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

Three-way 35mm M42 lens shootout
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2011 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Excalibur wrote:
RioRico wrote:
Yes, the Primagon is the best of these, with better detail almost everywhere. We can expect it to be best wide-open because its aperture is tighter than the others. We can expect it to be better at f/22 because that is closer to its "sweet spot". I should use mine more. [Exakta mount, fitted to a PK camera, the adapter ground down for infinity focus.]

Yes, a shoot-out between Primagon 35/4.5 and SMC Takumar 35/3.5 and any other slow 35's that may appear. I would expect the results to be 1) Takumar 2) Primagon 3) whatever. But who knows, ?quien sabe?


+1 for the Tak, also with the Tak if Ian could use a Canon FD 35mm f.2.8 or Hexanon 40mm f1.8 (not expensive lenses), it would be a very good standard to compare other 35mm lenses.


I know that Tak quite well from my art college days, very sharp and technically great images but I always found it to have a 'cold' character - great for architectural shots though, which is what I used it for.

I'm very happy with the Primagon as I like the vintage character, it's not the ideal 35mm for me though, hence buying the Mir-1 and Petri 35mm.

I would love a Hexanon 1.8/40, they are starting to get quite expensive now though and I don't want to hack one to make it work on an EOS.

Funny you should mention the Canon FD, I just bought a Canon FL 2.5/35 for 7.19ukp which I thought was a bit of a bargain. I don't know anything about this lens but I figured with a 2.5 max aperture it could be interesting to play with and a good candidate for conversion to EOS mount as I paid so little for it.

Anyone know anything about the FL 2.5/35?


erm Oh well I find Tak lenses a bit warm (maybe it's the film I use)..but that canon FL 2.5/35 was a bargain, I haven't gone back before the FD lenses , but it could be your new reference point for sharpness.


By 'cold' I didn't mean in colour rendition, just that it doesn't have any distinctive character as I recall it, but I am going from memory 15 years ago using a Spotmatic with BW film.


PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2011 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I know that Tak quite well from my art college days, very sharp and technically great images but I always found it to have a 'cold' character - great for architectural shots though, which is what I used it for.

I'm very happy with the Primagon as I like the vintage character, it's not the ideal 35mm for me though, hence buying the Mir-1 and Petri 35mm.

I find the SUperTak 35/3.5 neither 'warm' nor 'cool', just a very good 'normal' lens on my Pentax K20D when thin DOF isn't an issue. (If it IS an issue, I grab the Nikkor-O 35/2, but that's another story. Or if I want pixie-dust, I grab the Isco Westron 35/2.8.)

And yes, the Primagon has a nice vintage character, reminiscent of the Meyer Helioplan 40/4.5 and Makro-Kilfit 40/3.5. I also have the Mir-1, quite sharp but too under-used. It needs to go onto my lens-of-the-day schedule. Actually, I like it best on my Praktica FX3 with the waist-level VF -- the Mir's aperture ring numbers are most visible when viewed looking down.

And just before I left on my current extended journey, I inadvertently bought TWO Petri CC 35/2.8's -- I must decide which to alter for a PK mount. Then I will sell the other one. By the time I return, it should be worth something... Wink


PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2011 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The white buildings stand out well in those Primagon pictures, and they retain the white colour rather than being bleached out or reflecting the surrounding colours. Obviously you and the camera have got the exposure right, or damn near, for the white buildings, and the lens has done its job nicely.


PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2011 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RioRico wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I know that Tak quite well from my art college days, very sharp and technically great images but I always found it to have a 'cold' character - great for architectural shots though, which is what I used it for.

I'm very happy with the Primagon as I like the vintage character, it's not the ideal 35mm for me though, hence buying the Mir-1 and Petri 35mm.

I find the SUperTak 35/3.5 neither 'warm' nor 'cool', just a very good 'normal' lens on my Pentax K20D when thin DOF isn't an issue. (If it IS an issue, I grab the Nikkor-O 35/2, but that's another story. Or if I want pixie-dust, I grab the Isco Westron 35/2.8.)

And yes, the Primagon has a nice vintage character, reminiscent of the Meyer Helioplan 40/4.5 and Makro-Kilfit 40/3.5. I also have the Mir-1, quite sharp but too under-used. It needs to go onto my lens-of-the-day schedule. Actually, I like it best on my Praktica FX3 with the waist-level VF -- the Mir's aperture ring numbers are most visible when viewed looking down.

And just before I left on my current extended journey, I inadvertently bought TWO Petri CC 35/2.8's -- I must decide which to alter for a PK mount. Then I will sell the other one. By the time I return, it should be worth something... Wink


Hmm, I'm collecting Petris so I might take one off your hands if the copy I just bought myself isn't great.

I have a K-mount 135mm labelled Petri, I think it's a Chinon.

I would love a Helioplan. Same guy I bought the Primagon from had one, but it had a stuck aperture and went for more than the Primagon did so I let it go...

I can see a lot of similarities between the character of my Pentacon 2.8/28, Pentacon 4/200, Meyer Primotar 3.5/135 and this Primagon. The Primotar isn't as sharp as the others though, which is really annoying as the bokeh and overall look is great, I'm going to eventually get a 135 Oreston to replace it.


PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2011 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
The white buildings stand out well in those Primagon pictures, and they retain the white colour rather than being bleached out or reflecting the surrounding colours. Obviously you and the camera have got the exposure right, or damn near, for the white buildings, and the lens has done its job nicely.


Shot in RAW and deliberately underexposed half a stop, the Primagon seems to work very well with the EOS 10D metering, probably means the 4.5 aperture is a true 4.5 and a lot of other manufacturers have overstated the true speed of their lenses when labelling them 3.5 or 2.8...


PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 3:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
RioRico wrote:
And just before I left on my current extended journey, I inadvertently bought TWO Petri CC 35/2.8's -- I must decide which to alter for a PK mount. Then I will sell the other one. By the time I return, it should be worth something... Wink

Hmm, I'm collecting Petris so I might take one off your hands if the copy I just bought myself isn't great.

If you're still dissatisfied in five weeks, send me a note. I will be in a selling mood! (Hey, we're in Santa Fe. My other bought a pile of fine Navaho and Hopi jewelry. It must be paid for. Ratz. At least I get a fine subtle silver-with-petrified-wood ring out of the deal.)


PostPosted: Mon May 23, 2011 3:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You'll see my follow-on 35mm shootout shortly:

Primagon 4.5/35 vs Petri 2.8/35 vs Mir-1 2.8/37

The Unistar has gone in the 'spare parts' box, I'll keep the Rolmax for the timebeing, although it will probably go back on ebay before long...

Hopefully I can also successfully convert the Canon FL 2.5/35 I've bought, make it a four-way shootout.


PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2011 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Shot in RAW and deliberately underexposed half a stop, the Primagon seems to work very well with the EOS 10D metering, probably means the 4.5 aperture is a true 4.5 and a lot of other manufacturers have overstated the true speed of their lenses when labelling them 3.5 or 2.8...

What?!?!? Lensmakers stretching the truth?!?!? Can that happen????? Wink

I know, all manufacturing has tolerances, all the numbers might be within 5% or so of the truth. I have read that my Pentax FA50/1.4 is actually more like a 51/1.5. Of course, I am suspicious of Fifty's that are labeled as f/1.7-1.8-1.9-2.0-2.2. How different are those numbers, really? But, misstating the aperture by 1+ f-stops?!?!? Outrageous!!!!

So, two questions arise.

1) What sort of optical lab setup would I need to determine the truth?
2) Does that really matter, or should I just be happy with lens results?


PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2011 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RioRico wrote:
But, misstating the aperture by 1+ f-stops?!?!? Outrageous!!!!

So, two questions arise.

1) What sort of optical lab setup would I need to determine the truth?
2) Does that really matter, or should I just be happy with lens results?


I have a Korean-made Kalimar 28-200mm f/whatever zoom -- think it's a f/3.9 or f/4 or something. Doesn't matter.

I've known about this lens for years, and used to own one back when I was a camera dealer -- even took some test shots with it back then to try it out. It was a surprisingly decent performer. So anyway, about a year or so ago, on a whim, I bought another one -- off eBay, mostly because it was going for dirt cheap.

Well, one of the first things I noticed when I took it outdoors to play around with it was that the allegedly constant f/whatever aperture it has was not. My camera's meter needle dropped by one full f/stop when I zoomed from 28mm to 200mm.

My outrage was similar to yours, I suspect. Cool Why, how dare they misrepresent their product in such a fashion! Yeah, whatever.

So anyway, the special optical lab setup I used to determine light falloff with that lens was just my camera's meter.

If you have a set of calipers to measure your lens's front element diameter, mathematically at least you can get pretty close to finding out some info about your lens. Focal length = aperture x primary element diameter. The primary element will usually be the front element, since that's where the light enters the optic. So a 50mm f/2 lens for example would have to have a front element diameter of 25mm. In theory. This works great with telescopes, not so well with lenses, especially wide angle ones.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2