Soligor 2.8/35mm - sample shots

[Olivier]

In a batch with a Fujica ST-701.



1-

2-

3-

4- wide open at 2.8


5- at f16


6-


7- wide open


8- at f8


9- at f16

[Keysersoze27]

really like # 6.

[luisalegria]

Looks very good.

I have this one. I'd say its one of the better Tokina T4 primes

[Olivier]

[fish4570]

that will do, too.

[woodrim]

I just came across this Soligor 35mm. It was my 35mm lens from back in the seventies. It's a T4 mount, but for Minolta. Is ebay the best source for an M42 T4 adapter? Is it even worth bothering? I have a Zeiss Flektogon 35mm, so I wonder if I should bother.

[Olivier]

I think your Flek is a 2.8/35, so it's as fast as this Soligor.
I would say it's worth to get a T4 to M42 adapter if cheap.

Ask Alex (aka hk300) if he has some to sell.

Edit : I have just made a comparison between the Flektogon 2.8/35 alu version and this Soligor 2.8/35.
Shot handheld with Eos 40D set at Iso 200.
First observation : with the same shooting settings, the flek pictures were all overexposed. I corrected this before posting these comparisons.

1- at f2.8 :


2- at f8 :


3- at f16 :


So, this Soligor astonished me.
I can say that this Soligor is sharper, more constraty and more colourful than this old Flektogon 2.8/35 alu version.

Cheers,

[woodrim]

Thank you, Olivier. I agree that your test shows a good comparison by the Soligor. However, the contrast issue may have been influenced by the over exposure. I too have that problem with my Flek. I typically shoot with a -4/3 AV adjustment with my M42 lenses. While they individually expose differently, that adjustment seems to work well. I use aperture mode exposure, but I have even seen n exposure difference between lenses when using manual with all factors equal.

My Flek is the f/2.4 version. Honestly, I don't see any discernible difference with the lens when shooting at distance, but it really shines at close up and medium distance. This is likely true with many lenses that they all have their strengths, or sweet spots, and is the reason we see little difference when doing comparative assessments like yours. I have taken pictures to compare my Flek 35mm, MIR 37mm, and Tak 28mm; and the results are too close to make any conclusive judgment. So when it comes to selecting a lens, I find myself picking the Flek more times than not. The focusing on the Tak is more difficult, and the aperture arrangement on the MIR I find awkward. Those two lenses will probably be sold.

So why would I want to go through any trouble to make use of the Soligor? Simple, I'm sentimental. I used the Soligor starting 35 years ago and remember it even performing well for weddings I did. It was my go-to wide angle at the time because anything wider distorted too much. I'd like to see how it performs now on my digital, but then after doing that, I may find the memory to be better than the reality of today. Thanks for your images and comments. Here is a picture from my Flek - I will say with some confidence that the Soligor is not likely to be able to match this, and is the reason why I love it so much..

[Olivier]

Sure Woodrim.
I'm sure your Flek performs very well.
That's why I mentionned "this" flek. I mean that my flek is a 2.8 alu version and is an old lens. It should explain what I observe.

and I'm still happily surprised by the Soligor's results.

So, don't hesitate and find a T4 to Eos adapter on ebay (or ask Alex "hk300" on this very forum), or a cheap lens sold with this adapter.

There is this lens but not cheap with delivery costs...
http://cgi.ebay.fr/raro-zoom-Vivitar-90-230mm-ano-1971-montura-T4-M42_W0QQitemZ180388387458QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_186?hash=item29fffc5a82

T-4 mount seem difficult to find.
A link for T-4 to Canon Click here to see on Ebay

[woodrim]

I will look. Thank you for the leads.

[martinsmith99]

That Soligor looks very decent. Nice bokeh & sharpness.

The later 2.4 flek seems to be sharper than the 2.8 from samples I've seen. I've the 2.4 and it's great for close ups.

[woodrim]

Yes, close ups, exactly my point. I wouldn't doubt if the Soligor compares quite well at landscape type pictures. The strength of the Flek is close-to-medium distance.

By the way, what is the going rate for an M42 T4 adapter?

[woodrim]

Yesterday I received an adapter ring from China. Not the one I ordered, but one with glas that allows use of old Miniolta MC/MD mounts on my Sony. I had purchased the one without glass that would have permitted me to use my old Minlota mounts for macro or short distance only. Oh well. So I took the opportunity to mount my Soligor 35mm and give it a try. I also tried out several other lenses I have had in waiting. WHat surprised me most was the performance of the adapter. I had expected poor results due to introducing the additional glass, but it was actually quite good.

The Soligor performs pretty well. What really surprised me was the performance of my Vivitar 28mm Close Focus. Wow, is that lens sharp - even with this cheap adapter. I look forward to using a Close Focus directly on my camera and comparing it to my Flek. Another lens I tried also performed very well, but was more expected to do so - the Vivitar Series 1 90mm f/2.5.

[woodrim]

Reviving this thread instead of creating a new one. I finally found an M42 T-4 adapter for my Soligor 35mm. I could have bought a straight M42 35mm lens for less, but the sentimental guy I am, I wanted to try this old lens that served me well back in the 70s and 80s. I suppose on digital it's a whole different game because I don't remember the bokeh being quite like this.

I find the lens very sharp when I nail the focus. The contrast is there, but I'm less thrilled with the color. The bokeh seems to have an appearance like one of the artistic filters in Photoshop - like a painting effect. I'm one that doesn't consider many bokeh bad, just different, and most can be used creatively. I did a walk around in my yard today just to get some samples. It's no Flek, but I'll still want to get some comparison shots. I suspect it might compare well at distance. Here are some representative pictures from my 35 year old revived lens... and how I wish I got that flying wasp in focus.

[Olivier]

I understand for the wasp.
What a monster !