Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
|
| p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · MS-Optics Apollon 36mm f1.3 (Leica M-mount) | |
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I think that there can be more variance in MS-Optics lenses with regards to build quality overall when compared to factory-made lenses from established manufacturers, since MS-Optics lenses are all hand-made by Miyazaki-san. I've had both good and bad experiences with his lenses myself. I would say that this Apollon 36mm is among the topmost robust ones, together with Sonnetar 50mm f1.3. As far as I can see, this lens seems to be all metal and feels well made, everything moves smoothly.
Some of his other lenses have really quirky designs with controls that might not be very user-friendly, and some of them may have rather fragile designs. Bastian has a great overview of all of his lenses here with links to several lens reviews:
https://phillipreeve.net/blog/overview-ms-optics-lenses/
In the product introduction of this lens at MKDirect's blog (written by Miyazaki-san's grandson), they highlighted that this Apollon would be a good entry-point into Miyzaki lenses and also a very robust addition for those who have already been using his lenses a lot before:
https://www.mkdirect51.com/post/%E6%96%B0%E5%95%86%E5%93%81-apollon-1-3-36-%E5%95%86%E5%93%81%E7%B4%B9%E4%BB%8B
I would definitely recommend this Apollon as a first entry into Miyazaki lenses and Sonnetar 50/1.3 as well. However, that Sonnetar 50/1.3 is a bit limited in the way that it doesn't produce great corner-to-corner sharpness even stopped down, so it's not that usable as an infinity landscape or cityscape lens. Xenomax 50mm f3.5 excels in corner-to-corner sharpness but it has a bit quirky aperture control and I think its' build quality is not as robust since it was designed as a collapsible lens but changed to non-collapsible at some point before release.
As for rangefinder calibration, I have no personal experience about how well calibrated MS-Optics lenses are in general as I don't have an rangefinder cameras and I use the lenses exclusively on mirrorless. I think Bastian may be able to comment about that aspect. Some of the lenses have Spherical Aberration controls that also impact rangefinder focusing and those would then have some way for user to adjust the focusing. Sonnetar 50/1.3 also has that control at the bottom of the lens and only one specific setting position is marked as the spot where rangefinder calibration should be perfect. Apollon has no such control....Show more →
---------------------------------------------
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I ordered a 28/2ii from JCH...took it out of the box and it didn't even mount appropriately on my Ikon--it rattled around, and wouldn't even lock, like the rear casing was the wrong size for the mount. When I returned it, he was less than pleased, which I thought was ridiculous.
@fredmiranda@ Build quality is horrible and not at all up to the price. I have owned 5 separate lenses. One 28mm, mentioned above, didn't even mount appropriately. The 73 Sonnetar was good, till about 2 years in when the whole thing started to come loosen--I tightened the screws in back and it's been good since. The same happened with my 35/1.4. The 28/2ii I had didn't have a filter thread or anyway to mount a filter, same with the 24mm. The 35/1.4 Apoqualia shares the same ergo as this new 36/1.3, which is too say it's poor but usable and quite good for MS-Optical standards, as opposed to several of his other recent lenses. Of the 4 lenses I have tried across 2 different M240's and a Zeiss Ikon, none have been accurate WO. My 73mm is adjustable somewhat with the "coma" ring with optimizing focus at a set distance, but it's less than ideal or super precise (on top of that that lens already has FS). I have noticed as well that the grease he uses tends to seize up at just below freezing. I used to live in Utah and when in mountains, the 73 Sonnetar became very stiff and hard to focus, borderline inoperable.
His lenses very wildly, I would say they are generally optically poor WO (think of them as miniaturized and RF'ed vintage glass still in production with polycarbonate/plastic build). The selling points are very small size, large aperture, RF and wonderful unique signatures when most lenses are very ho-hum. If you don't like much character, stopping down "cures" that. The selling points are not IQ, build quality, ergonomics or price. Despite their considerable foibles, they are really their own little world--small batches, tons of personality, something novel and refreshing, pleasantly unpredictable, easy to carry, fun to use when not being overtly frustrating/you're not expecting it to function like refined lens ergonomically or optically. I still use them, and maintain in active interests in his work.
...Show more →
That's unfortunate. Thanks for the report. I was looking at the 28/2 II (just for the extreme compactness) and this new 36/1.3 as I really like the rendering wide open but I'm not looking forward dealing with RF inconsistency and optical/build variation.
|
