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

What's the latest lens you added to your collection?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jun 13, 2024 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Just ordered a Minolta AF 80-200mm f/2.8 APO (the older black version).
Not exactly an MF lens, but quite old by now and it will be adapted to my A7RII.

if i remember correctly, that lens is as good on 200mm as apo version, except weight


Yeah, it’s gonna be my heaviest lens for sure.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 14, 2024 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
kiddo wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Just ordered a Minolta AF 80-200mm f/2.8 APO (the older black version).
Not exactly an MF lens, but quite old by now and it will be adapted to my A7RII.

if i remember correctly, that lens is as good on 200mm as apo version, except weight


Yeah, it’s gonna be my heaviest lens for sure.


If I remember correctly, you had the mamiya 645 LD lens in that focal length, I wonder how do they compare on weight and image quality.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 14, 2024 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
kiddo wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Just ordered a Minolta AF 80-200mm f/2.8 APO (the older black version).
Not exactly an MF lens, but quite old by now and it will be adapted to my A7RII.

if i remember correctly, that lens is as good on 200mm as apo version, except weight


Yeah, it’s gonna be my heaviest lens for sure.


If I remember correctly, you had the mamiya 645 LD lens in that focal length, I wonder how do they compare on weight and image quality.


I expect them to be more or less equal; the Mamiya being slower of course, but also it is lighter.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 14, 2024 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


Tamron 28-A




Tamron QZ-210M



Probably have more on these later. Glass is in very good condition on both. I already have one of the QZ-210M here, in much rougher condition...
I have yet to get a photo of the 28-A out of box. It's got a bit of bag rash, and unfortunately, no hood. From what I'm seeing at the 28 end, it will need one.
Been a good day.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2024 12:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ref from younger sister website: http://adaptall-2.com/lenses/28A.html

Congrats That's one hunk of nice lens! I think you'll like it.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2024 4:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote


Name ring on the 28-A. Bit of a thumbprint there to remove- looks like finger oil.



At 28mm position here....



And at 135mm position.



It wants to flare badly towards the sun at 28mm- a hood is going to be an absolute necessity. The sun was no where near in the frame of this shot.

Little more cleaning to do with it yet, and a whole lot of test shooting...

-D.S.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2024 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Macro-Elmarit-R 60/2.8 & OM Zuiko 50/2





PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2024 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
wow some sweet gems you´ve got over there, i am really curious about the results these wonderfull lenses


PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2024 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Like 1 Congrats another WOW!


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
wow some sweet gems you´ve got over there, i am really curious about the results these wonderfull lenses


Honestly, I'm very, very disappointed.

Oly: strong vignetting and low contrast at F2, chromatic aberrations, "ninja star" at F2.8
Leica: large weight and size, poor ergonomics (especially the focusing ring), poor-quality body anodizing (shame on this brand!)

Both lenses have poor bokeh (for my taste). The Oly bokeh resembles photoshop, the legendary Leica bokeh resembles a cheap plastic Minolta MD 50/2 (price $10)
Both lenses are very inconvenient to use, Topcor 58/3.5 is much better.

"Legends are all to do with the past and nothing to do with the present." - Lauren Bacall


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
None of these lenses are very common , neither are cheap as they're very sought after. I have expected to a nice bokeh wide open on both lenses ,even though I've never had any of these lenses before. Could you compare them to other normal macro lenses ? Tomioka, vivitar , canon, yeshica?


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
None of these lenses are very common , neither are cheap as they're very sought after. I have expected to a nice bokeh wide open on both lenses ,even though I've never had any of these lenses before. Could you compare them to other normal macro lenses ? Tomioka, vivitar , canon, yeshica?


My 15-year search for the perfect macro lens was unsuccessful.
Vivitar 55/2.8 (Komine) and his cousin Panagor 55/3 - excellent sharpness, but very very poor bokeh
Canon FD 50/3.5 - strong vignetting, mid-level bokeh
Carl Zeiss Macro-Prakticar 55/2.8 - beautiful Zeiss bokeh, poor quality (especially the aperture mechanism)
Nikkor (all) - excellent sharpness and contrast, reliability, convenience, poor bokeh
Sigma (all) - bokeh is better than Nikkor's, but not significantly
Takumar (all) - nothing interesting
Kilfitt 40/2.8 - just awful
Tomioka 60/2.8 - I had no experience with this lens, but it seems to me that it should be similar to the Vivitar 55/2.8
Yashica 55/2.8 - good lens, light, convenient. Bokeh looks like Zeiss
Topcor 58/3.5 - excellent contrast and sharpness, but only in the macro range; at infinity the lens is very poor. Mid-level bokeh
Minolta Rokkor 50/3.5 - very bright and rich colors, interesting bokeh, but not for everyone

I’ve tested at least a hundred macro lenses, but I can't say that any of them caused a "wow effect." If you don't want to spend a lot of money, try Yashica ML 55/2.8 or Rokkor-QF 50/3.5. Yashica is lighter and more comfortable, but Rokkor has excellent build quality

Good macro and good bokeh are somewhat mutually exclusive concepts (please don't tell me about APO-Lanthars and so on, all this is not the standard of beautiful bokeh)


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 1:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D. P. wrote:
kiddo wrote:
None of these lenses are very common , neither are cheap as they're very sought after. I have expected to a nice bokeh wide open on both lenses ,even though I've never had any of these lenses before. Could you compare them to other normal macro lenses ? Tomioka, vivitar , canon, yeshica?


My 15-year search for the perfect macro lens was unsuccessful.
Vivitar 55/2.8 (Komine) and his cousin Panagor 55/3 - excellent sharpness, but very very poor bokeh
Canon FD 50/3.5 - strong vignetting, mid-level bokeh
Carl Zeiss Macro-Prakticar 55/2.8 - beautiful Zeiss bokeh, poor quality (especially the aperture mechanism)
Nikkor (all) - excellent sharpness and contrast, reliability, convenience, poor bokeh
Sigma (all) - bokeh is better than Nikkor's, but not significantly
Takumar (all) - nothing interesting
Kilfitt 40/2.8 - just awful
Tomioka 60/2.8 - I had no experience with this lens, but it seems to me that it should be similar to the Vivitar 55/2.8
Yashica 55/2.8 - good lens, light, convenient. Bokeh looks like Zeiss
Topcor 58/3.5 - excellent contrast and sharpness, but only in the macro range; at infinity the lens is very poor. Mid-level bokeh
Minolta Rokkor 50/3.5 - very bright and rich colors, interesting bokeh, but not for everyone

I’ve tested at least a hundred macro lenses, but I can't say that any of them caused a "wow effect." If you don't want to spend a lot of money, try Yashica ML 55/2.8 or Rokkor-QF 50/3.5. Yashica is lighter and more comfortable, but Rokkor has excellent build quality

Good macro and good bokeh are somewhat mutually exclusive concepts (please don't tell me about APO-Lanthars and so on, all this is not the standard of beautiful bokeh)



you should try the Tomioka - it's surprisingly good at both ends of your scale...

also - I did not see either of the Tamron Adaptalls here, the 52B or 72B (90mm f2.Cool...

or any of the k-mount Pentax macros - the later SMC A 50mm f2.8 Macro is a jewel...

the CZJ Macro-Prakticar should be given the benefit of the doubt, as well, since you've possibly just had a bad copy of it...

oh, and the Fujinon EBC 55mm f3.5 Macro is also excellent...


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 1:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Interesting discussion.

Macro/Micro lenses seem to have been a design of convenience.
Some of the old school stuff still works without a macro lens- the old stand-by normal SLR lens on a reversing ring, and/or an extension tube seems to work very well. I have gotten some softly muted backgrounds this way that are definitely interesting.
My favorite method is yet the shorter telephoto lens on the short extension tube for comfortable working distances, and painterly effects in the OOF areas.

I seriously doubt the designers had things like bokeh in mind while putting macro lenses together on the drawing board.
There are much better lenses around for general scenics.
What most of the macro lenses do best is get one in close and tight to small subjects~ which was the entire focus of the designs.
I am still amazed at what such lenses are capable of, but maybe my expectations are a bit on the low side Wink

-D.S.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
pepperberry farm wrote:

the CZJ Macro-Prakticar should be given the benefit of the doubt, as well, since you've possibly just had a bad copy of it...

oh, and the Fujinon EBC 55mm f3.5 Macro is also excellent...


I had three copies, all three with the same problem - incorrect aperture switching at F11-F16-F22. Otherwise, this is a nice compact lens, very pleasant to use.

Fujinon is a good thing, but five aperture blades are not very good.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Doc Sharptail wrote:
I seriously doubt the designers had things like bokeh in mind while putting macro lenses together on the drawing board.
-D.S.


You are absolutely right, so a GOOD macro lens with BEAUTIFUL bokeh is an urban legend Wink


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D. P. wrote:
Doc Sharptail wrote:
I seriously doubt the designers had things like bokeh in mind while putting macro lenses together on the drawing board.
-D.S.


You are absolutely right, so a GOOD macro lens with BEAUTIFUL bokeh is an urban legend Wink



mmm... I don't know about that....

I find the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 pretty solid at both....


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
pepperberry farm wrote:
D. P. wrote:
Doc Sharptail wrote:
I seriously doubt the designers had things like bokeh in mind while putting macro lenses together on the drawing board.
-D.S.


You are absolutely right, so a GOOD macro lens with BEAUTIFUL bokeh is an urban legend Wink



mmm... I don't know about that....

I find the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 pretty solid at both....


Here we were talking about "short" macro lenses (40-60mm). There are many interesting lenses in the "long" macro segment (70mm and more), including Tokina/Vivitar 90/2.5. But this Tokina has a big drawback - weight. I'm very lazy, and anything heavier than 300 grams is not very good for me Laugh 1


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D. P. wrote:
kiddo wrote:
None of these lenses are very common , neither are cheap as they're very sought after. I have expected to a nice bokeh wide open on both lenses ,even though I've never had any of these lenses before. Could you compare them to other normal macro lenses ? Tomioka, vivitar , canon, yeshica?


My 15-year search for the perfect macro lens was unsuccessful.
Vivitar 55/2.8 (Komine) and his cousin Panagor 55/3 - excellent sharpness, but very very poor bokeh
Canon FD 50/3.5 - strong vignetting, mid-level bokeh
Carl Zeiss Macro-Prakticar 55/2.8 - beautiful Zeiss bokeh, poor quality (especially the aperture mechanism)
Nikkor (all) - excellent sharpness and contrast, reliability, convenience, poor bokeh
Sigma (all) - bokeh is better than Nikkor's, but not significantly
Takumar (all) - nothing interesting
Kilfitt 40/2.8 - just awful
Tomioka 60/2.8 - I had no experience with this lens, but it seems to me that it should be similar to the Vivitar 55/2.8
Yashica 55/2.8 - good lens, light, convenient. Bokeh looks like Zeiss
Topcor 58/3.5 - excellent contrast and sharpness, but only in the macro range; at infinity the lens is very poor. Mid-level bokeh
Minolta Rokkor 50/3.5 - very bright and rich colors, interesting bokeh, but not for everyone

I’ve tested at least a hundred macro lenses, but I can't say that any of them caused a "wow effect." If you don't want to spend a lot of money, try Yashica ML 55/2.8 or Rokkor-QF 50/3.5. Yashica is lighter and more comfortable, but Rokkor has excellent build quality

Good macro and good bokeh are somewhat mutually exclusive concepts (please don't tell me about APO-Lanthars and so on, all this is not the standard of beautiful bokeh)


Well, after reading your findings I'm happy that I never spend my bucks on the Oly, I was close once. They're crazy expensive in general. My favourite vintage short macro untill now is the Yashica ML 55/2.8; if only it were a stop faster . Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2024 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D. P. wrote:
pepperberry farm wrote:
D. P. wrote:
Doc Sharptail wrote:
I seriously doubt the designers had things like bokeh in mind while putting macro lenses together on the drawing board.
-D.S.


You are absolutely right, so a GOOD macro lens with BEAUTIFUL bokeh is an urban legend Wink



mmm... I don't know about that....

I find the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 pretty solid at both....


Here we were talking about "short" macro lenses (40-60mm). There are many interesting lenses in the "long" macro segment (70mm and more), including Tokina/Vivitar 90/2.5. But this Tokina has a big drawback - weight. I'm very lazy, and anything heavier than 300 grams is not very good for me Laugh 1


There's a chinon macro 1.7 I guess ,but I know nothing about it, the zuiko 4/3 50mm f2 is very praised for the bokeh (small sensor)


PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Too bad you don't like CA's. I personally like it and never suppress it in post processing Very Happy

I also want to get the CA king, the Makro-Planar 100mm f2!

Doesn't some of the Venus optics macro lenses come with very low CA? Or it could have been one of the other Chinese manufacturers.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 12:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:

There's a chinon macro 1.7 I guess ,but I know nothing about it, the zuiko 4/3 50mm f2 is very praised for the bokeh (small sensor)


I had experience with Chinon 55/1.7 MCM Auto Macro. It's not quite a true macro (1:3 magnification), but it's a very interesting lens. The bokeh is quite pleasant.
There is also Chinon 50/1.7 Macro MC, but I don't know anything about it.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2024 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
blotafton wrote:
Too bad you don't like CA's. I personally like it and never suppress it in post processing Very Happy

I also want to get the CA king, the Makro-Planar 100mm f2!

Doesn't some of the Venus optics macro lenses come with very low CA? Or it could have been one of the other Chinese manufacturers.


I'm not a big fan of Chinese lenses, despite positive experiences with Haiou-64, Seagull-610 and some SLR Magic cine lenses.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 18, 2024 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a copy of the Chinon MCM 55/1.7 - as noted, it is only a 1:3 macro, but a capable lens:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/pepperberryfarm/albums/72157712836667193/


PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2024 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bought a (Edixa Reflex) M42 Schneider Kreuznach Tele-Xenar 135mm f/3.5. Haven't tested it properly, but first impression is good.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 302, 303, 304 ... 315, 316, 317  Next
Page 303 of 317