135mm lens club

Blue · 06-06-2010, 08:47 AM

Originally posted by dadipentak

Sorry to hear about the camera! It went out in a blaze of glory though.

+1. Javier, I take it you went in with it?

stevebrot · 06-06-2010, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by jgredline

Shame about this cam. I triped and fell at the tide pools and the the camera ate it along with me and it is dead....But the film survived as did the lens and the last roll of film from it.

The Ricoh is dead?

Time to find another one!

Steve

stevebrot · 06-06-2010, 08:55 AM

Originally posted by jgredline

I like this one.

Steve

Pentaxor · 06-07-2010, 02:09 AM

just a teaser for Doug, FA135.

RolloR · 06-07-2010, 02:32 AM

Not much of the M42 Super-Takumar 135/2.5 ?

jgredline · 06-07-2010, 08:25 AM

Thanks Dave, Ray and Steve.
I went in with her. Believe I did all I could to keep her above water, but in the end, she was gone. I will begin to look for another one, though I am in no rush. I have that lens on an me super now.

Pentaxor · 06-07-2010, 09:46 AM

Originally posted by RolloR

Not much of the M42 Super-Takumar 135/2.5 ?

it's practically the same with the K135/2.5. the only difference is the mounting and the auto function for the Super Tak.

alan_smithee_photos · 06-07-2010, 09:58 AM

I love my K 135 2.5

For the money, really tough to beat!

**Lowell Goudge** · 06-07-2010, 10:16 AM

A while ago, I set out on a quest to get an M42 mount 135. I had one specific requirement, I didn't really want a tak, not because I don't like them, but because I felt there would be too much similarity to my SMC-Pentax 135F2.5, which by all accounts is one of the best 135's ever.

I wanted something different, and my first venture began as a disaster. I bought a 135mmF2.8 Rikenon, This lens is in almost brand nes condition but suffered badly with bad contrast and severe ghosting, which I attributed to reflectoon off the sensor and back element. I had written the lens off, (only $30 any way) and gone out and picked up a much different 135 F2.8, a Tele Lentar preset with 16 blade aperture, but more about the replacement lens later.

Through other threads on the forum, and discussions with other users it became apparent that maybe it was not the rear element and coatings that were the culpret, but shinny parts in the barrel. Sure enough, the retaining ring for the rear element/group is very shinny black. I painted it over with flat black paint and voila I have a great little performer.

I had some time in my garden this weekend and this is typical at f5.6

It also is almost as sharp wide open.

p.s I could boost the whites a little, but did not want to blow them out I have since added a second PP'd version of the shot boosting the exposure

I will post shots from the tele lentar later

Pentaxor · 06-07-2010, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

A while ago, I set out on a quest to get an M42 mount 135. I had one specific requirement, I didn't really want a tak, not because I don't like them, but because I felt there would be too much similarity to my SMC-Pentax 135F2.5, which by all accounts is one of the best 135's ever.

I wanted something different, and my first venture began as a disaster. I bought a 135mmF2.8 Rikenon, This lens is in almost brand nes condition but suffered badly with bad contrast and severe ghosting, which I attributed to reflectoon off the sensor and back element. I had written the lens off, (only $30 any way) and gone out and picked up a much different 135 F2.8, a Tele Lentar preset with 16 blade aperture, but more about the replacement lens later.

Through other threads on the forum, and discussions with other users it became apparent that maybe it was not the rear element and coatings that were the culpret, but shinny parts in the barrel. Sure enough, the retaining ring for the rear element/group is very shinny black. I painted it over with flat black paint and voila I have a great little performer.

I had some time in my garden this weekend and this is typical at f5.6

It also is almost as sharp wide open.

p.s I could boost the whites a little, but did not want to blow them out

I will post shots from the tele lentar later

Lowell, do you have some nice images shot done with the Lentar? I'm not sure if it's the same lens as that of the Pentacon preset but with a different maker. although from the image you have shown, it doesn't appear like it at all.

**Lowell Goudge** · 06-07-2010, 12:48 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

Lowell, do you have some nice images shot done with the Lentar? I'm not sure if it's the same lens as that of the Pentacon preset but with a different maker. although from the image you have shown, it doesn't appear like it at all.

I have not spent much time yet with the lentar, the shot above is the rikenon, which I "recovered" from my junk pile by fixing the internal flair issue. one lens at a time, I will get to it, but here is a sample

Full frame from about 20 feet, natural light JPEG right out of the camera, resized to post, and a 100% crop to show detail

Shot at Between F4 and 5.6 (can't recall now exactly)

I actually really like the lentar, but one issue with both the lentar and the rikenon is that there are no 1/2 stops, only full stops

Pentaxor · 06-07-2010, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

I have not spent much time yet with the lentar, the shot above is the rikenon, which I "recovered" from my junk pile by fixing the internal flair issue. one lens at a time, I will get to it, but here is a sample

Full frame from about 20 feet, natural light JPEG right out of the camera, resized to post, and a 100% crop to show detail

Shot at Between F4 and 5.6 (can't recall now exactly)

I actually really like the lentar, but one issue with both the lentar and the rikenon is that there are no 1/2 stops, only full stops

are the images here still with the Rikenon? or is it the Lentar?

**Lowell Goudge** · 06-07-2010, 01:02 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

are the images here still with the Rikenon? or is it the Lentar?

the latter 2 are the tele lentar, sorry, I should have been clearer.

These are JPEG right out of the camera with neutral sharpening on the K10D. Note I use a split image viewing screen and it is right on the money.

if it helps you decide if it is similar to your lens, this is a T mount lens.

Blue · 06-07-2010, 01:13 PM

Smithee, nice work on those. That is where I think the 135mm excels.

Pentaxor · 06-07-2010, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

the latter 2 are the tele lentar, sorry, I should have been clearer.

These are JPEG right out of the camera with neutral sharpening on the K10D. Note I use a split image viewing screen and it is right on the money.

if it helps you decide if it is similar to your lens, this is a T mount lens.

Thanks Lowell. the Tele-Lenthar doesn't seem to be similar with that of the Pentacon. the difference that I noticed is with regards to pop, color rendering and bokeh. although the Tele-lenthar kinda reminds me of the Sun Optics 85-210mm with regards to similar IQ rendering. kinda difficult lens to use if you ask me.

06-07-2010, 09:58 AM	#218
alan_smithee_photos Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 844	love my 135 I love my K 135 2.5 For the money, really tough to beat!

06-07-2010, 10:16 AM	#219
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	new respect for junk A while ago, I set out on a quest to get an M42 mount 135. I had one specific requirement, I didn't really want a tak, not because I don't like them, but because I felt there would be too much similarity to my SMC-Pentax 135F2.5, which by all accounts is one of the best 135's ever. I wanted something different, and my first venture began as a disaster. I bought a 135mmF2.8 Rikenon, This lens is in almost brand nes condition but suffered badly with bad contrast and severe ghosting, which I attributed to reflectoon off the sensor and back element. I had written the lens off, (only $30 any way) and gone out and picked up a much different 135 F2.8, a Tele Lentar preset with 16 blade aperture, but more about the replacement lens later. Through other threads on the forum, and discussions with other users it became apparent that maybe it was not the rear element and coatings that were the culpret, but shinny parts in the barrel. Sure enough, the retaining ring for the rear element/group is very shinny black. I painted it over with flat black paint and *voila* I have a great little performer. I had some time in my garden this weekend and this is typical at f5.6 It also is almost as sharp wide open. p.s I could boost the whites a little, but did not want to blow them out I have since added a second PP'd version of the shot boosting the exposure I will post shots from the tele lentar later Attached Images Last edited by Lowell Goudge; 06-07-2010 at 01:00 PM.

06-07-2010, 12:48 PM	#221
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by Pentaxor Lowell, do you have some nice images shot done with the Lentar? I'm not sure if it's the same lens as that of the Pentacon preset but with a different maker. although from the image you have shown, it doesn't appear like it at all. I have not spent much time yet with the lentar, the shot above is the rikenon, which I "recovered" from my junk pile by fixing the internal flair issue. one lens at a time, I will get to it, but here is a sample Full frame from about 20 feet, natural light JPEG right out of the camera, resized to post, and a 100% crop to show detail Shot at Between F4 and 5.6 (can't recall now exactly) I actually really like the lentar, but one issue with both the lentar and the rikenon is that there are no 1/2 stops, only full stops Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lens Fetish Club	Nesster	Lens Clubs	930	20 Hours Ago 02:49 AM
The * lens club	BrendanPK	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	56	08-13-2017 12:38 PM
The any and all lens club	yeatzee	Lens Clubs	37	11-08-2012 04:50 PM
The 'Hey this lens has glass elements in it' Lens Club	Igilligan	Lens Clubs	50	11-14-2010 11:07 PM
For Sale - Sold: SuperTak 35mm f/3.5, Soligor 135mm f/2.8, Hanimex 135mm f/2.8 (M42 lens)	hinman	Sold Items	14	01-14-2008 11:36 AM

06-06-2010, 08:47 AM	#211
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by dadipentak Sorry to hear about the camera! It went out in a blaze of glory though. +1. Javier, I take it you went in with it?

06-06-2010, 08:53 AM	#212
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by jgredline Shame about this cam. I triped and fell at the tide pools and the the camera ate it along with me and it is dead....But the film survived as did the lens and the last roll of film from it. The Ricoh is dead? Time to find another one! Steve

06-06-2010, 08:55 AM	#213
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by jgredline I like this one. Steve

06-07-2010, 02:09 AM	#214
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	just a teaser for Doug, FA135.

06-07-2010, 02:32 AM	#215
RolloR Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 264	Not much of the M42 Super-Takumar 135/2.5 ?

06-07-2010, 08:25 AM	#216
jgredline Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: LosAngeles, Ca. Photos: Albums Posts: 10,628	Thanks Dave, Ray and Steve. I went in with her. Believe I did all I could to keep her above water, but in the end, she was gone. I will begin to look for another one, though I am in no rush. I have that lens on an me super now.

06-07-2010, 09:46 AM	#217
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by RolloR Not much of the M42 Super-Takumar 135/2.5 ? it's practically the same with the K135/2.5. the only difference is the mounting and the auto function for the Super Tak.

06-07-2010, 10:41 AM	#220
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge A while ago, I set out on a quest to get an M42 mount 135. I had one specific requirement, I didn't really want a tak, not because I don't like them, but because I felt there would be too much similarity to my SMC-Pentax 135F2.5, which by all accounts is one of the best 135's ever. I wanted something different, and my first venture began as a disaster. I bought a 135mmF2.8 Rikenon, This lens is in almost brand nes condition but suffered badly with bad contrast and severe ghosting, which I attributed to reflectoon off the sensor and back element. I had written the lens off, (only $30 any way) and gone out and picked up a much different 135 F2.8, a Tele Lentar preset with 16 blade aperture, but more about the replacement lens later. Through other threads on the forum, and discussions with other users it became apparent that maybe it was not the rear element and coatings that were the culpret, but shinny parts in the barrel. Sure enough, the retaining ring for the rear element/group is very shinny black. I painted it over with flat black paint and *voila* I have a great little performer. I had some time in my garden this weekend and this is typical at f5.6 It also is almost as sharp wide open. p.s I could boost the whites a little, but did not want to blow them out I will post shots from the tele lentar later Lowell, do you have some nice images shot done with the Lentar? I'm not sure if it's the same lens as that of the Pentacon preset but with a different maker. although from the image you have shown, it doesn't appear like it at all.

06-07-2010, 12:54 PM	#222
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge I have not spent much time yet with the lentar, the shot above is the rikenon, which I "recovered" from my junk pile by fixing the internal flair issue. one lens at a time, I will get to it, but here is a sample Full frame from about 20 feet, natural light JPEG right out of the camera, resized to post, and a 100% crop to show detail Shot at Between F4 and 5.6 (can't recall now exactly) I actually really like the lentar, but one issue with both the lentar and the rikenon is that there are no 1/2 stops, only full stops are the images here still with the Rikenon? or is it the Lentar?

06-07-2010, 01:02 PM	#223
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by Pentaxor are the images here still with the Rikenon? or is it the Lentar? the latter 2 are the tele lentar, sorry, I should have been clearer. These are JPEG right out of the camera with neutral sharpening on the K10D. Note I use a split image viewing screen and it is right on the money. if it helps you decide if it is similar to your lens, this is a T mount lens.

06-07-2010, 01:13 PM	#224
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Smithee, nice work on those. That is where I think the 135mm excels.

06-07-2010, 02:58 PM	#225
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge the latter 2 are the tele lentar, sorry, I should have been clearer. These are JPEG right out of the camera with neutral sharpening on the K10D. Note I use a split image viewing screen and it is right on the money. if it helps you decide if it is similar to your lens, this is a T mount lens. Thanks Lowell. the Tele-Lenthar doesn't seem to be similar with that of the Pentacon. the difference that I noticed is with regards to pop, color rendering and bokeh. although the Tele-lenthar kinda reminds me of the Sun Optics 85-210mm with regards to similar IQ rendering. kinda difficult lens to use if you ask me.