| Author: | | New Member Registered: September, 2016 Posts: 1
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: September 9, 2016 | Not Recommended | Price: $10.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | glass/metal body, sharp stopped down | | Cons: | Soft wide-open, | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 4
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: Pentax K5 Sigma sd14
| |
..
| | | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: September, 2013 Location: Toronto Posts: 2,074 | | Review Date: March 10, 2014 | Not Recommended | Price: $50.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | Inexpensive, fast-ish 135mm (compared to other m42-era 135s), corners are good compared to other Pentacon lenses | | Cons: | Soft wide-open, flare | | Sharpness: 6
Handling: 8
Camera Used: K-30, K20D
| |
Disclaimer: my copy is the "electric" version. Optically it's the same as the "auto" version, merely adding contacts for open-aperture metering on some cameras (e.g. the Praktica LLC).
A cheap enough lens. Solidly built. f2.8 is faster than many other inexpensive 135mm primes, but the lens is somewhat soft wide open and you'll need to stop it down a bit before you get a sharp photo. Given the usual price of these compared to the SMC 135/3.5 Tak and the need to stop it down, you're probably better off going with the Tak.
Built-in hood, but it's not quite deep enough. (Though better than the one on the Pentacon 4/200, which is practically useless.)
f2.8:
 Music by Andrew, on Flickr
 30/30(b): In the Orange (Crop) by Andrew, on Flickr
Unknown apertures:
 Track Work by Andrew, on Flickr
 16/30: Squeeze Box by Andrew, on Flickr
 Takaakira Goto by Andrew, on Flickr
| | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2017 Location: Vladimir Posts: 4 | | Review Date: July 11, 2023 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | bokeh, retro sharm. | | Cons: | flare | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: Nikon Z6
| |
Superb sonnar bokeh, beautiful retro charm.
Aware strong sunlight. MC coating is not effective enough.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: May, 2021 Posts: 15 | | Review Date: October 31, 2021 | Recommended | Price: $5.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Nice colors, cheap | | Cons: | Stiff focusring, CA | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 6
Value: 8
Camera Used: Sony A7III
| |
This lens isn't as bad as some people say. It actually renders quite nice images. The big downside to this lens is that it's build like a tank, it feels heavy and sluggish. The focus ring of my 'Electric' copy is very stiff. The lens is so heavy, that it makes my camera tilt forward(I don't have that with other 135mm's)
But the picture quality isn't bad. I reviewed it side by side with the 15 bladed Pentacon Orestor, and to be honest I think this 'Electric MC' one produces sharper and more colorful images.
Check the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5oNjQYAob0 | | | | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2017 Posts: 3 | | Review Date: January 27, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Solid, metal | | Cons: | Handling, soft at full aperture | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 6
Value: 8
Camera Used: Lumix GX-80
| |
My copy is the second edition (electric, 6 blades) in bad shape. The optic elements are scretched and The diaphragm is in bad shape too and a bit rusty so the aperture modification is not instantaneous when closing it. I must wait 1 or 2 seconds for the diaphragm to close at the chosen aperture. The scratches don't seem to affect IQ.
The focus ring is a bit hard but still useable.
At full aperture the image is a bit soft but still decent. I'd like to try out one in good shape though (the 15 blades one).
The bokeh is very nice.
Lumix GX-80 - @ f/2.8
 | | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 14 | | Review Date: March 22, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $45.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | beautifull glass/metal body | | Cons: | some few CA's | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: k-5
| |
*** changed review because of false calibration of earlier bought lens ***could be, that it was an error in production.
PRACTICAR LENSES are in reality fine CARL ZEISS JENA lenses - this is very similar to the famous SONNAR tele lens !
The exterior of this lens is very beautifull,
++ blue multi-coating 
+/++ very good sharpness, stopped down a few
O some visible CAs wide open 
+/++ stopped down a few scarecely visible CAs
O/+ a few warm color rendition  (must be corrected sometimes by PhSh)
highly recommended because of very fine sharpness (stopped down to f 5.6-8) of this optical 5/4 elements construction  | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: July, 2014 Location: Paris Posts: 1,939 | | Review Date: November 2, 2014 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | cheap, sharp stopped down | | Cons: | handling, m42 | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 6
Value: 8
| |
A good lens, but it's not easy to use because of the M42 mount, maybe my sample is too old, the focus ring is stiff and somtimes I unscrew the lens by accident while turning the focus ring
IQ : is sharp enough at 2.8, a lot better stopped down
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: April, 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Posts: 18,076 | | Review Date: September 2, 2013 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | f2.8, long focus throw, decent build, A/M switch ... | | Cons: | Not super sharp until stopped down, M42 ... | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 7
Value: 8
| |
Bonjour,
Optically, this lens is only average and must be stopped down before becoming acceptably sharp. I have a Prakticar version of this same lens (Dremel modified to PK fit - https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/prakticar-pentacon-135mm-f2-8-mc-modified-pk-fit.html , but I do not know if they are identical in their optics, etc. The Prakticar does better than its possible M42 ancestor ... sample images may come later.
Salut, John le Frog
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: October, 2010 Location: Berlin Posts: 33 | | Review Date: October 16, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 6 |
| Pros: | nice bokeh, good colour rendition, cheap | | Cons: | weight, size, not as sharp as others | |
This was my first 135 but I never really became familiar with it. It is too heavy and not as sharp as my Vivitar 135/2,8. Bokeh is superb, even though I have the six-blade version of this lens, so it might be a good choice for portrait work. Overall it's quite good but there are better choices out there for the same money I think.
| | |
;)
;)
