[Samsen]

Does anyone knows who actually made Auto Mamiya / Sekor f/55mm 1:1.4 , M42 mount? And by any chance is it same as Ricoh 's 1.4 ?
And lastly, and if any expert is out there for this one: Is today's Rokinon from So Korea (A.K.A. Samyang and several other re branded name of same great lens company of today) same as that old Rokinon or Ricoh or whoever the original vintage company was or is it only a similarity of the name?

[boriscleto]

Rokinon had nothing to do with Ricoh.

[pepperberry farm]

Mamiya most likely made that Mamiya lens....

Rokinon is not related to Ricoh or Rikenon lenses...

[pres589]

Five minutes of internet searching makes me think the Mamiya/Sekor 55 f1.4 was made by Mamiya themselves. It seems like most (but not all) of their lenses were made by themselves.

Ricoh sold lenses under the Rikenon brand. Rokinon is one of a number of brand names utilized by Samyang. No relation between Ricoh and Rokinon/Samyang as mentioned already.

[boriscleto]

Five minutes of internet searching makes me think the Mamiya/Sekor 55 f1.4 was made by Mamiya themselves. It seems like most (but not all) of their lenses were made by themselves.

Ricoh sold lenses under the Rikenon brand. Rokinon is one of a number of brand names utilized by Samyang. No relation between Ricoh and Rokinon/Samyang as mentioned already.

The debate of who made the various 55/1.4s seems to be as old as Internet forums...

They are usually attributed to Tomioka, at least the original Chinon. Sears and Ricoh are usually lumped in as well, the Ricoh Singlex TLS was made by Cosina and also sold as a Porst-Chinon and Sears.

There also seem to be two versions, one with a flat rear element and one with a curved rear element.

[Samsen]

Thanks "Boriscleto", "Pres589" and "Pepperberry farm"

I thought so. My doubt was because a seller has probably mistakenly named a Ricoh or Rikenon 55mm 1.4, Rokinon and I knew Ricoh/Rikenon/Tomioka/ Kyocera /autoSears even auto Chinon (All those who made a same or very closely related excellent optically, superior vintage 55mm f1.4 in 60-70s), are all Japanese where as Rokinon is Southern Korean.

Now that I'm also confirmed that Mamiya F1.4 is not the same as Rikenon, the question remains how good Mamiya 55mm 1.4 is, as compare with Ricoh's same FL lens. Both seems to have good score (Almost similar here on the forum).

[pepperberry farm]

Now that I'm also confirmed that Mamiya F1.4 is not the same as Rikenon, the question remains how good Mamiya 55mm 1.4 is, as compare with Ricoh's same FL lens. Both seems to have good score (Almost similar here on the forum).

that Mamiya 55mm f1.4 is probably quite good - one of Mamiya's 55/1.4 lenses were repackaged/renamed and used as the basis of Voigtlander Color-Dynarex AR 55mm f1.4, after VL stopped manufacturing their own lenses....

[stevebrot]

The trained by Mamiya tech who worked on my 1000 DTL told me that the M/S 55/1.4 was made by Mamiya/Sekor and that they made all their own lenses during that period. (Sekor was the name of the glass and lens works.) That said, there is a pervasive rumor that it was made by Tomioka, based on the diameter and profile of the almost flat rear element being similar to the Rikenon 55/1.4 and other rumored-to-be-made-by-Tomioka 55/1.4 lenses of the time.*

If you find a copy of the Mamiya/Sekor 55/1.4 in good condition at a price you can manage, it would be worth having; the Sekor factory made very high quality lenses. As for the Auto Rikenon 55/1.4, I like my copy and also my Auto Rikenon 50/1.7 of similar vintage and don't care about the pedigree of either lens; they both are on my never-sell list.


Steve

* Very few lens lines not bearing the Tomioka name have actually been confirmed as being made by them. The assertions are generally based on similar lens barrels, specs, and engraved fonts and the quality of images produced. Fuzzy logic...

[pres589]

Right, that's the difference that I saw mentioned; the Tomioka has a "flat" rear element (quotes due to the flatness maybe not being so flat after all, but to the naked eye it might as well be called flat) and the Mamiya has a convex rear element.


Lot of good 55's from back then. Not all are good, but just about.

[stevebrot]

Ricoh/Rikenon/Tomioka/ Kyocera /autoSears even auto Chinon

Kyocera should probably be replaced by "Yashinon". Tomioka had long been a supplier to Yashica and was bought by them in 1968. From then until the 1983 merger of Yashica with Kyocera they made Yashica's lenses as well as continuing their business of making high quality lenses for other branding.


Steve

[stevebrot]

Right, that's the difference that I saw mentioned; the Tomioka has a "flat" rear element (quotes due to the flatness maybe not being so flat after all, but to the naked eye it might as well be called flat) and the Mamiya has a convex rear element.

From Ron Herron's Mamiya site and the Dr. Ricoh site

Mamiya/Sekor 55/1.4 -- 7e/5g, 0.5m MFD, f/16 min, 55mm filter, 305g

Auto Rikenon 55/1.4 -- 6e/5g, 0.3m MFD, f/16 min, 52mm filter (55mm my copy), no wt.

Now this is where things get strange in Rikenonland:

• Pentax Forums review summary -- 6e/4g 0.5m MFD, and 306g with 55mm filter.
• My copy -- 0.3m MFD, 315g, 55mm filter, rear element almost flat with no rear element guard and black base, no cut-out for focus scale
• Matt's Classic cameras -- identical to PF description
• Manual Focus Forum -- reports of almost flat, seriously flat, and convex versions and at least one with a rear element guard collar and bright base and focus scale cut-out

Oh...and might I add that my Rikenon 55/1.4, along with others reported, has thoriated (radioactive) glass and was yellowed when I got it. I don't believe the M/S lenses have that general characteristic...Edit: Found several reports both with and without...


Steve

[stevebrot]

the Ricoh Singlex TLS was made by Cosina

So say the Cosina fans. The problem is that Ricoh built on and modified that platform for about a decade with the Singlex TLS coming to market over four years before the similarly configured Cosina HiLite. The configuration is sort of accidental to the Copal Shutter where the most direct linkage is straight out to the upper right front of the camera. To be honest, the position of the shutter dial and overall dimensions are the points of greatest similarity, with the Cosina coming off rather poorly in the comparison. The Ricoh is about 50g heavier and is an overall nicer build (e.g. no exposed screw heads other than on bottom of camera). They share no trim components or visible body parts and details such as the door latch mechanism, battery size, shutter button placement, wind lever placement, body shape/proportions, and strap lug placement (very strange on HiLite) are quite different between the two. I had opportunity to handle both, spring of 1971 and felt the Argus (U.S. branding) felt distinctly cheap. I bought a Singlex.

I am not saying the two are unrelated, only that Cosina (the HiLite was their first camera), built the HiLite to a lower standard and it appears to be a rude copy. The Sears TLS and Chinon TTL are obvious rebrands of the Ricoh. The 1970 Exakta Twin TL is an obvious relative to the HiLite and was made by Cosina.

Am I far enough afield (off topic) yet?


Steve

[pentaxus]

To make things more messy, having had both cameras apart, I am pretty sure the Argus felt cheap because it was made by Petri.

[Just1MoreDave]

I have these two. They share some specs but I think they are at least different designs, if not different manufacturers. In the photos, you can see the coating differences. The Mamiya not yellowed like the Takumar yellowing - i.e. if you look through it to a solid white background, the image is not tinted yellow. The rear elements are both close to flat, but mounted differently and I think the Rikenon has slightly more curvature. Both have six aperture blades but they interleave in the back on the Rikenon, in front on the Mamiya. The aperture clicks at only full stops on the Rikenon, half stops on the Mamiya. The M/A switch is quite recessed on the Mamiya, sticks out a lot on the Rikenon.

Every time I pick up this pair, I think about a comparison test, which I never do.

I get the same 305g for both, MFD is the same 0.5m, 55mm filter.

[stevebrot]

To make things more messy, having had both cameras apart, I am pretty sure the Argus felt cheap because it was made by Petri.

Even though it was branded Argus/Cosina?

Being mildly obsessive at times, I found an eBay listing for a HiLite and was able to compare mount, mirror box, and film chamber...very different approach to all three.


Steve