MC Cimko MT Series 1 Review: 2.8 f = 135mm

According provided by lens MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm for Nikon many thanks to Dmitry Khomutov.

MC Cimko MT Series 1 Review: 2.8 f = 135mm

MC Cimko MT Series 1 Review: 2.8 f = 135mm

This time I reviewed a manual lens of a rare brand 'Cimko', with a Nikon F mount, which is AI compatible for Nikon cameras. Who knows tales useful information about Cimko or Cima Kogaku, please unsubscribe in the comments.

How to use old AI lenses on modern CZK can be found in the section 'work with manual optics. '

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm

A lot of manual 135-currents passed through my hands and MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm does not stand out anything special, in general, it feels like I was shooting it on this particular instance.

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm is well assembled, has a built-in telescopic hood made of metal, which locks well in the extended position. The focusing ring is rubberized and rotates 220 degrees, while the trunk is lengthened, but the front lens does not rotate. MDF is 1.5 meters. On the lens barrel you can find the DOF scale for F / 5.6, 11, 16, 22 and the focusing distance scale. The diaphragm closes with a ring with feet up to F / 22 (no intermediate values). The lens has only 6 aperture blades, which is why you can easily get 'nuts' in the out-of-focus area at closed apertures (see the penultimate photo in the gallery). The diameter of the front filter is small, only 55 mm. In general, this lens is a classic representative of the old, typical, manual fixes of the 135 / 2.8 class.

There is a '18 ° 'mark in the lens designation to show the actual angle of view of the lens. Green letters MC They speak of the presence of multi-enlightenment, although, even visually, it is poorly expressed, not to mention its effectiveness.

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm

Working with the MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm is simple and comfortable, the lens is great for portrait shooting, and the maximum relative aperture of F / 2.8 allows you to shoot at fast shutter speeds. The lens has not the worst bokeh. I personally love 135-tki, even when used on Nikon DX cropped cameras, where EGF will be about 200 mm.

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm and Nikon 80-200mm AF Nikkor 1: 4.5-5.6D

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm and Nikon 80-200mm AF Nikkor 1: 4.5-5.6D

Despite the multi-coating, the lens is afraid of flare and the built-in hood does not help it. At F / 4, the bokeh nuts have small notches; at F / 2.8, the circles of confusion turn into lemon at the corners of the frame. In my opinion, at F / 2.8, as for a fix, there is not enough sharpness, and the lens chromates strongly, but if you close the aperture, the picture returns to normal.

Here link to the archive with the originals - 410 MB, 30 photos in .NEF format (RAW) from the camera  D700 (FX).

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm on the Nikon N8008S

MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm on ZK Nikon N8008S


Results

In the end, I repeat: MC Cimko MT Series 1: 2.8 f = 135mm mediocre such 135-weave.

Thank you for attention. Arkady Shapoval.

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 20, on the topic: MC Cimko MT Series 1 review: 2.8 f = 135mm

  • Alexander Trekhsotkovich

    The lens is garbage judging by your photos Arkady. But the review is super, as always, keep it up. But judging by the number of lines in the review, Arkady needs to get ready for flogging) Right now, an audience dissatisfied with the reviews will catch up)

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Now pull up Zero and bans someone for a flame :)

  • Alexey

    Alexander, you’ve already decided .. The lens is garbage, as you said, but do you need more lines about it? Where is the logic?)) Specifications are given, operating impressions too, test photos are available. You, sorry, what the hell do you need?))

  • Jackie

    The nut in the penultimate photo, IMHO, does not look kosher, although I really liked the photo with rowan bokeh. By the way, for the first time I hear about the manufacturer Cimko, but I wonder why the letters MS are green, although the enlightenment, judging by the photos, is yellow? Illogical :)

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, I just pointed out that the nuts are on the face. A rowan without nuts, as shot at F / 2.8, on the fully open diaphragm, the hole in the fixes is always round. As for letters, the color of enlightenment and letters are not connected in any way, it's just the design of the lens.

      • Jackie

        Yes, yes, I mean that on an open aperture in photographs the “back” picture is pleasing to the eye, but with a closed one - not much ... And for the letters I just had to by the way :)

  • Yuriy75

    I do not agree with the previous speaker, judging by the photo the lens is a strong middle peasant, but does not shine; in the above photos, even the flaws indicated by the author do not hurt the eyes. If the price of glass is $ 20-30, then everything is not even bad. Respect to the author! As always on the level!

  • androkin

    In appearance and design, this is an exact copy of the HANIMEX MC 1: 2.8 f = 135mm lens. There are no enthusiastic reviews about him, but in general the lens is not bad. With a polar and starting from aperture 4, it pleases with good photos.

    • nukemall

      Hanimex is a reseller trademark that sold dozens of different 135 / 2.8 lenses from different manufacturers.

  • Oleg

    My Tair-11 is also chromate on an open diaphragm. Well, at least sometimes seen. And so I looked at the photo, no better and no worse than our domestic optics of the 80s! Even at heart it became pleasant. Well, here in the test Nikon D700 !!! The camera itself is gorgeous. I liked the photo examples.

  • Yarkiy

    Strange, the company on the network does not google, but on ebee pieces 30 of these are sold. Specifically, 135tok three, and the remaining zooms and a pair of widths 24 and 28 mm. The zooms are all trombones alike.
    The review is good, the lens is mediocre. It’s clearly not worth the passionate comment.

    • anonym

      Everything is googled perfectly, even Cimko cameras give out. Google probably doesn’t want to show goyant things to Jews)

      • Arkady Shapoval

        For the flame blacklist for 300 years, I hope you understand me. Dear Anonymous :)

  • anonym

    For me, Jupiter is more interesting, albeit a 3,5 hole, but for that, with a cool result immediately open

    • anonym

      And for me, the Nikon 200mm f2 is more interesting, albeit a 2.0 hole, but for that, it’s immediately cool to open

      • Lynx

        no. 200 mm on the crop is already too much for most tasks, and a shortfall for the rest.

        • Alexander Trekhsotkovich

          Lynx do not tell. For example, I use Nikkor 300-80mm f200D MK-III on my D2.8s (s-male) and I do body and waist with chest portraits exclusively on a focal 200mm at aperture 2.8. And boke I think this only makes it better, and the depth of field zone is growing and two, three people easily fall into the depth of field. For example, a portrait at 200mm f2.8 http://www.pekarskas.com/#!untitled/zoom/c1u2e/image1qib and people feel more relaxed when I am so far from them, they cease to be shy and begin to show feelings, which was not the case with the poltnik and the 85th.

  • movritsio

    There is something in this lens, interesting. Judging by the photo. Although it may be only a specific instance is different ...

  • nukemall

    There was already a review of his relative under the Focal trademark. Why “review” the same lenses that differ only in their inscriptions?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      And there are samples on the crop, and here on ff, just more carefully :)

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2022

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2014/07/mc-cimko-mt-series-2-8-135/

Versión en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2014/07/mc-cimko-mt-series-2-8-135/