| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
eccs19
Joined: 15 May 2010
Posts: 118
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:29 pm Post subject: Takumar 28mm not a sharp lens? |
 |
|
eccs19 wrote:
I've got a small collection of Taks, and yesterday I took a few shots with my 28mm. I used it, as being a 28mm, even being close to the subject, it should have a decent DOF, so I figured it would help me keep things sharp. Two of the better ones I took are not super sharp as I would have expected. I took a couple other shots with my 100mm tak, and it would have a shallower DOF, but those shots are a LOT sharper. Is the 28mm not normally that sharp? My variant is the Super Takumar. I think it's the third generation of this lens. First 2 pics are with the 28mm, and the last is with the 100mm for reference.
_________________
Camera(s) - Pentax *istD & K7
Takumar Lenses - 28mm f3.5, 55mm f1.8, 100mm f4.0 1:2 macro, 105mm f2.8, 200mm f3.5, 85-210 Zoom f4.5
Tamron - 300mm f5.6, 500mm mirror f8
Pentax 50mm f2.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 4060
Location: Charleston
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
From those first two pictures I can't tell that it isn't sharp. Have you looked it over to see if the focus was off - look at the gravel?
I presume it was not at infinity, which would suggest another problem. I had one that I sold a few months ago since buying a 28mm that I liked much better. I found the Takumar difficult to focus. Maybe it was the slowness of the lens, but I think not because I have much more success with current 28mm even stopped down. For me it just didn't feel right, but when I hit the focus well and examined pixels, it was sharp.
_________________
Regards,
Woodrim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Torture for all lens infinity distance , closer shoots like this means no much trouble all handle it pretty well.
_________________
-------------------------------
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 |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
| Torture for all lens infinity distance , closer shoots like this means no much trouble all handle it pretty well. |
Generally this is true in the centre, although some wide angles perform better from corner to corner at infinity. For example, the Distagon 28/2.8 is a good example 
_________________
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: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
| ManualFocus-G wrote: |
| Attila wrote: |
| Torture for all lens infinity distance , closer shoots like this means no much trouble all handle it pretty well. |
Generally this is true in the centre, although some wide angles perform better from corner to corner at infinity. For example, the Distagon 28/2.8 is a good example |
I guess reason is because they designed for infinity shoots, but interesting this lens is not same good at least at center.
_________________
-------------------------------
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 |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
| ManualFocus-G wrote: |
| Attila wrote: |
| Torture for all lens infinity distance , closer shoots like this means no much trouble all handle it pretty well. |
Generally this is true in the centre, although some wide angles perform better from corner to corner at infinity. For example, the Distagon 28/2.8 is a good example |
I guess reason is because they designed for infinity shoots, but interesting this lens is not same good at least at center. |
Oops I meant that the lens is superb from corner to corner at infinity. But at close focus the center is even better with crap corners
This Tak looks alright IMO!
_________________
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 |
|
|
Spotmatic
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Posts: 4045
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Spotmatic wrote:
As was already told: the 28mm is harder to focus because on today's focusing screens almost everything looks sharp from front to back (screens have a much bigger DOF). With +100mm lenses focusing is much easier because the picture literally 'snaps' into focus.
Also, it's my experience that there are not many old wide angles which are sharp wide open. There are only a few exceptions and the 28mm f/3.5 Takumar is not one of them.
_________________
Peter - Moderator
Pentax K-5 + Pentax 645 + Canon 5D + Bessa RF 10,5cm Heliar, and a 'little' bag full of MF lenses. The lens list is * here *.
My fast 80s: Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 83mm f/1.9 - Super-Takumar 85mm f/1.9 - FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited - Cyclop 85/1.5 (Helios-40 innards) - Komura 80mm f/1.8 - Meyer Görlitz Primoplan 7,5cm 1:1.9 - Carl Zeiss Jena 80mm f/1.8 Pancolar - Canon 85mm f/1.8 S.S.C. - Canon 85mm f/1.2 S.S.C. Aspherical |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fatdeeman
Joined: 13 Jun 2009
Posts: 780
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fatdeeman wrote:
It's hard to tell sharpness at these sizes, the photos are nice looking though, did you use fill flash?
_________________
- Dave
www.lensporn.net
www.flickr.com/photos/fatdeeman/
DSLR: Canon EOS 60D, Samsung GX-1S (Pentax *ist DS2)
Mirrorless: Panasonic DMC-G1, Sony NEX-5N
Compact: Canon PowerShot G3
Lenses:
Wide: Tokina RMC 28mm F/2.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 28mm F/2.5, Sun Optical 28mm F/2.5, Super paragon 28mm F/2.8, Sigma filtermatic 24mm F/2.8, Fujinon 35mm F/2.8, Sun Optical 35mm F/2.8
Standard: Industar 50-2, Helios 44-2, Helios 44M, Helios 44M-3, Pentax-M 50mm F/1.4, Pentax-M 50mm F/1.7, Pentax-M 50mm F/2, Ricoh 50mm F/1.7, Chinon 50mm F/1.7
Tele: Pentacon 135mm F/2.8, Pentacon 200mm F/3.5, Optomax 200mm f/3.5, Sun Optical 135mm F/3.5, Soligor 350mm F/5.6
Zoom: Tokina 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 SZ-X270 SD, Sigma Zoom Pi 35-200mm F4-5.6, Sun Optical 28-80mm F/3.5-4.5, Sunagor 80-205mm F/3.8, Tokina RMC 80-200mm F/4, Vivitar 70-150mm F/3.8, Tamron 95-205mm F/6.3, Tamron Adaptall 28-200mm F/3.8-5.6 LD Aspherical, Tokina RMC 70-210mm F/3.5
Mirror: Falcon (Samyang) 800mm F/8, MTO-11CA 1000mm F/10, Tamron Adaptall 2 500mm F/8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eccs19
Joined: 15 May 2010
Posts: 118
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eccs19 wrote:
I guess more detail may help. On the first shot, nothings seems incredibly sharp on the original, at least not compared to my 100mm. The second one, his hands are somewhat sharp, but based on the online DOF calculator, the working distance I was at, I should have had about 5 feet in focus, and I have a hard time believing that my focus was that far off. I took about a dozen shots, and none of them as sharp as I would have liked. The 100mm, I only took a couple shots, and they were all nice and sharp, and my DOF for that lens would have probably only been about 6".
I did use flash for all the shots. I was playing with off camera flash, and these are what I got.
Thanks for the comments so far.
_________________
Camera(s) - Pentax *istD & K7
Takumar Lenses - 28mm f3.5, 55mm f1.8, 100mm f4.0 1:2 macro, 105mm f2.8, 200mm f3.5, 85-210 Zoom f4.5
Tamron - 300mm f5.6, 500mm mirror f8
Pentax 50mm f2.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dfujevec
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 43
Location: Slovenia
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dfujevec wrote:
In my experience with both versions of Takumar 28mm lens (ST 28 with 58mm filter and ST and SMCT with 49mm filter) is very difficult to set focus on object that are 2 meters away and closer. Even with the distace scale on lens is difficult. The easiest way is with live view. When the focus is set all Takumar 28mm that I have used are very sharp. Here is one proof
_________________
Pentax K20D + eos 5DmkII + 15kg of Takumar lenses
http://dfujevec.deviantart.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2010 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Beautiful sample , who care sharp or not 
_________________
-------------------------------
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 |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 4569
Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 07, 2010 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
maybe I am wrong, and please educate me:
but I would never expect a 28mm to be as sharp as a 100mm.
am I wrong in thinking this?
_________________
my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5017
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 07, 2010 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
| kuuan wrote: |
maybe I am wrong, and please educate me:
but I would never expect a 28mm to be as sharp as a 100mm.
am I wrong in thinking this? |
Well as a general question:- I did a test once and used the same film for a range of lenses from 28mm to 135mm (and zooms). And from a starting distance of 6 foot away, moved the lenses in or out to fill the frame of the subject, then enlarged the shots...and a Canon 28mm FD was up with names like 50 mm Hexanon F1.7, Olympus 50mm and Meyer, and slaughtered a super tak 135mm f3.5.
So what does these results tell anyone? well the Canon 28mm is excellent? or at that distance the 28mm had an advantage over others? So coming back to your question maybe the Tak 28mm at the shot distance wasn't at it's best compared to the Tak 100mm.
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 842
Location: Boston, Ma USA
Expire: 2014-11-22
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 07, 2010 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bruce wrote:
| kuuan wrote: |
I would never expect a 28mm to be as sharp as a 100mm.
am I wrong in thinking this? |
Exactly the impression I got, that’s why I did very little experimenting with the different manufacturers
of the wide angles and stuck with the favored Zeiss and also the Olympus OM's.
_________________
Digital: Canon 40d & 5DmkII, Film: Hasselblad 203fe/Zeiss 80/2.8 cfe
Adapters for EOS: Cy; M42; Zenit39; Exakta; LeicaR; OlympusOM; PK; Nikon; Rollei35; Retina; Adaptal; P-6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blue
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Posts: 304
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:46 pm Post subject: Re: Takumar 28mm not a sharp lens? |
|
|
Blue wrote:
| eccs19 wrote: |
My variant is the Super Takumar. I think it's the third generation of this lens. First 2 pics are with the 28mm, and the last is with the 100mm for reference.
. . . |
There are actually 2 models of the Super Tak 28mm and the early version of it actually has 2 variants, the earliest with an f3.5-22 aperture and the second with a 3.5-16 with both having 58mm filter threads and 7 elements in 6 groups. The 2nd model has 3.5-16 aperture and 49mm filter threads with 7 elements in 7 groups with the S-M-C being an updated version of this lens.
_________________
Pentax: K, H2, H3, S3, SV (late & early), SV black, Spot F, K2 chrome, K2 black, ME F, SuperProgram, 6x7, Auto 110, Asahiflex IIB late
Pentax "modern": MZ-3, *istD, K200d, K20d
Mamiya: C3 TLR, NC1000
Canon: EOS 10s, AE-1
Chinon: CP-7m
IKON: Contax D, Praktiflex FX & Victar 50mm f2.9
Contessa-Nettel Piccolette - 7.5 cm Tessar & Compur shutter
Rangefinders: Argus C4 and Ricoh Five-One-Nine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10967
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
The 4/100 has more contrast; subject has more definition against less complicated background. These illusions of greater sharpness add to whatever sharpness advantage the 4/100 lens has over 3.5/28.
The 3.5/28 photos do look slightly out of focus; an eyepiece magnifier or magnified live view may have helped, maybe a lot. Was the lens focused wide open then stopped down for photo?
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ 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 |
|
|
eccs19
Joined: 15 May 2010
Posts: 118
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:40 pm Post subject: Re: Takumar 28mm not a sharp lens? |
|
|
eccs19 wrote:
| Blue wrote: |
| eccs19 wrote: |
My variant is the Super Takumar. I think it's the third generation of this lens. First 2 pics are with the 28mm, and the last is with the 100mm for reference.
. . . |
There are actually 2 models of the Super Tak 28mm and the early version of it actually has 2 variants, the earliest with an f3.5-22 aperture and the second with a 3.5-16 with both having 58mm filter threads and 7 elements in 6 groups. The 2nd model has 3.5-16 aperture and 49mm filter threads with 7 elements in 7 groups with the S-M-C being an updated version of this lens. |
Well mine is the 49mm filter 3.5-16, but not SMC, just a Super. Thanks for that info.
_________________
Camera(s) - Pentax *istD & K7
Takumar Lenses - 28mm f3.5, 55mm f1.8, 100mm f4.0 1:2 macro, 105mm f2.8, 200mm f3.5, 85-210 Zoom f4.5
Tamron - 300mm f5.6, 500mm mirror f8
Pentax 50mm f2.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eccs19
Joined: 15 May 2010
Posts: 118
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eccs19 wrote:
| visualopsins wrote: |
| Was the lens focused wide open then stopped down for photo? |
That is correct, I did stop it down, as it's hard to focus at F11. hardly enough light coming through to get a good look.
_________________
Camera(s) - Pentax *istD & K7
Takumar Lenses - 28mm f3.5, 55mm f1.8, 100mm f4.0 1:2 macro, 105mm f2.8, 200mm f3.5, 85-210 Zoom f4.5
Tamron - 300mm f5.6, 500mm mirror f8
Pentax 50mm f2.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eccs19
Joined: 15 May 2010
Posts: 118
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eccs19 wrote:
I'm actually going to drop the lens off at my dad's place tomorrow (revers), and he's going to play with it. (he's retired, so he's got more time) He'll post some results in this thread for reference.
_________________
Camera(s) - Pentax *istD & K7
Takumar Lenses - 28mm f3.5, 55mm f1.8, 100mm f4.0 1:2 macro, 105mm f2.8, 200mm f3.5, 85-210 Zoom f4.5
Tamron - 300mm f5.6, 500mm mirror f8
Pentax 50mm f2.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 2190
Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
I just bought the S-M-C version from Eugene (visualopsins). Thanks so much again! I've found this one to be exceedingly sharp with great colors. This was taken with a Pentax ES on auto, stopped-down half a step, with ektar 100. Scanned on an epson v700.
Maybe a change in the version is the answer if you like the takumar aspect of it?
~Marc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
revers
Joined: 13 May 2010
Posts: 574
Location: In the country just north of Toronto Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2010 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
revers wrote:
Well Mark dropped off the lens this morning but it is raining so I shot on the balcony.
Panasonic G1 on tripod shooting @ f8 & focus carefully on the gnome in the centre of the frame.
Centre crop
I do not have a 28mm to compare so I shot a Minolta 35mm
Centre crop
_________________
Ron
Olympus OM-D E-M5, 14-42 & 45/1.8.
Panasonic G1, GF1, 14-45, 45-200 & various legacy lenses.
Canon S5, Sony 1.7 Tele-converter & Raynox DCR 150 Macro converter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 7788
Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2010 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
The gnome looks good in both of your pictures Revers.
I bought a Tak 28mm 3.5 a few days ago, and so far I'm liking it a lot. At the same time I bought a Soligor 35mm, and if I had bought that lens on it's own I'd have been happy with it, as I am with the Travenar 28 and the Pentacon 30 that I've had for a while.
But the Takumar trumps them - comprehensively.
_________________
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 |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
| kuuan wrote: |
maybe I am wrong, and please educate me:
but I would never expect a 28mm to be as sharp as a 100mm.
am I wrong in thinking this? |
Hi Kuuan.
The question, to me, isn't easy to answer.
First, you must consider the differents brands and models. For example, the 28 mm. Hexanon 7 elements (oldest) has more resolution power than the last MC version 5 elements, and the last has more contrast.
Second. Said that, if you compare the 100 mm lenses (almost all have 4 or 5 elements), so they will be more contrast than the 28 mm with 6/7/8 elements. And about the resolution power, there is an optic effect that play for the 100 mm: the same object's image is seen more big than the one taken with the 28 mm, taken from the same place both.
In my experience, the best contrast and resolution power are, generally, in the 50 mm line. The more near focal lenght to 50 mm, the more sharp, in both ways (tele and wide).
Of course that it's only my experience and not using special lenses, only the average.
I hope that you find any help with that words.
Regards, Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 4060
Location: Charleston
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
I couldn't find the gnome, but the little guy with the beard looked sharper with the Minolta.
_________________
Regards,
Woodrim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shoenberg3
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Posts: 22
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
shoenberg3 wrote:
I am betting it is an adaptor issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
