Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 43 of 43

Thread: small 135mm lens

  1. #1
    Member shadzee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    68
    Post Thanks / Like

    small 135mm lens

    What is the best lens for...
    - around 135mm-150mm eq. (70-85mm)
    - smallest possible (with a small adapter)
    - F2.8 or faster
    - with Excellent IQ
    - Less than $750
    - Mostly used for portraits

    Currently I'm considering the Pentax 77mm F/1.8. It's fairly small and fast lens, but the adapter makes it bigger than what I hope to have.

    Any suggestions?

    Thanks.
    .Sam.
    Panasonic GF1 & Olympus E-P5
    Photos: http://www.flickr.com/shadzee/

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    776
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    I think most SLR lenses in that size and speed wouldn't qualify as 'small', especially given their adapters. Some RF lenses might, and you could look into some C-mount/cine lenses as well since they're usually smaller.

    You should also consider looking at 50's lenses for portrait work (55, 55, 57, etc.). On mFT cameras they end up being just about in the sweet spot for portrait work, and there's a whole bunch more choices for smaller fast lenses in that focal length range.
    -Dragos
    Panasonic GH1/G1, Canon FTb(n)/F-1, Mamiya C330F/RB67 Pro SD, Chamonix 45N-2, Nikon F5 + Assorted Lenses

  3. #3
    Senior Member apicius9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Have you thought about c-mount lenses here? There are a few nice ones in 75mm out there. The Kern Switar 75/1.9 may be the leader of the pack but the prices have gone up quite a bit. More affordable alternatives: Kern Yvar 75/2.8, Schneider Tele-Xenar 75/2.8 or the Angenieux 75/2.5 all usually between $200 and $300 on ebay.

    Stefan

    P.S. Probably not the cream of the crop but still a really very nice lens in the same price range as the others I listed: Kodak Cine Ektar 63/2 with a c-mount adapter.

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by photoSmart42 View Post
    I think most SLR lenses in that size and speed wouldn't qualify as 'small', especially given their adapters. Some RF lenses might, and you could look into some C-mount/cine lenses as well since they're usually smaller.

    You should also consider looking at 50's lenses for portrait work (55, 55, 57, etc.). On mFT cameras they end up being just about in the sweet spot for portrait work, and there's a whole bunch more choices for smaller fast lenses in that focal length range.

    +1

    I would add here- seriously look into a Fujinon-TV 50/1.4 (simple mod needed) or a Fujinon-TV 75/1.8 (no mods and straight fit on any decent c-mount adapter for the old version on eBay. They go for ~$150/each). Consider getting appropriately sized hoods with these lenses. Very important.

    A slightly bigger Navitron (sold under many names) 75/1.3 (slight mod required and perhaps no mods needed on the new G2) with 58mm filter thread is perhaps one of the sharpest ever I have used on the m4/3rds. These are available new for ~$400/-. Worth every dime, IMO.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    To me it seems as the Voigtländer 75/2.4 is a given candidate. It rivals or betters the FA77/1.8 in all areas except of speed (yes, I have owned them all and I keep a rangefinder version of the CV75/2.4).

    Vivek, do you have a source for th Navitron 75/1.3?

    thank you,

    /Jonas

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Just did a google ("cctv 75mm") for you Jonas.

    This is what I came up with :

    http://www.graftek.com/pages/navitarlensesffl.htm

    DO-7513 75mm Fixed Focal Lenth Lens with Manual Focus and Iris, C-mount, 1in. format, F-stop: 1.3, Filter: 58mm, Pitch: 0.75 *Discontinued $200

    I am sure these are floating around elsewhere as well. NIB.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Just did a google ("cctv 75mm") for you Jonas.

    This is what I came up with :

    http://www.graftek.com/pages/navitarlensesffl.htm

    DO-7513 75mm Fixed Focal Lenth Lens with Manual Focus and Iris, C-mount, 1in. format, F-stop: 1.3, Filter: 58mm, Pitch: 0.75 *Discontinued $200

    I am sure these are floating around elsewhere as well. NIB.
    OK. Thank you for googling...

    The problem is that Graftek can't deliver the lens. I tried back in April and all I got was a mail were they recommended a replacement (GTKQ13088 which is a V7514 which is a Computar 75/1.4 for USD 369 and I don't know about its performance or if it is possible to mount).

    So far my search for a Navitar 75/1.3 has given me nothing reasonable. I could try harder I guess.

    regards,

    /Jonas

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: small 135mm lens

    This the exact lens (Navitar rebadged) I own/use:

    http://www.adorama.com/Als/ProductPage/SOF914029.html

    What I don't have (and it makes no sense to me at all) is this (from Adorama's listing):


    "WHAT’S IN THE BOX

    Sofradir-EC (Electrophysics) L75F1.3 C-Mount Objective Lens - Two Quartz Objective Lenses - Sofradir-EC (Electrophysics) Warranty"

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: small 135mm lens

    I would also recommend the CV 75mm f/2.5. It is screwmount, so it has a short lens registration distance (which means the adapter is small), it is not large itself, and it is widely considered to give the Leica 75mm f/2 and f/1.4 a run for their money at similar apertures. And it is cheap -- just over 300 USD new. You can surely find one used for less. I would say that it fits your needs very well.
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    This the exact lens (Navitar rebadged) I own/use:

    http://www.adorama.com/Als/ProductPage/SOF914029.html
    (...)
    Wow... contraband.
    OK, then it at least exists.

    Thank you,

    /Jonas

  11. #11
    Subscriber Member Jonathon Delacour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    454
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by shadzee View Post
    What is the best lens for...
    - around 135mm-150mm eq. (70-85mm)
    - smallest possible (with a small adapter)
    - F2.8 or faster
    - with Excellent IQ
    - Less than $750
    - Mostly used for portraits

    Currently I'm considering the Pentax 77mm F/1.8. It's fairly small and fast lens, but the adapter makes it bigger than what I hope to have.

    Any suggestions?

    Thanks.
    Pen F 70mm f/2

    + around 135mm-150mm eq. (70-85mm)
    - smallest possible (with a small adapter)
    + F2.8 or faster
    + with Excellent IQ
    + Less than $750
    + Mostly used for portraits

    Perhaps not as small as a C-mount lens but the 70/2 meets all the other listed criteria. The adapter is small too, about the same depth as a Leica M adapter.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathon Delacour View Post
    Pen F 70mm f/2

    + around 135mm-150mm eq. (70-85mm)
    - smallest possible (with a small adapter)
    + F2.8 or faster
    + with Excellent IQ
    + Less than $750
    + Mostly used for portraits

    Perhaps not as small as a C-mount lens but the 70/2 meets all the other listed criteria. The adapter is small too, about the same depth as a Leica M adapter.
    I had a Pen 70/2 for a short period. It wasn't really to my taste as I found the contrast very low and it was also soft. I don't recall the details but it gave me an overall impression of being soft, simply put. Or my memory might be dim. Maybe it's good for a certain type of portraits, or renders images a way some like.

    The difference to the CV75/2.5 is big. Here one needs to know what rendering style is preferred.

    /Jonas

  13. #13
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: small 135mm lens

    "Soft"?! The 70/2? Where did find your sample, Jonas?



    G1, pen F 70/2, wide open.

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by shadzee View Post
    What is the best lens for...
    - around 135mm-150mm eq. (70-85mm)
    - smallest possible (with a small adapter)
    - F2.8 or faster
    - with Excellent IQ
    - Less than $750
    - Mostly used for portraits

    Currently I'm considering the Pentax 77mm F/1.8. It's fairly small and fast lens, but the adapter makes it bigger than what I hope to have.

    Any suggestions?

    Thanks.
    So you're looking for a 70-85mm lens. This is a wonderful telephoto range for FourThirds. Why confuse things with 35mm Equivalence stuff?

    The Pentax FA77 Limited is a delightful lens, but pricey (now particularly ... it's much more than when I bought one). At nearly $800, I think it's way over-priced. When I bought mine in 2006, it was $600, and I thought that was pricey.

    I am using a somewhat rare Olympus Pen F G.Zuiko 70mm f/2 on the G1. Very small, excellent imaging quality:


    That's a B+W 49mm telephoto hood on a 43->49 step up ring. The lens cost me $415 last year, the adapter is about $60 IIRC. The lens is really very small and quite light. Olympus also made a 60mm f/1.5 which is beautiful, but even rarer than the 70/2.

    I haven't found anything "soft" about it either ... although wide open it is just a touch soft at the edges. It does need a good deep hood ... 1960s lens coatings.


    Panasonic G1 + Olympus Pen F 70mm f/2
    ISO 100 @ f/2.8 @ 1/800 second


    If you want a little longer, the Nikon 85mm f/1.8 is a superb performer and costs around $450. It's not as compact as either the Olympus Pen or Pentax, however. There's also the Samyang 85mm f/1.4 (sold under Vivitar and Bower names for Nikon mount) which is quite a good performer and only $350 new.
    Last edited by Godfrey; 8th May 2010 at 14:21.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    "Soft"?! The 70/2? Where did find your sample, Jonas?
    I got it from an expensive and well known dealer located in SF, California, often referred to as expensive but great to deal with.

    Compared to the CV75/2.5 (all versions) the Pen 70/2 (my copy) was soft, dull and lacked in contrast. I have heard the 60/1.5 is a gem though being contrasty and "sharp" also wide open and this as opposite to most other Pen F lenses. Hmm... who told me that?

    It may be down to sample differences, I have used one of those Pen 70/2 lenses only and can't tell.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    (...) There's also the Samyang 85mm f/1.4 (sold under Vivitar and Bower names for Nikon mount) which is quite a good performer and only $350 new.
    Have you seen any images taken with the Samyang 85/1.4 and a µ4/3 camera? I ask as I haven't. I have however used the lens with a 6DMkII and wide open it was on the limit. I wonder how it handles the µ4/3 pixel density?

    Samyang is btw sold under more names. Here is a list, and I'm not sure it is complete: Samyang, Bower, Falcon, Polar, Rokinon, Sakar, Samyang, Vivitar Series 1 and Walimex (all 85/1.4). It is made at least for the Canon EF and Nikon mounts and somewhere I read they'll make a 4/3 mount version as well.

    /Jonas

  17. #17
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    Have you seen any images taken with the Samyang 85/1.4 and a µ4/3 camera? I ask as I haven't. I have however used the lens with a 6DMkII and wide open it was on the limit. I wonder how it handles the µ4/3 pixel density?


    /Jonas

    Neither have I seen any from you but Rafael (with some obscure screen name here) did show a shot of his better half. Fabulous.

    That said, I would not want to hang a fat 85/1.4 on the m4/3rds. The 75/1.3 Navitar is (not that fat or long) is an exception to that.

    The pen F 70/2 does need a long hood without which flare will make the image look less contrasty. Sharpness, nevertheless, does not suffer though.

    The 60/1.5 is delicious. I think it makes a better match to the NX10 (APS-C) than the G1 (4/3rds).

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    (...)
    The pen F 70/2 does need a long hood without which flare will make the image look less contrasty. Sharpness, nevertheless, does not suffer though.
    I always use proper hoods (for flare protection but also as I use a satchel bag with the lenses standing up with their faces down. I don't use any front caps). There must have been another problem with the lens if the common opinion is that the Pen 70/2 is "sharp" and contrasty.

    /Jonas

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    ... There must have been another problem with the lens if the common opinion is that the Pen 70/2 is "sharp" and contrasty.
    I think you're the only person I've come across who ever said they felt the 70/2 was anything other than very sharp, Jonas. It's not quite as contrasty as some lenses, but nothing that can't be easily dealt with. Kirk Tuck seems to like his too:


    Regards the Samyang:

    I saw some work done with the Samyang (Bower) 85/1.4 in Nikon F mount compared against the Zeiss 85/1.4 also Nikon F mount, both fitted to a Olympus E-3. I can't remember where it was. It impressed me as being remarkably good wide open against the Zeiss ... the comment, though, was that while they were pretty close wide open, the Zeiss improved much more when stopped down.

    For $350, it's probably worth what you pay for it. The Nikon 85/1.8 is better ... excellent ... for $100 more. And I agree it's a biggish lump to fit on a Micro-FourThirds camera, just like the Summilux-D 25/1.4 ... but I still like what the Summilux does and use it anyway. I'd get the Nikon myself if I didn't already have the Oly Pen F 70/2.

  20. #20
    Member shadzee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    68
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Thanks for all the comments.
    So we have two candidates;
    - Oly Pen 70/2
    - Voigtländer 75/2.4

    Sounds good. I'll do more research on the two. I guess the CV would be easier to find.
    .Sam.
    Panasonic GF1 & Olympus E-P5
    Photos: http://www.flickr.com/shadzee/

  21. #21
    Senior Member bensonga's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,416
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    819

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Not many folks mention the Nikkor AI/AIS lenses.....such as the 85mm f2 or 85 f1.4. I've always thought the Nikkors were well made and optically quite good...and not that expensive on the used market. There should be quite a few folks who have owned (or like myself, still own) manual focus Nikkors. I realize they are not as small as the Voigtlander with a screw mount adapter.

    Any reason why these don't seem to be as popular for legacy glass on micro 4/3rds?

    Another option, slightly longer....the final version of the 90mm Leica Elmarit is very compact and according to Erwin Puts review it is "the best 2.8/90mm ever in the Leica history (R and M).

    Gary
    Last edited by bensonga; 8th May 2010 at 22:27.

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    seakayaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by shadzee View Post
    Thanks for all the comments.
    So we have two candidates;
    - Oly Pen 70/2
    - Voigtländer 75/2.4

    Sounds good. I'll do more research on the two. I guess the CV would be easier to find.
    I have the Voigtlander 75mm f/2.5 and it is a very nice lens on the GF1. It is a screw mount so it required the 'M' mount adaptor and the 'screw' mount to 'M' mouny adaptor. Pricing for the lens can be found at http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtlen.htm as well as B&H and other places.

    If you pay full price for a new Voigtlander lens and two adaptors you will be sitting around $565.00.

    This is what it looks like on the GF1 with adaptors.



    . . . . . and few images taken with the lens . . . . .








    Life is Grand!

    Dan
    ~

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Hmm. There are LTM-->µ4/3 adapters, no need to pay for two adapters.

  24. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    I think you're the only person I've come across who ever said they felt the 70/2 was anything other than very sharp, Jonas. It's not quite as contrasty as some lenses, but nothing that can't be easily dealt with. Kirk Tuck seems to like his too:
    Hi Godfrey,

    Maybe I am. Do you know a lot of people having used both these lenses?
    There may have been something wrong with my copy but I don't think so.
    I remember when I posted some negative critique about the FA77/1.8 Limited in the DPR Pentax forum. Everybody raved about that lens as if it was the best thing ever made in Japan. I took quite some flack. Some Canon guys also dislike my opinion on the EF35/1.4L. That's how it can be.

    I later sold my Pen 70/2 to a well known member here and I should really have expected it to come back if there was anything wrong with it. I would say the buyer knows about Zuiko Pen lenses.

    Anyway, I attach an image here, the size is about 500kB, showing the apparent differences between these two lenses. Hopefully the image shows parts of what I meant with contrast and rendering differences. The Pen images can certainly look better with some simple PP.

    In my, be it humble or not, opinion I don't see any reason to find an expensive second hand Pen lens when the CV75/2.5 is available at a lower price.

    Jonas

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: small 135mm lens

    That is funny. The pen actually seems like it gets sharp at f/2.8, but it is so much lower contrast. Have you compared how it looks when you adjust for contrast?
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Jonas,

    A few elementary things:

    1. Could you show the adapters (front/rear) that you used for the pen F and Cosina lenses? What I would like to know here is if the adapters were properly lightproofed.

    2. The rear element of pen 70/2 sits way inside the lens barrel. Did anyone clean it before they sold it to you? How do you notice "haze"?

    You know the Ricoh GXR eliminates all such such problems.

  27. #27
    Subscriber Member Jonathon Delacour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    454
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    In my, be it humble or not, opinion I don't see any reason to find an expensive second hand Pen lens when the CV75/2.5 is available at a lower price.

    Jonas
    Cameraquest lists the Voigtlander 75/2.5 at USD 329.

    LTM to m4/3 adapters are available on eBay and Amazon for around 40 USD (Amazon also has one for USD 26). Pen F to m43 adapters are available on eBay from around 50 USD.

    I paid USD 230 for my Pen F 70/2 six months ago, so I'd hardly describe it as an "expensive" lens. Maybe I got a bargain. Perhaps a used CV 75/2.5 will be available at a lower price.

    Pen F 70/2 + adapter: USD 280+ (used)
    CV 75/2.5 + adapter: USD 355-379 (new)

    That said, I agree that the CV 75/2.5 probably offers better value for money, given that you're buying a modern lens with newer coatings and a warranty. Still, I love the way the Pen F lenses render. To each his own.

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart Richardson View Post
    That is funny. The pen actually seems like it gets sharp at f/2.8, but it is so much lower contrast. Have you compared how it looks when you adjust for contrast?
    It gets better and I don't doubt the lens can be used with success. Some contrast loss is usually not critical and I used several low contrast with my 5D cameras. With our small sensors however I like to minimize any level adjustments in Photoshop.

    Increased contrast is good but it doesn't really help with internal flare reducing the edge contrast in some parts of the images.

    There are other differences as well between these lenses. The CV is contrasty and produces some fringe (can be taken care of) while the Pen makes less of that. There may also be little more LoCA in the CV images, I don't recall really. Lateral CA is a case for pixel peeping but as I remember it it can be corrected with both lenses.

    I know some like low contrast lenses claiming they retain more shadow details, or being better for portraits. As I'm a mediocre photographer and not very good at PP so I leave that area for those more skilled.

    regards,

    /Jonas

  29. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Jonas,

    A few elementary things:

    1. Could you show the adapters (front/rear) that you used for the pen F and Cosina lenses? What I would like to know here is if the adapters were properly lightproofed.

    2. The rear element of pen 70/2 sits way inside the lens barrel. Did anyone clean it before they sold it to you? How do you notice "haze"?

    You know the Ricoh GXR eliminates all such such problems.
    Hi,

    1) I used my RJ Pen-->µ4/3 adapter. It works fine with my Pen 42/1.2.
    2) Our well known seller at the American West Coast did not say anything about cleaning. When checking for haze I put reading glasses on, hold the lens against a strong light source in different angles, prety well angled actually, and then I have a good look trying to see anything abnormal, sometimes comparing to a well known and good lens. I didn't see anything strange with the Pen lens, as said. Maybe I didn't look good enough?

    I don't know about the Ricoh GXR eliminating any haze problems with their lensors. I would think that if the problem surfaces you'll have to replace the complete package. Hmm, I can image a long list of other problems, or at least peculiarities, with the GXR. Their 1.5 crop 50mm lensor seems fine.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathon Delacour View Post
    Cameraquest lists the Voigtlander 75/2.5 at USD 329.
    (...)
    Still, I love the way the Pen F lenses render. To each his own.
    Is Stephens price competitive? I think you got your Pen 70/2 for a good price. And I fully agree about liking a way a lens renders.

    regards,

    /Jonas

  30. #30
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: small 135mm lens

    The Pen F 42/1.2 is a very "special' construction. One of the (two to be critical) elements of the front group tends to de glue and the Canada Balsam used looks very unpleasant when that happens(It/they can be glued back using more modern versions).

    That isn't the case with the 70/2.

    So, you have more faith in the "well known west coast dealer"? Good for his business!

    If a (any) 42/1.2 is more contrasty than a 70/2, there was definitely something very wrong with that 70/2 sample. Good that you sold it. [I have only one sample of the 70/2 and several samples of the 42/1.2]

    The Ricoh GXR modules avoid all this lens/adapter, light path, haze, etc complications. Plug them in and you are good to go.

  31. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    So, you have more faith in the "well known west coast dealer"? Good for his business!

    If a (any) 42/1.2 is more contrasty than a 70/2, there was definitely something very wrong with that 70/2 sample. Good that you sold it. [I have only one sample of the 70/2 and several samples of the 42/1.2]

    The Ricoh GXR modules avoid all this lens/adapter, light path, haze, etc complications. Plug them in and you are good to go.
    Vivek, I didn't say anywhere the 42/1.2 is more contrasty than the 70/2. Where did you get that from? But OK, comparing these two, different, animals I can say the 42/2 is soft and has low contrast at f/1.2 and f/1.4. From f/2 my copy is as sharp (IMA-test) as any other real good lens in the focal range (comparing to for example the Contax Zeiss 45/2 or the OM50/2 Macro).

    But how did we go from the 70/2 to decemented and flary 42mm lenses? And what about that So, you have more faith in the "well known west coast dealer"? Good for his business! part?

    I trust what I see. Sometimes I miss something as I'm not perfect. I also trust you (yes, so it is) and some other. The far away dealer is not on my list.

    /Jonas

  32. #32
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    I've mentioned Nikon and Nikkor lenses several times but they do tend to be fairly bulky. The nikkor 85/2AI-S is indeed a very good lens.

  33. #33
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    Hi Godfrey,

    Maybe I am. Do you know a lot of people having used both these lenses?
    There may have been something wrong with my copy but I don't think so.
    I remember when I posted some negative critique about the FA77/1.8 Limited in the DPR Pentax forum. Everybody raved about that lens as if it was the best thing ever made in Japan. I took quite some flack. Some Canon guys also dislike my opinion on the EF35/1.4L. That's how it can be.

    I later sold my Pen 70/2 to a well known member here and I should really have expected it to come back if there was anything wrong with it. I would say the buyer knows about Zuiko Pen lenses.

    Anyway, I attach an image here, the size is about 500kB, showing the apparent differences between these two lenses. Hopefully the image shows parts of what I meant with contrast and rendering differences. The Pen images can certainly look better with some simple PP.

    In my, be it humble or not, opinion I don't see any reason to find an expensive second hand Pen lens when the CV75/2.5 is available at a lower price.

    Jonas
    Have to wait til I get back to my desk to look at your examples.

    I do know a number of folks with experience using the 70/2. Not too many with experience using the CV75. I'd planned to buy one of them when I still had Leica M gear but fell into a deal on the Summilux 75 instead.

    Will look in again later.

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Now that I look at the series of test images again and re-reading your comments I can't help to wonder if the lens was hazy anyway. This is strange. I understand Vivek's question. The short answer is MagLite. What I do not understand is how I could miss it, if it really was there. Oh well.

    A 75Lux Godfrey? That's heavy stuff, and Mandler's favourite (maybe I got that from Putz, I'm not sure).

    regards,

    /Jonas

  35. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    45
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    I'll just pipe in that I can't really judge optical condition of a lens without use of a _very_ bright flashlight. I've held many lenses up to seemingly-bright room lights or windows and seen only clear glass, only to find haze or other flaws when using a truly bright flashlight. If the light source isn't bright enough to momentarily hurt my eyes if I look at it directly, it isn't bright enough to reveal flaws.

    That said, if Jonas used a MagLite and the glass looked clear, there might be something else impacting optical performance. That said (that that said??), more than once, I've used flashlights with weak batteries, not realizing light output was lower. Lenses looked clear with weak batts, then I found haze after changing the batts.

    The key is the light has to be bright enough to hurt your retina. The trick is figuring out how to ascertain this without actually hurting your retina. :^)

  36. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    pcb_dpi (?!),

    Yup, I first check using my desk top lamp (60W Halogen) and then A MagLite (the standard size with 2 AA/LR6 batteries). That's why I'm puzzled. Maybe I need to switch my MagLite bulb and the batteries...
    Or, it might have been something else with the lens, but what?

  37. #37
    Member shadzee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    68
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Could you guys explain the differences (IQ) between the new Voigtlander 75mm f/2.5 and the older(?) F/2.4 version?
    .Sam.
    Panasonic GF1 & Olympus E-P5
    Photos: http://www.flickr.com/shadzee/

  38. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by shadzee View Post
    Could you guys explain the differences (IQ) between the new Voigtlander 75mm f/2.5 and the older(?) F/2.4 version?
    I don't think there is a 2.4 version. That was just my typo.

  39. #39
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    @ pcb_dpi:

    You don't need to hurt your eyes to examine a lens for haze or optical defects in the elements' glass. You simply need a collimated point source light and a focusing optical loupe designed with the correct range to inspect lenses, like one uses with an optical bench.

    @ Jonas:

    I just did a quick test using a Color Checker and an electronic flash setup for stable illumination. I set up the G1 with the Olympus Pen 70mm and made exposures at f/2, f/2.8, f/4 and f/5.6. I then set up the L1 using the Olympus 50 Macro + EC14 (an effective 70mm f/2.8 lens with known excellent contrast and resolution) and made the exposures at f/2.8, f/4 and f/5.6.

    All exposures were brought into LR. I adjusted exposure on each frame in Lightroom such that the white patch in the grayscale section read 91-92%. I then checked the percentages on the black patch. The Olympus Pen 70 averaged ~18.2% where the 50+EC14 averaged ~16.5%.

    My conclusion is that the Olympus Pen 70mm is slightly less contrasty than the Olympus 50+EC14 combination. However, the difference is indeed pretty darn small, percentage-wise, and is very easy to eliminate entirely with a small adjustment to the blackpoint setting or tone curve.

    Here's the range of exposures as processed above, cropped and arrayed to the same size as a JPEG composite.

    http://homepage.mac.com/godders/70mm-composite-u.jpg

    And in this version, I set the L1 and G1 white balance (using LR's eyedropper on the middle gray patch) and then adjusted the black point on all until each black patch showed ~10% in Lightroom.

    http://homepage.mac.com/godders/70mm-composite-c.jpg

    The small loss of contrast in the Olympus Pen 70mm lens is really of very little consequence with just the smallest amount of image processing. It could likely be eliminated with in-camera JPEGs by bumping up the contrast or saturation setting by one notch.

  40. #40
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    @ pcb_dpi:
    . . . . . . .
    @ Jonas:

    My conclusion is that the Olympus Pen 70mm is slightly less contrasty than the Olympus 50+EC14 combination. However, the difference is indeed pretty darn small, percentage-wise, and is very easy to eliminate entirely with a small adjustment to the blackpoint setting or tone curve.
    . . . . . . .
    Nice test Godfrey

    I just checked my 70/2.0 library and I like them a lot. Here is a flower

    Keith


  41. #41
    Senior Member f6cvalkyrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,643
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    29

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Neither have I seen any from you but Rafael (with some obscure screen name here) did show a shot of his better half. Fabulous.
    Am I the only one here, who owns this lens ? Could be, and I am quite happy with it ! You can find pics with the G1 and this lens here :

    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showth...526#post153526

    C U,

    Rafael
    E-M1/GH2/G1 Full Spectrum & lots of lenses
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/f6cvalk...th/9226689839/

  42. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    I just did a quick test using a Color Checker and an electronic flash setup for stable illumination. I set up the
    (...)
    The small loss of contrast in the Olympus Pen 70mm lens is really of very little consequence with just the smallest amount of image processing. It could likely be eliminated with in-camera JPEGs by bumping up the contrast or saturation setting by one notch.
    Thank you Godfrey. That's some work and I appreciate it. It's good you included the GCC in the images as the rest of the background is to no use. It's the same with my series above where the black fabric lures the eye to think the difference is bigger than it is.

    Your test, despite the different methods used, seem to confirm my findings. As sometimes earlier we are just using different words for our observations. As a sidenote one can again see that in-camera JPG shooting is not the optimal way... my thoughts go to those having to change contrast settings as they switch lenses.

    regards,

    Jonas

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: small 135mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by f6cvalkyrie View Post
    Am I the only one here, who owns this lens?
    Hi Rafael,

    Great portrait!
    I sold my Samyang when I sold my 5D. Too me an 85 is too long. I also didn't expect it to perform well on our high density sensors.
    How cool to see somebody managing it, and that the results, at least as seen here, are looking good.

    /Jonas

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •