I have the 1981 version and it is very small and a very nice little lens. I don't have any of the others, however, and I haven't converted to use on digital yet, so my only experience with it is on film.
Did you convert the 100/2 yourself? I recently got the 100/2 but not the MC version. No intention to convert as I think it is rather "sinful" to convert such a rare lens. But I did converted a MC 100/2.5 PF, the version that replaced the 100/2. There is also another super rare MC 100/3.5 which I just bought (but had not received it). Seems like there is even less info on the 100/3.5 online than the 100/2!
These are some shots showing the bokeh of the MC 100/2.5 PF at either F2.5 or F4 (can't remember). Not the best of shots though
I took it to the local lens repairman to convert it.
Velectron wrote:
I recently got the 100/2 but not the MC version. No intention to convert as I think it is rather "sinful" to convert such a rare lens.
Yes, I know that. And I already send an apology at my post in page 4. But do not worry because I love this lens so very very much that I plan to keep it forever
Velectron wrote:
But I did converted a MC 100/2.5 PF, the version that replaced the 100/2. There is also another super rare MC 100/3.5 which I just bought (but had not received it). Seems like there is even less info on the 100/3.5 online than the 100/2!
These are some shots showing the bokeh of the MC 100/2.5 PF at either F2.5 or F4 (can't remember). Not the best of shots though
You are welcome. Wide open the 100/2 is probably less sharp but I think the bokeh should be smoother. So far I have only tried it with a glassless adapter (so no infinity focus). The DOF is really thin at F2!
If you want to try the 100/2.5, I would suggest you get the MC version. The MD version is kind of difficult to convert because the aperture control lever within the lens does not move in a circular arc like the MC version, but in a parabolic arc. You would need to retain the internal mechanisms and shave the lens mount to convert it.
BTW...were you the one who bidded close to a thousand for this lens on Ebay recently?
Velectron wrote:
You are welcome. Wide open the 100/2 is probably less sharp but I think the bokeh should be smoother. So far I have only tried it with a glassless adapter (so no infinity focus). The DOF is really thin at F2!
BTW...were you the one who bidded close to a thousand for this lens on Ebay recently?
Nope. I bought a Buy Now item for about $450.
By the way after I bought that lens I checked the price of Rokkor 58/1.2 and I was suprised that they were more expensive than the rare 100/2 MC.
That's why I consider my 100/2 lens as my soulmate lens Waiting for so long and finally got it at unbelievable price.
$450 is a steal for this lens! But I got mine at an even greater steal, complete with original box and accessories . The night I bought it I was so excited I couldn't even sleep! But too bad it had oily blades that the seller did not know about, although I did managed to cleaned it up.
BTW, what colour is the coating on the front glass of the MC 100/2? Green? The older Auto Rokkor is probably single-coated as it is golden brown. Likely to be less flare resistant than your MC version.
I made an introduction and pictorial disassembly guide for whoever might be interested here
Velectron wrote:
$450 is a steal for this lens! But I got mine at an even greater steal, complete with original box and accessories . The night I bought it I was so excited I couldn't even sleep!
BTW, what colour is the coating on the front glass of the MC 100/2? Green? The older Auto Rokkor is probably single-coated as it is golden brown. Likely to be less flare resistant than your MC version.
Just check the lens, it's golden brown too, both front and rear glass.
I made an introduction and pictorial disassembly guide for whoever might be interested here
Velectron wrote:
$450 is a steal for this lens! But I got mine at an even greater steal, complete with original box and accessories . The night I bought it I was so excited I couldn't even sleep! But too bad it had oily blades that the seller did not know about, although I did managed to cleaned it up.
BTW, what colour is the coating on the front glass of the MC 100/2? Green? The older Auto Rokkor is probably single-coated as it is golden brown. Likely to be less flare resistant than your MC version.
I made an introduction and pictorial disassembly guide for whoever might be interested here...Show more →
I would be getting a NEX camera soon, and then the real capability of this lens would finally be unleashed! Right now, it is sitting sadly in the dry box...haha
I also had a converted MC-Rokkor PF 100/2.5. Pretty nice sharp lens. Would try the MD version when I get my NEX. Now I am looking for the final MD version of the 100/2.5 with built it hood. Saw it once on Ebay but didn't win it.
Wow....Very nice shots! How did you manage to get that bird with the manual macro lens? I believe this kind of bird is very fast moving and jittery....even AF lenses would have some trouble with it.
Velectron wrote:
Wow....Very nice shots! How did you manage to get that bird with the manual macro lens? I believe this kind of bird is very fast moving and jittery....even AF lenses would have some trouble with it.
cheating. i do have a better luck with small fast birds using manual focus than autofocus (they're too small and erratic to track with autofocus), but in this case the bird was dead.
it froze to death in the winter on my aunt's christmas lights. she found it perfectly preserved when she took them down in spring. i figured i'd take advantage of how well it was preserved with some shots.
using macros is for humming birds is not terribly uncommon though. you can prefocus the camera and lens near some food and wait with a remote to trigger a burst when they approach.
Thanks for the effort! You have a lot of lenses in this FL! But kind of difficult to make a comparison with the low quality of youtube, plus the fact that you had adjusted colours and WB. So which one did you like the most?
@Velectron: I don't have plan to collect them though. I bought them mostly due to my extreme curiosity after I was bitten and fall in love with manual lens world.
Plus I have an odd hobby of comparing things
By the I have updated the video with larger images, though I still find away to make a better high quality HD video on youtube. I only have Ulead software as my video editor.
All lenses are great so that I still can not decide which lens to keep and which one to go.
I'll keep the Canon EF for shooting sports and other events if I need AF. It's small and quite cheap lens but very good.
The Rokkor 100/2 certainty I will keep. It's hard to get, it's very small lens and I love the color and bokeh. It's subtle and warm color is good for portrait too. Not as sharp as Zeiss/Olympus but it's enough for me.
The Zeiss 100/2 and Olympus 100/2 are very tight. I still have to compare these two kings to decide which one has to go
The Nikon 105/2.5 l will keep. It has great color, contrast, sharpness and bokeh, though I can not have the f/2 aperture
I want to sell the Nikon 105/1.8 for so long but in some condition the thin DOF of f/1.8 gives me something that other lens can't. (see the close up shots in that video). And it also give more speed at low light shot. But the color is not quite good for portrait, though it could be post processed.
The 105 DC is design for portrait. The color is suitable for portrait. But at wide open it's only sharp at closer distance and difficult to focus or get sharp at longer distance (I have to do more test to confirm this). It's super sharp compared to other Nikon at the same any aperture.
By the way I am very curious about Rokkor 100/2.5. I believe it must be much sharper than my older Rokkor 100/2, but still find out which one is the best :
1968: MC Tele Rokkor-PF 100/2,5 -> replaced 100/2
1973: MC Tele Rokkor-X PF 100/2,5
1976: MC Tele Rokkor-X 100/2,5 -> new design, focus closer, smaller, one less element
1977: MD Tele Rokkor-X 100/2,5 -> MD update
1981: MD 100/2,5 -> smaller, built-in hood
Could you shot the 'wheel horse' text at closest distance with that leaves as background? I wanna see the bokeh 
