xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
oldwino
Well-known
Has anybody had any experience with any of these lenses? How is the build quality, optical quality, haptics, etc?
santino
FSU gear head
Meh… no rangefinder coupling.
dexdog
Veteran
That lens definately has the Biotar OOF rendition that one either loves or loathes.
CMur12
Veteran
I'm always interested to see new manual-focus lenses available in modern lens mounts.
What I want to see is a 28mm manual-focus, wide-angle prime, with a depth-of-field/DOF scale on the barrel, in Canon EF mount!
Wide-angle primes of this description in shorter focal lengths would also be appreciated.
I find manual-focus lenses with DOF scales especially useful for wide-angle applications because, for such focal lengths, I rarely focus on a specific subject, rather I focus on an area. Also, a manual focus lens can use a wider focusing arc, allowing for better spacing of the DOF scale markings.
- Murray
What I want to see is a 28mm manual-focus, wide-angle prime, with a depth-of-field/DOF scale on the barrel, in Canon EF mount!
Wide-angle primes of this description in shorter focal lengths would also be appreciated.
I find manual-focus lenses with DOF scales especially useful for wide-angle applications because, for such focal lengths, I rarely focus on a specific subject, rather I focus on an area. Also, a manual focus lens can use a wider focusing arc, allowing for better spacing of the DOF scale markings.
- Murray
james.liam
Well-known
The revised lenses do seem interesting, notwithstanding the scandal of the 1st versions. I'd be tempted it they were coupled; it's not as if they're cheap items. I wonder what's the big deal making these lenses RF-coupled? Even PRC-based junksters seem able to do so without issue.
BWF
Established
The revised lenses do seem interesting, notwithstanding the scandal of the 1st versions. I'd be tempted it they were coupled; it's not as if they're cheap items. I wonder what's the big deal making these lenses RF-coupled? Even PRC-based junksters seem able to do so without issue.
I totally agree - seems like a big miss not rangefinder coupling these. For an extra few hundred dollars, it would be worth it. I’m never going to shoot an uncoupled M Mount lens.
David Murphy
Veteran
Trying to market an M mount uncoupled prime is a very, very bad idea. I predict this will flop - too bad.
Cascadilla
Well-known
These also seem to be available in lots of other mounts--Canon, Nikon, Pentax (both K and M-42). I agree that non coupled f/1.5 lenses for a Leica RF film camera are a non-starter, but SLR users might find them useable, if they want that look from their lenses. I personally don't, and wouldn't pay anywhere near that price, but the company clearly thinks that some people will.
santino
FSU gear head
For an SLR I‘d just get a Helios for the fraction of the price of that Biotar. A coupled rf lens would be interesting though…
kram
Well-known
58mm f1.5 non couple, non starter and the price... shesh.
So sad that it is not rangefinder coupled, but my wallet thanks them.
das
Well-known
Whoa! An M42 version? Wonder if they have aperture pins. The 58mm only has a 0.75m min focus? That's kind of crazy. The Triopan II 35mm f/2.8 looks pretty interesting. Good, modern 35mm FL lenses in M42 are hard to come by - just the Zeiss ZS and the VC 40mm.
markjwyatt
Well-known
I like the M-42 option also. Tempting.
Darn- the one of most interest, Lydith 30mm f3.5 is not offered in M42. The Biotar 75mm f1.5 also sounds interesting. Not sure I would pay a grand for any triplet lens.
Darn- the one of most interest, Lydith 30mm f3.5 is not offered in M42. The Biotar 75mm f1.5 also sounds interesting. Not sure I would pay a grand for any triplet lens.
das
Well-known
I like the M-42 option also. Tempting.
Darn- the one of most interest, Lydith 30mm f3.5 is not offered in M42. The Biotar 75mm f1.5 also sounds interesting. Not sure I would pay a grand for any triplet lens.
I mean, when you look at what people are paying for the OG 75mm Biotar, it is not so expensive.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I like the M-42 option also. Tempting.
Darn- the one of most interest, Lydith 30mm f3.5 is not offered in M42. The Biotar 75mm f1.5 also sounds interesting. Not sure I would pay a grand for any triplet lens.
I am a big fan of the Lydith 30mm f3.5 lens and would welcome a new version of that lens.
markjwyatt
Well-known
I am a big fan of the Lydith 30mm f3.5 lens and would welcome a new version of that lens.
Well, I just picked up a Pentacon 30mm f3.5 in M42 (same lens, rebadged). It is a nice lens:

Solar Suburbs by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr
markjwyatt
Well-known
I mean, when you look at what people are paying for the OG 75mm Biotar, it is not so expensive..
The 75mm is not a triplet, and the originals are very rare. I think the new trioplans are triplets and maybe some of the primoplans.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Well, I just picked up a Pentacon 30mm f3.5 in M42 (same lens, rebadged). It is a nice lens:
Solar Suburbs by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr
A very nice lens indeed !
markjwyatt
Well-known
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.