[VisualDarkness]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Thanks for looking at Photography is all about sharing after all



There you go mate, the serial number there only : 131001

.
I like how it says: Tele - *Blank*
Almost as if they didn't have time to engrave it. Maybe a prototype as some said but still weird not to engrave it.

[elliott]

.
I like how it says: Tele - *Blank*
Almost as if they didn't have time to engrave it. Maybe a prototype as some said but still weird not to engrave it.

I'm thinking it might have been used as a sample from the manufacturer to show to potential vendors. The blank is like a "Your Company Name Here".

[VisualDarkness]

I'm thinking it might have been used as a sample from the manufacturer to show to potential vendors. The blank is like a "Your Company Name Here".

Probably, that would explain the high quality of it too.
I guess it was something like "This is the high level optics we can make, and this is the price tag if you want us to make them like this. If you want a lower price tag this is a list of cost reducing options".
It probably rolled out of the factory or office during a cleaning or closure of the building, but was never meant to see daylight like this.

[manntax]

Like I said, the barrel design is different, but there are similarities. It does have a slight blue tint to the glass as well, but it is hard to capture with my phone.

Thanks for that, it might be a track - although for example the closest focusing distance is about 1.35m in my case - so the optical design is probably different to your one. Also the blue coatings on my copy are very visible - and rear element is extremely blue.

I'm thinking it might have been used as a sample from the manufacturer to show to potential vendors. The blank is like a "Your Company Name Here".

That was my thought exactly after the idea of prototype appeared..

Probably, that would explain the high quality of it too.
I guess it was something like "This is the high level optics we can make, and this is the price tag if you want us to make them like this. If you want a lower price tag this is a list of cost reducing options".
It probably rolled out of the factory or office during a cleaning or closure of the building, but was never meant to see daylight like this.

And if so - it might be *very* difficult to actually find out who made that lens I recon

[p38arover]

The barrel looks very Takumar of the Sixties.

[yusuf]

Not sure but possibly made by Cimko.

[elliott]

Thanks for that, it might be a track - although for example the closest focusing distance is about 1.35m in my case - so the optical design is probably different to your one. Also the blue coatings on my copy are very visible - and rear element is extremely blue.

My MFD is 2m, but that could just be a difference in helicoid design.

Some coating pictures, the blue is pretty noticeable on mine:


Extremely blue in the rear as well. Is your rear element flat?


A very old shot from mine, back when I used my K100D:


No ghosting problems like I would expect in that situation from some unknown lens from 40+ years ago, so the coatings must be decent.


EDIT: Just another insignificant similarity that leads me to think they are related. The infinity stop screw is right in line with the infinity mark on both of them, which makes sense and doesn't mean much on its own. However, if you look in line with the 20ft mark you will see one of the adjustment screws on both of them. Just a little thing, but added up to the other things it is suspiciously similar.

---

Last edited by elliott; 09-26-2013 at 10:39 PM.

[emergo]

i did a quick scan on ebay and found that it vaguely resembles this Spira-Tel

Spiratel 135mm F 2 8 M42 Mount Lens Mint Condition | eBay

very similar construction, but with a slight age difference.

my first thought was that it was one of those sears lenses that were rebranded rokinons, soligors or similar brands, but I couldn't find anything but this spiratel that resembled it.

[manntax]

Extremely blue in the rear as well. Is your rear element flat?

Here is a shot of the rear element. The shot is pretty accurate - a blue coating is actually more purplish on mine one rather than strict blue and the element looks to be flat.

No ghosting problems like I would expect in that situation from some unknown lens from 40+ years ago, so the coatings must be decent.

yeah, I agree this looks pretty good- do you happen to remember if that was a fully open aperture ? Because the DOF looks like goes from about the hand and is still pretty good at the shirt. Just wanted to try and compare flare resistance at similar aperture since this is a massive factor.

very similar construction, but with a slight age difference.

my first thought was that it was one of those sears lenses that were rebranded rokinons, soligors or similar brands, but I couldn't find anything but this spiratel that resembled it.

my first thought was that it was one of those sears lenses that were rebranded rokinons, soligors or similar brands, but I couldn't find anything but this spiratel that resembled it.

Thanks for looking into it - I also think that it is probably some ready-to-be-branded example - perhaps that track with 'demo' lens showing off what they could do and offering custom branding is a way to go.

I will do further research as this lens truly intrigues me - it is far too good to be a simple random lens + lack of branding is another mystery. I have below two more shots - of a lens cap that was with it - looks like it is a high quality cap - full metal with moulded motif and also internal edges are lined with some black felt - pretty thought out if you ask me. Thanks to that the cap sits nicely and doesn't scratch the barrel.



Just a small thing but all counts in this case

[manntax]

Not sure but possibly made by Cimko.

Do you happen to have their glass ? What makes you think that possible would be the manufacturer ?
Thanks!

[yusuf]

Do you happen to have their glass ? What makes you think that possible would be the manufacturer ?
Thanks!

I had a Cimko made rebranded 135mm f2.8 which looked very similar, all engraving and M/A marks except for the chromed color ring. They were one of the Japanese manufacturer focused on the whitelabeled lens offering.

[elliott]

Here is a shot of the rear element. The shot is pretty accurate - a blue coating is actually more purplish on mine one rather than strict blue and the element looks to be flat.

The rear construction seems to be very, very similar as well. I have a hard time believing that it could be just coincidence.

yeah, I agree this looks pretty good- do you happen to remember if that was a fully open aperture ? Because the DOF looks like goes from about the hand and is still pretty good at the shirt. Just wanted to try and compare flare resistance at similar aperture since this is a massive factor.

It has been years, but if I had to guess it looks like maybe f5.6.


I think it might be related to this one as well:
Beroflex auto 1:2.8 f=135mm

Still don't know who the actual manufacturer could be.

[thornburg]

Given all the factors others have stated, combined with the "001" serial number, I'm going to go along with the theory that this was either a demo model, or maybe a manufacturing run test.

If a factory was going to make a bunch of lenses for different brands, they probably wouldn't actually include the branding on the first few units off the line, while they're checking quality and calibration. That's a wild guess on my part. I'm no expert in lens manufacturing.

A fairly unique item you have, regardless of what it actually is.

[manntax]

I had a Cimko made rebranded 135mm f2.8 which looked very similar, all engraving and M/A marks except for the chromed color ring. They were one of the Japanese manufacturer focused on the whitelabeled lens offering.

Thanks - always some direction to look into. The guy here : Super Paragon ( Cimko ) 135mm f2.8 is showing off some nice photos taken with a Cimko manufactured lens.

The rear construction seems to be very, very similar as well. I have a hard time believing that it could be just coincidence.

Well - these are similarities that cannot be ignored - I however also see a lot of differences - different coating color, difference in barrel, difference in MADE IN JAPAN lettering ( your one seems to be painted, on mine one is embossed/ engraved in the metal ), also the closest focusing distance tells me that the optical formula is probably different - not sure though since your shots doesn't clearly show what is a minimal focusing distance on your lens.

It has been years, but if I had to guess it looks like maybe f5.6.

I will try to go out and shot something with flare in it tomorrow ( today we had a very dull day where I live ). Will use the same aperture to see if the lens can handle this bright light source similarly.

I think it might be related to this one as well:
Beroflex auto 1:2.8 f=135mm

Exactly from that link you gave I found that related thread linked above, about a Cimko lens that shares some similarities with mine one.

Given all the factors others have stated, combined with the "001" serial number, I'm going to go along with the theory that this was either a demo model, or maybe a manufacturing run test.

Yeah, seems to be the case. And I agree - this is definitely quite unique lens.

Not only because of lack of branding - but also as it performs exceptionally well. I had a chance to play with it against a famous Pentacon electric "red" MC 135mm 2.8 which is owned by a friend of mine. Here is a photo of the two lenses. Pentacon is substantially larger and heavier ( about 100g. more ) and also has further minimal focusing distance at about 1.7m. I will post some results later tonight once I get them organised somehow.


Thanks to all for participating in this small researching !

[elliott]

Well - these are similarities that cannot be ignored - I however also see a lot of differences - different coating color, difference in barrel, difference in MADE IN JAPAN lettering ( your one seems to be painted, on mine one is embossed/ engraved in the metal ), also the closest focusing distance tells me that the optical formula is probably different - not sure though since your shots doesn't clearly show what is a minimal focusing distance on your lens.

The MADE IN JAPAN on mine is engraved as well, it is just also painted, probably an option chosen by the vendor. However, the relationship between the placement of the MADE IN JAPAN marking and the A/M switch that is interesting to me.

Even the relationship of the 3 screws in the mount to other parts of the lens match mine exactly, that is quite uncommon to find similarities like that between different manufacturers. Even my Tokina made 35mm and 21mm don't match each other in that respect, but they match other Tokinas of their respective focal lengths in all brands, including the Soligors that have different barrel designs.

The close focusing distance means next to nothing when it comes to optical design, since it is just a function of the distance between the rear of the lens and the sensor and 2m to 1.35m is not a big difference. The infrared mark is related directly to the optical design though because it indicates how far to shift the focusing when using it for infrared, the infrared mark placement is the way to identify the difference between a 7 element and an 8 element Super Takumar.

Exactly from that link you gave I found that related thread linked above, about a Cimko lens that shares some similarities with mine one.

That Cimko has the infrared mark at f16, indicating a different optical design.