Compact Telephoto Primes

Laurentiu Cristofor · 05-26-2011, 02:54 PM

A related thread on compact 135mm lenses:
What is the smallest M42 135mm lens?::Manual Focus Lenses

creampuff · 05-26-2011, 03:05 PM

Just get the DFA 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR.

RXrenesis8 · 05-26-2011, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

A related thread on compact 135mm lenses:
What is the smallest M42 135mm lens?::Manual Focus Lenses

Yes, yes! You're on the right track! Those Super Tak 3.5's and that Dollonds look about the perfect size! I also found another old tele lens that's pretty small, dunno about the length though:
Meyer Telemegor 180mm f5.5

steve1307 · 05-26-2011, 04:59 PM

If were gettng primes under 200mm I would want to stick to to f2.8, or you might a well just use a 55-200 or 55-300 zoom which is about f4.5-5.6 and f4.5 at 135-200 range. (ok the 55-200 might be a bit soft full open)

What about FA 135 f2.8 lightweight(375g) compact (80mm long) and fast f2.8
SMC Pentax-FA 135mm F2.8 [IF] Reviews - Pentax Lens Reviews & Pentax Lens Database
It about the same size as a DFA100WR.

An M200/4 isnt really that much smaller or more than a stop faster than a zoom.

Marc Sabatella · 05-26-2011, 05:37 PM

Originally posted by RXrenesis8

Well, you'd think that! But try to think outside of the (Pentax) box. Yes all of the M lenses 100-150 are moderately sized. (the 200 is a bit bigger than what I'm going for) but I could just as easily get a modern prime, the DFA 100mm WR and that's about the same size/weight.

Well, it's actually noticeably bigger/heavier than the M100/2.8, but definitely surprisingly compact taken on its own merits. I guess I was imagining you were also trying to keep the price down, and I did get the impression you really wanted longer. The FA135/2.8 is only barely bigger or heavier.

Quote:

If I were to say: 170mm and above, what would your answers be?

I'd say that if you really want it to be comparable to the kit lens in size, I refer you again to the DA50-200 - it's the only thing that comes close that I know of. The M200/4 is compact for a 200/4, but it is really is a lot bigger and heavier than anything else we're talking about here.

I know that a couple of companies made a 300mm mirror lens. That's the only other possibility I could imagine really fitting the bill.

RioRico · 05-26-2011, 05:58 PM

Compact?!?!? Y'all call those great lumbering beasts COMPACT?!?!? No way! I'LL show you COMPACT! And CHEAP! It's called the Enna Tele-Sandmar 100/4.5. On the camera, it is smaller than a SuperTak 55/1.8, about 35mm wide and extends 35mm from the body at infinity focus. It weighs just 110g, less than 4oz. I have two -- one in shiny gleaming minty collectible condition that cost me US$22, the other that I use that cost US$7. Shipped.

But you'll say, "Rico, there's gotta be a catch! What's the catch??" And the catch is... it's meant for an Argus C3 camera, THE BRICK. Register distance is short and there are no PK adapters made for it. So I made my own. From a one-buck PK body cap. I dremeled a hole in the cap and used contact cement to glue the lens into it. I get infinity focus and it's nice and sharp, but with character. It's my go-to lens for unobtrusive street shots. It's so small, it just doesn't LOOK like a telephoto!

Laurentiu Cristofor · 05-26-2011, 09:23 PM

Originally posted by RioRico

I'LL show you COMPACT!

I don't see it! Image please!

RioRico · 05-27-2011, 08:36 AM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

I don't see it! Image please!

I can't really post a shot of my mod right now, but this link goes to some online images. The little silver lens, not the big black one, eh?

[ enna tele-sandmar ]

I'll try to get a shot up later today, after I escape from the PHOTOGRAPHY AND ART exhibition at the Georgia O'Keeffe museum a few blocks from our casita. And lunch at the O'Keeffe Cafe, reportedly one of the best in Santa Fe. Yum!

RXrenesis8 · 05-27-2011, 10:15 AM

I figured you would be the person to ask about this RioRico!

That 180mm f/4 Voigtlander mentioned earlier looks like it has potential as a cream machine as well...

**Just1MoreDave** · 05-27-2011, 10:34 AM

Here are the lenses I have on hand for size comparison. The first image is from left to right, a Canon FD 135/3.5, the M135/3.5, the K135/2.5 and the Auto-Tak 135/3.5.

I set the Canon aside. The background row is the Vivitar/Komine 200/3.5, K135/2.5, Auto-Takumar 135/3.5, and S-M-C Tak 150/4. The foreground has the M135/3.5 and the S-M-C Tak 105/2.8.

The Vivitar is bigger than the M200/4, 62mm filter so not a contender, but looks small where I keep it, next to the K300/4. So I think of it as small.

Ben_Edict · 05-27-2011, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by RXrenesis8

If I were to say: 170mm and above, what would your answers be?

I think the price for the best ratio of focal lens versus physical size should go to the A* 300/4. It is tiny for its focal length and moderately fast aperture. In fact it is smaller and much lighter, than the 200/2.5.
Much longer, but very compact and light weight is the Tokina 500/8 mirror lens. It is one of the better mirror designs, with good contrast, but still unbelievably compact.

Ben

**Wormtographer** · 05-27-2011, 04:44 PM

Heres the Voigt 180mm and M-150mm compared to the DFA 100mm WR

-W

RXrenesis8 · 05-27-2011, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by Ben_Edict

I think the price for the best ratio of focal lens versus physical size should go to the A* 300/4.

Yes yes, I am familiar with the merits of this lens! I have shot several interesting shots with mine, but unfortunately it both sticks out like a sore thumb with it's large front element, and weighs my pack down quite significantly.

Originally posted by Wormtographer

Heres the Voigt 180mm and M-150mm compared to the DFA 100mm WR

Aah, the 180mm is a thing of beauty. The 150 doesn't retract as far into it's housing as I thought it would at infinity however...

dgaies · 05-27-2011, 05:22 PM

Here a quick size comparison between the FA77, 100WR and FA135.

TOUGEFC · 05-27-2011, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by dgaies

Here a quick size comparison between the FA77, 100WR and FA135.

good comparsion dgaies, the 100 and 135 are on my lba list, do you have any lens comparison shots including the DA*55 ?

05-27-2011, 10:34 AM	#25
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	Here are the lenses I have on hand for size comparison. The first image is from left to right, a Canon FD 135/3.5, the M135/3.5, the K135/2.5 and the Auto-Tak 135/3.5. I set the Canon aside. The background row is the Vivitar/Komine 200/3.5, K135/2.5, Auto-Takumar 135/3.5, and S-M-C Tak 150/4. The foreground has the M135/3.5 and the S-M-C Tak 105/2.8. The Vivitar is bigger than the M200/4, 62mm filter so not a contender, but looks small where I keep it, next to the K300/4. So I think of it as small. Last edited by Just1MoreDave; 05-27-2011 at 10:42 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Compare D700 + Primes to K5 + Primes	charleychen	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	03-26-2011 02:19 PM
Why do people love super telephoto primes?	esman7	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	29	08-28-2009 09:50 PM
Compact telephoto options	Andi Lo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	03-29-2009 11:43 AM
Old M42 extreme telephoto primes and TC's?	Rorschach	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	04-07-2008 02:55 PM

05-26-2011, 02:54 PM	#16
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	A related thread on compact 135mm lenses: What is the smallest M42 135mm lens?::Manual Focus Lenses

05-26-2011, 03:05 PM	#17
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Just get the DFA 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR.

05-26-2011, 03:25 PM	#18
RXrenesis8 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Orlando, FL (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 523 Original Poster	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor A related thread on compact 135mm lenses: What is the smallest M42 135mm lens?::Manual Focus Lenses Yes, yes! You're on the right track! Those Super Tak 3.5's and that Dollonds look about the perfect size! I also found another old tele lens that's pretty small, dunno about the length though: Meyer Telemegor 180mm f5.5

05-26-2011, 04:59 PM	#19
steve1307 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,130	If were gettng primes under 200mm I would want to stick to to f2.8, or you might a well just use a 55-200 or 55-300 zoom which is about f4.5-5.6 and f4.5 at 135-200 range. (ok the 55-200 might be a bit soft full open) What about FA 135 f2.8 lightweight(375g) compact (80mm long) and fast f2.8 SMC Pentax-FA 135mm F2.8 [IF] Reviews - Pentax Lens Reviews & Pentax Lens Database It about the same size as a DFA100WR. An M200/4 isnt really that much smaller or more than a stop faster than a zoom.

05-26-2011, 05:37 PM	#20
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by RXrenesis8 Well, you'd think that! But try to think outside of the (Pentax) box. Yes all of the M lenses 100-150 are moderately sized. (the 200 is a bit bigger than what I'm going for) but I could just as easily get a modern prime, the DFA 100mm WR and that's about the same size/weight. Well, it's actually noticeably bigger/heavier than the M100/2.8, but definitely surprisingly compact taken on its own merits. I guess I was imagining you were also trying to keep the price down, and I did get the impression you really wanted longer. The FA135/2.8 is only barely bigger or heavier. Quote: If I were to say: 170mm and above, what would your answers be? I'd say that if you really want it to be comparable to the kit lens in size, I refer you again to the DA50-200 - it's the only thing that comes close that I know of. The M200/4 is compact for a 200/4, but it is really is a lot bigger and heavier than anything else we're talking about here. I know that a couple of companies made a 300mm mirror lens. That's the only other possibility I could imagine really fitting the bill.

05-26-2011, 05:58 PM	#21
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Compact?!?!? Y'all call those great lumbering beasts COMPACT?!?!? No way! I'LL show you COMPACT! And CHEAP! It's called the Enna Tele-Sandmar 100/4.5. On the camera, it is smaller than a SuperTak 55/1.8, about 35mm wide and extends 35mm from the body at infinity focus. It weighs just 110g, less than 4oz. I have two -- one in shiny gleaming minty collectible condition that cost me US$22, the other that I use that cost US$7. Shipped. But you'll say, "Rico, there's gotta be a catch! What's the catch??" And the catch is... it's meant for an Argus C3 camera, THE BRICK. Register distance is short and there are no PK adapters made for it. So I made my own. From a one-buck PK body cap. I dremeled a hole in the cap and used contact cement to glue the lens into it. I get infinity focus and it's nice and sharp, but with character. It's my go-to lens for unobtrusive street shots. It's so small, it just doesn't LOOK like a telephoto!

05-26-2011, 09:23 PM	#22
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by RioRico I'LL show you COMPACT! I don't see it! Image please!

05-27-2011, 08:36 AM	#23
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor I don't see it! Image please! I can't really post a shot of my mod right now, but this link goes to some online images. The little silver lens, not the big black one, eh? [ enna tele-sandmar ] I'll try to get a shot up later today, after I escape from the PHOTOGRAPHY AND ART exhibition at the Georgia O'Keeffe museum a few blocks from our casita. And lunch at the O'Keeffe Cafe, reportedly one of the best in Santa Fe. Yum!

05-27-2011, 10:15 AM	#24
RXrenesis8 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Orlando, FL (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 523 Original Poster	I figured you would be the person to ask about this RioRico! That 180mm f/4 Voigtlander mentioned earlier looks like it has potential as a cream machine as well...

05-27-2011, 11:56 AM	#26
Ben_Edict Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: SouthWest "Regio" Photos: Albums Posts: 3,309	Originally posted by RXrenesis8 If I were to say: 170mm and above, what would your answers be? I think the price for the best ratio of focal lens versus physical size should go to the A* 300/4. It is tiny for its focal length and moderately fast aperture. In fact it is smaller and much lighter, than the 200/2.5. Much longer, but very compact and light weight is the Tokina 500/8 mirror lens. It is one of the better mirror designs, with good contrast, but still unbelievably compact. Ben

05-27-2011, 04:44 PM	#27
Wormtographer Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: San Diego Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 166	Heres the Voigt 180mm and M-150mm compared to the DFA 100mm WR -W

05-27-2011, 05:08 PM	#28
RXrenesis8 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Orlando, FL (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 523 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ben_Edict I think the price for the best ratio of focal lens versus physical size should go to the A* 300/4. Yes yes, I am familiar with the merits of this lens! I have shot several interesting shots with mine, but unfortunately it both sticks out like a sore thumb with it's large front element, and weighs my pack down quite significantly. Originally posted by Wormtographer Heres the Voigt 180mm and M-150mm compared to the DFA 100mm WR Aah, the 180mm is a thing of beauty. The 150 doesn't retract as far into it's housing as I thought it would at infinity however...

05-27-2011, 05:22 PM	#29
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Here a quick size comparison between the FA77, 100WR and FA135.

05-27-2011, 05:31 PM	#30
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Originally posted by dgaies Here a quick size comparison between the FA77, 100WR and FA135. good comparsion dgaies, the 100 and 135 are on my lba list, do you have any lens comparison shots including the DA*55 ?