[bc_the_path]

Hello Friends,

I have this K-mount Soligor MC 200mm f/2.8 lens in very good condition.
Almost the same lens (M42) has been found recently by our fellow "Hinman".

I will report my experience with this one soon.

I just want to know, if any of you have info on its maker.
The serial number starts with 38.
Does it tell something?

Thanks,

[hinman]

My m42 version has serial # of 37, it looks like from Tokina.

I have my test pictures in this flickr set. Some have rough recording of apertures

Flickr Soligor 200mm f/2.8 (m42) Test Set

• my m42 has serial # starting 37
• I find wide open f/2.8 a bit on the soft side.
• Contrast and color is quite good.
• I find f/4.0 very usable.
• The lens is well built.
• filter size is 72mm, a bit bulky but hand-hold-able
• lens iris is not symmetrical when stopped down
• PF happens in wider apertures
• built-in lens hood very nice

[wavecurrent]

I also have the Soligor MC 200mm 2.8 K-mount in a good condition, got my copy really cheap due to a slow aperture. I fixed that myself,
working like new now, the serial starts with 37
I find the lens a little soft wide open and with some PF, gone by F4 and really sharp at F5.6. Here it's mounted on my old favourite film camera, the MX
I also have the MC 300mm 4.5 K-mount, but I haven't really had time to test it yet.

[hinman]

I also have the Soligor MC 200mm 2.8 K-mount in a good condition, got my copy really cheap due to a slow aperture. I fixed that myself,
working like new now, the serial starts with 37
I find the lens a little soft wide open and with some PF, gone by F4 and really sharp at F5.6. Here it's mounted on my old favourite film camera, the MX
I also have the MC 300mm 4.5 K-mount, but I haven't really had time to test it yet.

Thanks for the input. I look everywhere and I don't see much mentioning about the Soligor 200mm lens f/2.8 as compared to other versions in f/3.5. Your K mount also starts with 37 and I wonder if OP post also meant for 37 as the starting digits in the serial number. My 42 looks very much identical to your K mount in cosmetics. I am just guessing the lens may be made by Tokina as in Vivitar manufacturing serial number.

I actually want to solicit opinion in how to test a tele lens, suggestions are welcome. What are easy shooting targets that is not a brick wall? I shoot similar pictures in f/8.0, f/5.6,f/4.0 and then f/2.8. I mostly found f/2.8 to be too soft and more prone to PF. And I do see PF in wide open apertures, less noticeable when stopped down.

I would not go too crazy looking for this lens unless you find it relatively low cost. And I find the iris not symmetrical when stopping down. The better lens that is slower that MAY offer better IQ will be the Vivitar 200mm f/3.5 by Komine or the Pentax M 200mm f/4.0 (the K version without M designation will be better one).

Since this lens has fast speed in f/2.8, I originally thought about using it for occasional bird shooting in close range but I find it too short for the purpose. It is my first time mounting Kiron 2x matched doubler that come equipped with my Kiron 70-150mm f/3.8 (m42), on my Soligor 200mm f/2.8. I have 400mm in the shooting from the combo. I am novice in bird shooting and I have a difficult time to catch up with their movement

Soligor 200mm f/2.8 (m42) +
2x matched doubler from
Kiron 70-150mm f/3.8 (m42)






Very soft
CA/PF

---

Last edited by hinman; 03-12-2009 at 05:50 PM.

[stevebrot]

I actually want to solicit opinion in how to test a tele lens, suggestions are welcome. What are easy shooting targets that is not a brick wall?

I have found that real estate signs work really well. There is an abundance in my neighborhood at a wide range of distances.



Seriously though...These signs usually are well-printed, are high contrast, and have a mix of larger and small type.

Alternatively, you can build a test target out of a sheet of plywood and some newsprint. Test the lens at 20x the focal length from the target. For your 200mm that would be 4 meters distance. Take care that the target is parallel to the sensor plane.

Steve

[newarts]

Mine looks like the others shown. Its SN starts with 37.

It was originally an OM mount & I changed to to a manual K. I like it.

Compare the left & right hand sides of this test shot:

The Soligor side at 2.8 has less contrast and some CA compared to the Super Tak at 4, but it is certainly not terrible.

Dave

[Just1MoreDave]

Thanks for the input. I look everywhere and I don't see much mentioning about the Soligor 200mm lens f/2.8 as compared to other versions in f/3.5. Your K mount also starts with 37 and I wonder if OP post also meant for 37 as the starting digits in the serial number. My 42 looks very much identical to your K mount in cosmetics. I am just guessing the lens may be made by Tokina as in Vivitar manufacturing serial number.

I read something about a later version of this lens with "C/D" in its name, standing for Computer Design. This designation is on the aperture ring. It was also built by Tokina and looked similar to these lenses. I can't find the page again.

[hinman]

I have found that real estate signs work really well. There is an abundance in my neighborhood at a wide range of distances.

http://www.aracnet.com/~brothers/images/vivpent3.jpg

Seriously though...These signs usually are well-printed, are high contrast, and have a mix of larger and small type.

Alternatively, you can build a test target out of a sheet of plywood and some newsprint. Test the lens at 20x the focal length from the target. For your 200mm that would be 4 meters distance. Take care that the target is parallel to the sensor plane.

Steve

I should have thought about your comparison, thanks for reminding me. A great suggestion, much thanks to you. For corner sharpness, I wonder if there is something more interesting than a brick wall.

[hinman]

Mine looks like the others shown. Its SN starts with 37.

It was originally an OM mount & I changed to to a manual K. I like it.

Compare the left & right hand sides of this test shot:
http://www.newarts.com/images/200mmCompareSummary.jpg
The Soligor side at 2.8 has less contrast and some CA compared to the Super Tak at 4, but it is certainly not terrible.

Dave

Thank you for your comment and comparison. I admire at your handyman skill in altering lens from OM to K mount

[hinman]

I read something about a later version of this lens with "C/D" in its name, standing for Computer Design. This designation is on the aperture ring. It was also built by Tokina and looked similar to these lenses. I can't find the page again.

If original poster can confirm if his also starts with 37 instead of 38, we are likely coming from the same manufacturing source.

[bc_the_path]

My serial is different.
My lens is not C/D but it is multicoated.
As far as I know, there is a detailed catalogue of lenses (in print, by Kadlubek) and that may be the only source for a clarification.
I will be reporting on the performance within next month and I will add "proper" photos of the lens.
Please report here if you encounter any info on the maker of this particular copy.

[Lloydy]

I should have thought about your comparison, thanks for reminding me. A great suggestion, much thanks to you. For corner sharpness, I wonder if there is something more interesting than a brick wall.

Graveyards are good, the headstones are well spaced and have sharp edges and carving. Great for DoF and focus checks.
There's usually good contrast with white marble and dark granites as well.

The residents don't give you any trouble either.

[hinman]

Graveyards are good, the headstones are well spaced and have sharp edges and carving. Great for DoF and focus checks.
There's usually good contrast with white marble and dark granites as well.

The residents don't give you any trouble either.

Thank you so much for the suggestions. I have not thought about the graveyards. That is a great suggestion to have some quiet place for test pictures on inscriptions, flowers, trees, green, etc.

I have a 10 minute window this morning and I just shot some random architecture with bricks and signs but I forget to line up my sensor to be parallel to the shooting sign. And I am trying to compare my Soligor 200mm f/2.8 (m42) to my Vivitar 200mm f/3.5 from Komine in K mount. I will bring in the test images later.

Besides sharpness, I am thinking of color, contrast and bokeh for near and distant objects. The two lens may be close -- both seem to be on the soft side and prone to CA prone wider apertures. More test will tell.

Soligor in f/2.8 + 0.7Ev




Soligor in f/5.6




Soligor in f/2.8 +0.7 Ev
just curious shot to see the background




Soligor 200mm in f/5.6 + 2x Kiron doubler
just curious to see the bokeh



Soligor 200mm in f/5.6 + 2x Kiron doubler
just curious to see the bokeh & color
with 2x adapter

I feel the need to bump +0.7 Ev in f/2.8 aperture as the Soligor seems to underexpose in widest aperture bigger than f/4 for me.

On the pedestrian photo, I actually like the softer picture in f/2.8 because of the blur background to bring out the subject of interest -- the lady's clothing. But this can be too subjective and I don't have the trained eyes to see the faults. Both apertures seem to fringe on the lamp post. When I pixel peep in 100% crop size, all in f/2.8 are quite soft to view either from user error or the lens itself.

Thanks again,
Hin

[Miserere]

Alternatively, you can build a test target out of a sheet of plywood and some newsprint.

Or just put your house on the market. Only the really dedicated lens testers go that far

[Jewelltrail]

Take care that the target is parallel to the sensor plane.

Steve

I know what you mean by parallel, and I know what you mean by the sensor plane, but I am confused by the meaning of these phrases in this sentence. Could someone kindly explain further--thanks?

Do you simply mean the if the camera is held level, then the signs you shoot must be level too? If so, why?