.

I tried all 4 of the older F/1.8 designs. My favourite was/is the Soligor with the cemented triplet, followed by the Sigma with the cemented triplet. For reasons completely unrelated to IQ, and more related to cemented triplets. None of them were objectively terrible, nor were they outstandingly great. All can isolate a subject as well as any other lens with the same size effective aperture, and that seems to be the reason you might want to try one with a modern camera.

Having said all that, I am of the opinion it could be had for somewhat cheaper if you lurk in wait for an opportunity. The identical lens badged as Polaris is available for a little less on Ebay currently, although I am not sure how that would work out in terms of import tax considerations.

[visualopsins]

Do you need 135/1.4?

https://m.dpreview.com/news/6873913619/mitakon-speedmaster-135mm-f1-4-lens-relaunched-with-7-mount-options

[Oldhand]

[calvin83]

[RokkorDoctor]

[DConvert]

[calvin83]

Yes. Aperture ring is clickless on the Mitakon 135/1.4.

[D1N0]

[RokkorDoctor]

[philslizzy]

[Lloydy]

Very interesting discussion, and I seem to have my doubts confirmed. The Soligor is overpriced for me, whether it's over valued is a different view? If it sells, then I guess that sets the value for an uncommon lens.

And more importantly, would it deliver what I hoped it might? Which is actually something I don't know. Other than curiosity, and the chance it might be a stellar lens, I don't actually need it. But your comments and the discussion has been very illuminating in so many ways. Without getting technical, pixel peeping and test charts I think we've concluded that the lure of the extra few wide open stops might not be the holy grail we think it might be.

Anyway, it's sold. I hope the buyer enjoys it, whatever it's worth?

[iangreenhalgh1]

Keep your eye out for a fast data projector lens, you can find those dirt cheap sometimes, made by companies like Minolta and Olympus and originally costing thousands, they have all the latest tech in terms of fancy glass types and aspherical elements, IQ is usually stunning if you can focus the damn things!

[stevemark]