Mitsuki 135mm / 2.8 [good no namer it seems]

dakoo · Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Posts: 603

Guys belongs to a friend.. Shot with it today, surprised me with the results.
I find it quite good to handle, isn't too heavy, colors come out quite nice & saturated.

Very Windy Day : 35km/hr, so the sharpness was hard to get

All images shot at JPG+RAW, These are resized jpgs, unprocessed, sharpened for web by IRFANVIEW.
WB: DAYLIGHT.
ISO: 100
Mount : m42
Camera : 350D
Most shots at f/8, f/2.8

I have send Attila big images too. He will publish it soon.

Now the three big one

I have never shot for a lense test/ samples before. Please let me know what u think.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Great samples! You made samples in good lights, this is perfect! What is missing some longer distance shoots , because these are mainly close up shoots.

dakoo · Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Posts: 603

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/mfl_club_members/dakoo/mitsuki_135mm_f2_8/

Hi-res images.

I think this lens about same than any third party not better not worst. Looks made by Cosina or Tokina to me.

stingOM · Expire: 2012-12-27

I was looking at this lens and found a useful reference here:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/365610@N21/discuss/72157612867438339/

I quote from the site:

Amateur Photographer reference:
"The test report I ordered from Amateur Photographer, dated July 12th 1978, covers the Mitsuki 28/2.8, 135/2.8, 200/3.5 and 300/5.5. It states that "the new lenses have been designed with the aid of the Facom 203-38 computer in Tokyo and constructed at the Tokina factory".

So, Tokina built, not a re-badged Panagor. I won't reproduce the whole report - there may be copyright issues there - but if anyone has a question, please feel free to ask.

AP used a 6-step grading system for lens performance then, ranging from Poor, Fair and Average, to Good, Very Good and Excellent.

The 28/2.8 was rated Good for Overall Performance, Definition, Image Contrast and Balance of Aberrations. Best central definition was at f/5.6 and overall at f/4.

The 135/2.8 did better, scoring Very Good in all four criteria with Best Central at f/11 and overall at f/8.

My 200mm f/3.5 was rated Very Good for all except Balance of Aberrations where it dropped to Good. Best Central was f/11 and Overall was at f/8.

The 300/5.5 was Good throughout and once again best at f/8 to f/11.

All were reported to be very easy to focus with a turn of about 230 degrees on the focussing ring and with Focus correct at infinity. The two shorter lenses have stops from f/2.8 to f/22. The 200 from f/3.5 to f/22 and the 300 from f/5.5 to 22 (but with half-stops beteween f/5.5 and f/16). All aperture rings were smooth and easy to operate.

Construction of all four lenses is all-metal and all were rated as well-built. Apart from the 28, all have sliding hoods built-in. "