TEST eight Konica AR 135mm primes and zooms

[stevemark]

While updateing some information on artaphot I've been re-testing their 135mm lenses, including three more primes (early Hexanon 3.2/135, early Hexanon 3.5/135 and Hexar 3.5/135) as well as the two well-known zooms AR 3.5/80-200mm and AR 4/80-200mm UC.



AS USUAL: CLICK TWICE ON THE IMAGE TO GET FULL RESOLUTION AND DOWNLOAD TO WATCH IT IN A PROPER PROGRAM SUCH AS PHOTOSHOP (TO AVOID ARTIFICIALLY "IMPROVED" IMAGES ...)

A few remarks:

* the 3.2/135mm samples are a bit inconsistent; the later (all black lens barrel) variant seems to perform slightly different from the earlier chrom/black version. I have tested two of the all-black AR 3.2/135mm, and they look similar

* the 2.5/135mm is as good as the 3.2/135mm and delivers very good results from f5.6 on. Wide ope there's some purple fringing and slight softness => good for portraits!

* the early 3.5/135mm is weaker than the two (later) lenses mentioned above

* the late AR 3.5/135mm is a different computation and - apart from lateral CAs - surprisingly good at f3.5. Stopping down doesn't improve the detail resolution, but reduces vignetting. At f5.6 and f22 the AR 2.5/135mm and the newer version of the AR 3.2/135mm (black barrel) are better

* the Hexar 3.5/135mm is pretty much between the earlier and the later computation of the 3.5/135mm AR Hexanons, but bigger and heavier

* my three samples of the AR 3.5/80-200mm (a very well built and nice looking heavy tele zoom) are a mixed bax - contrast is reduced due to the large number of lenses (seventeen ...!) and early coatings (plus porbably some weak fogging often found on old zoom lenses). Especially wide open, but to some extent also at f5.6 the image lacks resolution and contrast. Stopped down to f11 and at f=135mm the lens is remarkably free from CAs. Colors are clearly warmer than with all other lenses tested here (same also for the huge AR 2.8/35-100mm lens, BTW)

* the AR 4/80-200mm UC has stronger lateral CAs than the AR 2.5/135 and 3.2/135mm lenses, but a rather good detail resolutioin comparable to the "weaker" AR primes. Bear in mind however that most comparable telezooms from Canon / Minolta / Nikon / Zeiss at f=135mm do outperform their 2.8/135mm counterparts from the same manufacturer!

Comments and questions welcome

S

BTW information on disassembling / cleaning of the AR 2.5/135, the AR 3.2/135 and the AR 3.5/135 will follow

EDIT Image updated with information about apertures used!

[KEO]

[LittleAlex]

[Crazy Leica Fox]

Thank you for these extensive lens tests! What apertures were used in each column of your chart?

I have an all-black f/3.2 EE and a pair of f/2.5 AE's. I'm not sure how I ended up with two of the f/2.5's, but I should compare them and get rid of one. I love the f/3.2 for a lightweight landscaper, and the f/2.5 is wonderful at larger apertures. I haven't really used a f/2.5 for stopped-down infinity shooting of the type demonstrated here in your tests, because I bring the f/3.2 if I expect to do any of that, but it's good to know the f/2.5 still performs well in this function.

[Zamo]

Thanks for the work! It somehow confirms all my experiences with those lenses. Regular zoom is just ok; UC zoom I tried and sold, I found nothing to write home about; the 3.5 is a good lens but not exceptional, just a typical 135mm good performer; 3.2 is the one I have less experience with, but I didn't find it as good a performer as you read on forums, but that was probably my copy; and 2.5 is a bit on the heavy side but very low CAs and more that enough sharpness and contrast. It is the one I use, even sold the best version (can't remember which one it is now) Takumar 135/2.5 and kept the Hexanon (although someone said here on the forum that he could not imagine any reasons for that! ). In fact, I own 3 copies of the 2.5, all of them pristine, but my collection is a bit of a mess and I don't find the time to take them out and put them on sale!

[caspert79]

Thanks, interesting information. I’ll stick to my 135/3.2, which is great for close up subjects.

[stevemark]

[Raxar]

amazing works as always

[stevemark]

Original test image updated with information about the aperture used - see first posting!

S