Test results: resurrected Zykkor 135mm Manual Lens

**ismaelg** · 09-25-2009, 07:38 AM

Hello,

I had a few minutes to test outdoors the 135mm freebee lens I fixed.
Disclaimer: I'm NOT a expert testing lenses. I'm NOT a professional photographer. I'm just an enthusiast who likes to tinker with his toys.

So this is not meant to be any type of definitive test or results. I'm just having fun here....

Here is the link to the original thread.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/74433-freebee-lens-fixed.html

Here is the lens.

Test results: K100D Super / JPG / ISO200 / SR Off / Tripod mounted / Cable release / 2s timer / No PP

1/4000 @ f2.8

100% crop

1/1000 @ f8

100% crop

1/200 @ f16

100% crop

1/80 @ f22

100% crop

As expected: quite soft wide open. Decently sharp at f8 and above. Somehow f16 seems a hair better than f22.
Colors and contrast not bad.

While not an everyday lens, I was pleasantly surprised. with a FOV equivalent focal lenght of around 200mm it may have its use.
What do you think?

Thanks,

**Digitalis** · 09-25-2009, 08:20 AM

it seems to be a good lens, not bad wide open..I certainly beats the SMC Takumar 135mm f/2.5 that I loathe. and it doesn't appear to have significant purple fringing or LOCA and the bokeh looks decent.

CFWhitman · 09-25-2009, 08:58 AM

Doesn't look bad at all to me. It's a little soft wide open, as expected, but not bad. I'd be interested to know where it sharpens up. By what I see, I wouldn't be surprised if f4 would be fairly sharp (or even f3.5). I think the lens is sharp enough to see some use.

**Ash** · 09-25-2009, 12:57 PM

A very acceptable result.
There are many f/2.8 lenses out there, prime and zoom alike, that don't come out this well.
I too wonder when central sharpness comes through nicely and whether that changes with distant and near subjects.

**ismaelg** · 09-27-2009, 07:36 PM

Thanks all for the comments.
That's a very good idea for another test: A matrix with different apertures at different focusing distances.
Just a question: What does LOCA stands for?

Thanks,

09-25-2009, 07:38 AM	#1
ismaelg Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Puerto Rico Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,681	Test results: resurrected Zykkor 135mm Manual Lens Hello, I had a few minutes to test outdoors the 135mm freebee lens I fixed. Disclaimer: I'm NOT a expert testing lenses. I'm NOT a professional photographer. I'm just an enthusiast who likes to tinker with his toys. So this is not meant to be any type of definitive test or results. I'm just having fun here.... Here is the link to the original thread. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/74433-freebee-lens-fixed.html Here is the lens. Test results: K100D Super / JPG / ISO200 / SR Off / Tripod mounted / Cable release / 2s timer / No PP 1/4000 @ f2.8 100% crop 1/1000 @ f8 100% crop 1/200 @ f16 100% crop 1/80 @ f22 100% crop As expected: quite soft wide open. Decently sharp at f8 and above. Somehow f16 seems a hair better than f22. Colors and contrast not bad. While not an everyday lens, I was pleasantly surprised. with a FOV equivalent focal lenght of around 200mm it may have its use. What do you think? Thanks,

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
135mm Lens test: Six primes and a zoom	Just1MoreDave	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	07-30-2009 09:38 AM
zykkor 28-135mm f4 pka lens ???	dcmsox2004	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	02-09-2009 07:11 AM
slrgear.com test results: Tamron 28-75 f2.8: best lens... ever (even full frame).	123K10D	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	11-15-2007 08:06 AM
Test Results: K10D SR Superior - Even Compared to Some In-Lens IS Systems	stewart_photo	Pentax DSLR Discussion	29	08-13-2007 06:48 PM

09-25-2009, 08:20 AM	#2
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	it seems to be a good lens, not bad wide open..I certainly beats the SMC Takumar 135mm f/2.5 that I loathe. and it doesn't appear to have significant purple fringing or LOCA and the bokeh looks decent.

09-25-2009, 08:58 AM	#3
CFWhitman Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Upstate New York, US Photos: Albums Posts: 225	Doesn't look bad at all to me. It's a little soft wide open, as expected, but not bad. I'd be interested to know where it sharpens up. By what I see, I wouldn't be surprised if f4 would be fairly sharp (or even f3.5). I think the lens is sharp enough to see some use.

09-25-2009, 12:57 PM	#4
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	A very acceptable result. There are many f/2.8 lenses out there, prime and zoom alike, that don't come out this well. I too wonder when central sharpness comes through nicely and whether that changes with distant and near subjects.

09-27-2009, 07:36 PM	#5
ismaelg Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Puerto Rico Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,681 Original Poster	Thanks all for the comments. That's a very good idea for another test: A matrix with different apertures at different focusing distances. Just a question: What does LOCA stands for? Thanks,