This topic is in the 2017 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2017What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
p.71 #1What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Bifurcator wrote:
I nabbed the:
MC Tele Rokkor-QF 200/3.5
Auto Tele Rokkor-PF 135/2.8
MC Macro Rokkor-QF 50/3.5
MD Rokkor 50/1.4
Yesterday and they're all very good! I shot about 50 shots with each except the 50/3.5 Macro - which I shot about 300 with. I like it. It's rather unique for a 50mm macro - high contrast, low flare, yet with a LARGE glow falloff around bright objects and a half decent bokeh. I guess it could just need cleaning though.
i have the earliest version (m39 mount with SR adapter) of the 50 macro, and also was surprised to see relatively poor correction of spherical aberration. i definitely wouldn't call the bokeh halfway decent though, it's worse than the usual macro harshness. quite sharp though. haven't really had much opportunity to test it's flare performance, but the deeply recessed front element can't hurt.
a shot with it at f/5.6:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7140/6962750502_63492bbcae_o.jpg
I nabbed the:
MC Tele Rokkor-QF 200/3.5
Auto Tele Rokkor-PF 135/2.8
MC Macro Rokkor-QF 50/3.5
MD Rokkor 50/1.4
Yesterday and they're all very good! I shot about 50 shots with each except the 50/3.5 Macro - which I shot about 300 with. I like it. It's rather unique for a 50mm macro - high contrast, low flare, yet with a LARGE glow falloff around bright objects and a half decent bokeh. I guess it could just need cleaning though.
i have the earliest version (m39 mount with SR adapter) of the 50 macro, and also was surprised to see relatively poor correction of spherical aberration. i definitely wouldn't call the bokeh halfway decent though, it's worse than the usual macro harshness. quite sharp though. haven't really had much opportunity to test it's flare performance, but the deeply recessed front element can't hurt.
a shot with it at f/5.6:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7140/6962750502_63492bbcae_o.jpg
May 13, 2012 at 12:21 AM
p.71 #2What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Bifurcator wrote:
I nabbed the:
MC Tele Rokkor-QF 200/3.5
Auto Tele Rokkor-PF 135/2.8
MC Macro Rokkor-QF 50/3.5
MD Rokkor 50/1.4
Yesterday I tried MC Rokkor PG 50/1.4 and MC W.Rokkor SI 24/2.8 with NEX7 for floral closeups, ISO 200-400.Results are disappointing.Significantly worse than those of Distagons 25/2.8 C/Y,ZF and Planars 50/1.4 ZF.2,50/1.5 C/Y.Even the kit lens did better. Details in the shaded areas are poor,lacking contrast and hidden in chroma/luminance noise.I have to search this more in deep,but so far it seems that out of my lenses only Zeiss still delivers on the high pixel density sensor.Rokkors were never stellar by means of sharpnes/microcontrast compared to Zeiss lenses,but the difference was not that significant with NEX5N as it is with NEX7.
I nabbed the:
MC Tele Rokkor-QF 200/3.5
Auto Tele Rokkor-PF 135/2.8
MC Macro Rokkor-QF 50/3.5
MD Rokkor 50/1.4
Yesterday I tried MC Rokkor PG 50/1.4 and MC W.Rokkor SI 24/2.8 with NEX7 for floral closeups, ISO 200-400.Results are disappointing.Significantly worse than those of Distagons 25/2.8 C/Y,ZF and Planars 50/1.4 ZF.2,50/1.5 C/Y.Even the kit lens did better. Details in the shaded areas are poor,lacking contrast and hidden in chroma/luminance noise.I have to search this more in deep,but so far it seems that out of my lenses only Zeiss still delivers on the high pixel density sensor.Rokkors were never stellar by means of sharpnes/microcontrast compared to Zeiss lenses,but the difference was not that significant with NEX5N as it is with NEX7.
May 13, 2012 at 01:08 AM
p.71 #3What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Peire wrote:
Yesterday I tried MC Rokkor PG 50/1.4 and MC W.Rokkor SI 24/2.8 with NEX7 for floral closeups, ISO 200-400.Results are disappointing.Significantly worse than those of Distagons 25/2.8 C/Y,ZF and Planars 50/1.4 ZF.2,50/1.5 C/Y.Even the kit lens did better. Details in the shaded areas are poor,lacking contrast and hidden in chroma/luminance noise.I have to search this more in deep,but so far it seems that out of my lenses only Zeiss still delivers on the high pixel density sensor.Rokkors were never stellar by means of sharpnes/microcontrast compared to Zeiss lenses,but the difference was not that significant with NEX5N as it is with...Show more →
i'm certainly not surprised to hear the zeiss have higher microcontrast. i don't know about that version of the 24mm, but the 50/1.4 is definitely optimized for infinity not close ups in terms of sharpness aberration control and flatness of field, though i believe the planar probably is as well. i prefer my rokkors to zeiss for flowers, but it certainly isn't due to sharpness and contrast.
Yesterday I tried MC Rokkor PG 50/1.4 and MC W.Rokkor SI 24/2.8 with NEX7 for floral closeups, ISO 200-400.Results are disappointing.Significantly worse than those of Distagons 25/2.8 C/Y,ZF and Planars 50/1.4 ZF.2,50/1.5 C/Y.Even the kit lens did better. Details in the shaded areas are poor,lacking contrast and hidden in chroma/luminance noise.I have to search this more in deep,but so far it seems that out of my lenses only Zeiss still delivers on the high pixel density sensor.Rokkors were never stellar by means of sharpnes/microcontrast compared to Zeiss lenses,but the difference was not that significant with NEX5N as it is with...Show more →
i'm certainly not surprised to hear the zeiss have higher microcontrast. i don't know about that version of the 24mm, but the 50/1.4 is definitely optimized for infinity not close ups in terms of sharpness aberration control and flatness of field, though i believe the planar probably is as well. i prefer my rokkors to zeiss for flowers, but it certainly isn't due to sharpness and contrast.
May 13, 2012 at 01:33 AM
p.71 #4What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
LightShow wrote:
I'm thinking the macro is great, does it have the rubber focus ring or metal? I found my metal version to flare worse than my 58/1.2, although I have not used them together.
It's the rubber version. It's not "great" but it's very good. It sells for $75 ~ $125 and that's about what it's worth in terms of a lens this old which isn't a rare collectors item. IQ and function wise it's on par with the Nikkor 55/2.8 Macro. There's not enough CA in this version of the lens to even mention. Well, the proof of the lens is in the viewing of the image as they say; and all the ones I posted on the previous page are wide open with only a little processing. Here's some 100% crops from two of them. The "Large glow falloff" in that one shot is because the lens needs to be cleaned is all.
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_50mm_f3.5_Macro_MC/_1060624_100c.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_50mm_f3.5_Macro_MC/_1060780_100c.jpg
Here's what the lens actually looks like - along with the 200/3.5 and the 135/2.8.
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_50mm_f3.5_Macro_MC/_1070037.jpg
The shot was taken with the Rokkor 50/1.4 or I would have included it in the shot there. That's the 50/3.5 Macro fully extended. The Barrel markings and top rim disappear into the focus ring when focused to infinity. That beveled tip makes it look pretty cool on the GH1. It looks a bit, um, uncircumcised.
I took the 200/3.5 out birding today and while I haven't processed them yet the camera display was showing it to be quite a bit better then "good" and well into being excellent. I'll know more when I process them - from now...
I'm thinking the macro is great, does it have the rubber focus ring or metal? I found my metal version to flare worse than my 58/1.2, although I have not used them together.
It's the rubber version. It's not "great" but it's very good. It sells for $75 ~ $125 and that's about what it's worth in terms of a lens this old which isn't a rare collectors item. IQ and function wise it's on par with the Nikkor 55/2.8 Macro. There's not enough CA in this version of the lens to even mention. Well, the proof of the lens is in the viewing of the image as they say; and all the ones I posted on the previous page are wide open with only a little processing. Here's some 100% crops from two of them. The "Large glow falloff" in that one shot is because the lens needs to be cleaned is all.
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_50mm_f3.5_Macro_MC/_1060624_100c.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_50mm_f3.5_Macro_MC/_1060780_100c.jpg
Here's what the lens actually looks like - along with the 200/3.5 and the 135/2.8.
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_50mm_f3.5_Macro_MC/_1070037.jpg
The shot was taken with the Rokkor 50/1.4 or I would have included it in the shot there. That's the 50/3.5 Macro fully extended. The Barrel markings and top rim disappear into the focus ring when focused to infinity. That beveled tip makes it look pretty cool on the GH1. It looks a bit, um, uncircumcised.
I took the 200/3.5 out birding today and while I haven't processed them yet the camera display was showing it to be quite a bit better then "good" and well into being excellent. I'll know more when I process them - from now...
May 13, 2012 at 06:20 AM
p.71 #5What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
I was wrong about the MC 200/3.5.... It's good but only good... Not awesome or anything. It's weird, I have a few lenses which look exceptional in the EVF but in PS they'r not what they look like in the camera's displays. Maybe it has something to do with EVF resolution or something? 
Here's a couple of birds shot with it:
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_200mm_f3.5_QF_MC%20/_1060860_ROKKOR-QF_MC_200_f3.5.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_200mm_f3.5_QF_MC%20/_1060984_ROKKOR-QF_MC_200_f3.5.jpg
It's good but only good... Not awesome or anything. It's weird, I have a few lenses which look exceptional in the EVF but in PS they'r not what they look like in the camera's displays. Maybe it has something to do with EVF resolution or something? Here's a couple of birds shot with it:
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_200mm_f3.5_QF_MC%20/_1060860_ROKKOR-QF_MC_200_f3.5.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/ROKKOR_200mm_f3.5_QF_MC%20/_1060984_ROKKOR-QF_MC_200_f3.5.jpg
May 13, 2012 at 11:29 AM
p.71 #6What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Lovely bird, ugly pillowcase.
May 13, 2012 at 01:18 PM
p.71 #7What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
My thoughts exactly.
I nearly offered to remove it but I didn't think it would go over all that well. Edited on May 17, 2012 at 07:06 AM · View previous versions
May 17, 2012 at 06:34 AM
p.71 #8What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Picked up an AI 28/3.5 to complete by basic Nikkor kit (28/50/105). Decent little lens, not up to the 28/2.8 AI-S in performance but completely acceptable performance on film and it's unlikely to ever see digital.
May 17, 2012 at 06:51 AM
p.71 #9What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
I still need to get an 85 or 105 Nikkor to round out my set.
May 17, 2012 at 09:44 AM
p.71 #10What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Went on a buying spree this week. I picked up a Canon FD 50 1.2 locally for a good deal, bought a Rokunar (made by Vivitar) 55 2.8 macro (FD) off of buy/sell, and got a used Rokinon 85 1.4 from KEH.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7094/7216543108_3a5fd31d7d_b.jpg
(Edited in aviary because I am at work. As a side note, aviary sucks. Whatever junk flickr was using before was better, even though it sucked too).
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/i-Pt8Kqm4/0/M/i-Pt8Kqm4-M.jpg
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/i-V3bQMVb/0/M/i-V3bQMVb-M.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7094/7216543108_3a5fd31d7d_b.jpg
(Edited in aviary because I am at work. As a side note, aviary sucks. Whatever junk flickr was using before was better, even though it sucked too).
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/i-Pt8Kqm4/0/M/i-Pt8Kqm4-M.jpg
http://www.smugmug.com/photos/i-V3bQMVb/0/M/i-V3bQMVb-M.jpg
May 17, 2012 at 11:30 AM
p.71 #11What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Got a cheap Minolta MC W. Rokkor 28mm f/2.0 today on the fleamarket. A mount screw and paint missing.
Wonder how it performs after conversion on the EOS 5D.
Wonder how it performs after conversion on the EOS 5D.
May 20, 2012 at 06:03 AM
p.71 #12What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Yesterday's purchase:SMC Pentax M 50/1.7,SMC Pentax M 28/3.5,SMC Pentax M 135/3.5,Canon FD SSC 50/3.5 Macro with life size tube,Canon FD 50/1.8N,MD Zoom Rokkor 50-135/3.5,Kinor 200/3.3 MD mount,Tamron adaptall 80-210/3.8-4,Nikkor AFD 28-70/3.5-4.5,Sigma DL 100-300/4.5-6.7 Nikon AFD mount,Porst 35/2.8 MC Pentax K mount.Thats it.
May 20, 2012 at 10:34 AM
p.71 #13What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Today's delivery: Vivitar Series 1 70-210 2.8-4 (Komine made) and an albinar 28 2.8 macro, both in FD mount. Total outlay: $30 (Though I need to pick up a couple of FD rear caps).
May 21, 2012 at 01:06 PM
p.71 #14What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
just recieved the zeiss c/y 28-85mm.
its a tank.
but its very nice, an more compact than i thought.
i will see how it performs against the N24-85 which i sold.
its a tank.
but its very nice, an more compact than i thought.
i will see how it performs against the N24-85 which i sold.
May 21, 2012 at 01:42 PM
p.71 #15What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Just got a Canon 50/1.8
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/ODA0WDEyMDA=/$(KGrHqVHJDkE-ODOkpogBPum7stV(!~~60_3.JPG
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/ODA0WDEyMDA=/$(KGrHqVHJDkE-ODOkpogBPum7stV(!~~60_3.JPG
May 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM
p.71 #16What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Nice, LightShow. I'll be interested to hear what you think of it. I love my Canon LTM 35/2, but it's biggest problem is flare. You just have to whisper the words "light source" near the lens and everything washes out in veiling flare.
May 25, 2012 at 01:23 PM
p.71 #17What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
I don't mind veiling flare, and under some situations I like it, it's the the reflection and refraction flare I don't like.
I had high hopes with the 35/2.8 on my NEX7, but there is some smearing towards the corners, the rest looked nice, so it will be on display till I replace the 7, I expect this 50 to be much better.
I had high hopes with the 35/2.8 on my NEX7, but there is some smearing towards the corners, the rest looked nice, so it will be on display till I replace the 7, I expect this 50 to be much better.
May 25, 2012 at 03:10 PM
p.71 #18What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
Peire wrote:
Yesterday's purchase:SMC Pentax M 50/1.7,SMC Pentax M 28/3.5,SMC Pentax M 135/3.5,Canon FD SSC 50/3.5 Macro with life size tube,Canon FD 50/1.8N,MD Zoom Rokkor 50-135/3.5,Kinor 200/3.3 MD mount,Tamron adaptall 80-210/3.8-4,Nikkor AFD 28-70/3.5-4.5,Sigma DL 100-300/4.5-6.7 Nikon AFD mount,Porst 35/2.8 MC Pentax K mount.Thats it.
Man, I thought I was bad.
Yesterday's purchase:SMC Pentax M 50/1.7,SMC Pentax M 28/3.5,SMC Pentax M 135/3.5,Canon FD SSC 50/3.5 Macro with life size tube,Canon FD 50/1.8N,MD Zoom Rokkor 50-135/3.5,Kinor 200/3.3 MD mount,Tamron adaptall 80-210/3.8-4,Nikkor AFD 28-70/3.5-4.5,Sigma DL 100-300/4.5-6.7 Nikon AFD mount,Porst 35/2.8 MC Pentax K mount.Thats it.
Man, I thought I was bad.
May 25, 2012 at 07:55 PM
p.71 #19What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
He was such a fine fellow till LBA got him....
May 25, 2012 at 10:01 PM
p.71 #20What is your most recent (alt) lens purchase?
I know someone who's alt lenses collection is approaching 350.Bigger than Bif's(?!).I saw him last week buying EVF for he's NEX5N.....
Today's purchase:G Planar 35/2,G Sonnar 90/2.8,SMC Pentax A 70-210/4,Oly G-Zuiko 50/1.4,Canon FD 28/2.8,Canon FD 100-200/5.6,Nikkor 35-135/3.5-4.5.
Today's purchase:G Planar 35/2,G Sonnar 90/2.8,SMC Pentax A 70-210/4,Oly G-Zuiko 50/1.4,Canon FD 28/2.8,Canon FD 100-200/5.6,Nikkor 35-135/3.5-4.5.
May 26, 2012 at 01:08 PM