• Welcome to TalkEmount.com, the best Sony E-mount camera and photography community on the web.
    Click here to join for free and enjoy unlimited photo uploads in our forums.

I have lost my mind

kevistopheles

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
2,032
Location
here
Having a positive PayPal balance is a very tempting thing, so tempting in fact that I gave myself an early holiday present(s) and picked up a Rokkor MC 28/2.8 and MC 100/2.5. I still have a decent balance left (and a few lenses going up for sale) so I'm not too concerned. I have been so impressed with the Rokkor lenses I have used thus far that I decided to build up a set. I'm not even sure I can properly describe what it is about the Rokkors I like. They just give me results that I find pleasing and are a nice combination of great IQ and satisfying build quality. This gives me...

MC 24/2.8 SI (first version supposedly a design also used by Leica)
MC 50/1.7
MC 50/1.4
MC 50/3.5 macro (with 1:1 extension and reversing ring)
MC 100/2.5
MD 35-70/3.5 macro (also a design supposedly used by Leica)

I also have an MC 58/1.4 with a stuck focus ring...but that's a project and I'll have to see what it's like after I take it apart to replace the helical lubricant. If I don't break it maybe it'll end up being a fun lens. Of course the recent additions to the family mean some stuff is going to have to go, the lens cabinet is getting pretty full.
 

Bimjo

Super Moderator
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Messages
4,595
Location
Washington State
Real Name
Jim
That undefined "thing" about some lenses is what makes them special. Can't define it. Can't describe it. Know it when you feel it. Wouldn't trade it for anything. That's how I feel about my CV lenses. Every time I pick one up I can't help but smile. :)

Oh yeah, you haven't lost your mind. Or, if you have you're in good company. ;)
 

Jefenator

TalkEmount Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
914
Location
Oregon, USA
Real Name
Jeff
The latest descriptor I've come up with is "smoky". :) My 24, 28 & 50 MDs all have that look.

I've found they don't always peak well (gotten some pretty bad OOF relying just on peaking) and the field curvature can really throw me for a loop sometimes. But when I do nail it, it is pretty special.

Congrats on your acquisition - that's what positive PayPal balances are for! :)
 

freddytto

TalkEmount All-Pro
Joined
Dec 2, 2011
Messages
1,449
Location
Puebla, Mexico
MC 50/3.5 macro (with 1:1 extension and reversing ring)

MD 35-70/3.5 macro (also a design supposedly used by Leica)
I have a concern to see how it works these lenses, I've been planning to get one, but I have not decided yet, my paypal account is spent a lot this past Monday, because of my wife step out of line : ( , I will have to wait a few week, crhistmas shopping coming soon. :(
 

nianys

TalkEmount All-Pro
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
1,558
Location
France
I see a trend going on here !

Though I would question the need for both 24 and 28/2.8 (Kevin is that *really* necessary ??), the rest seems pretty reasonable to me.
Guess what, I'm shooting out nifties like crazy to determine which ones I like best. The Rokkors never fail to come out in the top 3. The only thing I can't quite decide is whether I like the 1.7 over the 1.4, or vice versa. Since I sold my minty copy of the plastic MD 1.7 to Nick, and kept the fungus equivalent, and since my MC 1.4 PG has a sliglty bent filter ring (though totally functionnal), I've decided to try and cherry pick to other copies, in the most recommended (by some) version, which is the early X series (still lots of metal in the body, already the modern coating on glass). I hunted a bit but located a 1.7 (non X, comes from the European market, but same specs) which I'll fetch at the post office within 2 hours, and am now watching a listing in the US on a gorgeous 1.4. I also have a 58/1.4 on the way because I was so darn curious of this one.
And to be perfectly honest with you guys, I'm tempted to sell my FL55/1.2 (?!) to try out a 58 SuperFast !!
 

kevistopheles

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
2,032
Location
here
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
I have a concern to see how it works these lenses, I've been planning to get one, but I have not decided yet, my paypal account is spent a lot this past Monday, because of my wife step out of line : ( , I will have to wait a few week, crhistmas shopping coming soon. :(
These are from the 35-70/3.5 macro. I REALLY like this lens a lot.


The Herald of the Ice Queen by dixeyk, on Flickr


Oh Canada! by dixeyk, on Flickr


Games by dixeyk, on Flickr


Thought by dixeyk, on Flickr


and the MC 50/3.5 macro


Wither by dixeyk, on Flickr


Rash by dixeyk, on Flickr

Between the two I would choose the 35-70/3.5 macro over the 50/3.5 macro. it's more versatile and I think the IQ is as good or better.
 

kevistopheles

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
2,032
Location
here
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
I see a trend going on here !

Though I would question the need for both 24 and 28/2.8 (Kevin is that *really* necessary ??), the rest seems pretty reasonable to me.
Guess what, I'm shooting out nifties like crazy to determine which ones I like best. The Rokkors never fail to come out in the top 3. The only thing I can't quite decide is whether I like the 1.7 over the 1.4, or vice versa. Since I sold my minty copy of the plastic MD 1.7 to Nick, and kept the fungus equivalent, and since my MC 1.4 PG has a sliglty bent filter ring (though totally functionnal), I've decided to try and cherry pick to other copies, in the most recommended (by some) version, which is the early X series (still lots of metal in the body, already the modern coating on glass). I hunted a bit but located a 1.7 (non X, comes from the European market, but same specs) which I'll fetch at the post office within 2 hours, and am now watching a listing in the US on a gorgeous 1.4. I also have a 58/1.4 on the way because I was so darn curious of this one.
And to be perfectly honest with you guys, I'm tempted to sell my FL55/1.2 (?!) to try out a 58 SuperFast !!
You're right, I have a log jam at 24/28, then again you must be up to about a dozen 50's by now right? :rolleyes: The MC Rokkor 24/2.8, Hexanon 24/2.8 and Vivitar 28/2 are all really close. If the Rokkor lives up to its reputation one of the other two may go (the Hexanon being most likely as I can sell it for more and they're pretty easy to find if I find I really miss it). Like you I find the 50/1.7 and 1.4 to be very close. I think however I prefer the IQ of the 1.4 by a little bit. The 50/3.5 i also really sweet as it can do 1:1 macro but in practical terms the 35-70/3.5 macro gets more work and is a lot more practical.

FWIW I would LOVE to pick up a 58/1.2 at some point.
 

kevistopheles

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
2,032
Location
here
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
The latest descriptor I've come up with is "smoky". :) My 24, 28 & 50 MDs all have that look.

I've found they don't always peak well (gotten some pretty bad OOF relying just on peaking) and the field curvature can really throw me for a loop sometimes. But when I do nail it, it is pretty special.

Congrats on your acquisition - that's what positive PayPal balances are for! :)
I like that...smokey. I find that they have a very film-like quality. I know that must sound odd but when I was shooting with m43 gear I had an Olympus 45/1.8. It's a terrific lens, super sharp even wide open and has a lovely bokeh. Everything you are supposed to want in a lens. I also found that images from that lens struck me as very clinical. I'm not saying it's bad lens at all (quite the opposite) but I found that I just didn't care for the way images looked. That's what I find that I really like about the Rokkors. They're the opposite of clinical.
 

nianys

TalkEmount All-Pro
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
1,558
Location
France
I like that...smokey. I find that they have a very film-like quality. I know that must sound odd but when I was shooting with m43 gear I had an Olympus 45/1.8. It's a terrific lens, super sharp even wide open and has a lovely bokeh. Everything you are supposed to want in a lens. I also found that images from that lens struck me as very clinical. I'm not saying it's bad lens at all (quite the opposite) but I found that I just didn't care for the way images looked. That's what I find that I really like about the Rokkors. They're the opposite of clinical.
+1, I had this excellent 45/1.8... And thoroughly disliked it's rendering. The 75/1.8 is identical and I find both totally sterile and uninteresting.
 

nianys

TalkEmount All-Pro
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
1,558
Location
France
My "new" 1st version MD 50/1.7 with 55mm thread just got here. If it were from the US market it'd be an X branded unit. It's very clean inside and out. The focus ring is a nicely dampened as the Rokkors have made me come to expect, a real joy to use. It feels heavier and a bit more serious than my all plastic cheapo fungus unit. Optically I'm forcing myself to think it might be a rat's ass hair sharper, but in all honesty it's probably totally identical, lol.
That makes me question getting a similar 1.4 unit, when I *already* have a perfectly good MC version... Oh well.
I also shot both Rokkors against the FL 55/1.2 and it still kicks their butts : similar sharpness and way more melted background. Of course, it's also wayyy bigger, heavier and much, much more expensive so is should have the edge here.
 

Jefenator

TalkEmount Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
914
Location
Oregon, USA
Real Name
Jeff
I like that...smokey. I find that they have a very film-like quality. I know that must sound odd but when I was shooting with m43 gear I had an Olympus 45/1.8. It's a terrific lens, super sharp even wide open and has a lovely bokeh. Everything you are supposed to want in a lens. I also found that images from that lens struck me as very clinical. I'm not saying it's bad lens at all (quite the opposite) but I found that I just didn't care for the way images looked. That's what I find that I really like about the Rokkors. They're the opposite of clinical.
"Grainy" was my previous descriptor. Opposite-of-clinical works, too. Thanks for sharing the 35-70 shots, BTW - that's some very lovely work! I've been mostly turning my nose up at zooms (especially MF legacy) since I got my NEX but it might be time for me to go ahead and relax on that a bit.
 

kevistopheles

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
2,032
Location
here
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
"Grainy" was my previous descriptor. Opposite-of-clinical works, too. Thanks for sharing the 35-70 shots, BTW - that's some very lovely work! I've been mostly turning my nose up at zooms (especially MF legacy) since I got my NEX but it might be time for me to go ahead and relax on that a bit.
Thanks, I felt the same way about zooms until I tried the Rokkor.
 

nianys

TalkEmount All-Pro
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
1,558
Location
France
Thanks, I felt the same way about zooms until I tried the Rokkor.
I guess my reluctance towards zoom would be an apprehension of having to deal with both zooming AND manually focusing. How hard do you find it to be Kevin ?
 

kevistopheles

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
2,032
Location
here
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #14
I guess my reluctance towards zoom would be an apprehension of having to deal with both zooming AND manually focusing. How hard do you find it to be Kevin ?
Not hard at all. The macro even has an edition all step of a small button to move it to the 1:4 and 1:7 settings but it feels very natural. The only thing odd about the lens is that fully extended is 35mm and collapsed is 35mm. That took a little getting used to but now it seems very intuitive. The lens peaks well and I am finding it my go to lens these days.
 

davect01

Super Moderator
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
8,420
Location
Fountain Hills, AZ
Real Name
Dave
Hey, as long as you have the funds, have fun picking up lenses.

The great thing is that as long as you did not over pay to much, you can always resale the ones you don't want.
 

davect01

Super Moderator
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
8,420
Location
Fountain Hills, AZ
Real Name
Dave
I guess my reluctance towards zoom would be an apprehension of having to deal with both zooming AND manually focusing. How hard do you find it to be Kevin ?
I have two zoom MF lenses and would say that it does add yet another layer, but is nice to have.
 

kevistopheles

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
2,032
Location
here
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #17
Hey, as long as you have the funds, have fun picking up lenses.

The great thing is that as long as you did not over pay to much, you can always resale the ones you don't want.
That's part of the appeal. You can get nice legacy glass for not much money. My 35-70 macro was all of $48
 

Jefenator

TalkEmount Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
914
Location
Oregon, USA
Real Name
Jeff
Hey, as long as you have the funds, have fun picking up lenses.

The great thing is that as long as you did not over pay to much, you can always resale the ones you don't want.
True dat! :)

For my home business product shots, zoom used to provide some work flow benefit - particularly when I'd use the tripod and have hardly any room to maneuver.
 

kevistopheles

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
2,032
Location
here
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #19
I am resisting the urge to seek out a Rokkor 24-50/4. I never thought I would even consider a lens that's widest aperture was F4 but my time with the 35-70/3.5 has really opened my eyes.
 

nianys

TalkEmount All-Pro
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
1,558
Location
France
I am resisting the urge to seek out a Rokkor 24-50/4. I never thought I would even consider a lens that's widest aperture was F4 but my time with the 35-70/3.5 has really opened my eyes.
From past experience you're not exactly too good at "resisting the urge", ah ah ah ;-)
I feel the right to poke because I got the bug from you in the first place <grin>
 
Top Bottom