Revuenon Special 135 2.8 (RJ M42 to M adapter) and Pigeon

[Cristian78]

Following this thread where I tested a CV 75 2.5, I continue my journey shooting (photos of) pigeons but this time with the Revuenon Special 135 2.8 in M42 mount, using the RJ's adapter to M mount. I am blown away by the results, considering that this lens is non MC and quite old. It's quite a bit of glass, heavy and well made but it balances ok on the Ricoh GXR. This shot was taken from about 4 meters away, I post the original one plus a 100% crop - quite sharp! This was at f4 and using focus assist Mode 2 it is easy to focus even on such a bright sunny day - of course, using the VF, otherwise difficult just with the LCD.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Yes you have to be very pleased with those results.

I keep hammering the point that although RF lenses are ideal on the GXR with A12 mount because of their size there is a big wide world out there containing other lenses that can also work well.

Fitting a RF lens to the GXR-M give a compact portable package. Fitting an ex-slr lens adds a fair bit of bulk but the overall package is still much smaller than a similarly equipped dslr.

We all now know that Mode2 focus peaking is very effective (quick and accurate) and that all manual lenses are more effective on cameras such as the GXR-M than they ever were on their original hosts that they were designed for.

Therefore ex-slr lenses are very useful as you show here but are not competing with RF lenses as if they are opposing teams. I have specimens of both and interchange as they suit me.

The side benefit is that ex-slr manual lenses are better value on a cost/performance basis.

And it seems that we can add RJ to our quality "good-guy" adapter manufacturers. (grin)

Tom

 

[streetshooter]

Cristian, That's a very impressive result. It warms me to see shooters venturing out from the traditional M glass.
As Tom stated, there's a big world out there from SLR lenses.
I know I tried some OM stuff and immediately put the m unit away.
I realized that I would get lost and at this point, I can't do that.

Thanks for this as its inspiring not just to me but everyone with the camera.
Don

 

[thelps]

Nice work, there is certainly plenty of detail there.
If this is a out of camera jpg I think there is more detail to be extracted from the RAW even.

 

[AlbertTRAL]

Nice detail! At which aperture was shot?

 

[ayewing]

Cristian, These are impressive results. It is surprising how good the images from old glass are. The primes will give the best results but even the old zooms are worth exploring.

I have a RJ K to M adapter and found that it was quite usable with an old SMC Pentax-A 35-70 zoom. I posted the results in this thread :-


http://ricohforum.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=63&t=8578

 

[Wiener]

Indeed there is a hugh world of pre-autofocus glass out there and much of it of high quality even if a tad heavier than the more modern lens designs produced. My worry is that much of this 'old timer' glass is not really in keeping with the 'take everywhere' philosphy which led me to buy my first Ricoh (the GR1v) in the first place. But I am getting SO tempted to wade in and give the 'M-Mount world a try!
Thanks Christian for the info on this fast, telephoto option.
Andy

 

[Cristian78]

Fitting an ex-slr lens adds a fair bit of bulk but the overall package is still much smaller than a similarly equipped dslr.

Hi Tom, you are right, myself I come from the DSLR world - got tired to carry heavy lenses in my bag. Although still larger compared to RF lenses (below a comparison between a CV 35/2.5, CV 75/2.5 and this Revuenon lens mounted with the RJ adapter) it still is smaller than a full DSLR package.

I know I tried some OM stuff and immediately put the m unit away.
I realized that I would get lost and at this point, I can't do that.

Well, my worry is that I will eventually start to buy many more to satisfy my curiosity and will end up with lots of stuff lying around. I am trying only to limit myself to lenses that I research extensively before buying.

If this is a out of camera jpg I think there is more detail to be extracted from the RAW even.

This was developed from RAW but only WB and some brightness, did not touch the sharpness so I think yes there is more "potential" to it.

Nice detail! At which aperture was shot?

Hi Albert, thanks, it was shot at f4 - I know for sure.

It is surprising how good the images from old glass are. The primes will give the best results but even the old zooms are worth exploring

I started with Pentax myself and like their old glass and zooms - quite affordable, thanks for the advice!

this 'old timer' glass is not really in keeping with the 'take everywhere' philosphy

You are right, I bought the adapter primarily to try long lenses, 135 2.8, 180 2.8, 200/4 where the RF options are somehow limited (from my research) and indeed not pocketable but some of them are quite cheap and worth a try! If you are in Vienna, try Leicashop - they do have some nice M42 glass

Two more from last weekend shot with this lens, at f4, including 100% crops. I included the 2nd one on purpose, to show the red color fringing, of course I expected this since this is a non coated lens. It is the only one photo from this day where I saw this happening and it was indeed a very bright sunny day where even modern lenses show this phenomenon under such conditions. Overall I am very pleased.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I have a Canon FD 200mm f2.8 which I actually bought for US$160 quite a while ago now. It is the later model and in immaculate condition (as new). It is internal focusing and surprisingly compact for its focal length and speed. No focus or aperture control motors and no IS. Is "tiny" next to the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS.

I used it mainly on a Samsung NX10 where the slr-style body helps the grip as the evf switches naturally on by eye proximity. And of course with such you really have just a tiny dslr-equivalent and used accordingly.

I did try it on my GXR-M but although workable the lcd alone is a "bit much" on it's own and this lens was considerd compact enough not to need a tripod collar. No way was this lens going to hang off a GXR body when tripod mounted. Using the lens with the clip on evf is not as comforatble as the more natural built in evf of the NX10. The lens is certainly fast enough to be very effective hand-held.

For a joke I actually tried the lens on the GXR with a 3x extender - 3x200x1.5 = 900mm effective. Yes it did work. But the dof was so tiny at the necessary wide setting - just a few centimetres (if not millimetres) that it rendered the effort the joke it was meant to be. I posted a photograph of this outfit on the GXR on this forum perhaps a year ago.

However the lens is a practical proposition on its own on the GXR-M. When I was buying mine the going rate seemed low US$200's but I did accidentlally come across one for sale fairly recently seemingly in good condition for a buy it now price of US$150. Seems that old glass by the tonne is quite cheap really. This lens looks and feels in the flesh like a quality construction.

Must fit it again and give it some serious use.

Tom

 

[Tom Caldwell]

A case for M42.

I have the Jupiter-9 both in M39 and M42 mount. The M42 is naturally shorter but by the time you put it on a M42 adapter there is nothing much in the length. The M42 version has quite a lot more girth but not unpleasantly so.

In general the M42 version is more reliably found in good condition over the M39 version. I quite like using the M42 version although where size is absolutely of the essence the M39 is smaller.

Nevertheless because the J-9 is an 85mm f2.0 Sonnar design lens it simply cannot be as small as (say) the 90mm f4.0 Minolta M-Rokkor.

Technical comparisons aside the M42 J-9 must be a good buy for a fast medium telephoto.

Tom