View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
izvar
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 Posts: 252 Location: Moldova
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 2:26 pm Post subject: manual focus lens 50-58/1.2 in M42 |
|
|
izvar wrote:
Hi all.
my question:
In M42 mount, lens with focal length - 50,55,57,58 with 1.2 maximum aperture or faster?
exist or not? _________________ “The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat.”
― Confucius |
|
Back to top |
|
|
atiratha
Joined: 07 Mar 2009 Posts: 77 Location: Czech Republic, Prague
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
atiratha wrote:
Indeed, Tomioka 55/1.2 and I think Yashica was the same. There was I think a Chinon 55/1.2 and maybe Cosina 55/1.2 I think they were basically the same design. _________________ In my bag: Fuji X-T20, Samyang 12/2, Voigtlander Ultron 28/2, Voigtlander Nokton Classic 40/1.4, Mitakon Speedmaster 35/0.95, 7artisans 50/1.1, Canon LTM 100/3.5, Canon LTM 135/3.5. www.vh-photo.tk |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Yashinon 1.2/55. There's a Fujinon 1.2/55 too but not sure if that one was available in M42, might have been X-mount only. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
izvar
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 Posts: 252 Location: Moldova
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
izvar wrote:
Thank you!
As I know Fujinon 55 1.2 does not exist in M42 mount. _________________ “The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat.”
― Confucius |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2187 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
Quote: |
There's a Fujinon 1.2/55 too but not sure if that one was available in M42 |
I'm pretty sure it came only in X-mount.
The only 1.2 I know in m42 are tomiokas: Chinon, Cosinon, Revuenon, Yashinon (and yashinon ds-m), all the same, all 55/1.2 .
There should be also a Tominon 55/1.2, same as the above, but I never saw one.
Then there's porst 55/1.2, made by Cosina - if not tomioka - but I think it only came in pentax K mount, and porst 50/1.2, which is made by fuji and, I suppose, the same as the Fujinon mentioned by Ian: only X mount, again. _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2187 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
Oh, I forgot Minolta MD Rokkor 58/1.2: it's not M42, but it's adaptable to some other mounts, with a little work. _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
izvar
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 Posts: 252 Location: Moldova
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
izvar wrote:
Aanything wrote: |
Oh, I forgot Minolta MD Rokkor 58/1.2: it's not M42, but it's adaptable to some other mounts, with a little work. |
It was a question of principle. Only M42. otherwise we should mention absolutely all manufacturers of lenses
thanks that you remember me TOMIOKAs _________________ “The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat.”
― Confucius |
|
Back to top |
|
|
izvar
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 Posts: 252 Location: Moldova
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
izvar wrote:
Any German? CZJ, praktica, Pentacon, Meyer, Enna etc. ??? _________________ “The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat.”
― Confucius |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
No, there is a Pancolar 1.4/50 in PB mount.
Remember, these fast lenses are intended to be shot at full aperture, they are to give you a brighter viewfinder on an SLR in low light conditions and were never intended to be shot wide open. Always makes me wince when I see pictures shot with them wide open, they almost always look crap, what's the appeal in shots where 95% of the frame is out of focus? _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
IAZA
Joined: 16 Apr 2010 Posts: 2587 Location: Indonesia
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
IAZA wrote:
Is this look crap Ian? (shot with Chinon Tomioka 55/1,2 wideopen) not mine it's my friend's, he didnt want to sell it
AFAIK, 50ish F1,2 in M42 only made by Tomioka, which has various brand, Yashinon, Chinon etc. and their price sky rocketing everyday _________________ nex5, Olympus EPM1, yashica half 14, Canon eos 650 want to see samples of mine? please click My lenses
and My gallery
~Suat~ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
No, that's a good shot. But I do see lots that do look crap to me, I have never been fond of the 'look' of wide open shooting, it works in some circumstances and subjects but not in all, and I often think 'hmm. that would look better if they had stopped down to 2.8'. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 3702 Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
No, there is a Pancolar 1.4/50 in PB mount.
Remember, these fast lenses are intended to be shot at full aperture, they are to give you a brighter viewfinder on an SLR in low light conditions and were never intended to be shot wide open. Always makes me wince when I see pictures shot with them wide open, they almost always look crap, what's the appeal in shots where 95% of the frame is out of focus? |
Oops, Ian. Back to first class . _________________ ---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Why? It's just my opinion but I really don't like most shots I see wide open with fast lenses, a lot of them look crap to my eyes. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
anscochrome
Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 115 Location: Omaha, NE
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
anscochrome wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
Why? It's just my opinion but I really don't like most shots I see wide open with fast lenses, a lot of them look crap to my eyes. |
Well, I think the whole "bokeh" mania that has existed since@Michael C. Johnston published that series of articles about it in the mid 90's in "Darkroom and Creative camera techniques" magazine, has produced a whole bunch of uncreative crap in general. The world now has 88 trillion photos of sprigs of leaves and berries taken since then, all in the pursuit of the "magical bokeh". And those go hand in hand with your comment about shot wide open crap. The 58mm F 2.0 Biotar can produce some excellent photos stopped down to f 5.6, but I would bet most are purchased to add to the existing pool of over done, wide open, swirly bokeh crap. Does anyone really want to look at these photos, in say, 50 years? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ChromaticAberration
Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 819 Location: Portugal
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ChromaticAberration wrote:
Well if one buys a 1.2 aperture lens it will mostly be used at 1.2 otherwise a 1.4 or even a nice 1.8 that you can get for a fraction of the price would do the job just fine.
I recently got myself a 1.2, it is the most expensive lens I bought, €50 (yeah, I know, I'm a cheap bastard!), and I plan on making some nice nightlife shots with it. It's big and heavy and it looks huge on my crop sensor low end Canon body, if I want to shoot at 5.6 or even lower I won't take such a big heavy lens with me, a 1.4 or even an Helios would probably do the job just fine.
I look at 1.2 aperture lenses as purpose lenses, they should be used wide open, that is what they were made for anyway even if they are sharper at the same aperture than narrower maximum aperture lenses.
Then there is the simple fact that if you need to isolate your subject you need at least a 2.8 aperture, maybe 3.5 depending on how close is the background, narrower than that and it probably won't look as isolated as you were looking for. But yeah, I must agree that these days most of use do abuse of this technique when we could get much sharper photos were shallow DOF is not required. _________________ Body: Fujifilm X-E1
Landscapes: Samyang 12mm f/2 NCS CS
Macro: Vivitar Series 1 105mm Æ’/2.5
Portrait: Helios-44 58mm Æ’/2.0
Low-light: SMC Takumar 50mm Æ’/1.4
_________________
Marketplace feedback
_________________
a pнoтograpн ιѕ neιтнer тaĸen or ѕeιzed вy ғorce. ιт oғғerѕ ιтѕelғ υp. ιт ιѕ тнe pнoтo тнaт тaĸeѕ yoυ. one мυѕт noт тaĸe pнoтoѕ.†– нenrι carтιer-вreѕѕon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
anscochrome wrote: |
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
Why? It's just my opinion but I really don't like most shots I see wide open with fast lenses, a lot of them look crap to my eyes. |
Well, I think the whole "bokeh" mania that has existed since@Michael C. Johnston published that series of articles about it in the mid 90's in "Darkroom and Creative camera techniques" magazine, has produced a whole bunch of uncreative crap in general. The world now has 88 trillion photos of sprigs of leaves and berries taken since then, all in the pursuit of the "magical bokeh". And those go hand in hand with your comment about shot wide open crap. The 58mm F 2.0 Biotar can produce some excellent photos stopped down to f 5.6, but I would bet most are purchased to add to the existing pool of over done, wide open, swirly bokeh crap. Does anyone really want to look at these photos, in say, 50 years? |
Well said. The only lenses I have that I think are worth shooting wide open are slow ones like the Primagon 4.5/35 or Primotar 3.5/50. I really dislike all the shots with ultra thin dof and a sea of 'bokeh'. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
I disagree , every tool has place wide open , narrow dof has same than opposite thing. Plenty of examples show how magical a narrow dof and plenty of other bad example shows how not to use it all matter from photographer. I like really 1.2 and even 0.95 lenses. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
hoanpham
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 2575
Expire: 2015-01-18
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 8:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
hoanpham wrote:
ChromaticAberration wrote: |
Well if one buys a 1.2 aperture lens it will mostly be used at 1.2 otherwise a 1.4 or even a nice 1.8 that you can get for a fraction of the price would do the job just fine.
... But yeah, I must agree that these days most of use do abuse of this technique when we could get much sharper photos were shallow DOF is not required. |
+1 +1 +1 Well said
Weight does matter - as i used to have more than 1 for longer/whole day trip. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2187 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
I always seen faster lenses as a chance to let more light in, and then shooting with faster times/lower iso.
The thinning of dof always looked to me as an unavoidable side effect of having grater apertures: a side effect that can be used in a creative way, nevertheless.
I wouldn't spend three times what I pay a 1.4 for a 1.2 lens cause I never really needed that little extra speeed, but it makes sense to me that someone may be needing it.
Then there's the issue of aberrations in faster lenses, but my knowledge about that is really little. _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Smoli4
Joined: 01 Jul 2011 Posts: 606 Location: Haifa, Israel
Expire: 2013-06-07
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Smoli4 wrote:
my opinion is the difference between f1.8 and f1.4 is noticeable, but between f2 and f1.8 is more delicate, so i guess the same can be said about the difference between 1.4 and 1.2 - it should be less dramatic.
I would buy a fast lens if the price right, but i dont see myself investing in an f1.2 just that extra speed.
and if im after speed maybe a camera that handles high iso better should be on my mind |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ChromaticAberration
Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 819 Location: Portugal
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ChromaticAberration wrote:
Smoli4 wrote: |
my opinion is the difference between f1.8 and f1.4 is noticeable, but between f2 and f1.8 is more delicate, so i guess the same can be said about the difference between 1.4 and 1.2 - it should be less dramatic. |
Well that is mathematical but what i believe matters is the results "outside" in real life situations. Is that really so much different a 1.8 to a 1.4? At best I believe one is better using the 1.4 lens stopped to 1.8 and get the same DOF with sharper results.
Shallow DOF can be really nice but has to be well used, for portraiture I think it is almost essential for all else.. well, creativity has always been too subjective to judge. _________________ Body: Fujifilm X-E1
Landscapes: Samyang 12mm f/2 NCS CS
Macro: Vivitar Series 1 105mm Æ’/2.5
Portrait: Helios-44 58mm Æ’/2.0
Low-light: SMC Takumar 50mm Æ’/1.4
_________________
Marketplace feedback
_________________
a pнoтograpн ιѕ neιтнer тaĸen or ѕeιzed вy ғorce. ιт oғғerѕ ιтѕelғ υp. ιт ιѕ тнe pнoтo тнaт тaĸeѕ yoυ. one мυѕт noт тaĸe pнoтoѕ.†– нenrι carтιer-вreѕѕon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
1.2 dof effect is visible different than 1.4 lens I remember for Nikon and Konica lenses where this was very true.
no difference with Pentax and Tomioka _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
izvar
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 Posts: 252 Location: Moldova
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
izvar wrote:
Thank you all. To recap. I understand that in M42 we have one player - Tomioka!
Otherwise the topic turned over in the difference between 1.2 and 1.4, same intriguing, but perhaps subject for a special topic.
TNX! _________________ “The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat.”
― Confucius |
|
Back to top |
|
|
zakapior
Joined: 09 Aug 2011 Posts: 44 Location: Manchester
|
Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
zakapior wrote:
Aanything wrote: |
Oh, I forgot Minolta MD Rokkor 58/1.2: it's not M42, but it's adaptable to some other mounts, with a little work. |
I had it with EF mount, nice piece of glass with specific bokeh:) _________________ Canon 40D
Canon 18-55mm IS, Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm 3.5f, Yashica ML 50 1.4f, Yashica ML 35 2.8f, Samyang 85 1.4f, Helios 44-3
www.flickr.com/photos/zakapior |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vlousada
Joined: 11 Dec 2010 Posts: 345 Location: Portugal
|
Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vlousada wrote:
izvar wrote: |
Thank you all. To recap. I understand that in M42 we have one player - Tomioka!
Otherwise the topic turned over in the difference between 1.2 and 1.4, same intriguing, but perhaps subject for a special topic.
TNX! |
+1 _________________ Regards,
VITOR
-------
SELLING:
Please ask
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|