View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
kyrcy
Joined: 23 Feb 2015 Posts: 124
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 4:45 am Post subject: Opinions about M42 lenses needed |
|
|
kyrcy wrote:
Which of following M42 lenses are worth buying?
Wide angle:
Porst Super Weitwinkel auto N 28mm f/2.8 S/N:7xxxxx
Ringfoto Auto 28mm f/3.5 S/N:2xxxxxx
MC Super Albinar Auto 28mm f/2.8 S/N:7xxxxx
Pentacon auto MC 29mm f/2.8 S/N:4xxxxxx
Auto Chinon 35mm f/2.8 S/N:5xxxxx
Soligor 35mm f/2.8 S/N:2xxxxxx
Super Travenar 35mm f/2.8 S/N:7xxxxx
Telephoto:
Pallas Magenta AM 135mm f/2.8 S/N:2xxxxx
Auto Exaktar 135mm f/2.8 S/N:7xxxxxx
Soligor Auto Telephoto 135mm f/2.8 S/N:3xxxxx
Auto-Revuenon MC 135mm f/2.8 S/N:8xxxxx
Auto Albinar Special 135mm f/2.8 S/N:2xxxxx
Optomax 135mm f/3.5 S/N:5xxxxx
Prinzflex Auto Reflex 135mm f/3.5 S/N:7xxxxx
Optomax 200mm f/4.5 S/N:5xxxx
Raynox Auto Tele 200mm f/3.5 S/N:0xxxxxx
Auto Albinar Special 200mm f/3.5 S/N:7xxxxx
I could not find much information about most of the lenses so any opinions are welcome.
I am mostly interested about image quality without having to stop down the lens a lot.
Last edited by kyrcy on Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:37 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
Of all the lenses you mention, I have personal experience with only one: the Albinar 28mm f/2.8. Mine also had a "macro" mode, of sorts, and was in Canon FD mount. The lens I owned wasn't very good. It just wasn't capable of producing sharp photos. This was back in my slide shooting days, so I can only compare it to other lenses I had at the time. It definitely wasn't as sharp as my Canon 50mm f/1.8. I also owned an Albinar 80-200mm f/3.9 zoom back then, which was a surprisingly good lens. Much better than the 28mm. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3439 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
I only have experience with Pentacon auto MC 29mm f/2.8 but S/N: 98xxxxx.
I have two copies of that lens, one never sharp, but the other is a very nice and sharp lens.
So you need some luck with that lens, no general advice from me |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7794 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
the Super Travenar was almost certainly the worst lens I've ever had, but it could have been a bad copy. It's a lens that turns up under many different names.
Soligor 35 / 2.8 - mine is a decent lens, but there are many variations of style and manufacturer of the Soligors - the same goes for the 135 / 2.8 - mine is a Tokina 135 / 2.8 which is excellent, a very good lens.
The same goes for the other lenses on the list, they are branded by a retailer or a distributor - the Prinzflex is the store brand of Dixons in the UK - and they are lenses sourced from various manufacturers, basically they are a lottery because the retailers would change suppliers at any time as long as they had "a 135 / 2.8" to sell.
I have a good Optomax lens, a very good Chinon and a very poor one, and a lot of Soligor - the majority are good to excellent. _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
exaklaus
Joined: 11 Aug 2009 Posts: 1633 Location: Niederrhein, Germany
Expire: 2011-12-02
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 12:14 pm Post subject: Re: Opinions about M42 lenses needed |
|
|
exaklaus wrote:
kyrcy wrote: |
Which of following M42 lenses are worth buying?
Wide angle:
Porst Super Weitwinkel auto N 28mm f/2.8 S/N:7xxxxx
Ringfoto Auto 28mm f/3.5 S/N:2xxxxxx
MC Super Albinar Auto 28mm f/2.8 S/N:7xxxxx
Pentacon auto MC 29mm f/2.8 S/N:4xxxxxx
Auto Chinon 35mm f/2.8 S/N:5xxxxx
Soligor 35mm f/2.8 S/N:2xxxxxx
Super Travenar 35mm f/2.8 S/N:7xxxxx
Telephoto:
Pallas Magenta AM 135mm f/2.8 S/N:2xxxxx
Auto Exaktar 135mm f/2.8 S/N:7xxxxxx
Soligor Auto Telephoto 135mm f/2.8 S/N:3xxxxx
Auto-Revuenon MC 135mm f/2.8 S/N:8xxxxx
Auto Albinar Special 135mm f/2.8 S/N:2xxxxx
Optomax 135mm f/3.5 S/N:5xxxxx
Prinzflex Auto Reflex 135mm f/3.5 S/N:7xxxxx
Optomax 200mm f/4.5 S/N:5xxxx
Raynox Auto Tele 200mm f/3.5 S/N:0xxxxxx
Auto Albinar Special 200mm f/3.5 S/N:7xxxxx
I could not find much information about most of the lenses so any opinions are welcome.
I am mostly interested about image quality without having to stop down the lens a lot. |
Maybe none of them? _________________ my Ebay auctions
Canon 5D II,
Fuji GW690III, Fuji G617, Fujifilm X-E1
Bessaflex TM
Tachihara 4"x5"
Summilux-R 1:1,4/50
Canon FD 85mm 1:1,2
Color-Heliar 75mm F2.5 SL
www.autoselbstfotografie.de
www.classic-cameras-and-lenses.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 12:22 pm Post subject: Re: Opinions about M42 lenses needed |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
[quote="exaklaus"]
kyrcy wrote: |
Which of following M42 lenses are worth buying?
Maybe none of them? |
Yes, my thoughts too. _________________ "I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
spiralcity
Joined: 02 Oct 2008 Posts: 1207 Location: Chicago, U.S.A
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
spiralcity wrote:
The Chinon should perform adequately, the price point should be reasonable, so you really cant lose. _________________ Nikons : F4-EM-FG-FE2-FA-EL-FTN-N2020-N70-F Nikkorex
Fujica: ST605N-ST701-ST705-ST705W-ST801-ST901-AZ1-AX-3
Chinon: CE4s-CM4s-CM5
Pentax: ME-Soptmatic
Ricoh:XR6
Pentax- K10D
Lenses- M42's-Nikon F mount, Pentax PK
FREE PHOTOGRAPHY COURSE |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marcusBMG
Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1318 Location: Conwy N Wales
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marcusBMG wrote:
Quote: |
Maybe none of them? |
Maybe any of them if the price is sufficiently negligible? For myself I have drifted away from reseller brands/nameplates except where the price is low enough to prompt my curiosity. The "good" lenses, I can suggest, are mostly known about. Browsing Pentax forums reviews and other sites like allphotolenses can provide pointers. I suggest being prepared to pay a bit more for more of a known quantity eg a tokina made 28mm: tokina RMC/Vivitar (fixed mount and TX mount 37xxxx serials)/others. 135mm lenses tend to be pretty consistent in quality, I think a good standard design was well established and not so difficult to make. But I would still point you to the old Soviet bloc 135mm's ie Jupiter's, Carl Zeiss Jena (and a quick mention of my Panagor 135mm which I like). _________________ pentax ME super (retired)
Pentax K3-ii; pentax K-S2; Samsung NX 20; Lumix G1 + adapters;
Adaptall collection (proliferating!) inc 200-500mm 31A, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f4.
Primes: takumar 55mm; smc 28mm, 50mm; kino/komine 28mm f2's, helios 58mm, Tamron Nestar 400mm, novoflex 400mm, Vivitar 135mm close focus, 105mm macro; Jupiter 11A; CZJ 135mm.
A classic zoom or two: VS1 (komine), Kiron Zoomlock... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008 Posts: 6622 Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
I'd save up a little more money and buy lenses with known good performance, especially if you need decent performance at wide apertures.
That said, if you fancy a bit of fun, buy some of them but only at very low prices. That way you can evaluate yourself and sell on without much loss if they are rubbish.
There ARE some gems out there e.g. Tokina made Soligor 300/5.5 preset lens. Look out for the Miranda 24/2.8 too, that one is pretty decent from f/4. _________________ Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
none of them , you not able to sell it if you get bored or just for peanuts , I bought many cheapos like these to try them out. All went free to vintage market to my friend, I spent money and never get back a single cents. If you buy more respected lenses and you get bored you able to sell them easily , very low price okay on a few items, but don't buy many of them.
At F8 all lenses will be usable in list , you can expect at least ok sharpness and details ,lower contrast , that is all. _________________ -------------------------------
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 |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 11040 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
There is some kind of value in trying many lenses. Looking through many lenses gives experience most photographers of the past never had. We need every advantage to get past their attainment. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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 |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
There is some kind of value in trying many lenses. Looking through many lenses gives experience most photographers of the past never had. We need every advantage to get past their attainment. |
You know, I've inadvertently experienced this, recently. Over the past several months, I've bid on and won several small camera systems and invariably they came with little-known aftermarket lenses. Ones that I have little, if any, interest in using. A while back, out of curiousity's sake more than any other, I decided to try all these obscure lenses out, so I mounted those for which I had adapters to my NEX and took some test shots with them. I was frankly amazed. In terms of resolution only, I found that all of the lenses held up very well in my tests.
Good thing I did that. So now, when I put them up for sale on eBay, I can include sample photos taken with each one. Maybe it'll help getting rid of them all. Well, one can hope . . . _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sceptic
Joined: 01 Jun 2013 Posts: 255
|
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
sceptic wrote:
As others before me have already said, those lenses are bottom-of-the-barrel and shouldn't be bought for their superior optical properties.
I've bought my share of similar lenses, often as part of a kit containing a more desirable lens (Takumars, for instance), but now try and avoid them. They take up vaulable real estate in my cupboards and are hard (if not impossible) to sell at a reasonable price.
They do however make for perfect "training dummies" if you want to practice lens repair/re-lubing/aperture blade cleaning (I always recommend people to practice on lenses they can afford to ruin).
Also, sometimes they come with a nice quality filter attached which can be worth more than the lens itself (I've bought junk lenses with B+W filters attached, more than doubling its value) _________________ Sony A7R and wildly varying flora of lenses |
|
Back to top |
|
|
buerokratiehasser
Joined: 12 Jun 2011 Posts: 470
|
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
buerokratiehasser wrote:
Most of them are relabels, so it's hard to tell without photos.
But is the Raynox (never had one) in the same clunk class?
Sight unseen i'd probably go for Pentacon 29 if only because it's a well known lens. Porst Super Weitwinkel maybe though I never had one, could be a good lens relabeled.
From the teles well, good 135/2.8 are very common anyway. The Super Albinar maybe. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
valjo
Joined: 10 Oct 2008 Posts: 68 Location: Bulgaria
|
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
valjo wrote:
My Recomendation (personal used):
Optomax 200mm f/4.5 _________________ Canon D60
3.5/135 Jupiter 37A |
|
Back to top |
|
|
valjo
Joined: 10 Oct 2008 Posts: 68 Location: Bulgaria
|
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
valjo wrote:
Optomax 4.5/200mm, f=4.5
_________________ Canon D60
3.5/135 Jupiter 37A |
|
Back to top |
|
|
spiralcity
Joined: 02 Oct 2008 Posts: 1207 Location: Chicago, U.S.A
|
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
spiralcity wrote:
I guess the question is what expectations do you have? I have used the Chinon and it's OK, so I disagree with most of the negative comments on that particular lens. I own an Optomax 400mm which is OK, I spent 20.00 dollars for it. I don't buy glass to make a profit by reselling it, I usually just keep my glass, I do not consider 20.00 a huge loss if a lens doesn't meet my expectations. To be honest, if I spent 20.00 on a lens I wouldn't expect much from it at all, it would just be a curiosity buy. If 20.00 is a huge sum to you, then save up for better glass, but if your buying one of these lenses just for the fun factor, then go for it.
Optomax 400 with 2x doubler.
_________________ Nikons : F4-EM-FG-FE2-FA-EL-FTN-N2020-N70-F Nikkorex
Fujica: ST605N-ST701-ST705-ST705W-ST801-ST901-AZ1-AX-3
Chinon: CE4s-CM4s-CM5
Pentax: ME-Soptmatic
Ricoh:XR6
Pentax- K10D
Lenses- M42's-Nikon F mount, Pentax PK
FREE PHOTOGRAPHY COURSE |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|