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

Soligor 200mm F4.5 - Very Soft
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 6:28 am    Post subject: Soligor 200mm F4.5 - Very Soft Reply with quote
OK here are a few shots taken. These are some of the best I have managed so far and they are still very underwhelming when it comes to sharpness. Some of these shots are also not focussed properly (very difficult to do).

The sharpest so far at F11 (or F8 - memory fails me)



A crop



Pigeon was shot at F8 with a monopod



crop



Last edited by parabellumfoto on Thu May 16, 2013 6:43 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 6:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Peg basket crop compared against my 35mm Nikon AFS prime.

First off the Soligor



And the Nikon prime



PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 6:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Is this the one with the silver ears? If so, it's rubbish Smile

The older Tokina made preset was much better.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 6:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Is this the one with the silver ears? If so, it's rubbish Smile

The older Tokina made preset was much better.


I don't know what you mean by 'silver ears' but the guys here told me it was a Tokina and yes it does have pre-set aperture.

It doesn't compare to Nikon as Old Hand has shown in this thread - http://forum.mflenses.com/nikkor-200mm-f4-5-lens-version-k-type-t24670,start,15.html

Here are some iPhone shots of my Soligor - http://www.parabellumfoto.com/soligor-200mm-f4-5/


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 7:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Look at the glow on this Australian Myna's beak



Crop



PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
It seems to pump out nice colour and I really like that but to me it looks very soft. Wide open is much worse than these shots shown.

Focussing as I have said is another issue but maybe I need to keep using it a bit more to get used to it and learn its limits.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 8:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've had 200-300mm lenses that were like this, seems many old ones are not very good, sad to say.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I've had 200-300mm lenses that were like this, seems many old ones are not very good, sad to say.


I guess I have an artistic lens.

Laughing

I will play around with it some more to see if I can get sharper images. The very first one I have posted isn't too bad I don't think.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, the first one isn't too bad, you can use this lens for artistic shots where sharpness is not important.

There are some good but cheap 200mms out there, funnily enough the Soligor 3.5/200 is one of them. Others include the Meyer/Pentacon 4/200 and the Kiron 3.5/200 (often seen in the Panagor branding in Europe).

Any of the major manufacturer's 200mms will be good, so keep an eye out for a cheap Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, Mamiya etc.

Another cheap way to get a good long lens is to use an enlarger or process lens on a set of bellows, I picked up a 300mm APO process lens (Wray Process Lustrar) for less than 5ukp recently, on bellows it is superb, I also picked up a 178mm Wray HR Lustrar for less than 10ukp and that is great too. There are loads of process lenses by all kinds of makers, and all of them are very very sharp and very highly corrected, when they were new they were extremely expensive items made to the most exacting standards.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's certainly not the sharpest 200 that I've got, and it's not as good as the other chrome eared Soligors I've got either.







these were all shot on a Sony NEX5 at ISO 400 and probably using a monopod. Just resized with no PP at all.

It can be sharp, but my hit rate with this lens is poor.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 1:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Yes, the first one isn't too bad, you can use this lens for artistic shots where sharpness is not important.

There are some good but cheap 200mms out there, funnily enough the Soligor 3.5/200 is one of them. Others include the Meyer/Pentacon 4/200 and the Kiron 3.5/200 (often seen in the Panagor branding in Europe).

Any of the major manufacturer's 200mms will be good, so keep an eye out for a cheap Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, Mamiya etc.

Another cheap way to get a good long lens is to use an enlarger or process lens on a set of bellows, I picked up a 300mm APO process lens (Wray Process Lustrar) for less than 5ukp recently, on bellows it is superb, I also picked up a 178mm Wray HR Lustrar for less than 10ukp and that is great too. There are loads of process lenses by all kinds of makers, and all of them are very very sharp and very highly corrected, when they were new they were extremely expensive items made to the most exacting standards.


Thanks for advice Ian. I'll probable look at a Nikon seeing I already have the D3200. Lenses here in Sydney are not cheap. Most people think their worst junk is worth a fortune. Even charity shops are asking minimum $40 for lenses that have busted aperture and are full of fungus. Confused


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That's such a shame. I guess postage from England would make buying from here expensive. Sad


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
That's such a shame. I guess postage from England would make buying from here expensive. Sad


Yup!

There are still opportunities but you need to look for them. I just won an auction for a Nikkor Q 135mm 2.8. It didn't say if it was converted to AI, just suitable for DSLR so here's hoping it fits.

I didn't pay too much. Hopefully it'll be significantly better than this lens.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
It's certainly not the sharpest 200 that I've got, and it's not as good as the other chrome eared Soligors I've got either.


these were all shot on a Sony NEX5 at ISO 400 and probably using a monopod. Just resized with no PP at all.

It can be sharp, but my hit rate with this lens is poor.


Lloydy, you're photographs make the lens look good. Images to me still look soft like mine but they are nicely taken. I reckon some of this poor performance is directly attributable to myself as a photographer. I need to learn how to make a lens work within its limits.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
This one is a Tokina, which is odd as their other 200/4.5 lenses were actually fairly decent.

I owned another version of the Soligor 200/4.5 which was pretty bad, it had a serial starting with a 2:



PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
parabellumfoto wrote:
Look at the glow on this Australian Myna's beak


That is not glow. That is LoCA - you have focused behind the bird, so this is the red fringing component. The bird is just out of focus.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
parabellumfoto wrote:
Look at the glow on this Australian Myna's beak


That is not glow. That is LoCA - you have focused behind the bird, so this is the red fringing component. The bird is just out of focus.


Thanks for pointing that out. I suspected some of this being my inexperience.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ah'd check...

a) that none of the elements have been reversed, in the lens.

b) none of the elements are misplaced/ out of alignment.

Cool


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TAo2 wrote:
Ah'd check...

a) that none of the elements have been reversed, in the lens.

b) none of the elements are misplaced/ out of alignment.

Cool


It doesn't look like it has been tampered with although one never really knows. It's in very good condition for its age and appears to have been well cared for.

What would be tell tale signs of alteration or tampering?


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
parabellumfoto wrote:

What would be tell tale signs of alteration or tampering?


That you are not happy with the performance Smile

I would not worry about tampering - I think this lens never worked better. Just look up information on it - you would find a lot more if the lens would have performed much better.


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The problem is basic: You need more light. Lloydy's examples are are sharp because they're clearly well-lit.


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2013 4:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Have you tried Camerahouse in Kent street Sydney for 2nd hand gear? Once again its not "cheap", but you never know what you may find.


PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2013 5:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
mo wrote:
Have you tried Camerahouse in Kent street Sydney for 2nd hand gear? Once again its not "cheap", but you never know what you may find.


There are a few shops where I live that I have discovered. In fact there's a second hand book store that is diversifying into film cameras and legacy lenses of all things. He reckons he gets a lot of interest. I sell my junk to him and he offers stuff to me cheaply.

We help each other out Wink

That's where I bought my Nikkor 50mm for $20.

I might even dump this lens at his shop for a 50% loss (I paid $40 after much haggling). I'm better off getting a 200mm Nikkor instead.


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 6:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I took a few more shots with this lens. This crop at 100% looks ok.

Shot at f8




A lot of other shots were still very bad so I guess it's a case of learning what the lenses capabilities are.


PostPosted: Sun May 19, 2013 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I reckon it's broken, should surely be better than that.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2