Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Rangefinder Forum > Optics Theory -

Optics Theory - This forum is aimed towards the TECHNICAL side of photographic OPTICS THEORY. There will be some overlap by camera/manufacturer, but this forum is for the heavy duty tech discussions. This is NOT the place to discuss a specific lens or lens line, do that in the appropriate forum. This is the forum to discuss optics or lenses in general, to learn about the tech behind the lenses and images. IF you have a question about a specific lens, post it in the forum about that type of camera, NOT HERE.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 07-22-2008   #26
brachal
Refrigerated User
 
brachal's Avatar
 
brachal is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New Orleans, La
Age: 46
Posts: 1,027
I have the Jupiter-11 and use it fairly often. Usually at music festivals or for wildlife shots in the swamp. The 11 is only f/4, but it's a good performer and usually very cheap. Also small enough that it isn't an issue to have it in my bag.
__________________
Bill

My Gallery

Me on flickr

"Living in fear is just another way of dying before your time." DBT
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2008   #27
deepwhite
Registered User
 
deepwhite is offline
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
Age: 42
Posts: 329
My Elmarit M 90mm f2.8 becomes an 135mm on the R-D1s, and to my surprise I found I love it more this way. It's totally personal. Me loving 135mm more than 90mm.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2008   #28
caperunner
Registered User
 
caperunner is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 82
Tried my nikon f3.5 on the S3 and very happy with the results. As a few have said previously this lens wants and deserves more work - the outcome is very satifactory.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-06-2008   #29
VinceC
Registered User
 
VinceC's Avatar
 
VinceC is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,963
This thread inspired me to shoot some 135mm pictures a couple of weekends ago. Nikon SP and Nikkor 135/3.5. Nothing special but I like the way it isolates subjects. It also lets you get in tighter on a subject than any other RF lens.





Attached Images
File Type: jpg 013_10A-wohnzmr-jul08.jpg (56.0 KB, 127 views)
File Type: jpg 026_23A-parade-jul08.jpg (45.8 KB, 127 views)
File Type: jpg 039_36A-yard-jul08.jpg (48.0 KB, 127 views)
__________________
Vince
My Gallery

Nikon S2, S3, S3-2000, SP, SP-2005 / Kiev 2a

Biogon 21/4.5; CV 21/4; CV 25/4; CV 85/3.5; the following Nikkors: 2.8cm/3.5; 3.5cm/1.8 (1956 and 2005 versions); 5cm/1.4; 8.5cm/2; 10.5cm/2.5; 13.5cm/3.5
Soviet lenses: Orion 28/6; Jupiter-12 35/2.8; Helios-103 50/1.8; Jupiter-8 50/2
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-06-2008   #30
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 10,165
When doing landscapes, 135 is great for isolating details. Like this:



Also, it is the only RF lens that shows the moon large enough for me. If you have seen AA's photo of moon and half dome (overlaying two 250mm and 80mm 6x6 photos), you know what I mean. I took this for my wife since it shows our house:



Both taken with Elmarit 135/2.8. Cheers,

Roland.
__________________
My Smugmug
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-06-2008   #31
VinceC
Registered User
 
VinceC's Avatar
 
VinceC is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,963
Great shots, Roland.
The second shot also shows the 135mm's other strong suit -- it's the only RF lens that really shows telephoto compression and flattening.
__________________
Vince
My Gallery

Nikon S2, S3, S3-2000, SP, SP-2005 / Kiev 2a

Biogon 21/4.5; CV 21/4; CV 25/4; CV 85/3.5; the following Nikkors: 2.8cm/3.5; 3.5cm/1.8 (1956 and 2005 versions); 5cm/1.4; 8.5cm/2; 10.5cm/2.5; 13.5cm/3.5
Soviet lenses: Orion 28/6; Jupiter-12 35/2.8; Helios-103 50/1.8; Jupiter-8 50/2
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-06-2008   #32
grainhound
Registered User
 
grainhound is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 377
This thread now has me wanting to get something to post with my Nikkor 135. I saw Bjørn Røslett's website recently, and he says this about the lens:
“A short telephoto design harking back to the late 1940's, the 135 mm can be expected to show its age and certainly is a little long in the teeth. The image is quite soft with the lens set wide open, and sometimes strong blue-yellow fringing is seen. By stopping down to f/8, the image sharpens up remarkably and the fringing is virtually gone. Colour saturation is much lower than by today's standards, so the final impression is of a well-rounded almost 3-D image with a slightly pastel-like look to it. Quite attractive in fact, if you find the appropriate subject to fit the image characteristics of the 135 mm lens.”
I've shot a few frames wide open, and they look sharp to me, though I haven't made any 11x14s from them. Bokeh alone is enough reason to keep the lens, but what do others make of Bjørn's assessment of its wide open performance?

Last edited by grainhound : 08-06-2008 at 11:10.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-06-2008   #33
VinceC
Registered User
 
VinceC's Avatar
 
VinceC is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,963
I don't really agree with his assessent of wide-open performance. Maybe his focus wasn't accurate. That's the biggest challenge with this lens, particularly if you're using it with a camera that doesn't have a 1:1 lifesize finder. Most of my 135mm pictures are taken wide open or f/4 and it's extremely sharp. This is also a pretty undemanding optical formula, so almost all reviews of 135mm lenses remark on their sharpness.
__________________
Vince
My Gallery

Nikon S2, S3, S3-2000, SP, SP-2005 / Kiev 2a

Biogon 21/4.5; CV 21/4; CV 25/4; CV 85/3.5; the following Nikkors: 2.8cm/3.5; 3.5cm/1.8 (1956 and 2005 versions); 5cm/1.4; 8.5cm/2; 10.5cm/2.5; 13.5cm/3.5
Soviet lenses: Orion 28/6; Jupiter-12 35/2.8; Helios-103 50/1.8; Jupiter-8 50/2
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-06-2008   #34
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 10,165
100% agree with Vince.

Best shot on a long EBL RF though, like an M3 or Nikon.

In general, it is very hard to find a bad classic 135mm lens, pick Canon, Leica, Nikkor, they are all good in my experience, relatively high resolution corner to corner and nice OOF; but accurate RF calibration is a must.

Roland.
__________________
My Smugmug
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-06-2008   #35
grainhound
Registered User
 
grainhound is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 377
Thanks, Vince. You've said what I'd read before I bought the lens (especially from Dante Stella), and what I've thought after buying it. Certainly, focusing requires care; my last shots with it, at dusk with an M3, were focused on the wrong flower. I really did take some flower shots... I wanted to see its sharpness and bokeh, and may actually post something like that. At least I learned something about handling the lens for when I get a chance to photograph someone interesting in a pub. Merciful's shot with the insane ISO comes to mind.

Guy
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-06-2008   #36
Bingley
Registered User
 
Bingley's Avatar
 
Bingley is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 4,582
I have the compact MD Rokkor 135 for my Minolta SLR, but don't have a 135mm lens for rf, prefering instead the little (and excellent) Canon 100/3.5. Frankly, I've never warmed to the 135 focal length, although I have to say from the photos in this thread that I should give it another try. There's some very nice work posted here.
__________________
Steve

M2, M4-2, IIIc, IVSB2, & T, and assorted LTM & M lenses
XD-11, X700, and assorted MD Rokkor lenses, Rolleicord III, Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS




My Flickr
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-06-2008   #37
Sonnar2
Registered User
 
Sonnar2's Avatar
 
Sonnar2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Germany
Age: 48
Posts: 1,412
My favorite 135mm is the 135/2.8 Sonnar (4 elements) for the Rolleiflex SL350 camera.
This is a reasonable short and lightweight lens, for the speed.
135mm is a great focal length but I prefer SLRs for it. Focussing is much much easier.
100mm is the longest where I use RF. My Canon RF 135 lenses don't see much daylight.

Last edited by Sonnar2 : 08-06-2008 at 13:49.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2008   #38
Spider67
Registered User
 
Spider67's Avatar
 
Spider67 is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,065
I used the 135 for taking pics at concerts readings never for portraits.
A Kiev + 135 is my special combo for readings etc.

Yes the 35+50+135 combo was the classic set.......and many people (myself included)actually knew what to do with them. The 135 for grabbing some pisc of people but until recently the 35 was quite a mystery for me.....
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2008   #39
noimmunity
registered niche user
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 51
Posts: 2,854
I have a Komura 135/2.8 that is getting CLA'd... It is an ernostar design, so actually very compact and light.

Haven't found anything much on the web, but it seems the SLR versions of these lenses were well regarded. Has anybody tried the Komura 135s? (they also made a 135/3.5 in LTM). I expect performance close to the Konica Hexanon 90/2.8, which is also an ernostar design...
__________________
jon 小強

Fuji XP1 8/14/23/35/55-200 (x1.5)
Sigma DP Merrill 19/30/50 (x1.5)
ZI, R4A 24/50/90 + 21/35/85 and a 40.


搬到畫國後免疫系統變得超強,所過的生活宅到不行!

The old adage says: Seeing is believing. To me, that doesn't mean that the world seen is the truth, it means rather that seeing is a field in which the purity of heart is expressed--or not, depending upon whatever happens to cloud that purity at any given moment.

flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2008   #40
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 10,165
I have often wondered about that one, Jon. The Komura teles (105/2, 105/2.8, 135/2.8) are supposed to behave similarly to Nikkors of that period. Do post some photos when you get it, please. Also, what is the minimum focus distance ?

Best,

Roland.
__________________
My Smugmug
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2008   #41
noimmunity
registered niche user
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 51
Posts: 2,854
I'll do that, Roland, when I eventually get it back.
As for minimum distance, I think it was 1 meter, but since I don't have the lens in front of me I can't check. My 135/2.8 came with a nice parallax adjustable 1:1 brightline VF.

The Komura 105/2 has often intrigued me quite a bit, but it is pricey (and rare) for a relatively unknown optic.
__________________
jon 小強

Fuji XP1 8/14/23/35/55-200 (x1.5)
Sigma DP Merrill 19/30/50 (x1.5)
ZI, R4A 24/50/90 + 21/35/85 and a 40.


搬到畫國後免疫系統變得超強,所過的生活宅到不行!

The old adage says: Seeing is believing. To me, that doesn't mean that the world seen is the truth, it means rather that seeing is a field in which the purity of heart is expressed--or not, depending upon whatever happens to cloud that purity at any given moment.

flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2008   #42
JasonC
Registered User
 
JasonC is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 130
Komura 135/2.8 foucs down to 5' or around 1.5m.

Jason.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2008   #43
lkgroup
Registered User
 
lkgroup's Avatar
 
lkgroup is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington State
Posts: 287
I got a Komura 135mm F/3.5 LTM a few months ago for $60. Very nice lens, solid easy to use well made. It really makes nice pictures. I'm more of 35mm, 50mm user so I'm not sure if I am going to keep it even though it is high quality. I might sell it. Offers?


I carry is in my bag and have found uses for it but I also have a 90mm.

Leo
In Washington State
__________________
my Flickr

Eastman Double-X Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lchristoffer/


FS Leitz AFLOO Film Winder -new-
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-08-2008   #44
noimmunity
registered niche user
 
noimmunity's Avatar
 
noimmunity is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lyon/Taipei
Age: 51
Posts: 2,854
Hi, Leo, if you have scans of some photos taken with the 135/3.5, I wonder if you wouldn't mind sharing them, either in this thread or in a new dedicated to Komura teles ? I'm using double-x, too, and the 135 I have would see use most often for portraits at conferences where the extra reach is a big plus, so I'm very eager to see what it can do. Thanks, Jon.
__________________
jon 小強

Fuji XP1 8/14/23/35/55-200 (x1.5)
Sigma DP Merrill 19/30/50 (x1.5)
ZI, R4A 24/50/90 + 21/35/85 and a 40.


搬到畫國後免疫系統變得超強,所過的生活宅到不行!

The old adage says: Seeing is believing. To me, that doesn't mean that the world seen is the truth, it means rather that seeing is a field in which the purity of heart is expressed--or not, depending upon whatever happens to cloud that purity at any given moment.

flickr
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-09-2008   #45
lkgroup
Registered User
 
lkgroup's Avatar
 
lkgroup is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington State
Posts: 287
Jon,

Just read your note, I am away from home for a few more days shooting and when I get home I will try and put up a couple of scans

Leo
__________________
my Flickr

Eastman Double-X Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lchristoffer/


FS Leitz AFLOO Film Winder -new-
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 13:35.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.