Orion-15 hunt

[photobizzz]

If anyone has a line on an Orion-15 for a decent price shoot me a PM or email. I am not having alot of luck locating one outside of *bay and the cheapest on there is around $200.
Thanks

[vrgard]

Can't help you with locating an Orion. My suggestion is to instead watch for a Canon 28/3.5. Should be able to find one for less than $200 and it's faster than the Orion.

-Randy

[ferider]

They are different beasts, Randy. The Orion is very high contrast. More than any other lens that I have had - ever.

Roland.

[vrgard]

You make a very good point, Roland. Guess my preference for the older-style, low contrast look is starting to show! Also, makes me wonder why one would want such a high contrast lens when that look should be easily created after the fact (certainly more so than trying to go the other direction). Or am I (once again?) missing something here?

-Randy

[ferider]

Originally Posted by vrgard

Or am I (once again?) missing something here?

Agree with you Randy

[raid]

I have the Canon 28mm/3.5. It can compete with the more expensive Rokkor 28/2.8.

[photobizzz]

I prefer not to digitally alter my scanned film much if any, If I am looking to use Photoshop I will just shoot with my K10D. But on that note I do always increase my contrast in PS no matter the photo so I guess I do like the look of high contrast without really thinking about it.

[Bill58]

Maybe I'm weird, but I prefer low contrast RF lenses (mostly Canon) that give me an "old look" for B+W and my high contrast, sharp AI/ AIs Nikon SLR lenses for color.

[Kim Coxon]

I did a service on an Orion for another member and ran some test shots on it whilst doing it. If it were a very cheap lens like the J8s etc, it might be worth considering. However, to me the prices asked are simply not worth it unless you are an ardent FSU collector and need one to fill a hole. I sspect the same could be said for the Russar.

Kim

[raid]

Kim,
So the Orion-15 does not have spectacular optical features?
They sell for $200.

[Kim Coxon]

I can try and dig out some scans but I was quite disappointed with the lens and would not pay more than about $60 for one. The prices are from "collectors" because you see them so infrequently.

Kim

Originally Posted by raid

Kim,
So the Orion-15 does not have spectacular optical features?
They sell for $200.

[photobizzz]

I really just want a 28mm FOV and dont have the money for a hektor 28/6. I would really like to find one of those nippon/nikkor LTM 28mm lenses but they are rarer still. I may go with the Canon Serenar 28mm. I am just trying to complete my RF kit, 28/50/90. I have invested so much in DSLR gear (evil I know) I cant justify spending too much more to my spouse. (I spent almost $4000 in the last month) LOL.

I did get lucky enought to find a T.O.C. 2.8 - 13.5 cm universal viewfinder for $135 so I will not have to purchase any dedicated finders....

[Andy Aitken]

There are other ltm 28mm options. The Kobalux 28mm f3.5 is a nice mid-high contrast 28 and the CV28mm f3.5 is supposed to be a sharp high contrast lens.

[John Robertson]

My Orion-15 was the first interchangeable lens I bought way back in the early 60's to use with my then new Fed 2.
Mine is an excellent if slow performer, very sharp and flare free. Much better than the Leitz Hektor I bought later!!!
But I agree the prices have gone a bit silly. the rarest one is the non coupled Kiev version.
I also have a Russar, but find it a bit disappointing, although the finder is very good.

[Jocko]

Kim posted some scans here - http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...light=orion+15 - it would be interesting if we could perhaps compare them with examples from other users.

The lens in question was originally bought by me, from an E-bay seller. It arrived in an appallingly stiff and unusable condition and by that time I had already found a new love in the CV 25. It was clear that I was never going to use it and our friend Jan Normandale very graciously gave it a home, Kim providing a CLA en route. Kim transformed the lens mechanically and it would be interesting If Jan could share his results as I hope it was simply a matter of Kim's scanner having an off day, because the image quality really does not seem very good at all

Cheers, Ian

[raid]

There is also a Tessar 28mm/8.0. Is it any good?

[ferider]

Originally Posted by Jocko

Kim posted some scans here - http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...light=orion+15 - it would be interesting if we could perhaps compare them with examples from other users.

I've shown these before:





Roland.

[Kim Coxon]

No, the scanner wasn't off! That was how the photos looked. However the film was developed by an ultra cheap lab as the sole purpose was to check any focus issues. There were taken using a Mir BTW. Hence my comments about paying $250 for such a lens.

Kim

Originally Posted by Jocko

Kim posted some scans here - http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...light=orion+15 - it would be interesting if we could perhaps compare them with examples from other users.

The lens in question was originally bought by me, from an E-bay seller. It arrived in an appallingly stiff and unusable condition and by that time I had already found a new love in the CV 25. It was clear that I was never going to use it and our friend Jan Normandale very graciously gave it a home, Kim providing a CLA en route. Kim transformed the lens mechanically and it would be interesting If Jan could share his results as I hope it was simply a matter of Kim's scanner having an off day, because the image quality really does not seem very good at all

Cheers, Ian

[Jocko]

Oh Kim I certainly wasn't criticising anything you did - you did an absolutely fabulous job restoring the lens mechanics, but it came from a notoriously erratic seller and I simply feared that I might have sold Jan an irretrievable clunker

My few shreds of good Karma are dripping away

Cheers, Ian

[brachal]

I'd highly recommend the Voigtlander 28mm f/3.5 Color Skopar! Extremely sharp and high contrast, I think it's a great value and a great lens. It's also very compact -- comparable in size to the Orion -- and the build quality is much higher.

I shot an Orion for a day in Prague last year. I liked it, but the focusing froze on it after a couple of hours and I returned it. Build quality seemed comparable to other Jupiters, and it produced sharp, high-contrast images. I remember not liking the J-12 style aperture ring. At f/6 it's also a little too slow for my taste. I'd consider getting another, as a collectible and for the fun of shooting FSU kit, but the CV 28mm Skopar is, IMHO, a much, much better lens. And not much more expensive than an Orion as well.

[Kim Coxon]

Sorry if my post came across as being abrupt, I didn't mean it that way. I was also rather busy in another couple of threads.

I didn't take your comment as a criticism and having seen Roland's shots, I am sure the fault was as much with the giveaway film and the cheap processing as much as anything else. However, such a test does tend to show up any weaknesses. To me the Orion is overpriced for it's usability. But then again people pay far more for black M3s than they do for chrome ones and it's not because they take better photographs.

Kim

Originally Posted by Jocko

Oh Kim I certainly wasn't criticising anything you did - you did an absolutely fabulous job restoring the lens mechanics, but it came from a notoriously erratic seller and I simply feared that I might have sold Jan an irretrievable clunker

My few shreds of good Karma are dripping away

Cheers, Ian

[photobizzz]

Well thanks to all for the info on the Orion-15. I actually had a RFF member with a good copy that he has tested and purchased from a US shop offered to me. I picked it up from him for a good price and at the same time a Schlact 35mm 3.5 Travenar-R in LTM. I will see how it goes and if I dont like it someone on ebay will. Thanks again!