Recently Seen on the 'Bay

[Andrea B.]

You don't see the Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar 85/4.5 too often on Ebay. This is not the worst price I've ever seen advertised for this lens, but it is a bit higher than it should be, methinks. Especially since this copy does not come with the original box and filters which make it more "collectible". The UAT does have reach, for sure.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/363554114423?hash=item54a5838b77:g:NnIAAOSwxXxhTcGJ

[Guest]

Clearly the seller doesn’t know much about the optics. It’s all separation!

“

Beautiful condition.  
- There is no separation. 
“

 

 

https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/ultra-achromatic-takumar-85mm-f4.5.html

[Doug A]

Geez, I don't need to be looking at this. How good is this lens? Same ball park as Nikon and Coastal/Jenoptic?

 

Thanks,

Doug A

[dabateman]

45 minutes ago, Doug A said:

Geez, I don't need to be looking at this. How good is this lens? Same ball park as Nikon and Coastal/Jenoptic?

 

Thanks,

Doug A

Oh you shouldn't ask that question. 

Its definitely a divorce maker for anyone considering its purchase.  Unless money isn't tight.

I haven't used the various 105mm lenses.  But it is an excellent lens. 

 

Mine does seem to hotspot at 254nm though.  All other wavelengths at and above 280nm are excellent. 

[Andrea B.]

Best "reach": UV-Nikkor 105/4.5, UAT 85/4.5

 

Achromatic UV/Vis/IR:  CO 60/4.0, UAT 85/4.5

How well the achromatic capability works is slightly dependent on distance, aperture, light, etc.

It's not perfect across UV/Vis/IR for either lens, but very close.

 

Best Built: UAT 85/4.5, UV-Nikkor 105/4.5

 

Sharpest: UV-Nikkor 105/4.5, CO 60/4.0

 

Macro Hotspot:  CO 60/4.0 (mostly mitigated with extension tube and long lens hood)

 

Note: UV-Rayfact 105/4.5 == UV-Nikkor 105/4.5.

 

If you were ever going to put a truckload of money into a dedicated UV-lens,

I'd recommend going for the UV-Rayfact 105/4.5.

 

 

[Doug A]

Thanks Andrea B. Not really looking for such a special purpose lens...at the moment (•‿•). Just good to know in case I run into one. Amazing such an old lens is competitive. Surprised Canon never entered the field.

 

Thanks,

Doug A

[Guest]

Some of these old standard lenses have 60-80 percent transmission on the curve at that 365nm. Is there much value added in getting a dedicated UV lens if someone only photographs in UVA?

 

Does Nikon Rayfact still produce their 105mm f4.5 or is it only available through eBay (Japan) Mint++++?

[colinbm]

First is the need for a good UVA camera.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, colinbm said:

First is the need for a good UVA camera.

 

Let's assume no hot mirror, cover glass and Bayer still intact. I guess that a sensor loses more transmission in that respect than what is gained from quartz and cfl?

[colinbm]

You get 340nm, at best 320nm.

[Guest]

I believe what I have commonly seen around here is a camera sensor with Bayer still intact using the Nikon 105mm f4.5 UV. 

 

I supposed with a dedicated UV lens the shorter wavelengths will transmit higher since it is more linear in that respect and those areas will not be as underexposed compared with longer waves. Where with a Kuri clone you get the steep transmission curve. 

[nfoto]

Rayfact list the UV 105 with their industrial lens offerings so the answer obviously you don't need find it on eBay.

 

The UV-Nikkor/Rayfact is basically a very sound and robust design and the build quality is high, thus the lens will last you a lifetime and beyond. My oldest UV-Nikkor purchased new in 1991 ie. 30 years old now still functions perfectly although obviously not to be designated 'mint' !!! The other is a few years 'younger' but basically the same lens I got 25+ years ago. I have added CPUs to both to make it easier to use the lenses also with modern cameras.

 

Sisters in arms

 

 

 

I always bring one of them with me. The UV-Nikkor is one of my most used lenses.

[Guest]

In other words one needs a Tax ID to buy that lens warrantied new, with likely educational discounts or commercial markups.

 

Climbers paint enamel on their carabiners and cams so not to mix up with their partners. I guess you do the same. 

 

Is that the OEM lens shade attached to the front?

[Guest]

I would actually like to see side by side photos of how a UV Nikkor 105mm f4.5 captures vs the Kyoei Acall 105mm f3.5 triplet using a Baader U-Filter with either an uncoated flash strobe or narrow beam 365nm torch or solar of a flower having good UV signature. Both lenses set to f8 or f11 at a field width about 100mm. Bayer filter intact using the same camera both shots. Does anyone have a link to such a test. 

[JMC]

For anyone feeling particularly 'flush' there are a couple of UV Rayfacts on the 'bay at the moment.

[nfoto]

43 minutes ago, Blazer0ne said:

In other words one needs a Tax ID to buy that lens warrantied new, with likely educational discounts or commercial markups.

 

Climbers paint enamel on their carabiners and cams so not to mix up with their partners. I guess you do the same. 

 

Is that the OEM lens shade attached to the front?

 

I'm VAT registered, but the question is moot as I have no intention of getting more UV-Nikkor/Rayfact lenses.

 

The color dots are just to mark each item for which mount/system their are intended.  When there are many combinations floating around I need a quick visual guide so as not to end up in the fielod with piecdes not suited together.

 

The lens 'shades' are an example of the use of the ubiquituous K-ring set.

[Guest]

I get it folks. I had to deal with the same situation when I bought my espresso machine and replacement parts. Nobody wanted to deal with me because I wasn't a company or commercial entity. I ended buying it from eBay, and begging suppliers to sale me accessories or replacement parts. I guess boilers are dangerous. UV is also dangerous.  I have no intentions of flushing anything down the toilet, but clearly made such attempts in the past.

 

My point is I don't think buying used UV lens of such caliber has easily accessible replacement parts. I have read stories of people purchasing a used UV lens and then sending it back to the manufacturer for recertification. A coastal was listed last week on dpreview with the same deal.

 

I still look forward to a real world comparison, ferrari vs ford, where the rubber meets the road.

 

Cheers!

[dabateman]

Well I have tested the Nikon EL 80mm f5.6 lens ($30) next to my UAT 85mm lens which has many more zeros added to it.

The UVA transmission is better for the Nikon EL 80mm than the UAT. The sharpness is similar.

Where they differ is below 350nm, which most will never go.

So if you want great UVA images than stop. Don't look further than your one great lens.  Also many modern cameras seem to have coatings directly on the sensor coverglass, which will prevent imaging below 340nm anyway.

 

If you want 313nm than expect to add many more zeros to your budget. The added cost of replacing the coverglass alone on a camera will be quite expensive. Let alone the filters and lenses you will need.

Unless you have one of the lucky few m43rds or APS-C cameras which seem to be coverglass coating free.

[Andrea B.]

Does Nikon Rayfact still produce their 105mm f4.5 or is it only available through eBay (Japan) Mint++++?

 

Yes. The UV-Rayfact 105/4.5 is in production. You have to find a broker/importer for your particular country.

 

 

---

 

The EL 80/5.6 (old metal version) is slightly prone to hotspotting in UV. Although I wouldn't exactly call it hotspotting so much as it is more like brighter in the center.

 

[Andrea B.]

I would actually like to see side by side photos of how a UV Nikkor 105mm f4.5 captures vs the Kyoei Acall 105mm f3.5 triplet using a Baader U-Filter with either an uncoated flash strobe or narrow beam 365nm torch or solar of a flower having good UV signature. Both lenses set to f8 or f11 at a field width about 100mm. Bayer filter intact using the same camera both shots. Does anyone have a link to such a test. 

 

I don't think we have a link to this here on UVP. If there were a link elsewhere, I'd be surprised. But you never know.

((If anybody wants to set up the betting pool, my money's on the UV-Nikkor.))

I'll go look and see if I have that Acall 105/3.5.

 

There is quite naturally a lot of emphasis on UVP about the reach of a lens into the UV. But there are many other lens qualities which are never discussed. Resolution of detail and micro-contrast (acutance), both of which are necessary for "sharpness". The various chromatic aberrations (linear, longitudinal).

Color transmission can be important. The build of the lens is worth considering for those of use who work outdoors a lot. And so on and so forth.

 

 

[Guest]

I know what you are saying and I won't argue any of the other weighted aspects. They all carry merit. One lens is built for the job the other just happened to be capable in a limited range of wavelength.

 

I have two copies with slightly different coatings and never intended to use them for UV. Only stumbled upon the fact after I took up the reflected UV hobby. The UV Nikkor has the same focal length, so I thought it would be less variables. I don't think a real world test would in any way discount the workhorse Nikkor. 

 

I only know of one person who owns both of these lenses. I honestly think that anyone who owns both would scoff at the idea of my suggestion.

 

https://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/2013/02/soligor-kyoei-105mm-lens-for-reflected.html

[Doug A]

I'd better buy a Kyoei 105 fast, in case it does well against the Nikkkor . Surprised a glass lens would have higher transmittance in any part of the UV range.

Thanks,

Doug A

1 minute ago, Doug A said:

 

 

[Bill De Jager]

 

Kyoei 105/3.5 - check

Kyoei 135/3.5 - for good measure

adapter rings to 52mm filter, both lenses - check

adapter to undisclosed camera mount - check

battery charged - check

card in camera - check

appropriate subject - can probably get shortly

Baader-U - uh-oh, missing somewhere

To be continued.... no promises about end result yet.... ;-)

 

[Doug A]

@Bill De Jager looks good. Is the Kyoei 135 supposed to be special in UV, like little 35mm brother?

[Guest]

I guess it's time to make a separate thread. Also, I do not have the Super-acall. My copy is a triplet in M39 mount. That might have different coatings and less transmission. I have a botanical entry that uses this lens. 

 

 

New Topic:

 

https://www.ultravioletphotography.com/content/index.php?/topic/4908-kyoei-optical-co-ltd-acall-105mm-f35/