raid
Dad Photographer
Johan,
The lens and the photographer did very well here.
The lens and the photographer did very well here.
jmilkins
Digited User
Interesting Johan. Mine vignettes more than that. Perhaps I had not put the hood on correctly in the test images I took.
jmilkins
Digited User
Raid - thatnks for another mulit lens set to examine. I like the Nikkor and Canon but your Komura seems pretty good too.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Same setup, 200ASA / 125th / f8.0
Only some dustbusting done, no other corrections. Film-RAW, you might say
Only some dustbusting done, no other corrections. Film-RAW, you might say
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Interesting Johan. Mine vignettes more than that. Perhaps I had not put the hood on correctly in the test images I took.
Well, while scanning now I have found out that its FOV is very wide and since its such a compact lens, you really need to get your fingers out of the way. I'm forced to cut off a lot of fingers
in corners. Maybe the lens hood just gets in the way on several apertures. Also, mounting a filter first and the hood on top of that might make the hood protrude too much.
But, this is all guessing with me.I'm shooting this without the hood, the seller gave me a discount when he found out he had misplaced it with the original leather case... Luckily the finder was included, as well as a non-branded deeper rear cap which might be original. The finish of lens and cap is very close, at least.
I'm very pleased with this lens, and with the 35mm W.Acall Kyoei I own. In fact, I'm selling my M-Hexanon 35mm f2.0 because it's a shelf sitter since the Kyoei arrived.
@ Raid: thanks for your comment!
chris00nj
Young Luddite
So I read that on testing the infinite focus and tried out my "soft" Elmar. (Learn something new everyday). It seems to be misaligned when I do that on the Bessa R, but it seems to be aligned properly on my M3. I'm pretty sure the Bessa is not horizontally misaligned, because I've focused it well with my 50/1.5, wideopen.
raid
Dad Photographer
I have a similar problem; the lens does not allign on one Canon P but is much better alligned on another Canon P. My other lenses work well with both cameras.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
full shot and crop from the W.Komura 28mm f3.5
full shot and crop from the W.Komura 28mm f3.5
Shot at Prachovské Skaly, Czech Republic, using Leica M5 and W.Komura 28mm f3.5 lens. Kodacolor 200ASA, f11.0 and 250th. Full size shot, raw scan, saved as JPEG:
The crop 100 % looks like this:
the sticks are kids jokes, they give the impression theses are needed to keep the rock upright. Actually, they might be necessary someday, since the whole base of this humonguous big rock measured no more than 3 by 6 meters.
full shot and crop from the W.Komura 28mm f3.5
Shot at Prachovské Skaly, Czech Republic, using Leica M5 and W.Komura 28mm f3.5 lens. Kodacolor 200ASA, f11.0 and 250th. Full size shot, raw scan, saved as JPEG:
The crop 100 % looks like this:
the sticks are kids jokes, they give the impression theses are needed to keep the rock upright. Actually, they might be necessary someday, since the whole base of this humonguous big rock measured no more than 3 by 6 meters.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
Johan,
Your posted image is huge! The sharpness of the lens is there.
Your posted image is huge! The sharpness of the lens is there.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
This will definitely be a one-of kingsize post, Raid, it is huge, I agree. But, like you said, it shows sharpness is there!
From now on, people will just have to take my word on it with the smaller image
I'm still keeping an eye out for a Komura like yours, and would like to know the 'solution' to the inconclusive rf-coupling mystery on your Canon bodies!
raid
Dad Photographer
Johan,
I will have the lens looked at by Eddy Smolov in the very near future. I always have stuff for him to inspect for me. Throwing in the Komura lens will not add much to the weight of the parcel.
I will have the lens looked at by Eddy Smolov in the very near future. I always have stuff for him to inspect for me. Throwing in the Komura lens will not add much to the weight of the parcel.
raid
Dad Photographer
Here are a few new images taken with the Komura 105mm 3.5. I cropped here and there.
1. Lina at Starbucks
2. My wife
3. Dana
1. Lina at Starbucks
2. My wife
3. Dana
Last edited:
I love the shot of Dana- you nailed the focus on it. Wind blown long hair- hard to beat in a portrait.
raid
Dad Photographer
Thanks, Brian. She has my brown eyes. I mean,she has the same exact color. We all have brown eyes on both sides of the family.
Yes- but she has her Mom's Hair and good looks!
raid
Dad Photographer
My dear friend, I am happy she has my eyes only!
ZorkiKat
ЗоркийК&
Paid $20 (or $25?) for a Komura 105/2,8 last year. Clean and on-the-dot. Focuses right on, and couples with the RF. It's neither light nor compact though. Sized, and weighs, about the same as a typical 105mm SLR lens from the late 1960s.
Studio photo with the Komura 105, mounted on a Leica IIIf:
Strobe lighting on colour negative film.
Studio photo with the Komura 105, mounted on a Leica IIIf:
Strobe lighting on colour negative film.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
Paid $20 (or $25?) for a Komura 105/2,8 last year. Clean and on-the-dot. Focuses right on, and couples with the RF. It's neither light nor compact though. Sized, and weighs, about the same as a typical 105mm SLR lens from the late 1960s.
Studio photo with the Komura 105, mounted on a Leica IIIf:
Strobe lighting on colour negative film.
This is very nice image.
Your Komura for $20 was a super bargain.
chris00nj
Young Luddite
Spending $125 on the Komura 105/3.5 isn't overpaying. Here's why:
I needed a lightweight "telephoto" lens for traveling, so I picked up both the Canon 100/3.5 and the Komura 105/3.5 and compared them against a postwar Elmar 90/4. I'd figure I'd compare the lenses and keep my favorite.
I was surprised by the performance quality of the Komura. I find the performance to be almost indistinguishable from the Canon 100/3.5.
All three lenses gave very similar results at mid aperature (f/8) at infiniti. At a closer distance (about 20 feet) the Elmar noticeably underperformed (seemed to suffer from flare).
At wider apertures, the Komura may suffer from some dropoff in sharpness at the corners wide open, but I'd have to do more tests to know whether this was just depth of field issue.
The Elmar (200 g) and the Canon (182 g) are roughly the same size and weight. The Komura is noticeably larger (about 30%) but it isn't much heavier. I don't have a scale but I'd guess about 260 g, whereas the earlier Serenar 100/4 is 460g.
A postwar Elmar seems to go for about $90 and Canon 100/3.5 is about $170. Since the Komura is opitcally extremely close to the Canon and only larger, I think the price should be close to that of the Canon.
A do plan on adding a full review with photos to my new blog.
I needed a lightweight "telephoto" lens for traveling, so I picked up both the Canon 100/3.5 and the Komura 105/3.5 and compared them against a postwar Elmar 90/4. I'd figure I'd compare the lenses and keep my favorite.
I was surprised by the performance quality of the Komura. I find the performance to be almost indistinguishable from the Canon 100/3.5.
All three lenses gave very similar results at mid aperature (f/8) at infiniti. At a closer distance (about 20 feet) the Elmar noticeably underperformed (seemed to suffer from flare).
At wider apertures, the Komura may suffer from some dropoff in sharpness at the corners wide open, but I'd have to do more tests to know whether this was just depth of field issue.
The Elmar (200 g) and the Canon (182 g) are roughly the same size and weight. The Komura is noticeably larger (about 30%) but it isn't much heavier. I don't have a scale but I'd guess about 260 g, whereas the earlier Serenar 100/4 is 460g.
A postwar Elmar seems to go for about $90 and Canon 100/3.5 is about $170. Since the Komura is opitcally extremely close to the Canon and only larger, I think the price should be close to that of the Canon.
A do plan on adding a full review with photos to my new blog.
Last edited:
dexdog
Veteran
I used to own the 105/3.5 Kyoei Acall, and it was a decent lens. Sharp images and good with color, as noted by Sonnar2. Put it on eBay, and it sold for about $225.