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

Rokkor 200mm f3.5
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2013 6:56 pm    Post subject: Rokkor 200mm f3.5 Reply with quote
I won a Rokkor 200mm f3.5 on ebay , cost me a tenner. It's a beast. 30% larger than my Rikenon and over 700 grammes in weight!!

The lens:





The QF in the name denotes that it is 7 elements in 7 groups. Probably from the early 70's. It matches my SRT100 perfectly.

It is heavy to carry about and will probably be left at home on a casual day out! It got a bit of attention from other nex users today who didnt know you could use MF lenses!

I took it out today to Liverpool where they are having a big event to mark the 70th Anniversary of the Battle of the Atlantic. (More details here:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-22658053)

Some photos: Taken on my NEX 5 aperture at about f5.6 to f8 for most of the photos















The last photo is a Spitfire and Hurricane - the NEX is no good for action, I missed them altogether trying to take a video, just lots of blue sky and the throaty roar of Rolls Royce Merlins! definitely a job for my SLR/DSLR

In all I'm very impressed with the quality of this lens but handling is a pain, its heavy and as a result not easy to focus fast.


PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2013 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Great series, I like these older Rokkors even more than latest series, little contrast color fix and they will be come easily into top range.


PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2013 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks like a very sharp lens.

I just bought an AF Sigma zoom (check it out here -> http://forum.mflenses.com/sigma-uc-zoom-70-210mm-14-5-6-t58917.html ) and in comparison it gets blown out of the water by this lens.


PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2013 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
Great series, I like these older Rokkors even more than latest series, little contrast color fix and they will be come easily into top range.


I think the contrast is fine, the only photo that has been altered (other than resized), was the helicopter one. Auto contrast and a crop to take out a flagpole and someone's head.

I have a 52mm f1.7 of similar vintage too, I must give this one a go too. Perhaps compare it to my MD 50mm f2

parabellumfoto wrote:
Looks like a very sharp lens.

I just bought an AF Sigma zoom (check it out here -> http://forum.mflenses.com/sigma-uc-zoom-70-210mm-14-5-6-t58917.html ) and in comparison it gets blown out of the water by this lens.


Thanks for that! I took some photos today of exactly the same subject with my Tokina 70-210 more convenient but not half as good.

Interesting, because in these days of computer design and materials such as we never had before lenses are no better.


PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2013 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
very nice, the more I see of old Rokkors the more I like them!


PostPosted: Mon May 27, 2013 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
very nice, the more I see of old Rokkors the more I like them!


and this one from a while ago:

Lloydy wrote:
You're doomed, the Minolta MD lenses have a very strange effect on people. Wink


yep correct dave!!


PostPosted: Mon May 27, 2013 5:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
philslizzy wrote:
Lloydy wrote:
very nice, the more I see of old Rokkors the more I like them!


and this one from a while ago:

Lloydy wrote:
You're doomed, the Minolta MD lenses have a very strange effect on people. Wink


yep correct dave!!


Laughing Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Mon May 27, 2013 9:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've just spent a couple of days in Coventry with my wife's family, so six of us went over in my old 4x4 and because it was just an excuse to drink beer and have a good time I only took the NEX and one lens, the Rokkor 35-70 / 3.5. I didn't even bother with the AF kit lens, the Rokkor just does the job. It's a great range, and the quality of the picture is second to none, Rokkors rule! Cool


PostPosted: Mon May 27, 2013 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
... Rokkors rule! Cool




yayyy...


PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2013 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Great results from the Rokkor lens.

When I saw the pictures of the lens I dug out my Auto Rokkor - PF 1.8/55mm. IT looks very similar, with the Focus scale, front lettering and the scalloped grip, yet my lens dates from the late 50s, so is your lens possibly earlier than 70s?


PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2013 4:01 pm    Post subject: Re: Rokkor 200mm f3.5 Reply with quote
philslizzy wrote:
The QF in the name denotes that it is 7 elements in 7 groups.

No, there were no (7/7) 200mm lenses from Minolta. The Q indicates four groups and the F stands for six elements (since F is the 6th character in the alphabet). So it's a (6/4) construction. The only (7/7) constructions from Minolta were some of the 28mm F2.8 and F3.5 lenses - and the late era 35-70mm F3.5-4.8.


PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2013 6:02 pm    Post subject: Re: Rokkor 200mm f3.5 Reply with quote
Dennis wrote:
philslizzy wrote:
The QF in the name denotes that it is 7 elements in 7 groups.

No, there were no (7/7) 200mm lenses from Minolta. The Q indicates four groups and the F stands for six elements (since F is the 6th character in the alphabet). So it's a (6/4) construction. The only (7/7) constructions from Minolta were some of the 28mm F2.8 and F3.5 lenses - and the late era 35-70mm F3.5-4.8.


OOps!! I'm remembering the wrong bit of information! I did think it odd to have 7 element/groups I was looking at a 28mm earlier.


PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2013 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think your lens does actually date from 1970 or shortly after according to the list:

http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/body_li.html


PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2013 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
skida wrote:
I think your lens does actually date from 1970 or shortly after according to the list:

http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/body_li.html


Hmm interesting list thanks for finding that!


PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2013 9:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
philslizzy wrote:
Lloydy wrote:
... Rokkors rule! Cool




yayyy...

Oh yes please, one in xxl for me Cool


PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2013 9:55 am    Post subject: Re: Rokkor 200mm f3.5 Reply with quote
philslizzy wrote:
In all I'm very impressed with the quality of this lens but handling is a pain, its heavy and as a result not easy to focus fast.

Have you checked it wide open? Is CA big problem then? I've put mine on the shelf because of that (see http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-rokkor-qf-200-3-5-t30761.html for details). I'm wondering whether it was my copy or is it general property of that lens...


PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2013 4:16 pm    Post subject: Re: Rokkor 200mm f3.5 Reply with quote
pavko wrote:
philslizzy wrote:
In all I'm very impressed with the quality of this lens but handling is a pain, its heavy and as a result not easy to focus fast.

Have you checked it wide open? Is CA big problem then? I've put mine on the shelf because of that (see http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-rokkor-qf-200-3-5-t30761.html for details). I'm wondering whether it was my copy or is it general property of that lens...


I spotted a little yesterday. here is the pic shrunk for the forum and a 100% crop showing a little CA. You can see the pixels at this magnification so it may not be too much problem.





Not enough to put me off it!!


PostPosted: Wed May 29, 2013 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks tiny compared to the image size.
I agree it looks tiny when compared to total image size but if your making large prints it would be a worry.


PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2013 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
parabellumfoto wrote:

... if your making large prints it would be a worry.


Thats not gonna happen soon. I use different equipment when shooting for large prints.

I understand there's a way to remove CA in photoshop, I've seen it mentioned but a tip on how to do it would be nice.

Anyone??


PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Use the "Lens Correction" function in the "Filter" menu, it features three sliders in the "Chromatic Aberrations" tab.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Dennis wrote:
Use the "Lens Correction" function in the "Filter" menu, it features three sliders in the "Chromatic Aberrations" tab.


Cheers dennis I found it but a lot was greyed out and the custom didnt seem to do anything. I'll go back to it. But some of the other stuff was interesting.

Thanks


PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I detailed a procedure in a post once. I'll see if I can find it before recreating.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 11:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Found it.

In PS, you simply enlarge the image enough to see the CA clearly, then go to Image - Adjustments - Hue/Saturation. Then change the menu selection where it says Master to the color you're correcting, most cases blue, but sometimes magenta. If you're wrong, it will correct the selection. Then take the pointer, which is now an eyedropper tool, and click on the CA where the color is obvious. You'll then see that color come up in your swatch selection. Now take the saturation and lightness sliders and find the best reductions to correct the CA. I typically do them about equally, but you can see the change as you're doing it and will know how much to adjust. Note: don't forget to select the color from the Master, otherwise the entire image will be effected, not just the CA color/area.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ok I tried it, its not got all of the CA but I concentrated on the gloved hand. the lifebelt seems to have lost its colour too but If i use 'auto color' it (sort of) comes back.

Thanks for that useful tip. I'll look more into it. Although the CA is not that much of a problem.




PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Your offending fringe was magenta or red, so you would have selected magenta from the drop down menu and if it Photoshop recognized it as a different color, it would correct you choice when you sampled the color with the eyedropper. It is important to be selective of color in that drop down, otherwise leaving it as "Master" will change the entire picture. There are times when the same color tone will exist elsewhere in the photo as may have happened with yours. In those cases, you can isolate an area for treatment using one of the drawing tools like the "Polygonal Lasso Tool". Or you can return a color to original using the history brush. Red CA is a little harder to correct than blue.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1