135mm fast old lenses

DrDave

I have several copies of the Rokkor 135, and they are just a bit soft, but there are many, many variants on these. I will try to make a test of whatever I have lying around, but the 135s have been thoroughly tested by better testers than me. I don't get sharpness like from a good 85, 90 or 105mm. I haven't tried the F2, though. My experience with all the 135mm I tried was that you have to go to F4 to get good results, but some people claim to do better wide open.

v10tdi

About a year ago I picked up the MC Tele Rokkor - PF F2.8. I really enjoy using this lens - but it is too heavy for me to hand-hold well. Mine has an integrated lens hood.

nomad

The 4/4 version of the 135mm 2.8 is the best. It's hard to identify, only by weight and dimensions. But it's quite sharp wide open, and the rare and expensive 2.0 version only reaches the same level when stopped down to 2.8.

MirrorMan

Another one of my (boring) tests, but a field test nonetheless comparing a Takumar 3.5, Pentacon Auto 2.8 and Nikkor 2.8. I'm not so satisfied with the Takumar I have, but the Pentacon and Nikkor are a pleasure to use and they only cost me about €30 each.

I've got a Tele Rokkor 2.8 coming and I'm curious to see how that compares.

fosterchen

I got the Sonagar 135mm today....bad news is that the aperture was pretty oily and when I tried opening and closing, a couple blades got stuck and it wouldn't open/close right.

I ended up taking it completely apart, opening the aperture up all the way, taking out the click ball and screw that prevents any aperture change, cleaned up the glass, so now I have a 'constant' f2.8 lens!

Also took off the OM mount...waiting on the M42 adapter for testing..

Here's some photos from the take off:

fosterchen

Couldn't wait any longer...decided to do some tests while holding the lens:

stoney

I heard many good things about Lumix 100-300mm. Why vintage 135mm that are soft and lacking OIS?

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@Why vintage 135mm that are soft and lacking OIS?

Get Vivitar 135mm F2.3 and you'll understand in few seconds why.

It is like fucking real woman instead of inflated dolly.

stoney

Ah inflated doll like this?

http://tinyurl.com/3ehvr5z

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@stonebat

Just turn ring of your fingers around Vivitar, you'll understand.

stoney

Hmmm.... Aren't you a big fan of Vivitar. I got two VIvitar lenses. 28mm 2.0 Close Focus and 55mm 2.8 Macro. They were cheap.

The 135mm is not cheap at all. The Komine version is around $250. Really the vintage lens worth that much?

Vitaliy_Kiselev

Really the vintage lens worth that much?

300mm F3.0 and 135mm F2.3 worth it. IF you get them in good state and turn focus ring you'll understand that you tried before only inflated dolls.

stoney

I never owned inflated dolls so I can't compare them. But I got your point.

fosterchen

My Sonagar was basically free...only paid for shipping since the aperture was bad. Glass was mint. Fully manual lenses are always fun to play around with, and they don't make them like they used to anymore. I can take it apart completely and not worry about screwing up any electronics.

DrDave

I took out my Komine made Vivtar close focusing 135/2.8 today and tested it. It is better than I remember. I suspect that there must have been a few different versions, some people claim it has a built in hood. Mine identical to this one http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/988253 And it looks just like the 55mm macro except it is heavier (the 55 is very light)

Mine is pretty sharp wide open, and has nice contrast and lack of color bleed wide open as well. The lens has some kind of coating, so maybe it is a later model. I prefer it to my Minolta 135. If you can find one, it is a nice lens.

My Olly 40-150 Zoom is just as sharp, maybe even sharper, but not as fast. If you don't need the F2.8. well, the Zoom is pretty cheap, very light as well. Of course I'm assuming I can put a metabones adapter on the 135...... at some point. That's one reason to hang on to some of these primes.

My 90mm Vivitar macro has an attachment to nake it go 1:1 and it works very well with 55mm for better than 1:1. So if you want some macro, this is a real nice lens for that.

Of the ones I have tried, this one has a very nice balance of features.

Other pros: compact Cons: heavy glass. Not as heavy as the 90, but chunky.

LPowell

I have the Vivitar Series-1 135mm f2.3 (in Minolta MD mount), and the Canon FD 135mm f2. Like Vitaliy says, the Vivitar is a black onyx work of art, with a liquid mechanical precision you have to feel to believe. The Canon FD is a little more compact and practical, a fast, long lens you can actually use handheld (but watch out for flare at wide apertures).

I can also recommend the Vivitar's big brother, the Series-1 200mm f3.0, though it's significantly heavier and less well-balanced than the 135mm. I adapted both of these Minolta MD lenses to legacy Four Thirds mount, in order to use them manually with the Panasonic Four Thirds adapter. The MD->FT adapter is a thin ring attached semi-permanently to the lens mount with a set screw, making a tight, immovable connection with zero wobble or play.

fosterchen

Just got the Vivitar 135mm f2.3, and I definitely see what you guys mean! Oh so smooth! Too bad the focus ring is slanted, can't really put gears on it...

DrDave

I actually prefer the "Close Focus" Vivitar Macro 1:2 135/2.8 to the Series I 135/2.3. I think overall, it is a slightly better lens. The Series one is a tiny bit faster, however. Neither lens is what I would call super sharp. The Series one has a more conical profile, and the Close Focus shares its design with several other Komine telescoping macros. The 135 CF 2.8 is a bit heavier than the 55, and the 55 gets more use. The 135/2.3 is a tank.

You can see some nice photos of the lens here http://www.theatreofnoise.com/2013/05/a-look-at-vivitar-135mm-close-focusing.html

However, the Close Focus is 1/3rd lighter than the Series one and focuses way closer. Lighter is good. The other thing is that the smooth Bokeh on this lens looks like film grain. It is a subtle effect, but a good one for video. Because of the macro, it is a good bug lens for photos, but as I mentioned before it isn't sharp like the Olly 75/1.8. A good candidate for the Metabones owing to the Bokeh and the color neutral multicoating.

Like all the others in this series, with the telescoping macro, it is a "long throw", but it is cylindrical, if you want gears.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

I actually prefer the "Close Focus" Vivitar Macro 1:2 135/2.8 to the Series I 135/2.3. I think overall, it is a slightly better lens.

Main thing in F2.3 is not sharpness. It is just the Thing. You just need to own one :-)

inviev

I have the Meyer Optic 135/2.8 with the 15 blades aka "Bokeh Monster" (just google it). It's my only prime in that focal length. For the GF2 is on the big side but on a tripod is perfect this focal length. The Vivitar Series-1 70-210/3.5 is an other lens that I have and covers this lenght, but it's a zoom and with an amazing macro mode, which is mind boggling on a 5D MkII. For the GF2 is so f**king big and front heavy

Vitaliy_Kiselev

For the GF2 is so f**king big and front heavy

Of course. You need GM1 for it to feel properly :-)

fosterchen

I read that the Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f2.8~4 Komine version is the best one. Has 9 blade aperture, and is the sharpest out of all of them. And wouldn't you know it, as soon as I found out, the price of them have started to go up...

nomad

Then look for a Russian Tair - even more blades …

RRRR

meyer optik görlitz.. at f2.8 it´s not the fastest, but very sharp wide open and a beauty stopped down. Wonderful lens. Pentacon "copies" are cheaper, generally but not as good imo, optically. (accounts for all the focal lengths where you can choose either or)

Obviously, this COULD be attributed to sample variations. Some of the pentacons have better coatings, which may make a difference for your intended use.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

Not so old and not so cheap - 135mm F2 L FE lens

http://www.calebkeiter.com/canon-135mm-f2l-review/

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters