Have you ever seen this Soligor?

Avotius

Avotius

Some guy
Local time
9:12 AM
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Messages
3,518
As I was researching different m42 and CY lenses I ran into this strange looker.

2007101823521.jpg


2007101823547.jpg


200710182360.jpg


It sure is dusty this lens, but a 35mm f2 m42 Soligor? 30 bucks? Hm....all that dust though....
 
The dust is nothing. Just blow it off, no effect on images.

I've got several similar. The lens was also marketed in a chrome version under the brand name "Juplen".


PS: I once mounted the Juplen on a Canon 5D with an adapter and the results were exceptionally good. If I can dig it out maybe I'll post pix.
 
Last edited:
I've got the same lens in it's later auto-incarnation. What's so strange about it?
The filter thread should have been bigger than the 49mm it is -- will vignette with both a filter and hood (or two filters) mounted, so you have to decide between filter or hood. (I always use a hood and sometimes a yellow filter.)
Build quality is good, very solid. As for performance? I don't think I have printed anything substantial yet. Negs looked sharp enough, though.
 
M. Valdemar said:
The dust is nothing. Just blow it off, no effect on images.

I've got several similar. The lens was also marketed in a chrome version under the brand name "Juplen".


PS: I once mounted the Juplen on a Canon 5D with an adapter and the results were exceptionally good. If I can dig it out maybe I'll post pix.
Click to expand...


I was just looking at that back element and wondering if you could mount the thing on a 5D... im sure it would be fine on my 20D but hard to say, it doesnt take much for that shutter to get stuck.

Im thinking about it, it is dusty and looks well used but hey, might be something to play with and the price is ok I guess, maybe can bargain the, down on it a bit!
 
Yes, I also have the successor of this lens. It is a nice (but not a stellar) performer.
 
sitemistic said:
Wow, an old preset lens. I haven't seen one of these since the 1970's. Well, the glass looks clean. Most of the third part preset lenses weren't that good; but, for $30, might be worth the gamble. I always thought the preset aperture idea was pretty good, actually.
Click to expand...



Preset eh? Guess im going to have to dive into the search for that. All I want is something I could play with on my canon 20D that would kind of be a 50mm and manual focus with some old lens, maybe....
 
Stopped down to f5.6 or so, the results are fine.

Haven't tried it on anything else but the 5D.

It's definitely preset, but any M42 lens used on a Canon DSLR with an adapter will not be automatic.
 
Soligor has never had a good rep that I can remember. With patience, you can get much better M42 glass for about the same price, or only a little bit more. I've been loading up cheaply on some beautiful Pentax Takumar and Super-Takumar M42 glass (35/2, 50/1.4, 105/2.8) that I'm using on an old Praktica, and my Contax RX with an M42-C/Y adapter. But maybe that one's an exception and will give you decent results, though I highly suspect it will be a bit soft.
 
Wait! You mean if I buy a cheap Canon consumer DSLR I can buy an adaptor to put M42 or LTM lenses on it? does the DSLR meter work? In AP mode?

I know the Nikon consumer DSLR meters don't even work on old Nikon AI lenses.
 
Vlad: Yeah, you can do that. It's one of the attractions of the Canon mount. I admit to being prejudiced against Canon (some of that is logical, some is not :D ), but that capability is nice. I have both M42 and OM glass that I would like to use on a DSLR. I am not much enamored of the Olympus E-510, but admit I haven't actually tried one yet. The E-3 looks promising but is serious money.
 
Trius said:
Vlad: Yeah, you can do that. It's one of the attractions of the Canon mount. I admit to being prejudiced against Canon (some of that is logical, some is not :D ), but that capability is nice. I have both M42 and OM glass that I would like to use on a DSLR. I am not much enamored of the Olympus E-510, but admit I haven't actually tried one yet. The E-3 looks promising but is serious money.
Click to expand...
The main problem of using old glass with the 4/3 system is the crop factor. All your normal and wide-normal (i.e. 35 mm) lenses become portait lenses and your wide lenses become big and heavy normal lenses. Only super-wides remain usable as wide angles, but only barely. Unless you do a lot of portrait photography it really does not make much sense. Telephoto is problematic as well, since you need exact focus, which is difficult to get with the small viewfinders even with a special split-screen focusing screen.

In short, if you want to use old manual focus glass with a DSLR, a Canon is a better choice. However, 1.6x is still a pretty big crop factor with many of the same problems as 4/3 in milder form, so ideally you should invest on a full frame camera. But if you can invest on a full frame camera (5D minimum), you would probably be better off by one of the 1.6x crop cameras and some EF or EF-S glass.

The conclusion is that using manual focus lenses on DSLR's may be a lot of fun and it may give you interesting optical signatures to play with, but it does not make much sense otherwise unless you simply have much money to throw around. Then again, most people in this forum have way more cameras than would be reasonable, me included...:rolleyes:
 
Chinon,
Porst,
Revue,
Ricoh,
Sears,
Praktica,
Cosina,
Pentax Spottie,
Zenit,
etc.

... all of them < $50, no crop factor.
Pick one, get some film and shoot away.

DSLR's are for wimps who can't handle film.

... joking :D ... sorta.
 
Dr. Strangelove said:
In short, if you want to use old manual focus glass with a DSLR, a Canon is a better choice. However, 1.6x is still a pretty big crop factor with many of the same problems as 4/3 in milder form, so ideally you should invest on a full frame camera.
Click to expand...

A full frame Canon camera is not the best choice to use manual focus lenses. Many of these lenses, including the Leica R ultrawides, most Pentax K lenses, and even some of the most popular M42 lenses (Zenitar Fisheye, Flektogon 35/2.8, Zeiss Biotar 58/2, Pentax Super-Takumar 35/2) won't fit on a Canon EOS 5D without extensive surgery because of the mirror clearance of this camera.

I have bought a Pentax K10d to complement my Canon EOS 1DS and especially to use with M42 lenses. The K10d also accepts pre-AI Nikkor lenses without the need for any adapter ring. Unlike my Canon 1DS, the Pentax has no mechanical compatibility problems with these lenses and I find it more usable than a crop format Canon camera. The focus confirmation feature works out of the box with all lenses, even with my almost 50 years old 58/2.4 Takumar. Best of all, the anti-shake feature is fully operational with all lenses, greatly enhancing the usability of vintage lenses with limited maximum aperture.

Cheers,

Abbazz
 
I disagree.

I have a Canon 5D and probably over a hundred manual focus lenses.

Very few present a problem with the 5D mirror. My Zenitar works perfectly.

Are you speaking from experience or repeating things read on the internet?
 
M. Valdemar said:
I disagree.

I have a Canon 5D and probably over a hundred manual focus lenses.

Very few present a problem with the 5D mirror. My Zenitar works perfectly.

Are you speaking from experience or repeating things read on the internet?
Click to expand...

I have a Canon 1DS and have many problems when mounting manual focus lenses on it (Error 99). Maybe your Zenitar is in EOS mount; mine is in M42 mount.

The lack of compatibility of the Canon 5D is a well known issue. There seem to be 2 versions of the Canon 5D, the older one having a shorter mirror assembly, thus exhibiting less problems with MF lenses. Just google "Canon 5D shaving mirror" and your will find hundreds of hits. I recommend these links:
http://www.16-9.net/5d_mirrorshave/
http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=72123

Cheers,

Abbazz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom