| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3255
Location: The Netherlands
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 2:10 pm Post subject: My experience with 100mm / 105mm lenses |
 |
|
caspert79 wrote:
As I've played around with quite a few lenses in the 100/105mm range and like to share my experience with them. Hopefully it's useful for some of you, and it would be interested if other members can share their experiences as well!
ISCO Isconar mm f/4
 Isconar521 by devoscasper, on Flickr
Very, very small lens. It has quite beautiful rendering though. Nice for bokeh shots, especially when paired with extension rings. I don't know whether it's good for landscapes (probably not the best).
Canon FD 100mm f/4 macro
Mine looks terrible, but I payed 50€ for it. It's a pretty good performer, and probably overlooked by many:
 canonfd100mmf4DSC00023 by devoscasper, on Flickr
Fujinon-T 100mm f/2.8
Quite a nice lens, but unfortunately hard to find in Europe. Backgrounds render a bit less smooth than for example the Topcor RE 100/2.8 or Minolta MC/MD 100/2.5 (5/5), but quite sharp and contrasty, nice colors, good flare resistance and interesting vintage rendering.
 FujinonT10028488 by devoscasper, on Flickr
Kaleinar 5H 100mm f/2.8
 Kaleinar5HJ by devoscasper, on Flickr
Nice portrait lens with beautiful bokeh. For close subject images almost indistinguishable from for example the Minolta 100/2.5 (5/5), but for landscapes the Minolta wins hands down.
Minolta MC/MD 100mm f/2.5 (5/5)
 dsc07815589 by devoscasper, on Flickr
Very good performer, both as portrait- and landscape lens. I used the MD-III which is very compact and has a double-segment built-in hood, which is quite nice and the latest MC version with the same lens formula. It's more bulky than the MD-III, but the tactile sensation and mechanical smoothness is better IMO, that's why I finally settled for this version. Some say that the MD-III is optically a tiny bit better, but personally I never noticed. In a landscape test, it matched the Canon EF 100/2 (except @ f/2 of course), even in the corners.
Olympus OM Zuiko 100mm f/2.8
 Zuiko100f28402 by devoscasper, on Flickr
Mechanically beautifully made and compact lens. I found it to be very sharp wide open from wide open (in the center), it needs some stopping down to match the corners of the Minolta 100/2.5. Bokeh is good, but not as good as the Minolta's. Still regret that I sold it though.
Topcor RE 100/2.8
 tOPCOR10028DSC00209 by devoscasper, on Flickr
Just click a few times on the image to see how it performs wide open. Mechanically it's just as beautiful. In my opinion, a must have lens.
Tokina AT-x 100mm f/2.8 AF macro IF
 TokinaATX10028IF_6 by devoscasper, on Flickr
This is the lesser known version with Internal Focus. I'm not sure if it ever sold on the European market, but in Japan you can find it almost for free. It has a metal barrel, maximum reproduction is 1:2. It is a darn sharp lens by the way, and on the Japanese market you find these almost for free. Bokeh of the Bokina and Tamron 90/2.5 is a bit smoother though.
Minolta MD 100mm f/4 macro
 _DSC0730 by devoscasper, on Flickr
One of the best deals when it comes to vintage macro lenses. Ultra sharp, lightweight, little CA's, well priced.
Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 (Xenotar version)
 nikkorP10525DSC09859 by devoscasper, on Flickr
I think enough has been said about this lens. It never disappoints. I had several versions of it. The later ones, at least the Ai-S, seems to be better in the corners. I also like it's built-in hood.
Minolta AF 100mm f/2.8
 DSC03824 by devoscasper, on Flickr
Great lens: very sharp. Good at all distances, for portrait, landscapes and macro. Metal barrel (at least the early ones).
Nikkor Ai-s 105mm f/1.8
 NIKKORAIS10518_2 by devoscasper, on Flickr
Great piece of quite bulky glass. Comparable with the 105/2.5 but with additional bokeh  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Posts: 7610
Location: Hong Kong
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
 
Where is the Trioplan? 
_________________
The best lens is the one you have with you.
https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 904
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
Very interesting. Thanks for the effort!
_________________
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 |
|
|
kypfer
Joined: 27 Sep 2017
Posts: 524
Location: Jersey C.I.
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kypfer wrote:
| calvin83 wrote: |
| Where is the Trioplan? |
Haha! ... my first thought as well
Nice to see the Fujinon-T included ... a long-time under-utilised favourite of mine.
You might want to keep your eyes open for a Soligor 105mm f/2.8.
Mine's in T4 mount, sourced primarily for use on my Miranda and Exa cameras, I can use it with M42 cameras (or adaptors) as well, but a slight modification has allowed me to fit a TX mount and also use on my Pentax K-mount cameras |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doc Sharptail
Joined: 23 Nov 2020
Posts: 1235
Location: Winnipeg Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Doc Sharptail wrote:
That 100mm MD Macro f4 is something else!
Great image.
-D.S.
_________________
D-810, F2, FTN.
35mm f2 O.C. nikkor
50 f2 H nikkor, 50 f 1.4 AI-s, 135 f3.5 Q,
50 f2 K nikkor 2x, 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 A/I-s, 35-105 3.5-4.5 A/I-s, 200mm f4 Micro A/I, partial list.
"Ain't no half-way" -S.R.V.
"Oh Yeah... Alright" -Paul Simon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3255
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| kypfer wrote: |
Haha! ... my first thought as well
Nice to see the Fujinon-T included ... a long-time under-utilised favourite of mine.
You might want to keep your eyes open for a Soligor 105mm f/2.8.
Mine's in T4 mount, sourced primarily for use on my Miranda and Exa cameras, I can use it with M42 cameras (or adaptors) as well, but a slight modification has allowed me to fit a TX mount and also use on my Pentax K-mount cameras |
I knew I'd forgot one. Nice lens. This is the Sun made Soligor f/2.8.
Very sharp stopped down to f/4, but a little soft wide open:
 Soligor10528_1 by devoscasper, on Flickr
 Comparisonwideopenflat by devoscasper, on Flickr
| calvin83 wrote: |
| Where is the Trioplan? |
Maybe one day. The prices are a bit steep. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KEO
Joined: 27 Sep 2018
Posts: 776
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KEO wrote:
Great roundup! Thanks.
If you're still interested in this focal length, I suggest the Nikon Series E 100mm f2.8 and the Meyer Orestor 100mm f2.8. The Nikon in particular is incredibly inexpensive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3255
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| KEO wrote: |
Great roundup! Thanks.
If you're still interested in this focal length, I suggest the Nikon Series E 100mm f2.8 and the Meyer Orestor 100mm f2.8. The Nikon in particular is incredibly inexpensive. |
I’ve had the Nikon E, but by I didn’t like the build quality. There are two versions though, the other one is apparently better in this regard. Optically good lens though.
Another lens I love in the fairly cheap category is the Pentax -M 100mm f/2.8, which is excellent on almost all fronts. I will post some images tomorrow.
The Meyer I’ve never had, but I’m happy to try. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 4114
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| caspert79 wrote: |
Minolta MD 100mm f/4 macro
One of the best deals when it comes to vintage macro lenses. Ultra sharp, lightweight, little CA's, well priced.
|
| Doc Sharptail wrote: |
That 100mm MD Macro f4 is something else!
Great image.
-D.S. |
The MD 4/100mm Macro is - in technical terms - a much more perfect lens than the e. g. the MC/MD 3.5/100 Macro. I have been using it "for fun" for some work related to golden monstrance which around 1750 was made in Lucerne/Switzerland for the (then) large monastery of Muri.
Such objects are pretty demanding when it comes to longitudinal CAs ("fringing"), and apochromatic lenses would be best (previously I've been using e. g. the Mamiya Sekor A 4/120mm Macro for such objects). Since the space was quite limited I needed a shorter focal length, though. The Minolta proved to be as good as I had expected after testing several 100 mm Macro lenses side-by-side. No lateral or longitudinal CAs at all, and excellent resolution on 43 MP FF A7RII. At f4 contrast is sligtly lower, from f5.6 on it's perfectly useable (but depth-of-field ususally is too small). Here I was using f11 as a compromise between resolution (diffraction) and depth-of-field.
Overview:
100% crop as indicated above:
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 11113
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
 caspert79!
(Also missing is Takumar. )
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3255
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Great results indeed Stephan! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 4114
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
@ casper79:
How did you convert the RAW data for your "TTen Euro" images ...?!? When I did my test of 50mm Macro lenses (shooting a CHF 10.-- Swiss banknote) my 2015 Photoshop refused to convert the RAW data, AND its was warning me that "reproducing banknotes was prohibited"!
After I first shock things got even weirder: My photoshop was years older than the Swiss banknote I had used as a testbed for the macro lenses! How did it get to know the data for the (newer) banknote?!? Pretty strange, especially since I was not online while trying to convert my RAW data ...
Anyway, using the (even older) Sony software for RAW conversion proved to be successful, finally ...
Results were here: http://forum.mflenses.com/4-short-macro-lenses-compared-surprising-results-t84178,start,25.html
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3255
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Yeah, I had to use a workaround. Open them in a general viewer at 100% view, use snipping to cut out a section, and then paste that into photoshop.
It’s an annoying job, but bills are great to test lenses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 4114
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| caspert79 wrote: |
Yeah, I had to use a workaround. Open them in a general viewer at 100% view, use snipping to cut out a section, and then paste that into photoshop.
It’s an annoying job, but bills are great to test lenses. |
Ah OK ... good old Sony IDC (probably from around 2014) was working too ... Next time I probably will stick to old Swiss stamps from around 1900 ... 1940. They have lots of detail too
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ultrapix
Joined: 06 Jan 2012
Posts: 584
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2023 9:10 pm Post subject: Re: My experience with 100mm / 105mm lenses |
|
|
Ultrapix wrote:
| caspert79 wrote: |
As I've played around with quite a few lenses in the 100/105mm range and like to share my experience with them. Hopefully it's useful for some of you, and it would be interested if other members can share their experiences as well!
|
All good lenses, the Isco surprised me |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doc Sharptail
Joined: 23 Nov 2020
Posts: 1235
Location: Winnipeg Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2023 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Doc Sharptail wrote:
| KEO wrote: |
Great roundup! Thanks.
If you're still interested in this focal length, I suggest the Nikon Series E 100mm f2.8 and the Meyer Orestor 100mm f2.8. The Nikon in particular is incredibly inexpensive. |
I found the series "E" 100mm f2.8 to be quite optically pleasing. Unfortunately, there is a "however" caveat that should be mentioned here. The mechanical plastic/nylon bearing/contact surfaces in these lenses will wear fast with heavy use. This becomes increasingly evident with rapid changes in temperature. It doesn't seem to affect the optical system in any way that I can see, but handling becomes a completely different story...
-D.S.
_________________
D-810, F2, FTN.
35mm f2 O.C. nikkor
50 f2 H nikkor, 50 f 1.4 AI-s, 135 f3.5 Q,
50 f2 K nikkor 2x, 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 A/I-s, 35-105 3.5-4.5 A/I-s, 200mm f4 Micro A/I, partial list.
"Ain't no half-way" -S.R.V.
"Oh Yeah... Alright" -Paul Simon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3255
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2023 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| Doc Sharptail wrote: |
| KEO wrote: |
Great roundup! Thanks.
If you're still interested in this focal length, I suggest the Nikon Series E 100mm f2.8 and the Meyer Orestor 100mm f2.8. The Nikon in particular is incredibly inexpensive. |
I found the series "E" 100mm f2.8 to be quite optically pleasing. Unfortunately, there is a "however" caveat that should be mentioned here. The mechanical plastic/nylon bearing/contact surfaces in these lenses will wear fast with heavy use. This becomes increasingly evident with rapid changes in temperature. It doesn't seem to affect the optical system in any way that I can see, but handling becomes a completely different story...
-D.S. |
Also, it seems that prices of the E series have gone up, and I often see the Xenotar type 105/2.5 (especially the pre-Ai versions) at very attractive prices, probably because Nikon sold lots of them.
As promised, some more information on another lens:
SMC Pentax-M 100mm f/2.8.
 PentaxM10028203 by devoscasper, on Flickr
This is a great lens for different reasons. First of all, it is sharp wide open and has smooth bokeh. Also corner performance is already very good wide open, which is great for landscapes. Mechanical quality is very good as well, despite its weight of only 225 (!) grams. This is significantly lighter than the already very small Minolta MDIII 100/2.5 (310 grams).
CA performance is average, not perfect, not bad, but definitely much better than the Pentax-M 85/2. There's one weakness I came accross a few times, which is ghosting under certain light circumstances. The next image shows both the great resolution (click image) of the lens, and ghosting in the left upper corner.
 AndlauPentaxM10028149 by devoscasper, on Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eggplant
Joined: 27 May 2020
Posts: 517
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2023 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eggplant wrote:
A nice comparison, and interesting to see the Tokina AT-x 100mm f/2.8 AF macro IF be a part of it. What makes them being 'given away'?
_________________
UK |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3255
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2023 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| eggplant wrote: |
| A nice comparison, and interesting to see the Tokina AT-x 100mm f/2.8 AF macro IF be a part of it. What makes them being 'given away'? |
From what I understand, Internal Focus was quite a unique feature at the time, but it was not entirely understood in the market. At the same time, this design caused its bokeh to be less soft than for example the Tamron’s. Therefore it was never a commercial success. On top of that, there’s very little information about it on the internet, so little people know about its existence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 11113
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2023 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
| caspert79 wrote: |
...
As promised, some more information on another lens:
SMC Pentax-M 100mm f/2.8.
pic
This is a great lens for different reasons. First of all, it is sharp wide open and has smooth bokeh. Also corner performance is already very good wide open, which is great for landscapes. Mechanical quality is very good as well, despite its weight of only 225 (!) grams. This is significantly lighter than the already very small Minolta MDIII 100/2.5 (310 grams).
CA performance is average, not perfect, not bad, but definitely much better than the Pentax-M 85/2. There's one weakness I came accross a few times, which is ghosting under certain light circumstances. The next image shows both the great resolution (click image) of the lens, and ghosting in the left upper corner.
pic |
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KEO
Joined: 27 Sep 2018
Posts: 776
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2023 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KEO wrote:
| caspert79 wrote: |
| eggplant wrote: |
| A nice comparison, and interesting to see the Tokina AT-x 100mm f/2.8 AF macro IF be a part of it. What makes them being 'given away'? |
From what I understand, Internal Focus was quite a unique feature at the time, but it was not entirely understood in the market. At the same time, this design caused its bokeh to be less soft than for example the Tamron’s. Therefore it was never a commercial success. On top of that, there’s very little information about it on the internet, so little people know about its existence. |
I've got one of those too, and I think it's very good. I mostly use it on my GFX for macro, but it's works well as a portrait lens too.
Another lens I like in this range is the old Takumar 105mm 2.8, the silver and black version with the preset aperture. Not perfect by any means, but the character and bokeh are both really pleasing. The later SMC Takumar 105 2.8 is a better lens technically, but it also has less character. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamaeolus
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2977
Location: Eugene
Expire: 2015-08-20
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2023 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jamaeolus wrote:
Well done! My very first vintage lens was an ISCO 100 f4. Came in the lttle blue leather look cardboard tube,and other than a focus throw that was just a bit stiff it seemed like new. I was hooked.
_________________
photos are moments frozen in time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleAlex
Joined: 27 Nov 2008
Posts: 1776
Location: L'vov (Western Ukraine)
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2023 11:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LittleAlex wrote:
I have tons of them in my possession. One of the most beloved is Olympus OM 100/2.8
My most recent acquiring was Vivitar 100/2.8 (Sun) which I have not been able yet to test properly. But even the very first samples were very encouraging? as I described in neighboring theme:
http://forum.mflenses.com/vivitar-100mm-f2-8-t10912,start,25.html
_________________
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept" - © H. Cartier Bresson |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010
Posts: 3255
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2023 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
| LittleAlex wrote: |
I have tons of them in my possession. One of the most beloved is Olympus OM 100/2.8
My most recent acquiring was Vivitar 100/2.8 (Sun) which I have not been able yet to test properly. But even the very first samples were very encouraging? as I described in neighboring theme:
http://forum.mflenses.com/vivitar-100mm-f2-8-t10912,start,25.html |
This is a different lens than the Sun made Soligor 105/2.8 right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LittleAlex
Joined: 27 Nov 2008
Posts: 1776
Location: L'vov (Western Ukraine)
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2023 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
LittleAlex wrote:
| caspert79 wrote: |
| This is a different lens than the Sun made Soligor 105/2.8 right? |
Quite possible, however I completely am not certain. Somebody claims that that Vivitar 100/2.8 is "is a Sonnar-type lens consisting of 5 elements in 3 groups":
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4117197
_________________
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept" - © H. Cartier Bresson |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
