| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
eggplant
Joined: 27 May 2020
Posts: 516
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2023 4:38 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
eggplant wrote:
Ohhhh... lol. I never thought to look there. My inexperience...
_________________
UK |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 2856
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2023 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Leica Summicron 90mm f/2 from 1976. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kiddo
Joined: 29 Jun 2018
Posts: 1036
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2023 11:01 pm Post subject: Re: Tamron 46A 70-210 3,8/4,0 |
|
|
kiddo wrote:
| lumens pixel wrote: |
I have just received my fourth copy of this lens.
All of them seemed in pretty good external shape.
One had faulty internal mechanics,
One had a tilted focus plane,
One could not focus at infinity from 70 to 100 mm but was OK a part from that and I kept it. But corners were not perfect at 200mm.
I saw and ad for a 17 € copy and decided there was little to loose. Was described as perfect, like new. Like new indeed but with a fungy dot inside.
I tested it and was amazed. Perfect at all focal distances. So this one will stay with me and it is under an Ikea Jansjo UV lamp for an UV bath for a while.
Just for you to know that my excellent Minolta MD 75-150 has been trounced...
These late Tamron adaptalls are sub par regarding mechanics and quality control but the optical computation is very good. So it is difficult to find a good copy and you need to pamper it once you find one. |
Did you ever tested the kiron macro 70-210 f4 zoomlock? I've read very positive thoughts about it, but never tried it personally |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 802
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2023 6:57 am Post subject: Re: Tamron 46A 70-210 3,8/4,0 |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
| kiddo wrote: |
| lumens pixel wrote: |
I have just received my fourth copy of this lens.
All of them seemed in pretty good external shape.
One had faulty internal mechanics,
One had a tilted focus plane,
One could not focus at infinity from 70 to 100 mm but was OK a part from that and I kept it. But corners were not perfect at 200mm.
I saw and ad for a 17 € copy and decided there was little to loose. Was described as perfect, like new. Like new indeed but with a fungy dot inside.
I tested it and was amazed. Perfect at all focal distances. So this one will stay with me and it is under an Ikea Jansjo UV lamp for an UV bath for a while.
Just for you to know that my excellent Minolta MD 75-150 has been trounced...
These late Tamron adaptalls are sub par regarding mechanics and quality control but the optical computation is very good. So it is difficult to find a good copy and you need to pamper it once you find one. |
Did you ever tested the kiron macro 70-210 f4 zoomlock? I've read very positive thoughts about it, but never tried it personally |
No I did not. But I have red good things about it including on this forum.
_________________
Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3734
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2023 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Fuji EBC Fujinon-T 3.5/135mm:
Konica AR 4/21mm "new" (on the right):
For quite some time I had lusted for the "new" AR 4/21mm with rubber focusing grip. Today I saw one at a local photo store, and so I got it ... It's the first time ever I've seen this version of the AR 4/21mm here in Switzerland (the earlier version with metal focusing grip occasionally appears on the local market). Nice find, and in an excellent like-new condition. Lens hood and the original lens case were included as well.
The newer version is performing quite a bit better when stopped down; wide open both versions are comparable (tested side by side on 43 MP FF). Not sure whether this is sample variation or (probably) a optimized computation. We know fro the AR 2.8/35mm that the the newer version with rubber focusing is much better than the older one - even though they have the "same" lens section.
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Crazy Leica Fox
Joined: 29 Apr 2017
Posts: 59
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2023 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Crazy Leica Fox wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
Konica AR 4/21mm "new"
The newer version is performing quite a bit better when stopped down; wide open both versions are comparable (tested side by side on 43 MP FF). Not sure whether this is sample variation or (probably) a optimized computation. We know fro the AR 2.8/35mm that the the newer version with rubber focusing is much better than the older one - even though they have the "same" lens section.
S |
I'm curious how this optimized version compares to other vintage ultrawides from the usual suspects, e.g., Canon, Mamiya, Zeiss Jena, etc., which, as a general rule, aren't very good out to the edges. I have a variety of 21st-Century rangefinder ultrawides, but my only one of the vintage SLR type is the Topcon 20mm/4. Actually, I have a '90s Tokina 17mm/3.5 in Nikon AF-D mount, but there's something wrong with it leading to blur everywhere outside the center at all apertures and distances, so it's basically just a paperweight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 802
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2023 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
| Crazy Leica Fox wrote: |
| stevemark wrote: |
Konica AR 4/21mm "new"
The newer version is performing quite a bit better when stopped down; wide open both versions are comparable (tested side by side on 43 MP FF). Not sure whether this is sample variation or (probably) a optimized computation. We know fro the AR 2.8/35mm that the the newer version with rubber focusing is much better than the older one - even though they have the "same" lens section.
S |
I'm curious how this optimized version compares to other vintage ultrawides from the usual suspects, e.g., Canon, Mamiya, Zeiss Jena, etc., which, as a general rule, aren't very good out to the edges. I have a variety of 21st-Century rangefinder ultrawides, but my only one of the vintage SLR type is the Topcon 20mm/4. Actually, I have a '90s Tokina 17mm/3.5 in Nikon AF-D mount, but there's something wrong with it leading to blur everywhere outside the center at all apertures and distances, so it's basically just a paperweight. |
My RMC Tokina 17 3,5 is quite sharp stopped down at infinity on 80% of the field. Edges and corner at the infinity setting are sharp at around 2 meters. Significant field curvature here. I do not know if a Kolari kind sensor would help.
_________________
Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3734
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2023 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| Crazy Leica Fox wrote: |
I'm curious how this optimized version compares to other vintage ultrawides from the usual suspects, e.g., Canon, Mamiya, Zeiss Jena, etc., which, as a general rule, aren't very good out to the edges. I have a variety of 21st-Century rangefinder ultrawides, but my only one of the vintage SLR type is the Topcon 20mm/4. Actually, I have a '90s Tokina 17mm/3.5 in Nikon AF-D mount, but there's something wrong with it leading to blur everywhere outside the center at all apertures and distances, so it's basically just a paperweight. |
Yeah, would be interesting indeed. I have quite a few 20mm/21mm lenses from various manufacturers (Canon, Konica, Mamiya, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Topcon, Yashica, Vivitar and Zeiss) ... let's see.
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BrianSVP
Joined: 09 Jun 2023
Posts: 168
Location: Philadelphia
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2023 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
BrianSVP wrote:
| JJB wrote: |
A Vivitar Series I 28-90mm 2.8/3.5 zoom to replace my copy that had been knocked over by somebody. The concrete floor was not kind. The replacement looks brand new in original box, including all packaging and manual.
A Topcor RE 35mm 2.8 is in transit and I am eagerly awaiting its arrival. |
Both great lenses. How is the aperture action on the Viv? This model is exceptionally prone to oily blades. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alun Thomas
Joined: 20 Aug 2018
Posts: 602
Location: New Zealand
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 28, 2023 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alun Thomas wrote:
I got this Upsilon 200mm F/2.8 today for a $40 bid. Upsilon was a house brand for Sigma, this is the same as their XQ lens of the same description. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
michelb
Joined: 24 Dec 2015
Posts: 61
Location: Montréal area,Québec, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2023 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
michelb wrote:
Minolta MC APO TELE ROKKOR-X 400mm F 5.6
#1
_________________
Michel B
Interested in Minolta SLR's since 1971 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 2856
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2023 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Petri 55mm f/1.4 and the adapter to mount it to my camera. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3734
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| michelb wrote: |
Minolta MC APO TELE ROKKOR-X 400mm F 5.6
|
That's a lens I always was looking for - but it's quiute rare here in Switzerland. I have been using a smaple which belongs to a friend bakc in 2015, though. That particular lens was abit puzzling since it hat pretty visible astigmatism in the image center (!!) which would indicate serious manufacturing problems. I am aware of two other Minolta 5.6/400mm APO lenses, and both semm to have the same same problem. Peculiar indeed!!
Stopped down to f11 the lens was excellent; certainly much less CAs than my Canon 2.8/400mm L, but maybe a bit less detail (I don't remember exactly, though).
I really wonder whether your lens has similar issues at f5.6?!
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3734
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2023 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Topcor RE 3.5cm 1:2.8 with damaged rear lens - should arrive tomorow. Let's see whether we can save the beast ...
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
michelb
Joined: 24 Dec 2015
Posts: 61
Location: Montréal area,Québec, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2023 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
michelb wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
| michelb wrote: |
Minolta MC APO TELE ROKKOR-X 400mm F 5.6
|
That's a lens I always was looking for - but it's quiute rare here in Switzerland. I have been using a smaple which belongs to a friend bakc in 2015, though. That particular lens was abit puzzling since it hat pretty visible astigmatism in the image center (!!) which would indicate serious manufacturing problems. I am aware of two other Minolta 5.6/400mm APO lenses, and both semm to have the same same problem. Peculiar indeed!!
Stopped down to f11 the lens was excellent; certainly much less CAs than my Canon 2.8/400mm L, but maybe a bit less detail (I don't remember exactly, though).
I really wonder whether your lens has similar issues at f5.6?!
S |
Here 2 sample images ( weather not really nice here right now with smog from northern forest fires and overcast) both at F 5.6 with no PP. Both on Sony A7r using ISO 1600 in A Mode and Novoflex MD-NEX adapter all mounted on tripod
First sample at minimum focusing distance
Second sample at about 200 ft (66m) distance
I can't see any softness or CA on both of these and neither on the shots i took of the same subjects stopped down up to F 32 ( F22 and F32 do show some softness either due to some camera shake or to diffraction)
#1
#2
Really favorably surprised that my copy does not match all the comments i see on the web about this lens.
_________________
Michel B
Interested in Minolta SLR's since 1971 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3734
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2023 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| michelb wrote: |
Here 2 sample images ( weather not really nice here right now with smog from northern forest fires and overcast) both at F 5.6 with no PP. Both on Sony A7r using ISO 1600 in A Mode and Novoflex MD-NEX adapter all mounted on tripod
Really favorably surprised that my copy does not match all the comments i see on the web about this lens. |
High ISO and strong compression may "mask" some minor problems of the lens, but nevertheless your lens seems to be OK (i e no strong astigmatism in the image center). Good to know!
It's still a mystery to me why the three other Minolta 5.6/400mm APO lenses I'm aware of do have the strange astigmatism problem ...
Thanks a lot for checking and posting the images - I really appreciate it!
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeM
Joined: 22 Jun 2023
Posts: 15
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2023 3:28 pm Post subject: Metrigor 35mm f2.8 M42 - looks like Takumar? |
|
|
MikeM wrote:
I bought a Metrigor 35mm f2.8 M42 mount online. The lens looks a lot like a Takumar, and has a M --- A switch - though I don't recall ever seeing an M42 Takumar in 35mm f2.8. Are any members familiar with the Brand Metrigor?
A shot with the Metrigor of my house gas meter cropped 300% to show the gauges
I'd appreciate any help you can give identifying this lens.
Thank you,
Mike
_________________
MikeM
I know the answer is 'out there' but I'm agoraphobic.
Last edited by MikeM on Sat Jul 01, 2023 4:32 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeM
Joined: 22 Jun 2023
Posts: 15
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2023 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
MikeM wrote:
I bought a Metrigor 35mm f2.8 M42 mount online. The lens looks a lot like a Takumar, and has a M --- A switch - though I don't recall ever seeing an M42 Takumar in 35mm f2.8. Are any members familiar with the Brand Metrigor?
A shot with the Metrigor of my house gas meter cropped 300% to show the gauges
I'd appreciate any help you can give identifying this lens.
Thank you,
Mike
_________________
MikeM
I know the answer is 'out there' but I'm agoraphobic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phalbert
Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 341
Location: Namibia
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2023 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Phalbert wrote:
I got this Upsilon 200mm F/2.8 today for a $40 bid. Upsilon was a house brand for Sigma, this is the same as their XQ lens of the same description.[/quote]
I'm curious about that one. A friend of mine had one (in the Sigma flavour) and was not happy with it. Let us know how it performs please.
_________________
🙋 My wishlist: Titan or Idaho 135/1,8; Nikon Df Vivitar 35-85 f2,8 AI Nikkor 105/1,8 35/1,4 85/1,8
My dream lenses: Prototype Zuiko 85/1,4 Zuiko 180/2
Zeiss CY: 55/1,2 85/1,2
Astro Berlin 250/2 Canon EF 50/1,0 85/1,2
Nikkor 105/1,4 28/1,4
My stolen stuff: Zuiko 24/2 #106874; Zuiko 35-80/2,8 #102180; Zuiko 35/2 #119168; Zuiko 90/2 macro #102858; Zuiko x1,4 converter #102019; Tamron 17/3,5 #400567; Tamron 400/4 #80407; Soligor 135/2 #17506600 Sigma 28/1,8 #1001124 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 802
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2023 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
| michelb wrote: |
Minolta MC APO TELE ROKKOR-X 400mm F 5.6
#1
|
Piece of history. Hope you will report about the qualities of this lens.
_________________
Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phalbert
Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 341
Location: Namibia
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2023 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Phalbert wrote:
| MikeM wrote: |
I bought a Metrigor 35mm f2.8 M42 mount online. The lens looks a lot like a Takumar, and has a M --- A switch - though I don't recall ever seeing an M42 Takumar in 35mm f2.8. Are any members familiar with the Brand Metrigor?
I'd appreciate any help you can give identifying this lens.
Thank you,
Mike |
That lens is almost certainly Cimko made (Cima Kogaku, which are usually recognizable at the diamond shaped focusing mark) . I have an almost identical "Rubimat" labelled lens. It is sharp in the center wide open, which is why I keep it. ☺️
_________________
🙋 My wishlist: Titan or Idaho 135/1,8; Nikon Df Vivitar 35-85 f2,8 AI Nikkor 105/1,8 35/1,4 85/1,8
My dream lenses: Prototype Zuiko 85/1,4 Zuiko 180/2
Zeiss CY: 55/1,2 85/1,2
Astro Berlin 250/2 Canon EF 50/1,0 85/1,2
Nikkor 105/1,4 28/1,4
My stolen stuff: Zuiko 24/2 #106874; Zuiko 35-80/2,8 #102180; Zuiko 35/2 #119168; Zuiko 90/2 macro #102858; Zuiko x1,4 converter #102019; Tamron 17/3,5 #400567; Tamron 400/4 #80407; Soligor 135/2 #17506600 Sigma 28/1,8 #1001124
Last edited by Phalbert on Mon Jul 03, 2023 8:19 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
michelb
Joined: 24 Dec 2015
Posts: 61
Location: Montréal area,Québec, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
michelb wrote:
_________________
Michel B
Interested in Minolta SLR's since 1971 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D. P.
Joined: 26 Apr 2015
Posts: 146
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
D. P. wrote:
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008
Posts: 3443
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
Meyer Görlitz Primotar 135mm 3.5
On a Praktica LTL3 ("met grote lens" = with a big lens)
for a reasonable price.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10364
Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
michaelb. the url tags got messed up...
| michelb wrote: |
| lumens pixel wrote: |
| michelb wrote: |
Minolta MC APO TELE ROKKOR-X 400mm F 5.6
#1
|
Piece of history. Hope you will report about the qualities of this lens. |
See here album showing both the lens and some results with it. When seeing same scene, first picture is wide open up to the minimum F32 aperture setting:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55173440@N08/albums/72177720309414710
See here another album using the dedicated MC 2X Converter for APO TELE ROKKOR in less than ideal conditions ( late in the day with some overcast):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55173440@N08/albums/72177720309505754
This lens is definitely not designed for hand held shots, but on a tripod, i am really impressed up to now. |
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
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
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
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
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
