| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Is this lens a piece of crap or a hidden gem |
| It's crap - just look at all the scratches |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| It's a gem - just look at the crop |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| The crop's from a Leica-glass, good joke :) |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| It's an all right lens, even in this shape |
|
100% |
[ 8 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 8 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 11:17 am Post subject: Got MC Kaleinar 5H |
 |
|
Anu wrote:
I read something nice about this lens and decide to buy one. At least it wasn't expensive, if my worst nightmares come trough - I ordered it from the ex-east block. Well, It seems to work all right, though the aperture mechanism doesn't work that well if focused to infinity, the focus scale is nor working quite right and there are some small scratch marks in the back glass. Well, then I looked inside:
Aaargh, never have I seen so many scratches inside the lens. Did I get a horrible lemon, worthless of actual use? Interestingly, the scratches don't show if I view the lens from dead center:
Even more interesting is this:
Above shot wide open - I also made some shots closed and they seemed to give just as nice results. Maybe, just maybe, the scratches don't make this lens a total piece of crap 
I'll try to get some real action with it soon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
The model is certainly well respected, and your example shows it can deliver. But what on earth is going on with that middle element?! I guess the only way to know for sure is to shoot in the sun, disappointing though if not described correctly by the seller.
Edit: are you sure they are scratches and not some weird type of fungus (I've seen something similar before, I'm sure)?
_________________
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 |
|
|
no-X
Joined: 19 Jul 2008
Posts: 2495
Location: Budejky, Czech Republic
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
no-X wrote:
One of my Primoplans 58/1.9 has scratched inner lens element, but I found no difference in performance when compared to unscratched copy...
_________________
(almost) complete list of Helios lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:08 pm Post subject: More photos |
|
|
Anu wrote:
Here are some test shots I just took
Bokeh wide open and stopped down:
Then the mandatory pigeon shot:
And a crop:
I also took high contrast shots and briefly held the lens almost to the sun, yet nothing evil happened. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| ManualFocus-G wrote: |
Edit: are you sure they are scratches and not some weird type of fungus (I've seen something similar before, I'm sure)? |
I am cetain it is made by artificial means, not by forces of nature. I may open the lens one of these days, just to make sure all the elements are clean to happy  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mal1905
Joined: 30 Oct 2008
Posts: 1705
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mal1905 wrote:
It's hard to determine whether it's one of those linear type fungi, or simple over-exuberance with a Brillo pad!!!
The Kaleinar is a nice lens and is still an affordable option - the crop from the €50.00 note is proof that it's also quite capable of decent results.
_________________
Canon EOS 5D / EOS 40D
Carl Zeiss Jena: Flektogon 2.8/20, 2.4/35, 2.8/35, Pancolar 2/50, MC 1.8/50, MC 1.8/80, Triotar 4/135, Tessar 2.8/50, S 4/135 1Q, S 3.5/135, Sonnar 3.5/135 MC, 2.8/180, Biotar 2/5,8cm, 2/58, 1.5/75
Carl Zeiss: Distagon 2/28 T*, 1.4/35 T*, Ultron 1.8/50, Tessar 2.8/50, Planar 1.4/50 T* MM, 1.7/50 T* MM, 1.4/85 T* AEG, Sonnar 2.8/135 T*
Asahi Optical Co.: Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 4.5/20, 3.5/24, 3.5/28, 2/35, 3.5/35, 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 1.8/85, 2.8/105, 2.8/120, 2.5/135 I & II, 3.5/135, 4/150, 4/200, 4/300, 5.6/400, 4/45-125, 4.5/85-210, Super-Takumar 4.5/20, 3.5/24, 3.5/28, 2/35, 3.5/35, 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 2/55, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, 4/150, 4/200, 4.5/70-150, Fish-Eye-Takumar 4/17, Macro-Takumar 4/50, Super-Macro Takumar 4/50, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-Takumar 4/50, 4/100, Bellows-Takumar 4/100, Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 3.5/50, 2.4/58, 3.5/100, Asahi-Kogaku Tele-Takumar 3.5/135, Auto-Takumar 2.3/35, 3.5/35, 1.8/55, 1.8/55 (Zebra), 2/55, 2.2/55, 1.8/85, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, Takumar 4/35, 2.2/55, 2/58, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, 3.5/200, 5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 5.6/200, 6.3/300, SMC Takumar 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 2/55, SMC-M 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 2/50
Tomioka: Tominon 2/5cm, Auto-Chinon 3.5/21, 1.4/55, Auto-Yashinon DS-M 1.2/55 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
Crop of the scraches (and/or fungus):
Please note that this is not visible at all if looked directly in front of the lens, only from an angle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mal1905
Joined: 30 Oct 2008
Posts: 1705
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mal1905 wrote:
That's bizarre!!! I've never seen anything quite like that on an internal element, so perhaps it is a fungal growth after all?
_________________
Canon EOS 5D / EOS 40D
Carl Zeiss Jena: Flektogon 2.8/20, 2.4/35, 2.8/35, Pancolar 2/50, MC 1.8/50, MC 1.8/80, Triotar 4/135, Tessar 2.8/50, S 4/135 1Q, S 3.5/135, Sonnar 3.5/135 MC, 2.8/180, Biotar 2/5,8cm, 2/58, 1.5/75
Carl Zeiss: Distagon 2/28 T*, 1.4/35 T*, Ultron 1.8/50, Tessar 2.8/50, Planar 1.4/50 T* MM, 1.7/50 T* MM, 1.4/85 T* AEG, Sonnar 2.8/135 T*
Asahi Optical Co.: Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 4.5/20, 3.5/24, 3.5/28, 2/35, 3.5/35, 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 1.8/85, 2.8/105, 2.8/120, 2.5/135 I & II, 3.5/135, 4/150, 4/200, 4/300, 5.6/400, 4/45-125, 4.5/85-210, Super-Takumar 4.5/20, 3.5/24, 3.5/28, 2/35, 3.5/35, 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 2/55, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, 4/150, 4/200, 4.5/70-150, Fish-Eye-Takumar 4/17, Macro-Takumar 4/50, Super-Macro Takumar 4/50, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-Takumar 4/50, 4/100, Bellows-Takumar 4/100, Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 3.5/50, 2.4/58, 3.5/100, Asahi-Kogaku Tele-Takumar 3.5/135, Auto-Takumar 2.3/35, 3.5/35, 1.8/55, 1.8/55 (Zebra), 2/55, 2.2/55, 1.8/85, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, Takumar 4/35, 2.2/55, 2/58, 2.8/105, 3.5/135, 3.5/200, 5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 5.6/200, 6.3/300, SMC Takumar 1.4/50, 1.8/55, 2/55, SMC-M 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 2/50
Tomioka: Tominon 2/5cm, Auto-Chinon 3.5/21, 1.4/55, Auto-Yashinon DS-M 1.2/55 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkku
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 1416
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arkku wrote:
I think the coatings on the elements of this lens are very prone to scratching and rubbing off. Mine had fungus on it and when I removed the fungus, most of the coatings of the rear element simply came off together with it. Never seen anything like that happen with other lenses I've cleaned…
(Mine, too, was inadequately described by the seller. But it still wasn't expensive and I did get a discount. Mine, too, is sharp despite this.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 2190
Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
Actually I can second what Arkku said. The coating is really weak. Perhaps the inner don't have a hardener coating or something similar? Mine is a little scratched up, and I only use a very gentle optical glass cleaner. It doesn't hurt performance though... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| Arkku wrote: |
(Mine, too, was inadequately described by the seller. But it still wasn't expensive and I did get a discount. Mine, too, is sharp despite this.) |
Yes, very sharp lens indeed, at least on an APS-C. And I like the bokeh. Nice minimum focus distance too. There is some purple fringing and axial CA, but not too much.
Maybe the scratches are really some secret USSR holy grail of lens manufacturing and actually increase the IQ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gurdie
Joined: 29 Jul 2008
Posts: 997
Location: Finland
Expire: 2013-02-20
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gurdie wrote:
My Kaleinar-5N arrived today from Belgium (member Fotomachi).
Here´s some quick samples wide open. (D700 full frame body).
_________________
Markku
Give me two hours a day of activity, and I'll take the other twenty-two in dreams.
― Salvador Dali
----------------------------------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
| themoleman342 wrote: |
| Actually I can second what Arkku said. The coating is really weak. Perhaps the inner don't have a hardener coating or something similar? Mine is a little scratched up, and I only use a very gentle optical glass cleaner. It doesn't hurt performance though... |
I have two Pentacon 100 with similar back and one Pancolar 80mm performance is not effected too. I like really your sample shoots they are stunning! Perhaps your digital body is the reason , but I think you must be happy with this lens.
I had same time a Leica-R 90mm f3.8 II vesrsion if I remember well I didn't see any significant difference from Kaleinar.
_________________
-------------------------------
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 |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
I have two Pentacon 100 with similar back and one Pancolar 80mm performance is not effected too. I like really your sample shoots they are stunning! Perhaps your digital body is the reason , but I think you must be happy with this lens.
I had same time a Leica-R 90mm f3.8 II vesrsion if I remember well I didn't see any significant difference from Kaleinar. |
I made some more shots - wide open the center quality is excellen. Corners and extreme edges (on APS-C) are not as good, but that's irrelevant, considering the uses for the lens. Center sharpness is rock solid both at minimum focus and infinity.
Also also shoot the 50 euro bill with the CZJ teleconverter and the results were excellent - no need to stop down.
No, this lens is not as good as CZJ 135/3.5 when it comes it image quality, but it is still very nice lens to use, and being 2/3 stops faster than the Sonnar I can see myself using it when the amount of light is a bit more limited.
One more test shot:
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 10:40 pm Post subject: Re: Got MC Kaleinar 5H |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
| Anu wrote: |
| I read something nice about this lens and decide to buy one. At least it wasn't expensive, if my worst nightmares come trough - I ordered it from the ex-east block. Well, It seems to work all right, though the aperture mechanism doesn't work that well if focused to infinity, the focus scale is nor working quite right and there are some small scratch marks in the back glass. |
Who did you buy it from? I had (and just managed to return) a similarly scratched Kaleinar from grizzly33bear.
Having said that, I had not one or two, but THREE samples of this lens, all of them with scratches on the back glass. My guess is that probably the Arsenal factory used some sort of grease that evaporates and condensates on the rear glass, and users disassembling this lens and attempting to clean it - more than once. My proof is a brand-new (in sealed box) Kaleinar-5N that has already something fuzzy on its rear glass (no scratches though).
As to whether or not to keep the lens is really up to you. The scratches don't seem to affect image quality at all, although it would not be possible to resell a lens in such condition. If you paid $45-50, I would say keep it; otherwise, I wouldn't bother.
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anu
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 879
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:05 am Post subject: Re: Got MC Kaleinar 5H |
|
|
Anu wrote:
| aoleg wrote: |
Who did you buy it from? I had (and just managed to return) a similarly scratched Kaleinar from grizzly33bear.
Having said that, I had not one or two, but THREE samples of this lens, all of them with scratches on the back glass. My guess is that probably the Arsenal factory used some sort of grease that evaporates and condensates on the rear glass, and users disassembling this lens and attempting to clean it - more than once. My proof is a brand-new (in sealed box) Kaleinar-5N that has already something fuzzy on its rear glass (no scratches though).
As to whether or not to keep the lens is really up to you. The scratches don't seem to affect image quality at all, although it would not be possible to resell a lens in such condition. If you paid $45-50, I would say keep it; otherwise, I wouldn't bother. |
It's an eBay-purchase, not from grizzly33bear (I seem to remember that grizzly33bear has a bad reputation here?).
The theory you present is interesting.
I am not going to return the lens - it was cheap enough and as you said, the image quality is not a problem
When I have the energy to do so, I'll open the lens up and have a closer look of the scratches. Maybe I'll even leave my own mark to this lens and add some more of them
Anyhow, yesterday I realized why the focus scale is off - this particular lens was originally meant for Nikon-mount, and somene has converted it into m42. As the lens focuses properly, this is absolutely no problem for me (as for me lenses are for using, not for collecting (dust)). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:59 am Post subject: Re: Got MC Kaleinar 5H |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
| Anu wrote: |
| Anyhow, yesterday I realized why the focus scale is off - this particular lens was originally meant for Nikon-mount, and somene has converted it into m42. As the lens focuses properly, this is absolutely no problem for me (as for me lenses are for using, not for collecting (dust)). |
This should not be the reason, as Kaleinar was supplied with two factory mounts, Nikon and M42. Needless to say, the factory M42 mount properly accounts for the register difference.
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arkku
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 1416
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:46 am Post subject: Re: Got MC Kaleinar 5H |
|
|
Arkku wrote:
| Anu wrote: |
| aoleg wrote: |
Who did you buy it from? I had (and just managed to return) a similarly scratched Kaleinar from grizzly33bear.
|
It's an eBay-purchase, not from grizzly33bear (I seem to remember that grizzly33bear has a bad reputation here?). |
The funny thing is, I also bought mine from grizzly33bear… But back (years ago) then it was a she with a good reputation, now it seems to be a different he with a bad reputation selling with the same name. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
