1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Chinon Lens

Discussion in 'Pentax Chat' started by colindavis, Apr 30, 2007.

  1. colindavis

    colindavis Well-Known Member

    Anyone got any advice on Chinon lenses. I was offered one recently, a 135mm f2.8 prime lens. I dont know anything about them. The price was very reasonable but I know that more often than not you get what you pay for. However with the rise of digital and AF lenses many good manual lenses can be had for reasonable prices.

    Thanks in anticipation
    Colin
     
  2. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    I believe they were the budjet end lenses. They probably work fine at mid aperture, but may be less good wide open. Check AP to see if they were tested at all.
     
  3. colindavis

    colindavis Well-Known Member

    Thanks. Will do

    Colin
     
  4. Roger_Provins

    Roger_Provins Well-Known Member

    I've a couple or Chinons here, I've never used them, they seem very well built for a "budget" lens. But maybe I'm comparing how stuff used to be made with today's plastic fantastic creations :)
     
  5. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    The Chinon lenses, usually sold through Dixons, were budget 1970s lenses. The 135mm f2.8 was a typical low cost offering giving adepquate but not exceptional results. How it would work on digital is anybody's guess, but mine would ne not too well.
     
  6. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    The 50mm f1.7 was generally well regarded, and it's not a bad lens. For the rest, their reputation was pretty average - I would agree with John. Must be worth all of a fiver these days.
     
  7. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    Probably the older lenses were not ground to the same tolerances as they are today with modern computer technology to control things. I believe that there were greater variations between individual lenses, so you could get a goodish one or a bit of a pup. Also the blooming on the lens may not be up to much for digitals and you could get flare from internal reflections. I doubt if the back optic will be coated.
     
  8. Damien_Demolder

    Damien_Demolder Well-Known Member

    Hi Colin

    If it is about £20 go for it. It isn't a brilliant lens, but it will be fun to use and will produce good enough results. I've been using loads of Chinon lenses as well as old Ricoh and Pentax MF lenses and they are fine. Just don't expect too much. Most people have more lens quality than they need, and you'll find these old fixed focal length lenses are better than most cheap zooms that come in the body/lens kits.

    I shot this using a nasty Ricoh 28mm that cost £5.

    [​IMG]

    damien
     
  9. colindavis

    colindavis Well-Known Member

    Thanks Damien. It's £25 so I might just have a go.

    Colin
     
  10. Damien_Demolder

    Damien_Demolder Well-Known Member

    What are you going to use it on Colin?

    damien
     
  11. colindavis

    colindavis Well-Known Member

    Pentax K10. I am also looking at a Vivitar 200mm PKA with macro

    Colin
     
  12. colindavis

    colindavis Well-Known Member

    Well I decided to get it. I forgot about the increased focal length. Certainly fills the viewfinder. Will give it a thrashing at le weekend and see how I get on.

    Thanks to all and Damien. (Tugs forelock and genuflects)

    Colin
     
  13. Damien_Demolder

    Damien_Demolder Well-Known Member

    I just bought a MV kit just so I could have the Helios 135mm f/2.8. It arrived today, and looks nice/interesting/not great quality all at the same time. It has Vivitar 70-200mm 4.5-5.6 and a very bent 50mm Cosina. I have never used the MV and hadn't realised how small it is. The camera isn't in great condition but it seems to work OK. Anyone else got one?

    damien
     
  14. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    My snobbery prevents me getting one - auto-only is one thing, but no indication of shutter speed is a step too far for me.

    My favourite cheap 135 by miles is the Carl Zeiss Jena S 135mm f3.5 - I adore that lens, and they're cheap as chips. M42, of course, but well worth a go.
     
  15. colindavis

    colindavis Well-Known Member

    Just to correct myself it's a 35-200 mm f3-4.5 macro zoom. Sorry Damien I am not familiar with the MV.

    Colin
     
  16. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    The MV was the first SLR I bought for my wife Sue. We still have it, and, with a bit of imagination, it will do as much as it needs to despite the lack of shutter speed indication. We're photographers and we can estimate where we are. Can't we?

    There are some terrific M series lenses that will go very nicely with your MV, including the 40mm f2.8 which makes the whole thing very pocketable.
     
  17. Damien_Demolder

    Damien_Demolder Well-Known Member

    Are you trying to tell me its a girl's camera??

    I'm really pleased with it and will take it out next week - I need to get out more as you can probably tell. The lighting system for the exposure indicator in the viewfinder is quite unusual - not sure if mine is all that accurate though, as it is giving some funny readings.

    It's a nice small camera though. Not enough of those now.

    damien
     
  18. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    I wouldn't dare!

    If the exposure seems a little off, try "working" the ISO setting dial a bit - sometimes grit or corrosion results in a poor connection. The battery connections also might need cleaning. If the power fails on ME-derivative cameras they tend to deliver the top shutter speed, resulting in some frames being grossly under-exposed.

    Hope that helps you enjoy this terrific camera.
     
  19. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Struck me at the time of launch as a massive retrograde step from the ME. I've got a few auto-only cameras, from the OM10 with manual adaptor, through the Praktica BCA and Rolleimagic which indicate exposure to the Konica FP-1, which doesn't. I just don't like not knowing - although oddly enough, I don't mind with the Pentax Auto 110.

    Anyway, I still prefer the MX for my modest slew of M lenses (28 f2.8, 40, 50 f1.7 and 135 f3.5) - just as compact - in my mind, the nicest compact SLR ever made by a country mile.
     
  20. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    Can't argue with that, nor would I wish to, the MX is probably my favourite manual SLR. I even still use one today, although not so often thanks to the Digital Tide...

    As regards the MV, it was more of a sideways step and aimed at tempting compact users who wanted no complication into the SLR world. It ran alongide the ME Super. The MV1 added a self timer and the MG reverted to having a shutter speed display in the viewfinder. The MV/MV1/MG are effectively the same camera with slight variations.

    I did write an article covering all these models and the M series lenses over two issues of Pentax User Magazine, and anyone interested could enquire after back issues.

    The M series is a very useable and enjoyable photographic experience - well designed, slick and efficient.
     

Share This Page