HANIMEX 35mm/f2.8 M42

[padiej]

Hallo!

I tested this lens and i am not amused. There is a fog in the pictures, a drunky lens , cleaning is for nothing, it´s adapted to raining weather, I see. An english lens also

regards Peter

[Orio]

If you are looking for super cheap wide angle lenses, try the Macro Revuenons (35mm and 28mm), preferably MC version (multicoated).
I have both, paid very little, and they do a very good closeup work.
Of course at infinity they are not like a Flektogon, but for the money, they are acceptable.

[padiej]

there is no dust into the lens, but the result is very soft

[Orio]

that is because of flare, you did not use a hood and the lens has bad or no multicoating.

[luisalegria]

Check for haze (condensation of oil or adhesive solvent) between the lenses. That can make flare very bad, like this or worse.

I have a formerly good lens (Sigma 28mm) that is now ruined for this reason.

[padiej]

At first, my Hanimex look´s new, only the rubberband is broken, so I think, this is a cheap lens.
The machanic is great, the blind works fine.
I don´t know anything about the quality-ranking of this lenstype.


regards Peter

[Richard_D]

The Hanimex lenses were cheap Japanese lenses mainly sold through general catalogue stores like Argos and high street chains like Dixons.

[Attila]

These lenses are door stop only waste time to use them. For a bit more money so many excellent 35mm lens are available.
My conclusion is usable bargain lens available in normal and telephoto category. For wide angle shoots need to pay a bit more.

[padiej]

An optical doorstop, also.

If I see the differens to asahi or zeiss, that´s true.

So I have two doorstopper´s - Berolin and Hanimex

I think, this is the end of my interrest for hanimex.

Whitch screw should I use for the montage on the floor to stop the door???



regards Peter

[montecarlo]

Well, you already have one of the best (if not the best) M42 35mm lens, the CZJ Flektogon 2.4.
I too tried once a Hanimex , a 28mm K Pentax mount one but the results were poor (no contrast especially).
A Hanimex is good if it is very cheap or for free
Except the optics, the build quality is pretty good but on those times ('60-'70 and older) almost all lenses were build like a tank. In the '80 plastic appeared more and more as material in lenses and cameras too.

[cbaldeck]

I have a clean Hanimar Automatic 35mm f2.8 lens in M42 mount and with shade, recently acquired for US$5.00. Any time I find an M42 lens in apparently clean condition for $5.00, I buy first and try it out later. Then I did a site search for Hanimar 35mm f2.8, and found none, but only the Hanimex 35mm f2.8. The comments on the Hanimex were not very encouraging, and the weather here is cold and cloudy, so I haven't tried it yet and have no idea what to expect. Perhaps a potential entry in a "worst lens" contest?

So I wondered if these two "brands" are related in some way.

Charles Baldeck

[hifisapi]

dont waste your time with the hanimex. you can get an incredible m42 35mm f3.5 lens,
the super multi coated takumar for reasonable money and use that instead...

[montecarlo]

you can find infos about Hanimex/hanimar in this old catalog/guide (cretis to butkus ) http://lens-club.ru/public/files/pdfs/e9d860c370f470a7af54762f39aa9976.pdf

[luisalegria]

Hanimex was an international distributor of many makers lenses for several decades.
The brochure from Butkus covers a certain period of its operations, and I think also a limited market segment, in this case maybe the UK.
Some Hanimex branded products don't seem to have been sold in the US for instance.
The lenses listed are quite varied, but several that are pictured on the cover are identifiable as Tokina made.
Some others are German.

[nukemall]

Yes, brands like Hanimex, Revuenon, Sears etc means nothing. It's only resellers, than different batches of lenses with the same FL and apetrure(like 35/2.8, 28/2.8 etc) may be ordered from different manufacturers.

Another Hanimex 35/2.8 M42 from Cima Kogaku ("hollow diamond" DOF mark)



Samples:

f/2.8:





f/4:



f/5.6:

[Excalibur]

I'd include Hanimex m42 28mm f2.8 as just an OK lens until you can afford something better.

[cbaldeck]

Thanks to everyone for the responses. Many of the contributors here really know their lenses.

The brochure referenced above did contain a table of Hanimex lenses, and another table listing (not as many) Hanimar lenses, but I didn't see anything which would indicate the differences (if any) between them.

Since the Hanimar lens was purchased from a knowledgeable and experienced specialist in vintage photo equipment, I did not expect to find a Zeiss-grade lens for $5.00 , but I really do like manual focus primes and it looked interesting enough to give it a try. As a long time camera and lens collector (although relatively new to this forum) I know there are much better 35mm lenses, and I already have a few, like the Zeiss ZF-2 35/2 and the Nikon AiS 35/1.4 in Nikon mount, as well as the aforementioned Pentax M42 35/3.5 S-M-C Takumar.

But even not-very-good lenses can have interesting uses. When the weather gets better, it might be fun to attempt replication of an interesting experiment I read about somewhere on the web. There, a photographer took his WORST lens and used it to make a panoramic stitch, then downsized it a bit. He found that stitching with even a poor lens could yield excellent final image quality -- if there are enough pixels. And getting a lot of pixels has become quite feasible lately. With its reportedly much improved photo merge capability, CS6 might make this kind of approach a lot easier.

Charles Baldeck

[Lloydy]

Using Microsoft ICE - a free download - I've had some good results stitching big panoramas with average quality lenses. I've got pictures that would have been impossible otherwise.

[Pancolart]

[Oldhand]

Unusual Hanimex pre-set in T mount.
Wearing the leather/leatherette focus ring from early Chinon and Revuenon Days.
Who made it - not sure.
It is not a bad lens nonetheless.
Here is the lens:




and some quick backyard samples:

[luisalegria]

Yeah, good question as to the maker. There are at least three possibilities.

I wish I had clear ID's of all Tokina, Nittoh/Komine and Kawanon preset wide angles.

[Oldhand]

Thank you luisalegria.
Here are a couple more taken wide open.
OH

[philslizzy]

Use autocontrast to beef up your images. It will appear better.

Sadly the lens is not the best but you can use it. Remember when these lenses were made they were designed for the budget conscious amateur, most of whom only took home prints that were 10 x 15 or 12x17 cm. At that size, edge resolution wasn't an issue. Colour prints were quite contrasty as cheap films were designed to give brighter colours than the professional films. This cancelled out the inherent low contrast of the lenses.

These lenses were a product of their day and designed for then.

You may sell it for more than you paid. Check first if it has a T-mount, that may be worth more than the lens!

[dimitrygo]

[Pancolart]