[pepperberry farm]

Where do you get your tame dragonflies from?

funny thing about that blue dragon (I do not know the species of our dragonflies); I was shooting a wasp (which did not turn out) when I saw a blur out of the corner of my eye - this dragon had landed nearly on me (that shot is not cropped at all) and did not mind me turning a smidge to shoot him....

there are a couple of species of dragons that do not mind me getting close for shots, while a couple of the others will not settle at all if I'm anywhere near them...

[pepperberry farm]

sunflower kick

[pepperberry farm]

[edom31]

Glad to see someone else playing with the Rikenon XR lenses ! Whats your overall thoughts on not only the 135mm/2.8 , but also the seldom seen 35mm/2.8 ?
Just curious as I think the 35mm is actually pretty decent , but never played with the 135mm because of poor reviews.

Thanks - I wasn't looking to acquire neither the 135/2.8 or 35/2.8 - they were part of a bundle that came in with the XR 50/2 (the three lenses I got for about $26 with shipping so, I reckon it was a good deal).

Now, the 50/2 is as sharp as advertised, but similar to other 50s I have...

The 135/2.8 - the reviews do not "lie", a bit harsh maybe. I would not go out of my way to get this lens. Not worth paying over $35 for it as there are so many 135mm/2.8 out there that could out perform (Super-tak 135/3.5 would beat this to the ground, and can be purchased cheaply). It has a small hood that may not do much but at least it's there.

I shoot 135mms mostly for flowers... For the XR - wide open it is soft, bokeh example below (one shot I already had posted here, sorry for redundance):





And one stop down ruins the bokeh balls... no half stops:



NOW - the 35/2.8 = that one surpirsed me a whole lot! Good colors, great built, sharp... Haven't shot isolated subjects so I cannot speak of bokeh. I do like the results from it better than my M 35/2.8... SMC Tak 35/3.5 I believe is still my favorite overall 35mm one. The XR very likely my second. I couldn't tell which one is "better" out of the two, but the XR 35/2.8 was a pretty cool find.

[ivanvernon]

Thanks - I wasn't looking to acquire neither the 135/2.8 or 35/2.8 - they were part of a bundle that came in with the XR 50/2 (the three lenses I got for about $26 with shipping so, I reckon it was a good deal).

Now, the 50/2 is as sharp as advertised, but similar to other 50s I have...

The 135/2.8 - the reviews do not "lie", a bit harsh maybe. I would not go out of my way to get this lens. Not worth paying over $35 for it as there are so many 135mm/2.8 out there that could out perform (Super-tak 135/3.5 would beat this to the ground, and can be purchased cheaply). It has a small hood that may not do much but at least it's there.

I shoot 135mms mostly for flowers... For the XR - wide open it is soft, bokeh example below (one shot I already had posted here, sorry for redundance):





And one stop down ruins the bokeh balls... no half stops:



NOW - the 35/2.8 = that one surpirsed me a whole lot! Good colors, great built, sharp... Haven't shot isolated subjects so I cannot speak of bokeh. I do like the results from it better than my M 35/2.8... SMC Tak 35/3.5 I believe is still my favorite overall 35mm one. The XR very likely my second. I couldn't tell which one is "better" out of the two, but the XR 35/2.8 was a pretty cool find.

I have never used any of my 135s for flowers. Thanks for the hint, however, and now I will have to try them on some of my blossoms.

[Benz3ne]

I shoot 135mms mostly for flowers... For the XR - wide open it is soft, bokeh example below (one shot I already had posted here, sorry for redundance):

Good to know - I'll have to give a go with my SMC M135/3.5!

[edom31]

I have never used any of my 135s for flowers. Thanks for the hint, however, and now I will have to try them on some of my blossoms.

I like it because I do not have to get too close, especially when there is a nice enough background to create some good off focus content.

Now, mind you I only shoot cropped... Thus the crop factor makes the space of the image for a 135 quite small - hence good for isolating a small but not tiny element (like a rose or hibiscus).

You shooting medium and ff might change the 135 approach, but hey, I'd try it anyhow...


Off topic, but some of my favorite baby-baby portrait pictures I got of my daughter I took with a 28mm, very close to her obviously, but baby-babies cannot go off running - my point, even if it is not meant for the purpose, it is worth trying. There are always nice surprises here and there.

[ivanvernon]

I like it because I do not have to get too close, especially when there is a nice enough background to create some good off focus content.

Now, mind you I only shoot cropped... Thus the crop factor makes the space of the image for a 135 quite small - hence good for isolating a small but not tiny element (like a rose or hibiscus).

You shooting medium and ff might change the 135 approach, but hey, I'd try it anyhow...


Off topic, but some of my favorite baby-baby portrait pictures I got of my daughter I took with a 28mm, very close to her obviously, but baby-babies cannot go off running - my point, even if it is not meant for the purpose, it is worth trying. There are always nice surprises here and there.

I use lots of different lenses for flowers but never a full-frame 135mm. S0 . . . you inspired me to try out my Takumar bayonet 135mm f 2.5, and I think the results are encouraging. Now I will have to systematically work myself through my set of 135mm lenses to see which works best.

KIT K-1 with Takumarf (bayonet) 135mm f 2.5.

[edom31]

use lots of different lenses for flowers but never a full-frame 135mm. S0 . . . you inspired me to try out my Takumar bayonet 135mm f 2.5, and I think the results are encouraging. Now I will have to systematically work myself through my set of 135mm lenses to see which works best.KIT K-1 with Takumarf (bayonet) 135mm f 2.5.

That Bayonet Tak shows nice reds and greens... I have the 2.8 version and I like it.

It seems that you're already really comfortable with the 135mm range and the subjects... lovely shots, that last one is a joy!

[ivanvernon]

That Bayonet Tak shows nice reds and greens... I have the 2.8 version and I like it.

It seems that you're already really comfortable with the 135mm range and the subjects... lovely shots, that last one is a joy!

Thank you. I was pleased with these too particularly the OOF/bokeh smoothness and color rendering. I use two different approaches to flower photography--this approach of using moderate telephoto lenses and standing back from the subjects and using a wide angle lens with good "minimum focal distance" and coming in real close. My favorite using the latter approach is the Pentax 67 55mm f 4.0 with MFD of about 10 inches. The 55mm is extremely sharp and captures fantastic amounts of detail, but the 135mm offers excellent/artistic rendering in the OOF/BK department.

[paulh]

wind in the willows - Super Tak 28/3.5 on *ist D:

[ivanvernon]

I love it when the cheapest prime in the lens cabinet produces passable images.

KIT: K-1 with Auto Sears MC 135mm f 2.8.

[pepperberry farm]

I love it when the cheapest prime in the lens cabinet produces passable images.

KIT: K-1 with Auto Sears MC 135mm f 2.8.

quite passable... helps that the person behind the camera knows what he's doing, too....

[goatsNdonkey]

I love it when the cheapest prime in the lens cabinet produces passable images.

KIT: K-1 with Auto Sears MC 135mm f 2.8.

With the "MC" (Multi-Coated) marking, I assume you have one of the two Korean-made Sears 135s. The one with Macro mode is prized for its bokeh. I had a copy of the other Korean one that, unfortunately, had its aperture stuck wide open. If you like yours, also keep a watch for the earlier Japanese-made Auto Sears f/2.8 135mm, very highly rated by those who've reviewed it and not merely as good for its price:

Auto Sears 135mm F2.8 Lens Reviews - Miscellaneous Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

You'll probably only find it in m42 mount, but no problem if you have the adapter. I have one, and the reviewers are right about its Takumar-like build quality. After the Korean copy I had came apart when I was trying to unstick its aperture, the Japanese one is the only Pentax-compatible 135 I have, and I can't think of a good reason to get another 135.

[ivanvernon]

With the "MC" (Multi-Coated) marking, I assume you have one of the two Korean-made Sears 135s. The one with Macro mode is prized for its bokeh. I had a copy of the other Korean one that, unfortunately, had its aperture stuck wide open. If you like yours, also keep a watch for the earlier Japanese-made Auto Sears f/2.8 135mm, very highly rated by those who've reviewed it and not merely as good for its price:

Auto Sears 135mm F2.8 Lens Reviews - Miscellaneous Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

You'll probably only find it in m42 mount, but no problem if you have the adapter. I have one, and the reviewers are right about its Takumar-like build quality. After the Korean copy I had came apart when I was trying to unstick its aperture, the Japanese one is the only Pentax-compatible 135 I have, and I can't think of a good reason to get another 135.

thanks for the info. I will surf through eBay to see what I can find.

---------- Post added 07-18-19 at 11:30 AM ----------

quite passable... helps that the person behind the camera knows what he's doing, too....

Thanks for the flattery. :>)

---------- Post added 07-18-19 at 11:30 AM ----------

quite passable... helps that the person behind the camera knows what he's doing, too....

Thanks for the flattery. :>)