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

The most expensive and highly regarded 135 I have is crap!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:22 pm    Post subject: The most expensive and highly regarded 135 I have is crap! Reply with quote
Hi folks

I'm not saying what this lens is right away as I want you to judge it without prejudice. Imho it is utter crap, totally unuseable above f8 due to awful purple fringing and softness, low contrast at all apertures, low resolution, poor colours with an overly warm tone, just dogs*it.

I had to pump up the contrast of all of these samples and adjust colour tone to get rid of the warm cast that made everything look like it was shot just before sunset, apart from that, no PP other than resize for web.

These are wide open, worst CA I have ever seen and by far the softest result of any of the dozen 135s I've tried:








This is at 5.6, awful CA, pretty soft, awful:






These are at f8, resolution now becomes acceptable but still a bit soft, CA is still present, not good but now acceptable:
















I am going to sell this lens, but if I show these samples I doubt I'll be able to sell it, what an awful, horrible optic. So much for big reputations and price tags!


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
seems indeed realy bad Confused .... just in 2 words; sell it Rolling Eyes ....


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Some of those images don't look focused correctly to me, hence the softness and CA. However, I had similar results once from a Pentacon 135/2.8 with one of the elements reversed Laughing


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, I focused very carefully with 7x magnify on the NEX, perhaps on some the focus is a tad off but I doubt it. The lens came to me mint, I doubt it has ever been used, if it is faulty I reckon it left the factory in that state.

Even the cheapest Samyang Korean 2.8/135 I have walks all over this lens.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
What lens is it?


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
it looks pretty bad on the focussing and CA...


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
my S-M-C takumar 2.5/135, wich is also highly regarded, does also turn everything with a little sunlight in it very orange. It also does show CA fairly quick. It IS very sharp when focused correctly though. I consider it not my 'easiest' lens, but when results are good, they ARE really good.
I guess you're pretty disappointed. I'm very curious what lens you are talking about.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Okay, it's a Vivitar Series 1 2.3/135. Fat chance of selling this lens, it's bloody awful.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Okay, it's a Vivitar Series 1 2.3/135. Fat chance of selling this lens, it's bloody awful.


Maybe it's better on film.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sell it as spare or repair. I have a few paper weights for parts in my collection , they do come in handy every now and again.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I doubt it, the low contrast, extreme CA, bad colour rendition and lack of resolution would all show up on film too, surely?


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Do you think it's a Friday afternoon job? Any idea who made it?

Edit: I don't mean the individual, rather the company Laughing


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ian: This lens is challenging to focus (ut oh) and takes practice and skill. It isn't particularly great at wide open and does have a fair amount of blue CA. The lens needs to be used for its strengths and when that's done, it outperforms every other 135mm that I have. Once again you're having trouble with a highly regarded lens. In my hands it performs like this:








If some images do not appear, it will have to wait for pbase to fix their problems, or go here for a gallery of this lens:
http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/vivitar135s1

Last edited by woodrim on Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:50 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I had that lens and was surprised about good sharpness....
Klaus


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well I must have a bad copy then because it is the fourth day I've taken it out and every time it was utter crap.

The CA is ridiculous, how anyone can tolerate such CA is beyond me, this lens really is unusable above f8.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think your lens has faulty IAN, come from factory with defect or it was cleaned before and wrongly assembled.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hmm, I have read about Vivitar having crap QC and lots of copy variation.

Perhaps I have just unearthed a clear example of that.

My copy really is awful and you can't blame it on lack of skill, things like CA, low contrast and horrible colour rendition can't be down to user error, missed focus and camera shake could spoil resolution.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Hmm, I have read about Vivitar having crap QC and lots of copy variation.

Perhaps I have just unearthed a clear example of that.

My copy really is awful and you can't blame it on lack of skill, things like CA, low contrast and horrible colour rendition can't be down to user error, missed focus and camera shake could spoil resolution.


QC doesn't have any effect on what you see. It's in the design of the lens itself, the glass types, shapes, # of elements, etc.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The image with the VW Polo in looks surprisingly sharp given that the rest look dodgy.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Woodrim's samples look like they came from a different lens entirely though, which would suggest either mine is faulty or I really badly messed up with my shots.

I will give this lens one more try on a tripod and be ultra careful with my technique.

Frustrating process, trying to find the hidden qualities of this glass...


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The lens seems to be known for the CA, but hey it's not the end of the world:

http://makingnottaking.blogspot.com/2010/03/vivitar-series-1-135mm-f23.html


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
The image with the VW Polo in looks surprisingly sharp given that the rest look dodgy.


Seems to me this lens is only sharp at f8 onwards, the ones at wider apertures are soft.

The CA is a big issue for me, I think purple fringing looks awful and I reject any image that has it.

I wouldn't shoot this lens above f8 again due to the softness and CA.

As I say, I will try it once more with great care but I have few hopes of getting anything great from it.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I read through this post and quickly ran outside to try mine. This was literally taken 10minutes ago. No PP, just re-sized. Taken @f2.3.




Take from it what you will.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, that's a lovely dog.

IQ-wise, total difference indeed, looks like a different lens altogether.

So either I got a dog of a copy or it's faulty.

Bugger...


PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think the lens might be faulty, I have a copy that is really ropey and has a serious fungus infestation but it's still better that this, it has some fringing but that's normal for this lens, the sharpness even wide open is pretty reasonable considering the huge amount of fungus!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5