Komura 135mm f/2.8 vs. Vivitar 135mm f/2.3 Series 1

[woodrim]

I had to alter the original Exacta mount enough to be able to hold the Komura lens to my camera. It's not ideal and definitely puts the lens at a disadvantage, but I was able to get off some pictures. I chose my Series 1 135mm lens as one to compare to. Since the reason I purchased the Komura was the wonderful bokeh I've observed in other member's posts, the Series 1 seemed a good choice for comparisons. The Series 1 lens has eight blades to its diaphragm while the Komura has 12.

All pictures were shot at 100 ISO, metered manually, and are out of the camera jpegs. I used Photoshop to adjust levels and make consistent across all pictures. No sharpening has taken place post camera, nor has there been any correction for CA. While I did use a tripod, you will see some differences with the Komura image positions for two reasons - my wrestling to hold the lens to the front of the camera moved the tripod, and differences in position of lens relative to center. It is very likely that the Komura was not held perfectly in the center for any of the pictures. Pictures were taken at f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, and f/8.

I must give the Series 1 the award for sharpness. While I have an opinion, I'll leave the bokeh judgment up to you. A link to the full sized image will follow each picture.

Series 1 f/2.8

http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/image/127889674/original

Komura f/2.8

http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/image/127889675/original

Series 1 f/4

http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/image/127889676/original

Komura f/4

http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/image/127889677/original

Series 1 f/5.6

http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/image/127889678/original

Komura f/5.6

http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/image/127889679/original

Series 1 f/8

http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/image/127889680/original

Komura f/8

http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/image/127889682/original

[luisalegria]

I'd give the Series 1 the award for bokeh as well.

[Excalibur]

[woodrim]

[fatdeeman]

It's a little smoother, in isolation both look fine but side to side you can see elements blend together more seamlessly with the Vivitar.

[revers]

The Vivitar is a little sharper on the subject.

[woodrim]

Yes, Ron, you're right. That was evident at all apertures, but the bokeh is more subjective. I was surprised to see the Vivitar's bokeh compare so well given the difference in blades; 8 vs 12, but the Vivitar has also been known for good bokeh. To be fair, I need to do this again when I have the mount worked out. I have more 135mm lenses than you can shake a stick at, so there's also an opportunity to do a mass comparison.

[cooltouch]

I liked the Vivitar's bokeh better as well, but this was because it was noticeably softer than the Komura's. The Komura's bokeh has rather sharp edges that detract somewhat I think.

For me it's hard to say which is sharper at this image magnification, but the Vivitar definitely seems to have better color saturation.

[woodrim]

[vulko]

Won the very same Vivitar on ebay recently. cant wait to get the lens, the results look amaizing. Very pleasant bokeh. Komura's bokeh look synthetic to me.
What's the price on this Komura?

[woodrim]

vulko: $24.50 including shipping. It is in excellent condition, looking better than I thought from the pictures. The S1 lens canbe very expensive if M42, much less for other mounts, but still not cheap. Which did you get? I think you will find a little too much CA, but correctable and very sharp with obviously good bokeh. The Komura is a beautifully built lens with an amazing 12 blade aperture.

[vulko]

Won the Vivitar in an LN condition on ebay for 83 euros. With shipping it would be like 100. Of course no compare to the Komura's price, but IQ is always worth bucks.

[djmike]