Veteran Member Original Poster | Originally posted by WhatsMyNameAD67 thanks. ---------- Post added 11-09-20 at 08:48 PM ---------- Originally posted by marcusBMG There are several different ones, but two are the common ones. I rate the 17xxxx serial no's ones made by tokina above the 9xxxx serials "chrome-eared" ones (link above), both being on average better than the typical generic 400mm f6.3. I actually don't recommend the latter, due to prevalence of hazed rear elements, and variable quality.
Are they any good? Depends on your measuring stick. Pentax lenses like the "M" 400mm f5.6 are better: closer focusing, bit sharper and a bit faster, but probably not enough to justify the typical 4x the price. I can suggest, given they can be acquired very cheaply, that they are pretty worthwhile for say €50, nice solid metal 'n glass lenses, easily cleaned/TLC'd. The tokina made ones may be fixed mount - M42 is the only choice then - pre PK introduction - or swappable T4/TX mount. Note it can take some diligent hunting to find PK mounts for TX, also that a bit of diy is required to get a TX PK mount to work on the earlier T4 mount, M42 T4/TX is thus easier but irritating to stop down - have to hold the stop down button unless modded. The chrome eared ones are t-mount so no adapting issues with that one, just screw on a PK or M42 t-ring. As you can see from the reviews (and also trawl through the 300mm lens club for my posts and others) with diligent technique (recommended accessory: bean bag), careful focusing (magnified live view is your friend) and some post processing they can deliver some results. I read in some reviews that there is a problem with focusing to infinity when using an adapter, is this true? Because I don't see the point of buying a telelens when you can't have infinity. ---------- Post added 11-09-20 at 08:49 PM ---------- Originally posted by marcusBMG Just found this good review of a chrome eared one: Soligor 400mm f/6.3 T2 Classic Lens Review | ePHOTOzine
with test pics on a K1 that you can view full sized. Note that the pics are all at f6.3, this is unfortunate as these lenses benefit from stopping down to f8, and f11, he would have got sharper results. Also that 36MPx is really going to highlight the modest resolution. My best results with lenses like this are always by resizing and judicious sharpening. thank you for the link. ---------- Post added 11-09-20 at 08:50 PM ---------- Originally posted by Bosse I have one, but it is years since I used it. It is the preset type. At the time I used it, I hardly got one sharp image with it, compared to today's standards.
So my advice is no, it's not worth it, regardless of price. I see, thanks. ---------- Post added 11-09-20 at 08:51 PM ---------- Originally posted by vonBaloney Yeah, there are a ton of versions (branded names) of that lens, and a ton more that are very similar (different construction, but nearly the same). Simple construction. It obviously isn't going to compare to any high-end telephoto (even a vintage one), but it isn't abjectly terrible either. I wouldn't pay much for it at all -- there are a gazillion of them out there. The interesting thing about it (and other cheap old lenses) is that it is actually sharper using it on modern digital (sort of) than it was originally because with a click of a button in lightroom much of its noticeable spherical aberration can be instantly corrected and so the sweet spot is somewhat enlarged (will still look best in the center though). It is something to play with -- not for serious work though. Ok, thanks. ---------- Post added 11-09-20 at 08:58 PM ---------- Originally posted by marcusBMG There are several different ones, but two are the common ones. I rate the 17xxxx serial no's ones made by tokina above the 9xxxx serials "chrome-eared" ones (link above), both being on average better than the typical generic 400mm f6.3. I actually don't recommend the latter, due to prevalence of hazed rear elements, and variable quality.
Are they any good? Depends on your measuring stick. Pentax lenses like the "M" 400mm f5.6 are better: closer focusing, bit sharper and a bit faster, but probably not enough to justify the typical 4x the price. I can suggest, given they can be acquired very cheaply, that they are pretty worthwhile for say €50, nice solid metal 'n glass lenses, easily cleaned/TLC'd. The tokina made ones may be fixed mount - M42 is the only choice then - pre PK introduction - or swappable T4/TX mount. Note it can take some diligent hunting to find PK mounts for TX, also that a bit of diy is required to get a TX PK mount to work on the earlier T4 mount, M42 T4/TX is thus easier but irritating to stop down - have to hold the stop down button unless modded. The chrome eared ones are t-mount so no adapting issues with that one, just screw on a PK or M42 t-ring. As you can see from the reviews (and also trawl through the 300mm lens club for my posts and others) with diligent technique (recommended accessory: bean bag), careful focusing (magnified live view is your friend) and some post processing they can deliver some results. Well ,the adapter issue with T4 seems a bit too complex for me, especially if it will involve DIY. So maybe I'll go for the T2-mount. ---------- Post added 11-09-20 at 09:05 PM ---------- Originally posted by marcusBMG There are several different ones, but two are the common ones. I rate the 17xxxx serial no's ones made by tokina above the 9xxxx serials "chrome-eared" ones (link above), both being on average better than the typical generic 400mm f6.3. I actually don't recommend the latter, due to prevalence of hazed rear elements, and variable quality.
Are they any good? Depends on your measuring stick. Pentax lenses like the "M" 400mm f5.6 are better: closer focusing, bit sharper and a bit faster, but probably not enough to justify the typical 4x the price. I can suggest, given they can be acquired very cheaply, that they are pretty worthwhile for say €50, nice solid metal 'n glass lenses, easily cleaned/TLC'd. The tokina made ones may be fixed mount - M42 is the only choice then - pre PK introduction - or swappable T4/TX mount. Note it can take some diligent hunting to find PK mounts for TX, also that a bit of diy is required to get a TX PK mount to work on the earlier T4 mount, M42 T4/TX is thus easier but irritating to stop down - have to hold the stop down button unless modded. The chrome eared ones are t-mount so no adapting issues with that one, just screw on a PK or M42 t-ring. As you can see from the reviews (and also trawl through the 300mm lens club for my posts and others) with diligent technique (recommended accessory: bean bag), careful focusing (magnified live view is your friend) and some post processing they can deliver some results. I notice a couple of them by the brand Sun, and I was also wondering if this is T2 or M42, can't make it out on the pictures. ---------- Post added 11-09-20 at 09:08 PM ---------- Originally posted by mikeprotts Can have interesting results, the attached using a Samsung GX10 and 2x tele converter. Ok, not bad. ---------- Post added 11-09-20 at 09:14 PM ---------- Originally posted by marcusBMG There are several different ones, but two are the common ones. I rate the 17xxxx serial no's ones made by tokina above the 9xxxx serials "chrome-eared" ones (link above), both being on average better than the typical generic 400mm f6.3. I actually don't recommend the latter, due to prevalence of hazed rear elements, and variable quality.
Are they any good? Depends on your measuring stick. Pentax lenses like the "M" 400mm f5.6 are better: closer focusing, bit sharper and a bit faster, but probably not enough to justify the typical 4x the price. I can suggest, given they can be acquired very cheaply, that they are pretty worthwhile for say €50, nice solid metal 'n glass lenses, easily cleaned/TLC'd. The tokina made ones may be fixed mount - M42 is the only choice then - pre PK introduction - or swappable T4/TX mount. Note it can take some diligent hunting to find PK mounts for TX, also that a bit of diy is required to get a TX PK mount to work on the earlier T4 mount, M42 T4/TX is thus easier but irritating to stop down - have to hold the stop down button unless modded. The chrome eared ones are t-mount so no adapting issues with that one, just screw on a PK or M42 t-ring. As you can see from the reviews (and also trawl through the 300mm lens club for my posts and others) with diligent technique (recommended accessory: bean bag), careful focusing (magnified live view is your friend) and some post processing they can deliver some results. Ok, I'm getting a little bit confused here: a Tokina-version has also a M42-mount ? ---------- Post added 11-09-20 at 09:17 PM ---------- Originally posted by marcusBMG There are several different ones, but two are the common ones. I rate the 17xxxx serial no's ones made by tokina above the 9xxxx serials "chrome-eared" ones (link above), both being on average better than the typical generic 400mm f6.3. I actually don't recommend the latter, due to prevalence of hazed rear elements, and variable quality.
Are they any good? Depends on your measuring stick. Pentax lenses like the "M" 400mm f5.6 are better: closer focusing, bit sharper and a bit faster, but probably not enough to justify the typical 4x the price. I can suggest, given they can be acquired very cheaply, that they are pretty worthwhile for say €50, nice solid metal 'n glass lenses, easily cleaned/TLC'd. The tokina made ones may be fixed mount - M42 is the only choice then - pre PK introduction - or swappable T4/TX mount. Note it can take some diligent hunting to find PK mounts for TX, also that a bit of diy is required to get a TX PK mount to work on the earlier T4 mount, M42 T4/TX is thus easier but irritating to stop down - have to hold the stop down button unless modded. The chrome eared ones are t-mount so no adapting issues with that one, just screw on a PK or M42 t-ring. As you can see from the reviews (and also trawl through the 300mm lens club for my posts and others) with diligent technique (recommended accessory: bean bag), careful focusing (magnified live view is your friend) and some post processing they can deliver some results. And the Hanimex is out of the question.
|