[edri]

The bokeh highlights are not very similar to the original one. Soap bubbles are too "full" in the center. Otherwise everyone is trying to sell the new lenses at overpricing.

[Mistral75]

A picture taken by Benedikt Ernst with Lydith 30 f3.5 II. Source: Facebook



Another one taken with Trioplan 50 f2.8 II. Source: Facebook

Technically speaking, there is nothing to write home about but that's what I call capturing a decisive moment! (Henri Cartier-Bresson)

[Larrymc]

So why would someone get a Trioplan 100 over a Pentax DFA 100 macro WR? I looked at the images on their site and I thought the bokeh was pretty rough, although I suppose some people might like that "hard edged soap bubble" bokeh.

My thoughts exactly!

[reh321]

Another one taken with Trioplan 50 f2.8 II. Source: Facebook

Technically speaking, there is nothing to write home about but that's what I call capturing a decisive moment! (Henri Cartier-Bresson)

But since it is manual focus, could anything be done with it that could not be done with a Takumar 50mm??

[Serkevan]

But since it is manual focus, could anything be done with it that could not be done with a Takumar 50mm??

The Trioplan has a distinct bokeh as it's a 3-element lens; the look at wide apertures is very different. Now, if it's worth an entire thousand of your preferred currency is a whole 'nother story. Definitely not if you shoot at f/5.6 or smaller (say, landscapes). In particular because these old lenses are all-mechanical and pretty well made, so they last an eternity.


On a positive note, our Pentacon 200mm f/4 is on the way (16€ with delivery!), with all its glorious 15 blades. I also got a couple adapters (M42-EF and M42-PK). As I don't plan to use this lens for anything other than portraits or close focus bokeh shots, I chose a cheap flanged adapter to avoid having to cover the mount - I'm lazy like that and the original Pentax M42-PK adapters seem to have vanished from Europe...

[reh321]

I also got a couple adapters (M42-EF and M42-PK). As I don't plan to use this lens for anything other than portraits or close focus bokeh shots, I chose a cheap flanged adapter to avoid having to cover the mount - I'm lazy like that and the original Pentax M42-PK adapters seem to have vanished from Europe...

I have shot with several M42 lenses {including the Takumar 50mm, Mir 37mm, and Takumar35mm) and never needed to 'cover the mount'.

[UlrichSchiegg]

Either you see it or you don't see it. If you don't see it, don't bother about the lens.

[Serkevan]

I have shot with several M42 lenses {including the Takumar 50mm, Mir 37mm, and Takumar35mm) and never needed to 'cover the mount'.

It happens mostly on longer, narrow-profile lenses. The openings in the adapter don't get covered, from what I've seen.

[beholder3]

The bokeh highlights are not very similar to the original one. Soap bubbles are too "full" in the center.

Yep. Here is a typical image from the original lens: Dália - MOG Trioplan bokeh | Meyer-Optik Görlitz Trioplan 2.? | Flickr or https://www.flickr.com/photos/zinovi_s/49327444327/in/pool-1015178@N21/

Anyhow. Someone not deleting images of this kind has to have a very, very, very special taste - and I would set him on ignore list if he ever dares comment on "bokeh" quality.

[UlrichSchiegg]

The bokeh highlights are not very similar to the original one. Soap bubbles are too "full" in the center. Otherwise everyone is trying to sell the new lenses at overpricing.

This opinion is not shared. You can check here (in German though):

Meyer Görlitz Trioplan 100mm / F2.8 Alt und Neu - Lens Club* ? Pentaxians
Trioplan Alt und Neu -Familientreffen am Bodensee ? Pentaxians

[Mistral75]

This opinion is not shared. You can check here (in German though):

Meyer Görlitz Trioplan 100mm / F2.8 Alt und Neu - Lens Club* ? Pentaxians
Trioplan Alt und Neu -Familientreffen am Bodensee ? Pentaxians

The above are comparisons between the historical Trioplan and the one made by net SE. The latter was modified by OPC Optics to obtain the Trioplan 100 f2.8 II we are talking about in this thread.

Our technical analysis also showed that the previous Trioplan 100 is simply a good lens, and yet we were able to introduce and implement improvements here and there. This applies on the one hand to the mechanics and on the other hand to the optics itself in terms of contrast behavior and resolution.

Source: Renewal of the Meyer Optik Görlitz portfolio on schedule | News | Meyer Optik Görlitz lenses - Tradition meets innovation

[BarneyL]

I wonder how big an improvement one can do on a Cooke triplet...

[Jonathan Mac]

Cheap to make and amazingly overpriced.

Steve

Exactly my thoughts when I saw it was a three element design.

[UlrichSchiegg]

The above are comparisons between the historical Trioplan and the one made by net SE. The latter was modified by OPC Optics to obtain the Trioplan 100 f2.8 II we are talking about in this thread.


Source: Renewal of the Meyer Optik Görlitz portfolio on schedule | News | Meyer Optik Görlitz lenses - Tradition meets innovation

That is correct. But the references & links made here by others to state the character has changed are references to the older new variant.

OPC has made it clear that it was a target to keep the character of the cooke triplet. I have seen no images of old new and new new that do contradict that statement.

[Mistral75]

That is correct. But the references & links made here by others to state the character has changed are references to the older new variant.

(...)

1/ I posted three examples taken with the Trioplan 100mm f/2.8 II, the 'OPC Trioplan', in the first post of this thread.

2/ Answer #15 by @D1N0

It's for the bubbles of course, but so much more fun with a legacy trioplan. The samples are pretty poor.

3/ Answer #16 by @edri

The bokeh highlights are not very similar to the original one. Soap bubbles are too "full" in the center. (...)

It seems to me the references made here are to the pictures I posted, i.e. the 'OPC Trioplan', not the 'net SE Trioplan'.