Auto Yashinon DS-M 135mm F/2.8 - a new addition

Hi moggi1964 ,

What a delightful shot of the robin - makes you wonder what he's thinking...

The purple and green is easily removed in post-production which will leave you with a very memorable photo. Well done!

And yes, that Tamron lens is a real gem, especially when used with its dedicated extender to take it to a true 1:1.

moggi1964 ... You've reminded me that I have to test the very same lens. I got it a few months ago and it's been miserable weather overall to get outside where I can have some subject distance to give it a proper run-through. I did pop it on a digital body quickly to get a peek, and I like what I saw from that - but I don't remember if there was any CA issues of note, but it did remind me of a ML 135 in general for contrast, color, and detail. From your test shot, I'd say it's well worth a little PP work, plus a few more tries stopped down to see if the CA goes away at some point.

For the wide end you're looking for - would it be in M42 or C/Y? There's a notable difference in what you'll get between the 2 mount types at the same focal lengths.

If you save RAW files in-camera and use Lightroom or DxO and several others, there's usually a toggle to get rid of it automatically, and then tweakable for fine adjustments. You can do the same with JPG files in any of the same RAW processors, and everything from PhotoShop (CS2 or higher), PS Elements, on down to Affinity Photo (50% off at the moment - $24.99) on the commercial end. There's lots in OpenSource tools too... browse alternativeto.net/software/dxo-photolab/ for a bunch of free/paid types for multiple OS's.

I've tried most of them, and use several regularly, and it can be 100% corrected in under 30 seconds. I'll post details and a how-to if it will help get anyone started.

For film, I'd suggest scanning to digital files and use any JPG image processor that you'd pick above -or- shoot in B&W where it's often irrelevant. Otherwise I'd assume the lab that does your prints might have an analogue solution.

biggles3 ... My guess would be: "Again? Somebody needs a model release first".

A little heads up on the 01F. Optically a good copy will be among the best 2x converters of it's era but check carefully for haze in the rear group when it arrives - these converters have a lens in the rear pair which frequently gets cloudy and will reduce contrast and sharpness. What's really frustrating is that the affected element is very easy to remove but simply doesn't clean off as it's a kind of surface pitting.

I'm not sure that a stripped back 01F would really work as an extension tube but have never tried! I have a good copy, but it took about 3-4 attempts to get there.

As an aside, there is also the rare and pricey 200F. I'd like to find out that is prone to the haze problem as I'm pretty sure all the 01Fs will get it at some point.

Well it arrived and seems clear so that is a bonus. I've attached it to the SP90 and will have a play round in the sunshine tomorrow. Turns out I paid £13 for it; it even comes with the bottom and top caps and the case so I consider that a bargain 

It's warmer outside, but still on the dreary and grey side. I thought I'd at least do a couple of inside tests to look at the 135 in more detail with subjects I know. Everything was shot wide open at f/2.8. My guess is that CA will probably amplify itself more when shooting over longer distances, but my copy isn't showing it inside until I zoom to a 1:1 crop. It's still easily fixed in post, so not necessarily an issue on digital, and likely will be minimal on film at full frame sizes... unless there's a large shift at some of the farther distances that will show up once I'm outdoors. Until I get out there to confirm, it seems like there's a definite difference in our lens samples, moggi1964 .

CA isn't the only thing, and color rendering differences can be another casualty. Reds and blues look accurate to the eye in comparison on most tele lenses, but greens, oranges, and purples seem to suffer - or sometimes they can be outright wrong. There's not much in the way of greens or purples in these test shots - if any - but what colors are there, look very accurate.

I didn't see any issues with resolution, sharpness or contrast so far, and at first blush, the DS-M seems better than the ML series (the 135, or 135c) with all three characteristics.

Tests were done on a Sony FX-3, so they're sensor cropped. No PP except minor color balance correction (i'm still in the process of replacing some of my room lights with CRI 95+ Daylight LED's) and noise reduction. Full frame shots, then a 1:1 crop on these 2 inside shots.

testbed.lumiworx.com/#16167370296430

One more note on the DS-M lens line... I just got a rare 200mm, but unfortunately it's overrun with fungus. I still haven't even taken a test shot after finishing the initial cleanup, and I'm not really in a mad rush to pull it apart until I know how to disassemble it properly. Sad that it's in such bad shape.

Just an after thought,

I have a TON of robins in my area, but none have the rufous above the beak. So for me that is nice to see -- a real treat, or should I say TWEET!!!

But birds, like people, vary around the globe.