[stevebrot]

what are those things in that yellow column in the middle

Those would be the Steve-specific AMU (type Ritz). Regular SMUs have a very limited lifespan at my house.


Steve

[aslyfox]

Those would be the Steve-specific AMU (type Ritz). Regular SMUs have a very limited lifespan at my house.


Steve

mmmm

sound suspicious to me

first the folks down under with their so claimed AMU that are rectangular

[ Arnott's Tim Tam Original | Arnott's ]

now you want an AMU (type Ritz)

well it's the call of the originator of the immortal SMU @Pepperberry Farm

I'm still bothered about no chocolate at all but not my call

[clickclick]

I'm still bothered about no chocolate at all but not my call

Yeah, I thought chocolate was kinda necessary too, but maybe that's just to keep the elves happy!

[clickclick]

they are a sad, pale shadow of an SMU....

while I will happy enjoy one of those imposters with a smidge of cheese, peanut butter, or something more exotic, they have no business standing in place of an SMU....

I will lodge a formal complaint with a strongly-worded email....

(harrumph)

I think it looks like the eyepieces are even talking about it!

[Gary H Perth]

Minolta 35-70 Macro zoom

I think I now have enough Minolta-mount lenses to put on my Sony A7ii. Here they are, a Soligor 28mm, two Fifties and the newly acquired zoom. All except the Soligor are shown with MD-NEX adapters attached.

Also included here is a shot taken on the new zoom at 70mm and minimum focus (not using the macro) showing my Portrait Pig. This new lens is sharp, as member pcoch stated in his review of the Pentax M 35-70: Is it my favourite 35-70mm zoom lens? No it isn't. the Minolta md 35-70mm f3.5 has it beaten because it is lighter by 100g, has a 1:4 macro function and a more modern 'twist to zoom' design. I do not have a Pentax M to compare, but I do have a Tamron 35-80mm, so I will test them together one day soon.

Read more at: SMC Pentax-M 35-70mm F2.8-3.5 Reviews - M Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

These are shown with the accepted AusMU - Australian Measuring unit - of the Tim Tam. These Tim Tams are white-choc-coated Mango flavour and Double Choc flavour. The history of the Tim Tam has been discussed previously: made in Australia but named after a Kentucky Derby winner.

[edom31]

RMC Tokina 500/8 Mirror lens - my first attempt at one of these. Looking forwards to lots of doughnuts!

[ivanvernon]

Minolta 35-70 Macro zoom

I think I now have enough Minolta-mount lenses to put on my Sony A7ii. Here they are, a Soligor 28mm, two Fifties and the newly acquired zoom. All except the Soligor are shown with MD-NEX adapters attached.

Also included here is a shot taken on the new zoom at 70mm and minimum focus (not using the macro) showing my Portrait Pig. This new lens is sharp, as member pcoch stated in his review of the Pentax M 35-70: Is it my favourite 35-70mm zoom lens? No it isn't. the Minolta md 35-70mm f3.5 has it beaten because it is lighter by 100g, has a 1:4 macro function and a more modern 'twist to zoom' design. I do not have a Pentax M to compare, but I do have a Tamron 35-80mm, so I will test them together one day soon.

Read more at: SMC Pentax-M 35-70mm F2.8-3.5 Reviews - M Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

These are shown with the accepted AusMU - Australian Measuring unit - of the Tim Tam. These Tim Tams are white-choc-coated Mango flavour and Double Choc flavour. The history of the Tim Tam has been discussed previously: made in Australia but named after a Kentucky Derby winner.

I was interested to note that you have acquired the Minolta 35-70mm macro. I have the Minolta MD Zoom Rokkor 35-70mm f 3.5 non-macro version. I also have the Leica vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm f 4.0-22 macro. Somewhere I have read that Minolta was the maker of the earliest version of the Leica 35-70mm non-macro version before production of the Canadian Mandler-designed macro version. In my experience, the Minolta 35-70mm f 3.5 non-macro lens does not offer the Leica rendering (the Mandler glow!) of the later Leica-R macro lens though it is a competent lens with good color and rendering.. On the other hand, I have only used the Minolta lens on my Pentax K-1 camera using an adapter with corrective glass, which likely results in some degree of mage degradation. One day soon I must give the Minolta lens on my Sony alpha camera. I will appreciate any remarks you may be able to offer once you have tried it out on the Sony alpha. I am wondering if your macro version renders more like the Leica lens. My Leica 35-70mm vario is so good that it pretty well wipes out any need for any of the prime lenses covered by its zoom range.

---

Last edited by ivanvernon; 07-14-2021 at 12:32 PM. Reason: correction

[Jonathan Mac]

Used Reveni Labs shoe mount exposure meter



$50 shipped on eBay.



Chris

Sounds like a good deal. I think I'll go for the Doomo option when I can convince myself that spare cash can be spent on things other than lenses and film cameras...

[wtlwdwgn]

My new to me CZJ Biotar 58mm f/2 with my K 55 f/1.8 and proper SMUs.

[clickclick]

My new to me CZJ Biotar 59mm f/2 with my K 55 f/1.8 and proper SMUs.

I really love my CZJ Biotar. I think you'll find it a lot of fun. Just make sure you get the fingers cleaned after the SMUs!

[wtlwdwgn]

i really love my czj biotar. I think you'll find it a lot of fun. Just make sure you get the fingers cleaned after the smus!

Thanks, I think I will too. And I will clean my hands after measuring the lenses.

[cyberjunkie]

just arrived

I hope you already started to enjoy this beautiful lens.
I have the non-Anniversary version, like yours. Makes zero practical difference.
About a year ago I did an impromptu comparative test of my best 180/200mm lenses in PK and M42 mounts. The Tamron SP came out second, clearly beating very good optics like the MC Sonnar 2.8/200mm M42. Only the Pentax-A Star 2.8/200mm did better.
For portrait use on full frame the Tamron is preferable, though.

I see that most of these lenses (including mine and, from what I see, yours) are sold without hood. The original Tamron hood is difficult to come by and usually very expensive.
Personally I gave up trying to find one and will probably try to adapt a cheap second hand substitute. It has taken ages to find the original hood for the Tamron SP 17mm. I recently found one for cheap in a set of worthless accessories, that included in the description only another remotely desirable item: a Takumar hood. The picture wasn't clear at all, I bid anyway, won the auction, and finally found that the mysterious hood branded "Tamron" was in fact the rare one specifically made for the 17mm! For a few years I had tried my best to come up with other creative solutions, adapting other hoods, but all of them produced vignetting on FF.
The 180mm needs a hood cause the front element is exposed, but I'm not willing to spend a few more years to find the original one. I believe a Chinese metal/plastic hood would do, cause there is no risk of vignetting this time...

Cheers
Paolo

[Mbaez]

My new to me CZJ Biotar 58mm f/2 with my K 55 f/1.8 and proper SMUs.

That Biotar looks similar to the HD 20-40.
You guys are bad! My wife wants me to loose weight and you're not helping with those SMU

[pepperberry farm]

I hope you already started to enjoy this beautiful lens.
I have the non-Anniversary version, like yours. Makes zero practical difference.
About a year ago I did an impromptu comparative test of my best 180/200mm lenses in PK and M42 mounts. The Tamron SP came out second, clearly beating very good optics like the MC Sonnar 2.8/200mm M42. Only the Pentax-A Star 2.8/200mm did better.
For portrait use on full frame the Tamron is preferable, though.

I see that most of these lenses (including mine and, from what I see, yours) are sold without hood. The original Tamron hood is difficult to come by and usually very expensive.
Personally I gave up trying to find one and will probably try to adapt a cheap second hand substitute. It has taken ages to find the original hood for the Tamron SP 17mm. I recently found one for cheap in a set of worthless accessories, that included in the description only another remotely desirable item: a Takumar hood. The picture wasn't clear at all, I bid anyway, won the auction, and finally found that the mysterious hood branded "Tamron" was in fact the rare one specifically made for the 17mm! For a few years I had tried my best to come up with other creative solutions, adapting other hoods, but all of them produced vignetting on FF.
The 180mm needs a hood cause the front element is exposed, but I'm not willing to spend a few more years to find the original one. I believe a Chinese metal/plastic hood would do, cause there is no risk of vignetting this time...

Cheers
Paolo

I love this lens - it may be a beast, but for a mid-range telephoto, it is amazing:

Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 63B 180mm f2.5 LD IF | Flickr

mine was purchased with the OEM hood and pouch, so no worries there.....


I'm familiar with the SP 151B and its hood vs cap arrangement - a poorly-designed affair that was just part of the reason I sold my copy.....

[wtlwdwgn]

That Biotar looks similar to the HD 20-40.
You guys are bad! My wife wants me to loose weight and you're not helping with those SMU

Not to mention all the goo all over the lenses when you're done with the measuring.