Rexagon 23mm f3.5

[guardian]

I just picked up one of the subject lenses and I'm looking for input:

Click here to see on Ebay

I did try to research the lens prior to purchase; but had no luck at all. I think this might be a real oldie (not sure).

Hoping maybe somebody already owns one of these and can report their satisfaction level.

Any input would be appreciated and of interest . . . cause right now all I have is a giant goose egg.

Obviously nobody else wanted this lens in a serious way. Maybe that's all the input I should need!

BTW the lens has a P/K mount showing, though not in the auction photo. Whether there might be an underlying T mount, or whatever, I don't know but I'd certainly like to know. I know about the P/K owing solely to having messaged the seller early on.

[iangreenhalgh1]

This 23mm has been asked about before, it's seen in a few brands, I think the last time it was asked about it was a Soligor.

Never seen any samples from it, I think it's early to mid 60s.

[guardian]

[Attila]

I remember as crap lens already discussed here seek 23mm lens.

[Mos6502]

Yes I have this same lens, under the Avanar brand.


Avanar 23mm lens by berangberang, on Flickr


23mm exa by berangberang, on Flickr

Mine is very soft wide open, as well as gives a glow. It also shows a ton of barrel distortion. Stopped down to 5.6 though it actually gets quite sharp.

[Mos6502]

I've never actually used this lens on digital since the only real reason to have one is for use on film, ultrawides are hard to find in M42, but everywhere in modern mounts, and generally much better than what we have in this lens.

Anyway here is a real quick hand held test showing performance at f3.5, f4, and f5.6



Never really good to test sharpness with minimum focus but as it is dark out, there's nothing really else to do.



Full crop - it suffers a bit from jpeg compression, but you can still see that by f5.6 the sharpness is acceptable.

[guardian]

[Mos6502]

You will find people who will praise any lens, like you will find people who will put down any lens. I'm sure for instance if this lens was made in Germany many people would be excited by its glow, color rendition, unique bokeh, etc. etc. etc.

It is obviously over apertured, probably it should have a max of f4, but f3.5 was snuck in for easier viewing and focusing (probably marketing too).

[Attila]

[guardian]

Guys don't fight!

Seriously, here in USA a Coke bottle bottom labelled "23mm" would be an expensive get. Exaggeration? Sure, but you see my point. Short focal length MF lenses here are a challenge to buy inexpensively.

This Rexagon will be my shortest focal length lens. I already admitted my inability to find anything at all on this lens prior to purchase. But for what I paid, and given marketplace circumstances overall, I'm still happy I made the jump.

Finally, I completely agree this thing could be like all those other "no-name" 23's. It might be. When I searched, before purchase, I did not search on "23" like I should have. I searched on "Rexagon", which was not smart. But I didn't know.

I still have hope (just a little) that, being a Rexagon, this lens might be different and better. Because (other) Rexagon lenses here are not selling for peanuts.

[Mos6502]

There is only one 3.5/23 that I know of, although people seem to be split on whether it was manufactured by Chinon or Sun. You can find it under lots of brand names though, and also in different mounts. I think your deal would be great for any lens really so I wouldn't fret too much about it, whether it's good or bad depends on your expectations and what you plan to do with it.

[guardian]

Epilogue

Well, guys, with thanks to all posters the lens showed up in the mail today. Remember, this was a "pig in a poke" deal since the auction photo showed only the front of the lens and the mount was not known. I like the lens a lot, but that's not astonishing as I like most any MF lens a lot. I just like lenses (don't ask! )

But the lens is in very nice shape and, while it has been used, it is not all beat up. Not at all. The lens is very, very, similar to the Avanar lens kindly posted above by Mos6502, only the grip pattern being slightly different. But it's the same lens with the narrow chrome rings, for example, alongside the grip fore and aft.

My lens arrived with a bit of (what might have been) white paint splattered on the front surround. The front of this lens disassembles really, really, easily. It is not glued, thank goodness. So I had the paint, if that's what it was, cleaned up in very short order. The focus is smooth and the aperture is snappy. This lens, I discovered, has an M/A switch which is a feature I appreciate in any lens.

It was a happy outcome for me that the lens arrived with an m42 mount. Remember, as I posted earlier, I was assuming the mount was P/K because the seller said this lens fit a camera body which clearly was P/K. There must have been an adapter which I didn't receive and don't need. But with m42 this lens will mount easily onto my SD14.

So bottom line I'll continue to be pleased until, and if, the photos with this are too blurry. If they are the lens will become a treasured paperweight.

[Pancolart]

[guardian]

Am only posting this for other forum members who might venture here in search of Rexagon 23mm information. Today I stumbled across this item which pertains to the Rexagon 23:

http://www.davemiltonphotography.com/2013/06/a-few-updates.html

It's no bigee, but still I'm posting FWIW.

[TrueLoveOne]

And here's this lens again.... i really need to take some time to test my copy (Pallas branded), getting curious by now....

Pallas 23mm f/3.5 by TrueLoveOne, on Flickr

[dimitrygo]

[TrueLoveOne]

I'll post results as soon as i have them!

[guardian]

[Lightshow]

Looking forward to sample shots.