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

Mamiya Sekor E/EF lenses: Updated information on artaphot
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2023 11:13 pm    Post subject: Mamiya Sekor E/EF lenses: Updated information on artaphot Reply with quote
During the weekend I managed to update the information about Sekor E/EF primes on my website. The Sekor E/EF lineup was the last iteration of a long and successful series of Mamiya Sekor lenses for 35 mm SLRs. Due to the collapse of Osawa in 1984 (Mamiya distributor in the US and elsewhere) Mamiya stopped producing 35mm SLRs, and the corresponding Sekor E lineup probably never was completed as planned. Superwides and a Fisheye (part of the previous Mamiya SX and/or Mamiya CS lineup) as well as portrait lenses were missing, but the most important primes in the 28mm, 35mm and 50mm as well as the 135mm, 200mm and 300mm focal lengths were available.

Here are the links:
2.8/28mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/571-mamiya-sekor-e-28mm-f28
3.5/28mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/572-mamiya-sekor-e-28mm-f35
2.8/35mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/573-mamiya-sekor-e-35mm-f28
1.4/50mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/574-mamiya-sekor-e-50mm-f14
1.7/50mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/576-mamiya-sekor-e-50mm-f17
2/50mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/577-mamiya-sekor-e-50mm-f2
3.5/50mm Macro: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/578-mamiya-sekor-e-50mm-f35-macro
2.8/135mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/580-mamiya-sekor-e-135mm-f28
3.5/135mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/579-mamiya-sekor-e-135mm-f35
4/200mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/582-mamiya-sekor-e-200mm-f4
4/300mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/583-mamiya-sekor-e-300mm-f4

There's nothing spectacular about these lenses. Many are solid performers, and a few clearly are built as budget lenses. Most are not that common or even somehow rare. Not much reliable information is available online, and therefore I have compared them with better known lenses (usually from CaKoMiNikon).

Some additional images and information about the six Sekor E zooms ever produced will follow.

S


PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2023 5:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very useful information, thanks for sharing!


PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2023 8:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice and straight to find info, I see you're missing sx 50mm f2, lens that someone praised to be better than 1.8 (maybe you?) ,I'm after one SX 50mm lens and dunno which one to get


PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2023 9:00 am    Post subject: Re: Mamiya Sekor E/EF lenses: Updated information on artapho Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:


Some additional images and information about the six Sekor E zooms ever produced will follow.

S


Thank you Stephan.

There is something I wonder about. The Mamiya-Sekor E 50mm 2.0 that I have has a three row diamond texture focusing ring, plastic too. Your Mamiya-Sekor E 50mm 2.0 red S a near gear wheel texture focusing ring. So next to the E-EF distinction there is also at least a lens exterior difference in the E range too. Herron tells the red S lenses are for the ZM camera. http://herron.50megs.com/ZE.htm. The S stands for? Unlikely a coating difference as S would be interpreted as Single coating, no marketing man would allow that. Shake warning in the cameras existed already before the ZM model. More electronic contacts on the S lenses? Or more computing done within the lenses?


PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2023 10:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
An interesting point of view from someone who've bought mamiya lenses and cameras in the 60's

"The camera and lenses were generally considered 3rd tier quality in the 35mm line up. First tier was Leica, Contax, and Nikon. Second tier was Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Konica, & Topcon. Third tier was Mamiya(35mm), Petrie, Yashica (35mm), & Ricoh. Fourth Tier was the East German line Pentacon (old designs but pretty high optical quality), and whatever Russia was trying to sell based on Pentacon designs. People were aware of the Chinese Seagull cameras, but no one had ever actually seen one.

The difference in quality between 2nd & 3rd tier, was virtually nonexistent. 2nd Tier companies had bigger advertising budgets, better distribution, and more vocal and verbal fanboys (though in those days the term didn't exist - Bokeh didn't either, we just called it 'out of focus')"

Link : https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3630051

It is still very interesting how history is working on people's evaluation over the time.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2023 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excellent info Like 1


PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2023 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
Very nice and straight to find info, I see you're missing sx 50mm f2, lens that someone praised to be better than 1.8 (maybe you?) ,I'm after one SX 50mm lens and dunno which one to get


I don't have an SX 2/50mm, and usually I don't write about stuff I haven't used myself. I have the older Auto Sekor 2/50mm, plus a few 1.8/55 lenses (two Auto Sekors with different optics, two Sekor ES with different barrel, and two identical SX). Plus two Tessar type 2.8/50 Auto Sekors which clearly are inferior to the faster double gauss Sekors.

Especially the 1.8/55 deserves some special attention since there are at least two different optical calculations (different diameter fo front lens and different performance). I have been writing about this before, including some test images.


Ernst Dinkla wrote:

There is something I wonder about. The Mamiya-Sekor E 50mm 2.0 that I have has a three row diamond texture focusing ring, plastic too. Your Mamiya-Sekor E 50mm 2.0 red S a near gear wheel texture focusing ring. So next to the E-EF distinction there is also at least a lens exterior difference in the E range too. Herron tells the red S lenses are for the ZM camera.

Yep, that's true. I got my own ZM at the age of 15y, and immediately fell in love with her (sort of). Clean and simple design, had everything essential and was easy to use. And three seemingly small, but important improvements over the ZE:

1) A and M mode (ZE was only A mode)
2) Small but useful grip (much easier to work with over an extended time)
3) Split image indicator is horizontal (ZE was diagonal which is useless for portraits)

Back then I didn't get any "S" lenses though since I already had a E 1.7/50 and a EF 1.4/50 "non-S".
BTW the only "S" lenses ever built were Sekor E 1.7/50 S and Sekor E 2/50 S.

Ernst Dinkla wrote:
The S stands for? Unlikely a coating difference as S would be interpreted as Single coating, no marketing man would allow that. Shake warning in the cameras existed already before the ZM model. More electronic contacts on the S lenses? Or more computing done within the lenses?

Back in the early 1980s everything was "S". It usually meant "Super" Or "Sports" (cars). Or "Special". But "S" it had to be.
Later replaced by "X" and later even by "i-" ...
I think they simply changed the design of the lens. Even today it still looks modern! And the focusing grip finally was made of rubber which was/is much nicer to work with. On the other hand the distance and aperture marks now were just printed (previously they were "engravings" filled with color, although "engraving" is probably not the proper English term)

kiddo wrote:
An interesting point of view from someone who've bought mamiya lenses and cameras in the 60's

"The camera and lenses were generally considered 3rd tier quality in the 35mm line up. First tier was Leica, Contax, and Nikon. Second tier was Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Konica, & Topcon. Third tier was Mamiya(35mm), Petrie, Yashica (35mm), & Ricoh. Fourth Tier was the East German line Pentacon (old designs but pretty high optical quality), and whatever Russia was trying to sell based on Pentacon designs. People were aware of the Chinese Seagull cameras, but no one had ever actually seen one.

The difference in quality between 2nd & 3rd tier, was virtually nonexistent. 2nd Tier companies had bigger advertising budgets, better distribution, and more vocal and verbal fanboys (though in those days the term didn't exist - Bokeh didn't either, we just called it 'out of focus')"

Thank you for that link! I can't contribute to how Mamiya was perceived in the 1960s in th US (don't remember that any more), but I can say somthing about Switzerland in the early 1980s!

1) Nikon clearly was "the" professional 35mm SLR brand, with Nikon Europe headquarters in Zurich / Switzerland

2) Canon was trying hard to get Number One with their New F1 and several incredible lenses (nFD 2.8/14mm L, 1.4/35mm L, 1.2/85mm L, 2.8/300mm L, 2.8/400mm L, 4.5/500mm L, 5.6/800mm L, 20-24mm L, 80-200mm L, 150-600mm L ...)

Professionals usually did prefer the Nikon F-2 over the Canon F-1, but they considered Canon Lenses to be better.

3) Leica R was system was "prestigious", but overpriced and underwhelming (SLR without changeable viewfinder, limited lens lineup) and therefore something for lawyers, teachers, doctors and the like (Leica M just hade been "reborn", but was virtually non-existant)

4) Minolta was selling very well as the typical SLR for serious amateurs. And I know some very successful Swiss photographers which were using Nikon outdoors ("nobody was gonna book me if I wouldn't come with a Nikon") and Minolta at home in the studio ("better lenses, better viewfinder").

5) Pentax wasn't as common as the others, but available in every photo store

6) Brands like Mamiya usually were sold by large distributors and at incredibly low prices (my father, around 1980, got the entire set of Mamiya ZE, 1.7/50, 3.5/28 and 3.5/135 for less than what the cheapest Minolta body would have cost at the local photo store)

7) Eastern Germany SLRs were used only at schools: Simple, easy-to-teach, metal body, and CHEAP! Never heard of Russian (let alone Chinese) cameras back then ...


kiddo wrote:
It is still very interesting how history is working on people's evaluation over the time.


Today we look at the lenses of a vintage camera system, and we reliably can judge their performance and their properties by looking/comparing thousands of images.

Back then most people were buying a certain camera (including professionals!).

That's not the same thing.

S


PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's an image of most of primes available as "Sekor E" - only the Sekor E 2/50mm is missing ...



Back row, from left to right: Mamiya Sekor E 3.5/50mm Macro, 3.5/135mm, 2.8/135mm, 4/200mm and 4/300mm.
Front row, from left to right: Mamiya Sekor E 2.8/35mm, 3.5/28mm, 2.8/28mm, 1.7/50mm and 1.4/50mm.


In the mean time I have also updated the information on all Sekor E zooms ever built. Here they are:



From left to right: Mamiya Sekor E 3.5-4.5/28-50mm, 3.5-4.5/35-70mm, 3.5-4.5/35-105mm, 3.8/70-150mm, 4/80-200mm and 3.8/80-200mm

Links to the respective information:

Sekor E 3.5-4.5/28-50mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/588-mamiya-sekor-e-28-50mm-f35-45
Sekor E 3.5-4.5/35-70mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/586-mamiya-sekor-e-35-70mm-f35-45
Sekor E 3.5-4.5/35-105mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/587-mamiya-sekor-e-35-105mm-f35-43
Sekor E 3.8/70-150mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/589-mamiya-sekor-e-70-150mm-f38
Sekor E 3.8/80-200mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/584-mamiya-sekor-e-80-200mm-f38
Sekor E 4/80-200mm: http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/585-mamiya-sekor-e-80-200mm-f4

While the information presented is far from complete, it gives some clues about the performance of these lenses compared to contemporary better known peers. I sooner or later will add some information about vignetting, distortion (important for zooms) and bokeh.

S

Last edited by stevemark on Wed Oct 18, 2023 9:27 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2023 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I guess ,you've got to be the only collector with these mamiya lenses all together, nice.
Glad to see the review of the 70-150mm and in some way, from 70-110mm might have same result as the longer 3.8 zoom regarding CA and sharpness.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2023 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
I guess ,you've got to be the only collector with these mamiya lenses all together, nice.

I'm still missing the Sekor E 2/50mm "non-S" though Wink

The story behind all that stuff is funny, sort of. When I was 15, Osawa collapsed and I was able to get a few nice lenses plus a ZM, all brand new, at low cost. That was a fine set to shoot girls and, to some extent, flowers and landscape. It included the 2.8/28, the 1.4/50, the 3.5/50 Macro and the 4/200mm Sekor E lenses, later complemented by a Sekor CS 3.8/80-200mm. Four years later I got my Minolta 9000 equipment, including lenses such as the AF 2.8/20mm, the AF 1.4/50, the AF 1.4/85, and the AF 2.8/200 APO. All the Mamiya stuff was given to a friend.

Around 2015 I started to look at used Mamiya 35mm SLRs again, but sure enough, I was outbidded quite a few time when trying to get a ZE-2 or a ZE-X. After a few futile attempts I finally got a ZE-2 plus 35-70mm zoom, and I was satisfied. Temporarily, at least.

One or two years later I successfully bid on another Mamiya, and went to pick up the camera. To my complete surprise the seller litteraly had three large boxes filled with multiple ZE, ZE-2, ZM and even ZE-X cameras, plus dozens of lenses. He all had collected them lately, outbidding everone (including me) on local auctions. However, now that he had "everything" (well, not exactly, but almost) he wanted to get rid of the stuff, because it was boring and he needed space for new adventures.

OK - long story short: I bought the boxes, un-boxed them at home and discovered that I now had most Sekor E lenses. Only the E/EF 2.8/35mm, 1.4/50mm, 2/50mm and 4/300mm were missing ... So I kept my eyes open, but for years didn't spot any of those missing lenses locally. Then, finally, in 2021 I found the EF 2.8/35mm, in 2022 the EF 1.4/50mm, and in 2023 the E 4/300mm. So maybe there's hope to find the last remaining missing lens, the Sekor E 2/50mm "non-S", in 2024 ... ?!

kiddo wrote:
Glad to see the review of the 70-150mm and in some way, from 70-110mm might have same result as the longer 3.8 zoom regarding CA and sharpness.

On 24 MP FF they are pretty similar, though the 3.8/80-200mm still has slightly more corner detail (both wide open and at f5.6). I suspect the differences might be bigger using 43 MP FF, but haven't checked it side-by-side.

S

EDIT if you think that guy was a bit funny - look at what others are collecting ... :
https://www.destoutz.ch/nikon_f_bodies.html
https://www.destoutz.ch/nikon_f_lenses.html

EDIT Here's another one - all the Sekor E tele- end telezoom-lenses on one image Wink. Just for fun ...!



S

Last edited by stevemark on Wed May 08, 2024 9:40 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2023 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've seen the f2 without S asking price 40€ ,for me it's way too expensive as I don't need it ,but is there any difference with the S version? I mean optically difference


PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2023 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
I've seen the f2 without S asking price 40€ ,for me it's way too expensive as I don't need it ,but is there any difference with the S version? I mean optically difference


I assume not, but with Mamiya you never know ... Wink

There are differences between my Mamiya CS 1.4/50mm (several samples) and the later EF, for instance, and so are between Sekor CS 3.5/50 Macro and Sekor E 3.5/50 Macro.

Only a test would show.

S


PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2023 7:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It seems to have a lot in Common with the Auto-Chinon 50mm 1:1.9


PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2023 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D1N0 wrote:
It seems to have a lot in Common with the Auto-Chinon 50mm 1:1.9


No. Focusing thread on the Mamiya is inverse compared to the Chinon. Chinon letters are printed, Mamiya letters are engravings filled with paint. Chinon has a much deeper recess on the front side (front lens is hidden deeper within the barrel). Certainly quite different lens barrels ...

S


PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2023 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I didn't say there were no differences


PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2023 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
I've seen the f2 without S asking price 40€ ,for me it's way too expensive as I don't need it ,but is there any difference with the S version? I mean optically difference


It would surprise me if there are optical design differences. The Z camera period
covers only four production years. Then there are the Mamiya QC caused differences that could deviate more.
IIRIC, I got the M-S E 50mm 2.0, sans S, for 1 Euro as a bycatch on a 5 Euro purchase of a Yashica ML 50mm 2.0 with a dented filter thread. Patience is your best friend.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2024 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Between 1984 and 1989 Rollei did sell "their" Roleinar MC 4/80-200mm which was produced by Mamiya. The indicated timeline as well as the specs do suggest that this "Rollei" lens has the same optical construction as the rare Mamiya Sekor E 4/80-200mm. I therefore was able to update the corresponding information on artaphot with a probable lens section:

http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/585-mamiya-sekor-e-80-200mm-f4

Please note that some of the indicated air spaces between some lenses probably aren't real, but a result of the way Rollei was depicting the lens sections!

S


PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2024 2:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
Between 1984 and 1989 Rollei did sell "their" Roleinar MC 4/80-200mm which was produced by Mamiya. The indicated timeline as well as the specs do suggest that this "Rollei" lens has the same optical construction as the rare Mamiya Sekor E 4/80-200mm. I therefore was able to update the corresponding information on artaphot with a probable lens section:

http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/e-ef-lenses/164-mamiya-sekor-e-ef-lenses/585-mamiya-sekor-e-80-200mm-f4

Please note that some of the indicated air spaces between some lenses probably aren't real, but a result of the way Rollei was depicting the lens sections!

S


Interesting info, there's a Auto Revuenon MCE 80-205mm f4.5 macro ,I thought all these revuenon would be mamiya made lenses but this one doesn't fit , maybe it could be osawa?


PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:

Interesting info, there's a Auto Revuenon MCE 80-205mm f4.5 macro ,I thought all these revuenon would be mamiya made lenses but this one doesn't fit , maybe it could be osawa?


Yeah, could be very well ... I've never dived into the Osawa stuff even though there are a few Osawa lenses here (28-50, 35-70,35-105, 60-300, 75-260, and two different 80-205). What I can say for sure is that eg the Osawa 28-50 and the Mamiya E 28-50 have differnt computations, and the same goes for the Osawa 35-105 vs the Mamiya E 35-105mm. Therefore I wouldn't be surprised if the Mamiya E 4/80-200mm would have optics differeing from the Osawa 4/80-205mm. But we can check that later on, looking at the reflections in both lenses ...

S


PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2024 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
kiddo wrote:

Interesting info, there's a Auto Revuenon MCE 80-205mm f4.5 macro ,I thought all these revuenon would be mamiya made lenses but this one doesn't fit , maybe it could be osawa?


Yeah, could be very well ... I've never dived into the Osawa stuff even though there are a few Osawa lenses here (28-50, 35-70,35-105, 60-300, 75-260, and two different 80-205). What I can say for sure is that eg the Osawa 28-50 and the Mamiya E 28-50 have differnt computations, and the same goes for the Osawa 35-105 vs the Mamiya E 35-105mm. Therefore I wouldn't be surprised if the Mamiya E 4/80-200mm would have optics differeing from the Osawa 4/80-205mm. But we can check that later on, looking at the reflections in both lenses ...

S


I think my father has an Osawa 4/80-205 somewhere. Because of low expectations, I've never tested it.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2024 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hallo stevemark,

many thanks for your continued work. For your Sekor lens section on artaphot I would like to see a little bit additional information about the Mamiya-Rollei-Voigtländer relationship.
I sometimes like to use my Rolleinar-MC 1:2.8 f=135mm on my vintage lens body (Sony A7RII) and still love it. It looks nearly as your MAMIYA SEKOR CS 135mm 1:2.8 but there are tiny differences maybe due to bayonett adjustments.
But optically the Rolleinar 135mm is a very good lens as you mentioned for the Mamiya lens too.

I also own the Rolleinar-MC 1:2.8 f=35mm (seems to be a clone of the MAMIYA SEKOR CS 35mm 1:2.8 ) which I do not like as much because the corners are simply not sharp enough for my landscape work.

The third Rollei-QBM-Bayonett lens, and this one I really like too, is the Voigtländer Color-Ultron 1.4/55 which seems to be a clone of the MAMIYA SEKOR SX 1.4/55. Not as sharp wide open but with a beautiful creamy look and really sharp stopped down.

I have found many informations about this relationship over the years maybe most often in this wonderful forum and if you like I can provide you photos of the three lenses for free for your website.

BG


PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2024 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
lightdreamer wrote:
Hallo stevemark,

many thanks for your continued work. For your Sekor lens section on artaphot I would like to see a little bit additional information about the Mamiya-Rollei-Voigtländer relationship.
I sometimes like to use my Rolleinar-MC 1:2.8 f=135mm on my vintage lens body (Sony A7RII) and still love it. It looks nearly as your MAMIYA SEKOR CS 135mm 1:2.8 but there are tiny differences maybe due to bayonett adjustments.
But optically the Rolleinar 135mm is a very good lens as you mentioned for the Mamiya lens too.

All information I'm aware of suggetst that the Rolleinar MC 2.8/135mm is a clone of the Mamiya Sekor SX 2.8/135mm, and NOT of the Sekor CS! That's supported by your statement that the Rolleinar is a very good lens - the Sekor CS is much lighter than the SX and has much more CAs too! The Sekor SX is the better lens ... Here's the Mamiya SX 2.8/135mm:
http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/mamiya-sx-objektive/568-mamiya-sekor-sx-135mm-f28

lightdreamer wrote:
I also own the Rolleinar-MC 1:2.8 f=35mm (seems to be a clone of the MAMIYA SEKOR CS 35mm 1:2.8 ) which I do not like as much because the corners are simply not sharp enough for my landscape work.


Same as above - the Rolleinar MC 2.8/35mm is a clone of the Mamiya Sekor SX 2.8/35mm (which in itself was arather outdated lens when new, and has quite a low performance):
http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/mamiya-sx-objektive/539-mamiya-sekor-sx-35mm-1-2-8


The Sekor CS 2.8/35mm is much better than the SX indeed, and pretty good even in todays standards.
http://www.artaphot.ch/mamiya/mamiya-cs-objektive/424-mamiya-cs-35mm-f28

lightdreamer wrote:

The third Rollei-QBM-Bayonett lens, and this one I really like too, is the Voigtländer Color-Ultron 1.4/55 which seems to be a clone of the MAMIYA SEKOR SX 1.4/55. Not as sharp wide open but with a beautiful creamy look and really sharp stopped down.

Should be an interesting lens if the user descriptioins on the net are right Wink. I have an Sekor ES 1.4/55mm (which proablöy has he same optics) ut can't use it on the A7 series since I don't have an adapter ...

S


PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2024 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
lightdreamer wrote:
Hallo stevemark,

many thanks for your continued work. For your Sekor lens section on artaphot I would like to see a little bit additional information about the Mamiya-Rollei-Voigtländer relationship.
I sometimes like to use my Rolleinar-MC 1:2.8 f=135mm on my vintage lens body (Sony A7RII) and still love it. It looks nearly as your MAMIYA SEKOR CS 135mm 1:2.8 but there are tiny differences maybe due to bayonett adjustments.
But optically the Rolleinar 135mm is a very good lens as you mentioned for the Mamiya lens too.

I also own the Rolleinar-MC 1:2.8 f=35mm (seems to be a clone of the MAMIYA SEKOR CS 35mm 1:2.8 ) which I do not like as much because the corners are simply not sharp enough for my landscape work.

The third Rollei-QBM-Bayonett lens, and this one I really like too, is the Voigtländer Color-Ultron 1.4/55 which seems to be a clone of the MAMIYA SEKOR SX 1.4/55. Not as sharp wide open but with a beautiful creamy look and really sharp stopped down.

I have found many informations about this relationship over the years maybe most often in this wonderful forum and if you like I can provide you photos of the three lenses for free for your website.

BG


I made a list some years ago:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60948500

It was based on the number of elements / groups for both Rollei and Mamiya and of lens diagrams if available. I have to say that the Rollei info was in general worse than that of the Mamiya Sekor SLR lenses.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2024 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ernst Dinkla wrote:

I made a list some years ago:

Many thanks Ernst, very helpful information.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2024 5:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:

Rolleinar-MC 1:2.8 f=135mm on my vintage lens body (Sony A7RII) and still love it. It looks nearly as your MAMIYA SEKOR CS 135mm 1:2.8.
All information I'm aware of suggetst that the Rolleinar MC 2.8/135mm is a clone of the Mamiya Sekor SX 2.8/135mm, and NOT of the Sekor CS

Same as above - the Rolleinar MC 2.8/35mm is a clone of the Mamiya Sekor SX 2.8/35mm

Sorry, but for some reason I mixed the Mamiya versions up.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1