Lomo 32/2.8 Minitar gets sassy with Sony - another nice review

[Huss]

Not mine, but still good


http://www.lomography.com/magazine/319205-a-love-letter-daniel-schaefer-on-the-minitar-1?utm_campaign=nl_minitar_1_push_march&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter

p.s. the dood was not paid by Lomo etc etc. But not that it would matter as the images are taken with the lens, either way.

and if it then tickles your fancy..

https://shop.cameraquest.com/lomography/

 

[Ko.Fe.]

One of the most pleasing and surprising reviews I have read recently.
I liked digital images and enjoyed bw. Flaws of this lens worked as enchantment on his photos. They are classic, dimensional and not sterile as from modern Leica, Zeiss MF lenses on digital. Objects are in focus, but background is no the move, it adds big city spice in pictures. IMO.

 

[FPjohn]

He has a good eye. is the lense a Tessar? FPJ

 

[FPjohn]

Five elements in four groups. So it is not a Tessar. FPJ

 

[Jockos]

The corners and edges gets far to distracting in my opinion.

 

[Huss]

The corners and edges gets far to distracting in my opinion.

For better or worse that is the point. There are lots of lenses that do not have this character trait. If this lens was like those, well, there would be no reason for it.

FYI stopped down that goes away. But it's raison d'etre is that look. And size I guess for some (you can really slide a camera w this lens in to a big pocket)

 

[robert blu]

For sure an interesting lens for lover of this look...curious to know how it works on a film camera...maybe with a tri-x....
robert
PS: I do not have a mirrorless, yet

 

[nukecoke]

Five elements in four groups. So it is not a Tessar. FPJ

The original Minitar on LCA has a 4 elements in 4 groups formula.
I read on an independent lens maker's site that he suggests the Minitar originates from Taylor Hobson Speedic f/2.5 (Astro Berlin Pan Tachar falls in the same group):
http://www.photo-china.net/yulai.html#04

He has made home-brew Minitar lenses:
http://www.photo-china.net/sinsaku/x1.html

OT: This is a cool guy makes all kinds of non-sharp lenses with classic formulas (or Art Lens as people call today), and each of them is given a poetic name.

 

[13Promet]

For sure an interesting lens for lover of this look...curious to know how it works on a film camera...maybe with a tri-x....
robert
PS: I do not have a mirrorless, yet

Shell out 50€ for an original soviet LC-A and you'll know

 

[Huss]

For sure an interesting lens for lover of this look...curious to know how it works on a film camera...maybe with a tri-x....
robert
PS: I do not have a mirrorless, yet

I have a roll coming back that I just shot with it, but it is colour film.
I found that these Lomo lenses work best in colour. There their personality shines, while in B&W it is hidden.

Same for the LCA-120 camera. The B&W images are 'ok' but in colour it is something else.

 

[nightfly]

Really like the images in that review.

Anyone else used one and have any opinions?

 

[Huss]

Really like the images in that review.

Anyone else used one and have any opinions?

I just posted new images with this lens here:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152853