| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 880
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
 Posted: Mon May 02, 2022 2:24 pm Post subject: Canon FL 3,5/135 |
 |
|
lumens pixel wrote:
Finally bought a copy of this lens. I wanted something lighter than the 2,5 version and check whether quality is comparable. It is. Here on extension tube.
[img] Pissenlit | Dandelion | Parc de Saint-Cloud by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img]
_________________
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 |
|
 |
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2022 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I have the M39 version which I suspect is the same optics. I did a 3-way comparison once with a CZJ 3.5/135 Sonnar and a Komura 3.5/135 in M39. The Canon wasn't quite as sharp as the Sonnar, about the same as the Koomura, but the problem it had was low contrast, much lower than the Sonnar, but slightly better than the Komura which was very poor in macro and micro contrast. However, the contrast problem was fixed with a couple of clicks in Photoshop and then the results were pretty nice.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 880
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2022 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
| iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
| I have the M39 version which I suspect is the same optics. I did a 3-way comparison once with a CZJ 3.5/135 Sonnar and a Komura 3.5/135 in M39. The Canon wasn't quite as sharp as the Sonnar, about the same as the Koomura, but the problem it had was low contrast, much lower than the Sonnar, but slightly better than the Komura which was very poor in macro and micro contrast. However, the contrast problem was fixed with a couple of clicks in Photoshop and then the results were pretty nice. |
In this case I had microcontrat to spare. I will see in duller lighting conditions.
_________________
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 |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 880
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
| Posted: Wed May 04, 2022 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
Same lens. Like it very much. Of course the short distance helps with the bokeh. But it seems to me exceptionally creamy.
[img] Iris | Parc de Saint-Cloud by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img]
_________________
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 |
|
|
kiddo
Joined: 29 Jun 2018
Posts: 1264
|
| Posted: Wed May 04, 2022 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kiddo wrote:
Wow that's amazing, was it f11? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 880
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
| Posted: Wed May 04, 2022 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
No probably 5,6
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
