[Dewman]

I picked up one of these lenses today for little to nothing. It seems to be very well built. No lens creep. Nice looking aspherical glass with no haze or fungus. I've yet to put it to task, but was wondering if any of you "Off-Branders" might have any personal experience with this lens.


Thanks for any information.


Dewman
SW Idaho

[Sagitta]

I have that lens!

My copy is... uh... ~special~. I call it Crunchy, because that's the sound it makes.

I honestly haven't taken more than a handful of shots with it because my copy is just so very, very awful. It could simply be a case of my not having taken the time to learn its quirks, but I have other, better lenses which relegated the Soligor to the 'maybe someday' pile. The only reason I have mine is because it tagged along in the kit that I went after because it had my Pentax-M 50mm f/1.4 in it.

All in all I picked up an ME Super (with winder), the Soligor, a battered Promaster 850210 f/3.8 (again, I haven't really messed with the Promaster enough other than to say 'wow, this lens has been beat to hell and back'), and the 50mm for something like $12, not counting shipping in that find. Its part of LBA - that oddball 'other' lens in the sale might wind up a paperweight if it wasn't the lens being chased after.

The only shot from it I have up on my flickr stream is this one: That bokeh was just surreal. If I remember right, it was caused by a purple wire cleaner that was stuck behind the jar I was shooting at or something.

EDIT: I just grabbed the lens out, and the why of my disinterest at the time just came back to me: it has a minimum focus distance of 6 feet. I tried taking test shots inside and I couldn't, because I couldn't get the thing to focus properly at anything up close and personal, and I couldn't figure out the macro function on the thing so gave up after about 3 minutes.

[Dewman]

My copy must be "special collectors edition," () because it didn't notice any of the "crunchiness" you spoke of. As a matter of fact, it is very smooth in every respect. The macro feature, other being different than any other lens I own, worked fine. Just a turn of the macro ring and you're set. I thought it odd that there are three clicks between f:11 & f: 16. The long minimum focus is kind of a put-off, but for what I paid for it, I'm not gonna' complain to loudly! As far as cosmetics, this thing looks like it just came off the assembly line. The test images were very flat, even with the camera's internal adjustment kicked up three notches, so I had to do quite a bit of PP to compensate for it. All in all, not a bad little lens for $5.00. Yeah, I needed ANOTHER 28-80mm lens in my arsenal! But, what the heck.... I didn't own a Soligor lens. That's a good enough reason..... right?
Shot #1 is at 28mm. #2 is at 80mm. It seems to be sharp enough.... for what it is.


Dewman
SW Idaho

I have that lens!

My copy is... uh... ~special~. I call it Crunchy, because that's the sound it makes.

I honestly haven't taken more than a handful of shots with it because my copy is just so very, very awful. It could simply be a case of my not having taken the time to learn its quirks, but I have other, better lenses which relegated the Soligor to the 'maybe someday' pile. The only reason I have mine is because it tagged along in the kit that I went after because it had my Pentax-M 50mm f/1.4 in it.

All in all I picked up an ME Super (with winder), the Soligor, a battered Promaster 850210 f/3.8 (again, I haven't really messed with the Promaster enough other than to say 'wow, this lens has been beat to hell and back'), and the 50mm for something like $12, not counting shipping in that find. Its part of LBA - that oddball 'other' lens in the sale might wind up a paperweight if it wasn't the lens being chased after.

The only shot from it I have up on my flickr stream is this one: That bokeh was just surreal. If I remember right, it was caused by a purple wire cleaner that was stuck behind the jar I was shooting at or something.

EDIT: I just grabbed the lens out, and the why of my disinterest at the time just came back to me: it has a minimum focus distance of 6 feet. I tried taking test shots inside and I couldn't, because I couldn't get the thing to focus properly at anything up close and personal, and I couldn't figure out the macro function on the thing so gave up after about 3 minutes.

---------- Post added 09-22-14 at 10:12 PM ----------

Jody, has the new worn off of your Sears 300mm prime yet? IIRC, you picked it up pretty reasonable, right? I saw some of the photos you posted taken with it and they were very impressive, not only the IQ but the imagery, composition, subject matter, etc,, as well. I really liked the pigeon on the steel beam with the orange rust. I have a Vivitar "matched 75-205mm multiplier" that I've been experimenting with lately and I'm absolutely blown away at some of the results I've been getting with it when coupled with various lenses. The images from a SMC Pentax-K 400mm was amazing! Something like almost 1,000mm equivalent! Really sharp.... REALLY sharp for what you'd expect from a 2X Converter..... of ANY brand! The one I have surely must be a "one of a kind," because it turns in stellar results regardless of what lens I attach it too. Tomorrow, I'm going to try it on my Sears 60-300mm and see what happens. Just for S&G's, I'm going to try stacking TWO converters together and see what gives. I wonder..... what would happen if I were to add an extension ring to the Pentax 400mm? As if it's not long enough already!


Dewman
SW Idaho

[Sagitta]

I think my big issue with my Soligor is that I have a bunch of lenses that fall ahead of it in any pecking order I can imagine. I have my FA28-90 (my go-to if I need a zoom in that range), then I have my Sears 28-80 which while a bit lacking in contrast is sharp pretty much out of the gate, plus has a macro function I can wrap my brain around. Behind that I have my 28 and 50mm primes, at which point the Soligor would probably fall into play. Its like the back-up to the back-up to the back-up quarterback.

That 300mm has found a permanent home inside my carry-bag. I'm just waiting to get myself a new camera so I can actually use it at f/8 and upwards, or with one of my TCs I have around.

I can honestly say the 300 was one heck of a pleasant surprise for me in what it kicks out as results considering everything I shoot these days has that added level of mayhem added to it from the camera.

I still haven't given it a good hard test with my astrotracker though - I'm thinking a good dark night up here in the Frozen Wastes could give me some impressive results with it. Granted, that means going out in the cold to shoot as well so... eh.

All in all, my bag has settled into something of a set now - I have my 10-20, the 50mm, then the 135, then the 300. If I anticipate needing a zoom I can swap the 135 out for the 70-210 or the 75-260 if I think I'll need that kind of range.

[kacansas03]

I picked up one of these lenses today for little to nothing. It seems to be very well built. No lens creep. Nice looking aspherical glass with no haze or fungus. I've yet to put it to task, but was wondering if any of you "Off-Branders" might have any personal experience with this lens.


Thanks for any information.


Dewman
SW Idaho

Soligor was a company that started out in the M42 days making their own lenses then they had to start buying rebadged lenses to fill out their selection. Next came a takeover by some other company and the quality went in the dumper. Then they were bought back and developed their C/D line which stands for Computer Designed. This was when most lens manufacturers were not willing to go with full computer designing so they put the C/D on the line of lenses and started selling a lot of them. Then they changed ownership again but the new owners could not use the C/D on the lens or advertising.
So Soligor has had periods of building good lenses and some periods where they were not above the competition. I recently acquired a 35mm f2.8 "T"(T-2/) mount lens that has a fantastic depth of field, far more than any other lens in my collection, and shoots really nice scenic shots. That one must have been built in the 50's or very early 60's. It is the smallest diameter lens I have ever seen for full 35mm film frame. I will have to post some images.

[Dewman]

Soligor was a company that started out in the M42 days making their own lenses then they had to start buying rebadged lenses to fill out their selection. Next came a takeover by some other company and the quality went in the dumper. Then they were bought back and developed their C/D line which stands for Computer Designed. This was when most lens manufacturers were not willing to go with full computer designing so they put the C/D on the line of lenses and started selling a lot of them. Then they changed ownership again but the new owners could not use the C/D on the lens or advertising.
So Soligor has had periods of building good lenses and some periods where they were not above the competition. I recently acquired a 35mm f2.8 "T"(T-2/) mount lens that has a fantastic depth of field, far more than any other lens in my collection, and shoots really nice scenic shots. That one must have been built in the 50's or very early 60's. It is the smallest diameter lens I have ever seen for full 35mm film frame. I will have to post some images.

Thanks for the information. Mine does indeed have the CD notation. The test images I've shot so far seem to show that the lens has potential.


Dewman
SW Idaho

[stevebrot]

Argus auto cintar 55 1.7

Nice performer. The Cintar name was inherited from the earlier Argus rangefinder cameras. This lens was originally sold with one of the Argus/Cosina branded cameras in the early 1970s and was probably made by Cosina.


Steve

[altopiet]

CUNOR Telephoto lens 1:4.5 f=200mm
With my K-x @4.5 ISO200 1/400

[altopiet]

X post....CUNOR Telephoto lens 1:4.5 f=200mm
With my K-x @4.5 ISO200 1/400

[Dewman]

....would Hanimex, Soligor, Tuo-Five Star, Osawa and Albinar qualify for inclusion in this category? If so, I'm off on a shoot, using the aforementioned lenses.
I have yet to put any of then to the fire and this is as good a reason as any.... don't ya' think?


Dewman
SW Idaho, USA

[Jean Poitiers]

....would Hanimex, Soligor, Tuo-Five Star, Osawa and Albinar qualify for inclusion in this category? If so, I'm off on a shoot, using the aforementioned lenses.
I have yet to put any of then to the fire and this is as good a reason as any.... don't ya' think?


Dewman
SW Idaho, USA

I would say "yep" ... happy shooting and don't forget to share.

[stevebrot]

....would Hanimex, Soligor, Tuo-Five Star, Osawa and Albinar qualify for inclusion in this category? If so, I'm off on a shoot, using the aforementioned lenses.
I have yet to put any of then to the fire and this is as good a reason as any.... don't ya' think?


Dewman
SW Idaho, USA

Absolutely! Soligor was more mainstream back in the day, but is quite obscure and off-brand now. The others started off as off-brand!


Steve

[Dewman]

Having acquired several of the "off-brand" lenses in the past few months, I decided to finally take them out of the closet and see just what they could do.
To date, I have:
1. Osawa MC, f:4.5, 100-200mm.
2. Hanimex MC, f:4.5, 75-200mm macro zoom,
3. Soligor MC-CD, f:3.5, 28-80mm macro zoom.
4. Albinar-ADG, f:3.9, 28-80mm macro zoom.
5. CPC-CCT, f:2.8, 28mm macro.
6. Auto Chinon MC, f:3.5, 35-70mm macro zoom.
7. Tuo/Five Star MC, f:4.5, 75-200mm macro zoom.


I think the first thing that occurred to me when I assembled the lenses on my desk was the amazing solid construction of them. The only one that would appear to be "cheaply made," was the Albinar... and that solely because of the glossy black finish. It is a very sound lens, but for some reason, the glossy finish smacked of patent leather shoes to me!


As you might surmise I tend to do a lot of close-focus shooting, hence my overwhelming leanings toward lenses of that sort. These are all "inexpensive," not necessarily cheap, per se'. Solid, very smooth focus/zoom rings and positive aperture settings, the lot. Zoom creep is present in the Tuo/Five star and Hanimex, albeit very slight. The other two "one touch zooms," the Soligor and the Albinar are creep-free.


I took the Osawa out for a stroll around the neighborhood, shooting various scenes, hoping to get a feel for what it was capable of. The limitations of the 100-200mm FL was apparent, right from the get-go. I can't see this lens ever being one of my favorites because of this.... but I DID discover one of it's redeeming qualities. It has a very useful close-focus ability. This would be very handy when photographing flowers and such. A pleasant surprise, indeed. Also, the lens appears to render very good contrast. The photos shown were all shot (using a monopod) at 200mm, are all full-frame and have had no PP whatsoever. However, the contrast was bumped up two notches in-camera, as well as a little saturation. They were shot with an ISO of 400 @ f:8 - f:11. The depth of focus seemed to me to be very shallow for the given f factor.


The sharpness is good, but not great. It's at it's best near the center of the frame, but falls off considerably the farther out you go. Color saturation is quite good. Focal length is a real bastard in the lens world - neither fish nor fowl. The lens was an impulse buy, more because of curiosity and cost than anything else. On a scale of 1-10, I'd give it a 7.5 overall. Very well made, solid & smooth, with the close-focus ability being it's strong point. Would I recommend this lens? If you need a decent close-focus lens and can find one for $10.00, sure. Otherwise, I'd pass.... unless you're like me and just can't seem to kick this LBA virus!


Dewman
SW Idaho, USA

[Tsuken]

I have one "odd" lens: a Soligor (M42 mount) 1:2.8/35. It is rather fungus-y:

Fungus flare by -Occasionally Focused-

... and flare is ugly.

It does not do backlit. Just no.

However, it does do most everything else really nicely.


Sitting waiting by -Occasionally Focused-


Li'l Dude by -Occasionally Focused-


Herb and bike rack by -Occasionally Focused-


Rose garden by -Occasionally Focused-

[phoenixvision]

My Chinon 135mm 2.8 is the steal of my collection....an absolute stunner....