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

Bower auto tele 135mm 2.8
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:58 pm    Post subject: Bower auto tele 135mm 2.8 Reply with quote

It has been said on this site "There are no bad 135's". Well this rather odd lens is not like the others I have. Image quality is not up to standard compared to the rest. It looks to me like a triplet design, what do you think?
All shat taken at f2.8. It works great if you want glow and stuff.


First analog, Canon F1, Elite chrome 100.









Eos 40D fd-eos adapter, no glass:









Basic white point/black point adjustments on all shots.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the phrase used was "....it's hard to find a bad 135mm lens......."
This lens really struggles in the sharpness stakes doesn't it, and yet a couple of those images are - as they say - "to die for............"
Images 3 and 4 the last one are amazing, and would do well in competition IMHO.
If you ever get tired of this lens, send me a PM and I'll take it off your hands
OH


PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If it "made in Korea" and looks like this:



So it's Samyang lens, also known as Jcpenney, Sears, Chinar etc etc.
Worst 135/2.8 lens ever. Good only for parts.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The bokeh looks like a triplet to me.

There is a Samyang 2.8/135 that is very common here in England and is actually a really good lens.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Are you sure no one has messed with the lens elements?

The bokeh looks very interesting. Almost like a mirror lens but softer.

You may be able to sell this to some lomographer.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
I think the phrase used was "....it's hard to find a bad 135mm lens......."
This lens really struggles in the sharpness stakes doesn't it, and yet a couple of those images are - as they say - "to die for............"
Images 3 and 4 the last one are amazing, and would do well in competition IMHO.
If you ever get tired of this lens, send me a PM and I'll take it off your hands
OH


Oh, that phrase does look more familiar. And although my first post seems to indicate otherwise, I actually like to have that dreamy look at my disposal. And I intend to use it more! But in pure technical terms I don't think it's good enough to be called a good lens. Also, the aperture is stuck wide open.

The images were just snaps and backyard test shots but they turned out ok. I'm glad you like them!

buerokratiehasser wrote:
Are you sure no one has messed with the lens elements?

The bokeh looks very interesting. Almost like a mirror lens but softer.

You may be able to sell this to some lomographer.


There are no signs of tinkering so if it has defects it probably left the factory that way.

My first thought was that the bokeh kind of resembled trioplan 100mm bokeh.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nukemall wrote:
If it "made in Korea" and looks like this:



So it's Samyang lens, also known as Jcpenney, Sears, Chinar etc etc.
Worst 135/2.8 lens ever. Good only for parts.


It's made in Japan and looks like this:







iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The bokeh looks like a triplet to me.

There is a Samyang 2.8/135 that is very common here in England and is actually a really good lens.


Is the Samyang also a triplet?


PostPosted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Bower lens pictured above is manufactured by Cima. Coincidentally its serial number is very similar to that on a Canon EF body I've owned for many years. 330300.