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

Group report: Lydith; Xenar; Kalejnar; Orestor; & Westan
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 3:38 pm    Post subject: Group report: Lydith; Xenar; Kalejnar; Orestor; & Westan Reply with quote
My most recent purchases have arrived - just before Christmas Smile and in time to use on some family outings. This may very well be my last lens purchases... except for the most compelling of situations. After all, we must leave some room for emergencies. But all in all I have gathered all the lenses I need with very few gaps that I really care about. The Trioplan has escaped me and may be something I'll consider in the future after I've sold other 135mm lenses. Now is the time to narrow the field to only those that I'll be giving frequent use.

The lenses that just arrived are:
Meyer Lydith 30/3.5
Schneider - Kreuznach Edixa - Xenar 50/2.8
Kalejnar 100/2.8
Meyer Optik Görlitz Orestor 135/2.8
ISCO - Gottingen Tele - Westanar 135/3.5
and Helios 40 58/2 older alloy finish

The Helios is an afterthought to this post because I haven't done much with it yet and not ready to make any judgments.

Lydith: I knew this lens had some dirt and I'm yet to clean it. My eyes aren't very close focus, so I couldn't really tell how dirty it might be. However, the initial handful of pictures showed surprising sharpness at both close up and distance. It focuses quite close, but not as close as Flektogon 35/2.4 or Vivitar 28 CF, but plenty close enough. The distant shots revealed some haze in bright areas, so I suspect that was from haze or mold inside. I'll give this a workout after cleaning - if I can figure out how.

Xenar: This is an automatic lens with no A/M switch and has a funky lever that closes the diaphragm. I haven't figured out how to keep it closed yet, so had to shoot wide open. I did slightly miss the focus a few times, which isn't unusual for me, but the lens promises good sharpness. I was in a bright environment and maxed out my shutter at 1/4000, so a few shots were overexposed. Still, the lens performed very well considering it couldn't stop down. I must remind myself that a lens wide open at f/2.8 can't be fairly compared with a much faster one at wide open. There was a surprising absence of CA. I look forward to using this small lens more after figuring out the lever problem.





Kalejnar: This lens appears as new. It cam with both Nikon and M42 mounts. This will be a Christmas gift to my brother, so my time with it is limited. I took only a few pictures, but enough to see that it's very sharp. I'll be making a judgment of how it compares to my other lenses in the near focal length after I've used it some more later today.


Orestor: Given its reputation, I was most eager to use this zebra lens and took the most pictures so far from this bunch. I have mixed opinion, but mostly good. Again, I missed perfect focus on a few of the shorter distance shots, but see very good sharpness on the distant pictures. I took a few to evaluate the famous bokeh and while not disappointed, I question whether it's any better than the Tair 133mm I have; in fact, I think the Tair is a little better. Like the Tair, it shows CA in the usual areas, but then in other pictures it seemed surprisingly absent. I shot into the strong light on several occasions and it did very well. My initial evaluation rockets this lens to third place among lenses I have in the focal length, right behind the Tair-11 and highly regarded, expensive and crappy Vivitar Series 1.











ISCO Westanar: This is a plastic lens in very good condition other than slight stiffness with the aperture ring. Unfortunately, when setting aperture, the aperture ring will cause the focus ring to move also. Other than that, the lens performs admirably. Much like my ISCO 150mm, it is very sharp. As you can see by the one close up portrait, the bokeh is right up there with the Orestor. Pictures show a minimum of CA and only upon extreme expansion of those areas.






Some of these lenses have the aperture selection at the front of the lens but no separate ring for stopping down. Are these still considered presets? I much prefer the separate ring.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excellent photos!


PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Great tests.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I see many great images here! Congrats!


PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I can see why you're happy with that fine collection of lenses, you get great results.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
Some of these lenses have the aperture selection at the front of the lens but no separate ring for stopping down. Are these still considered presets? I much prefer the separate ring.

Just check that you can lift (pull it towards the front of the lens) the single ring and turn it to your selected F stop...there should be a red dot somewhere on the ring.Then it should only open and close to the selected F stop.I hope this makes sense.I have the zebra orestor and I thought it wasn't a preset until Martin set me straight. Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
mo wrote:
Quote:
Some of these lenses have the aperture selection at the front of the lens but no separate ring for stopping down. Are these still considered presets? I much prefer the separate ring.

Just check that you can lift (pull it towards the front of the lens) the single ring and turn it to your selected F stop...there should be a red dot somewhere on the ring.Then it should only open and close to the selected F stop.I hope this makes sense.I have the zebra orestor and I thought it wasn't a preset until Martin set me straight. Very Happy


Ahaaaa, thank you mo. I should have known that. The two Meyers do work this way, but the ISCO unfortunately does not. I'm disappointed in the build quality of the ISCO - it isn't as good as the 150mm I have. However, the imae quality is quite good. In fact, I need to explore the bokeh capabilities of this lens some more as it is looking very good. This picture taken at f/4:


Thanks to all for the kind comments.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2011 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
What a beautiful package you have got !
Some great tests here!


PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 2011 1:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you, yinyangbt. I cleaned the Lydith today and will be able to use it now if I got it back together right. Yesterday I took the Kalejnar downtown and now have more to share from it. I've yet to come to any comparitive judgments with my others at this focal length.





Bad composition on this last one - cars were in the way at the bottom.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 2011 1:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
great series of great lenses by great man Very Happy


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 3:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a few updates now that I've used these lenses more. And since cleaning the Lydith I've come to like it very much. It is much sharper than I had expected and the MFD is pretty good, although not as close as the Flek or Vivitar Close Focus. Eventually I will have some opinions comparing this Lydith to those other two excellent lenses, but for now I'm happy with its performance.

The ISCO continues to impress me with its bokeh. I find that I'm back focusing it when doing portraits and haven't figured out why. On the ones that work out well, I believe the bokeh is up there with the best. Please do tell me if you disagree.

I have now used the Kalejnar more and even did a couple of comparisons to my Pentor 100mm. Attila had asked in another post that I compare those two lenses. I'm not ready to make a declaration until I've done some closer than infinity comparison shots. HOWEVER, I have been quite surprised that the Kalejnar seems to edge out the Pentor in sharpness, and most surprising was at wide open since I had been very impressed with the Pentor's open performance. Here are some recent examples with these three lenses:

Kalejnar:




ISCO Bokeh:


Lydith:



PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Great samples.

I would agree on the Tair being a bit better than the Pentacon in some respects. It's still a great lens. I would not compare the Lydith to a Flek as they are great in different ways.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looking forward for your Kalejnar compaison test. Regarding ISCO - this last pic looks good but the previous one (with a fence) shows pronounced double edges.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
martinsmith99 wrote:
Great samples.

I would agree on the Tair being a bit better than the Pentacon in some respects. It's still a great lens. I would not compare the Lydith to a Flek as they are great in different ways.


Better is always the subjective term we wrestle with. I had recently reported that the Tair had taken over first choice for me in that focal length - replacing my beloved Series 1. This was all based on my perception of the images, and wasn't just a sharpness test as the Series 1 is sharper. Then I took both lenses out and took similar pictures, but couldn't support a choice either way. So I pretty much forget about direct comparison tests and just go with my gut. My gut tells me to use the Tair first, then Series 1 and then Meyer. The ISCO is good to and between these four and others I have there is a bigger perceptual gap.

Even though the Lydith fits in between the narrow range of the 28 and 35, in this case I wouldn't consider eliminating any of the three, but I do have two other 35s that won't get any use. If you've followed my posts, you'll know that I highly regard the Vivitar Close Focus (don't mention this to Ian). The Flek and I have a love/hate relationship. When I hit the focus right it's wonderful, but I miss much more with that lens than either the Vivitar or Lydith. As for dollar per dollar value, I'd have to rate the Flek last among those three.

dimitrygo: The Pentor and Kalejnar will be getting more use, for sure. I likely won't be doing the typical type tests, but will make comparisons in real use; I find that more productive. Thanks for your comment on the ISCO. I looked back and saw what you meant. Is that a deviation from official good bokeh criteria? Bokeh is an interesting subject in that there seems to be defined characteristics of what the experts - or original bokeh definers consider good bokeh. Then most of us agree that bokeh is also a matter of personal taste. However, I have seen what I consider pretty miserable bokeh called good by people on this forum. On that level it isn't worth arguing - it would be like arguing whether or not liver tastes good (I like liver, by the way). However, it would be nice if we know enough about what was generally considered perfect bokeh so that we could make our judgments on two levels.


PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
woodrim wrote:
Is that a deviation from official good bokeh criteria? Bokeh is an interesting subject in that there seems to be defined characteristics of what the experts - or original bokeh definers consider good bokeh. Then most of us agree that bokeh is also a matter of personal taste. However, I have seen what I consider pretty miserable bokeh called good by people on this forum. On that level it isn't worth arguing - it would be like arguing whether or not liver tastes good (I like liver, by the way). However, it would be nice if we know enough about what was generally considered perfect bokeh so that we could make our judgments on two levels.


Good bokeh is indeed very subjective and personal. Someone likes smooth and creamy bokeh, another one finds this too boring and prefers more "characteristic" bokeh. There are a lot of discussions about this, on this forum as well.

Double edges are definetely not a characteristic of the smooth bokeh but sometime they are not very distracting.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1