Soligor 135/2.8 and 28/2.8 vs. Takumars? Question.

aheadfordinci · 02-19-2011, 01:04 PM

I post this here because my samples are shot with an Olympus, but it's a question about the lenses.

I have bought these two lenses on the cheap, with a kit some time ago; since i have not yet tested on my Spotmatic but just on the m4/3 Olympus Ep-1, and the results there are mixed, I have yet to figure what to use them for: the 2x crop factor makes me not to definitely apt at something in particular, given also their sizes.

I'm more positive on the 28/2.8, because at least on a tripod is good for interior shots of paintings, which is the most I do with it.

Anyway, the question I have is on the IQ of them both, in respect, for instance, to Takumars on the same focus lengths.

Here are some shots:

Soligor 2.8/135

Soft light scene: I've just adjusted the levels and added a bit of vibrance; I like the bokeh, no problem.

Contrasted scene: to avoid dull and coldish colors, I have adjusted levels here too, augmenting the contrast; there is a lot of purple fringing, that is more visible in this 100% crop of another non corrected shot of the same subject:

All in all, even if it is not much apparent here, it seems to me that the 135 is not really much useful handheld to me, and that this lens has the tendency to make colors colder
than they are.

-------------------------------------------

Soligor 2.8:28

untouched image: a bit soft on the edges, a normal burnout, cold colors.

and

where the second is a conservative HDR of 3 ISO bracketed images of which the other one was the base-one.
Just to show a bit more color accurate depiction of the scene.

It seems to me the fringing on the 28mm is more acceptable, in general.

So, I have so far little experience with these: I would like to ask if my feelings about these are, in your experience, off, and to people having used them and their Takumar counterparts, if they noticed differences in favour of the latters, particularly in respect of the coatings.

Ratmagiclady · 02-20-2011, 06:23 PM

I once had a Soligor 135 like that in Miranda mount, (Should be about the same age) I found it to be a pretty pleasing 'people lens' in black and white, at least. Not razor-razor sharp but quite good, I thought. (I'd say better than yours appears here, but my eyes are pretty tired and I'm on an old monitor, so don't believe me if you see better from it where you are.

)

(Come to think of it, I think my Miranda 28 was probably the same lens, but there's a lot of 28s. I dont recall shooting too much in the way of color with them, though, and obviously, that'd have been on film.)

My understanding is that the Takumars, particularly the 3.5s are about the best for digital of the old ones. I expect they'll give you less trouble about color and such.

aheadfordinci · 02-21-2011, 11:43 AM

Thank you for your answer Ratmagiclady!
Well, it's not a bad lens the 28mm, aside the lack of multi coating and therefore a bit of flare, and the colors being a bit too cold: for good conditions of light, not too contrast and warm, is good enough, at least as much as the Zuiko kit lens at the same focal length.

While the 135 is more problematic because of the color aberrations mentioned above.

I agree that the Takumars are outstanding lens, at least in the 50mm range i have tried.

Some other people has tried both Soligor and Takumar and wants to give his opinion?

02-19-2011, 01:04 PM	#1
aheadfordinci Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 99	Soligor 135/2.8 and 28/2.8 vs. Takumars? Question. I post this here because my samples are shot with an Olympus, but it's a question about the lenses. I have bought these two lenses on the cheap, with a kit some time ago; since i have not yet tested on my Spotmatic but just on the m4/3 Olympus Ep-1, and the results there are mixed, I have yet to figure what to use them for: the 2x crop factor makes me not to definitely apt at something in particular, given also their sizes. I'm more positive on the 28/2.8, because at least on a tripod is good for interior shots of paintings, which is the most I do with it. Anyway, the question I have is on the IQ of them both, in respect, for instance, to Takumars on the same focus lengths. Here are some shots: Soligor 2.8/135 Soft light scene: I've just adjusted the levels and added a bit of vibrance; I like the bokeh, no problem. Contrasted scene: to avoid dull and coldish colors, I have adjusted levels here too, augmenting the contrast; there is a lot of purple fringing, that is more visible in this 100% crop of another non corrected shot of the same subject: All in all, even if it is not much apparent here, it seems to me that the 135 is not really much useful handheld to me, and that this lens has the tendency to make colors colder than they are. ------------------------------------------- Soligor 2.8:28 untouched image: a bit soft on the edges, a normal burnout, cold colors. and where the second is a conservative HDR of 3 ISO bracketed images of which the other one was the base-one. Just to show a bit more color accurate depiction of the scene. It seems to me the fringing on the 28mm is more acceptable, in general. So, I have so far little experience with these: I would like to ask if my feelings about these are, in your experience, off, and to people having used them and their Takumar counterparts, if they noticed differences in favour of the latters, particularly in respect of the coatings.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How much is this set of Takumars worth? (35, 50, 135)	sameagle	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	02-13-2010 09:42 PM
Soligor 135 F2.8	jheu02	Post Your Photos!	4	09-22-2009 05:24 AM
Soligor 135 f2.8	ILoveVerdi	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	06-05-2009 06:42 AM
For Sale - Sold: A Couple of f3.5 SMC Takumars 28 and 135 at eBay	clm	Sold Items	0	04-04-2007 03:48 PM
Super Takumars 105 & 135	Mike Cash	Post Your Photos!	8	04-03-2007 06:39 AM

02-20-2011, 06:23 PM	#2
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	I once had a Soligor 135 like that in Miranda mount, (Should be about the same age) I found it to be a pretty pleasing 'people lens' in black and white, at least. Not razor-razor sharp but quite good, I thought. (I'd say better than yours appears here, but my eyes are pretty tired and I'm on an old monitor, so don't believe me if you see better from it where you are. ) (Come to think of it, I think my Miranda 28 was probably the same lens, but there's a lot of 28s. I dont recall shooting too much in the way of color with them, though, and obviously, that'd have been on film.) My understanding is that the Takumars, particularly the 3.5s are about the best for digital of the old ones. I expect they'll give you less trouble about color and such.

02-21-2011, 11:43 AM	#3
aheadfordinci Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 99 Original Poster	Thank you for your answer Ratmagiclady! Well, it's not a bad lens the 28mm, aside the lack of multi coating and therefore a bit of flare, and the colors being a bit too cold: for good conditions of light, not too contrast and warm, is good enough, at least as much as the Zuiko kit lens at the same focal length. While the 135 is more problematic because of the color aberrations mentioned above. I agree that the Takumars are outstanding lens, at least in the 50mm range i have tried. Some other people has tried both Soligor and Takumar and wants to give his opinion?