| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:41 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
stevemark wrote:
The first time ever I saw this one here in Switzerland - not exactly a common lens, though it was not that expensive when new.
This Yashica ML 5.6/300mm C looks and feels "like new": no dents. no scratchings, and smooth focusing. A real joy to play with ...!
Compared to contemporary 5.6/300mm lenses such as the Canon nFD 5.6/300mm IF or the Minolta MD 5.6/300mm, the Yashica is a bit inferior: Less resolution in the field and in the corners, and bit more CAs. The Yashica is, however, the shortest of the three lenses mentioned, and therefore aberrations are more difficult to correct:
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10543
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
... shortest of the three lenses mentioned, and therefore aberrations are more difficult to correct
... |
because necessary angles of correction are steeper? Optical materials and techniques such as apo and aspherical also contribute or lessen length imho.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gott23
Joined: 10 Dec 2018
Posts: 250
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gott23 wrote:
So the Exakta mount silver CZJ 135mm f4 Sonnar arrived in the post. Impressed with it so far. . Below are generally unprocessed other than a bit of colour temp shift and upping the exposure a touch if needed. Iso 100, sony a6000
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uddhava
Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Posts: 3073
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-06-21
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uddhava wrote:
Nice samples!
I have the same lens and it performs well, but is hard to focus because of stiffness so
I bought a black one for M42. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 6009
Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
| uddhava wrote: |
Nice samples!
I have the same lens and it performs well, but is hard to focus because of stiffness so
I bought a black one for M42. |
Yes, I agree - nice samples.
I expect that you will get the most from this lens as you use it more
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10543
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Page 100 of 100 
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 6009
Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
| Page 100 of 100 |
That is more than 25 pages per year.
A very popular thread
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidaho
Joined: 29 Apr 2018
Posts: 456
Location: Ukraine
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
aidaho wrote:
Wow, 100 pages! I think I want to check in.
Went eBay fishing and caught mint Minolta MD 135mm F3.5:
And I've recently got Minolta MC Rokkor-PF 55mm F1.9
I've shot one with the other and vice versa for the kicks.
_________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/curry-hexagon/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gott23
Joined: 10 Dec 2018
Posts: 250
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2019 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gott23 wrote:
Well here's today's post...
Quite impressed so far..
Unprocessed other than the exposure upped about half a stop.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2019 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
| stevemark wrote: |
... shortest of the three lenses mentioned, and therefore aberrations are more difficult to correct
... |
because necessary angles of correction are steeper? |
Yes. If we look at the common construction of 200mm and 300mm lenses around 1980, we can find a triplet typ "master lens" (positive) in front and a (negative) pair of lenses at the back, acting as a teleconverter and "field flattener". Of course this is a simplified explanation.
I) If we make the triplet with f=300mm and a aperture of f5.6, the lens will be roughly 300mm long, and the triplet alone is sufficient - no need for a negative element in the back. The Noflexar 5.6/400mm has this construction, for example.
II) If we make a triplet with f=200mm (to make the overall lens shorter, about 200mm) we will need a negative lens group in the back, acting as an 1.5x teleconverter. The triplet type "200mm" master lens in front no needs to have an aperture of f3.73 (=f5.6/1.5).
III) If we want to have a really short 300mm lens (about 150mm long), we have to make the master triplet f=150mm, with an aperture of f2.8. Of course, to get the desired 5.6/300mm lens, we need in addition a rear group acting as a 2x teleconverter.
Let's look at a real life example:
"Lens I" is the Minolta Tele Rokkor 4.5/300mm (the SR type lens, not the later MC 4.5/300m!!). The lens was released in 1965, and certainly has no ED/AD/ULD glass (v=80), probably not even LD glass (v=70). It has a triplet type master lens and a sligtly negative single lens in the back, acting as a field flattener. Its overall length (first lens to sensor) is quite exactly 30 cm.
"Lens II", the SMC Pentax-M* 4/300mm, is a highly sophisticated and extremely compact 300mm lens (132mm long, which means the distance from firts lens to sensor is about 17cm). It was released around 1980, and it uses the best glass available: Three (!) large ED lenses (v=81.4), and a glass resembling the "Leizt Noctilux glass" in the rear part of the lens (nD_1.88, v=41).
Here they are:
Now let's look at their chromatic correction. You would assume the Pentax M* 4/300mm, having three large ED lenses, to have little lateral CAs? So I did ... and I was dead wrong (100% cormer crops from the 24 MP A7II, as usual):
Here comes the Minolta SR 4.5/300mm - physically long lens, no ED glass, probably no LD glass, simple construction, 15 years older ... but quite exactly twice as long as the Pentax:
It has less CAs than the Pentax ...
| visualopsins wrote: |
| Optical materials and techniques such as apo and aspherical also contribute or lessen length imho. |
APO lenses are based on ED/AD/ULD glass (v=80), Super ED glass (v=90) or crystalline fluorite (v=95). All these materials have a low refractive index, causing lens systems to be longer compared to "normal" glass.
Aspherical lenses are hardly ever used in long tele lenses.
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gott23
Joined: 10 Dec 2018
Posts: 250
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2019 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gott23 wrote:
Got to admit I've been stunned by the CZJ 50. The colours are so rich and great contrast. Feels almost like velvia in some ways.
This is unprocessed:
Somy a6000, iso 100, I think around f5.6
Few more shots and full sizes her3;
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmFYiBZK
Seems like a lot of bang for the buck tbh.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10543
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2019 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
stevemark to my eyes there is color shift between Pentax & Minolta CA examples, with Pentax exhibiting more purple fringing less green, Minolta more teal fringing less lighter purple. (due to slight focus difference?) Pentax CA colors appear more saturated than Minolta, appear like more CA but in fact both lenses are about the same to me. Am I missing something obvious?
Yes my comment about apo & aspherical was silly, thanks.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2019 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
...
Am I missing something obvious?
|
My point was that Pentax with its M* 4/300mm (in spite of using three large ED lenses and expensive Noctilux glass) could not reach the color correction of the "ancient" and very simply Minolta design. Why? Pentax put too much emphasis on making an extremely small 4/300mm lens (measuring only 132mm).
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10543
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
| visualopsins wrote: |
...
Am I missing something obvious?
|
My point was that Pentax with its M* 4/300mm (in spite of using three large ED lenses and expensive Noctilux glass) could not reach the color correction of the "ancient" and very simply Minolta design. Why? Pentax put too much emphasis on making an extremely small 4/300mm lens (measuring only 132mm).
Stephan |
My point is that Pentax reached the color correction but did not improve on Minolta's. The steeper angles weren't limiting corrections.
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vivaldibow
Joined: 23 Jun 2018
Posts: 837
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
Left a footprint on the 100th page!
Vivitar series 1, 135mm f/2.3
Vivitar 135mm f/2.8 Close Focusing
Minolta auto tele Rokkor 100mm f/3.5, looking forward to seeing how this one performs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marcusBMG
Joined: 07 Dec 2012
Posts: 1304
Location: Conwy N Wales
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marcusBMG wrote:
To complement and compare with the komine made viv close focus 28mm f2 I already have. Seller described this as "iris clean and snappy" but he was telling fibs, however my winning bid was still a good price for a PKA. Looks like there's quite a bit of online info re disassembly and cleaning, not a difficult job.
_________________
pentax ME super (retired)
Pentax K3-ii; pentax K-S2; Samsung NX 20; Lumix G1 + adapters;
Adaptall collection (proliferating!) inc 200-500mm 31A, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f4.
Primes: takumar 55mm; smc 28mm, 50mm; kino/komine 28mm f2's, helios 58mm, Tamron Nestar 400mm, novoflex 400mm, Vivitar 135mm close focus, 105mm macro; Jupiter 11A; CZJ 135mm.
A classic zoom or two: VS1 (komine), Kiron Zoomlock... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vivaldibow
Joined: 23 Jun 2018
Posts: 837
Expire: 2021-03-09
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vivaldibow wrote:
| marcusBMG wrote: |
To complement and compare with the komine made viv close focus 28mm f2 I already have. Seller described this as "iris clean and snappy" but he was telling fibs, however my winning bid was still a good price for a PKA. Looks like there's quite a bit of online info re disassembly and cleaning, not a difficult job.
|
This is a good lens optically, not as bad as in some other reviews. Saturated color as Kiron's character. Mine came in just fine with the aperture. But I am not sure if it will become stuck afterwards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 6009
Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 10, 2019 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
| vivaldibow wrote: |
| marcusBMG wrote: |
To complement and compare with the komine made viv close focus 28mm f2 I already have. Seller described this as "iris clean and snappy" but he was telling fibs, however my winning bid was still a good price for a PKA. Looks like there's quite a bit of online info re disassembly and cleaning, not a difficult job.
|
This is a good lens optically, not as bad as in some other reviews. Saturated color as Kiron's character. Mine came in just fine with the aperture. But I am not sure if it will become stuck afterwards. |
I agree completely with this.
The colour rendition is its greatest strength.
Softer than others - mine was - but with a character of its own.
Oily blades seem to haunt the Kiron Kinos though.
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 308
Expire: 2011-12-28
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 11, 2019 12:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
james wrote:
...and it came with the hard-to-come-by cone hood. It was this lens or the Nikkor 45/2.8. From what I have read, believe I made the better choice. Version 2 is unattractive while V.3 is even more attractive but a lot larger. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfhansen
Joined: 06 Oct 2013
Posts: 511
Location: Germany, Ruhr Area
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2019 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
wolfhansen wrote:
New cam and new lens - a classic mechanical combination in top condition:
Leica R6 from the first 4000 pcs production batch from 1987 and the Summicron-R 2.0/50mm from 1978.
A R-winder is still on the way to me.
_________________
Greets
Wolfgang |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tgm
Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Posts: 16
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tgm wrote:
Now lets see what this can do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
walter g
Joined: 20 Feb 2010
Posts: 2463
Location: NC, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 15, 2019 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
walter g wrote:
My latest lens is total junk. I was excited to add another Minolta lens to my collection.
Minolta. MD tele Rokkor X 135mm f2.8, this is the second MDii version that was shorter and lighter.
Unfortunately it has heavy haze to the second optic group, and heavy scratching to the rear element. In other words it's junk.
Looks like this lens comes completely apart with no glued elements, so the haze should be removable. Still would have the scratched rear element, but might be usable.
_________________
Main cameras
Panasonic G5,Nikon J1,Pentax Q10,Sony Nex 6
Minolta MC W SI 2.5/28, MD 2.8/28, MC W SG 3.5/28, MC Celtic 3.5/28, MC W HG 2.8/35, MD Celtic 2.8/35, QE 4/35, Rokkor X 2/45, MC Rokkor X PG 1.4/50, MC Rokkor X PG 1.7/50, MD Rokkor X 1.7/50, MD 2/50, MC Rokkor PF 1.7/55, MC Rokkor PF 1.9/55, Auto Tele Rokkor PG 2.8/135, MC Tele Rokkor QD 3.5/135, TC 4/135, MC Celtic 4/200, MC Tele Rokkor PE 4.5/200
MD 28-70 f3.5-4.8, MD Macro 35-70 f3.5, Md 70-210 f4, MD Rokkor X 75-200 f4.5, MD 100-200 f5.6
Nikon Nikkor 4/20, O Auto 2/35, S Auto 1.4/50..... Miranda Auto 2.8/28, Auto 2.8/35, Auto 1.4/50, Auto EC 1.4/50, Auto 1.8/50, Auto EC 1.8/50,Auto 1.9/50, Auto 3.5/135
Various Soligor,Sun,Fujita,Komura,Spitatone, etc. Lenses
Last edited by walter g on Fri Aug 16, 2019 7:41 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gott23
Joined: 10 Dec 2018
Posts: 250
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gott23 wrote:
When East meets West meets East...
It also came with a Tamron-f 135/2.8 which has a touch of fungus on it.. 
and a really nice early zebra Pentacon 50mm f/1.8, i.e an Oreston in all but name.. a keeper as I figure I can offload my M42 Oreston then.. D
So as for the Cavalier, given the badge on the bottom I presume it's a Pentax, anyone got any ideas as to which? It's optically in good condition but the aperture won't budge beyond f.8.. :/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 3462
Location: Northern Ireland
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 16, 2019 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
| Gott23 wrote: |
| So as for the Cavalier, given the badge on the bottom I presume it's a Pentax, anyone got any ideas as to which? It's optically in good condition but the aperture won't budge beyond f.8.. :/ |
Afaik, Pentax didn't manufacture lenses for anyone else, it certainly doesn't look like a Pentax.
The Pentax label probably refers to the lens mount, Pentax screw.
_________________
"I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gott23
Joined: 10 Dec 2018
Posts: 250
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2019 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gott23 wrote:
| DigiChromeEd wrote: |
| Gott23 wrote: |
| So as for the Cavalier, given the badge on the bottom I presume it's a Pentax, anyone got any ideas as to which? It's optically in good condition but the aperture won't budge beyond f.8.. :/ |
Afaik, Pentax didn't manufacture lenses for anyone else, it certainly doesn't look like a Pentax.
The Pentax label probably refers to the lens mount, Pentax screw. |
I learn something new every day.. 
Seriously, so in a cynical ploy they badge the lens with a pentax sticker, and it also had pentax front and rear caps..
As for the lens, I have had a rummage on the net and I have found it in another guise, namely as the Prinzflex Auto Reflex 28mm
I reckon my copy is a bit battered as the focus on it is totally off, near focus fine buy anything beyond six foot/2m is impossibly soft/out of focus.. that and the aperture not closing beyond f/5.6.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
