Meyer Optik Görlitz adds native Canon RF mount for all of its lenses

[Ozarker]

Nevertheless, living in Europe and enjoying excellent healthcare etc... I prefer to invest in companies paying taxes where I live.

Lol. I never thought of buying consumable goods as investing. Guess I'd better put a bunch of stuff in the safe.

 

[Ozarker]

Yeah.. there is one problem though, technology moved on. Using a manual lens because you don't need to nail focus every-time, sounds a bit weird for a lens to be slapped on a Canon R5 etc which boasts exceptional focusing capabilities.

These lenses are nothing more than fake 'exotics' for the 'retro' hipster photographer. I really can't see the point buying one, if you own a modern camera.

I've bought many manual lenses. Hipsters? Tell it to the Zeiss lovers. How about some people just like variety and don't see why someone would insult "hipsters," or anyone else for that matter... because of what they prefer to use. R5? Great camera. Can't buy it without AF, even if manual is preferred.

 

[SNJ Ops]

Yeah.. there is one problem though, technology moved on. Using a manual lens because you don't need to nail focus every-time, sounds a bit weird for a lens to be slapped on a Canon R5 etc which boasts exceptional focusing capabilities.

These lenses are nothing more than fake 'exotics' for the 'retro' hipster photographer. I really can't see the point buying one, if you own a modern camera.

Different lenses give different looks to an image which is why you would choose one lens over another.

I have 2 lenses for my street photography. One gives me a very very sharp modern detailed look and the other gives one is a bit more film like and softer. Depending on what I want to achieve determines which I would use.

In the case of Meyer their lenses render in ways that a Canon lens never would. Whether that’s good or bad is entirely subjective.

 

[Del Paso]

Lol. I never thought of buying consumable goods as investing. Guess I'd better put a bunch of stuff in the safe.

LOL.
Maybe you shouldn't have taken "investing" litterally...
Incidentally: one Euro 550 Leica M lens (bought used in 1992) bought me an EOS 5 DIII plus TSE 24 II plus 100-400 II plus spare batteries.

 

[Ozarker]

Different lenses give different looks to an image which is why you would choose one lens over another.

I have 2 lenses for my street photography. One gives me a very very sharp modern detailed look and the other gives one is a bit more film like and softer. Depending on what I want to achieve determines which I would use.

In the case of Meyer their lenses render in ways that a Canon lens never would. Whether that’s good or bad is entirely subjective.

Yup. Some of us seek out particular lenses for how they render. I guess it's just another way to get creative. I've got a 50mm f/1.4 Takumar I think is great for myself. Several 135mm for various manufacturers too. There's a market for manual lenses. Probably a very small market, but it is there.

 

[Ozarker]

LOL.
Maybe you shouldn't have taken "investing" litterally...
Incidentally: one Euro 550 Leica M lens (bought used in 1992) bought me an EOS 5 DIII plus TSE 24 II plus 100-400 II plus spare batteries.

Ahhh... So those wonderful Japanese products are part of your "Made in Germany" healthcare investing pool?

*No idea why your health benefits were even brought up.

 

[Del Paso]

Ahhh... So those wonderful Japanese products are part of your "Made in Germany" healthcare investing pool?

*No idea why your health benefits were even brought up.

Easy!
The question raised by a former post was whether a product's origin mattered at all.
My answer was yes, local or national companies pay taxes where I do live. European companies are heavily taxed, but our excellent and expensive healthcare is partly financed by them too. Not by foreign companies. Of course, rejecting for instance Asian products would be both stupid and certainly xenophobic.
I too spend a lot on Canon, Samsung, etc... gear.
And several M vintage lenses have indeed become an investment, but my Canons, I buy for FUN !
And lose more money year after year !

 

[Skux]

We're on a photography forum and people are questioning why people would buy an expensive niche product lol

I have a few Meyer lenses and they are true character lenses, the Trioplan 50mm is the soap bubble bokeh king and the Primoplan 58mm swirls like nothing else in its focal range. Trying to find good copies is a bit of a lottery though, so I like that a modern optic is available where you can be sure of the quality.

I wouldn't pay that much for a triplet lens, but the Primoplan would be a dream.

 

[Del Paso]

We're on a photography forum and people are questioning why people would buy an expensive niche product lol

I have a few Meyer lenses and they are true character lenses, the Trioplan 50mm is the soap bubble bokeh king and the Primoplan 58mm swirls like nothing else in its focal range. Trying to find good copies is a bit of a lottery though, so I like that a modern optic is available where you can be sure of the quality.

I wouldn't pay that much for a triplet lens, but the Primoplan would be a dream.

I fully understand you.
But the bokeh is exactly what I dislike about these lenses! Strange, isn't it?
"De gustibus non est disputandum".

 

[cayenne]

Far too expensive for what they offer. Just trying to revive an old reputed brand with lenses nobody knows where they are actually made.
"made in Germany" doesn't necessarily mean that the optical components are German made. It often stands for "assembled".
I'd rather buy native RF lenses like the 35mm or 85mm, better optically, macro, AF, and less expensive. And for bokeh, there are vintage options (Pentax, Minolta etc...) which cost a fraction of the price of these primitive lenses.
PS: you can even get vintage Leica M lenses for less (2,8-3,5/35, 2,8/90, 2,8/50...)

I bought the Trioplan 100mm in M mount for my M10M.
I think. I got mine for about $499. It really IS a fun lens....that bubble bokeh really is unique to only a few of the vintage style lenses and this is one of them.

To me the fun thing about mirrorless cameras IS the fact that you can adapt a whole ton of older (or new old style) vintage lenses...and with the focusing aids on the new cameras, even someone like me with horrible aging eyes and focus manually.

My trioplan 100mm has turned out to be a very nice lens...

I thought about getting the older version of this lens on eBay, but with that you never know what the condition really is till you get it and often if it comes from overseas, for the most part you're stuck with it.

As for cost....well, not every product is meant for every person or budget. I guess I don't get the complaining about cost on everything. I mean, I don't have a Porsche GT3 cause I can't afford it, but I don't complain about the price.

Anyway, I can attest that the new version of at least one of these old design lenses is well put together and fun to use and generates some unique images for me.

But in general, you see the RF lenses are easily going for close to $2K or more....why complain on other non-canon lenses going for less than $1K?

Just my $0.02,

cayenne.

 

[Hector1970]

I see people complaining about the prices of these lens. These aren't mass produced items. You'd don't buy these instead of a Canon 35mm or 50mm lens.
They are reproduction of classic lens and you shouldn't touch them unless you specifically want or can live with their shortcomings. Generally you buy them for the look they give. I don't own the modern version but I have some of the originals with adapters. Sharpness would not be a characteristic of the original or the modern version. My favourite is the Trioplan 100mm 2.8. I use it with flowers for its bubble bokeh. I like it but everything is soft at 2.8. A modern Canon / Sigma lens just can't create that bubble bokeh but will be far sharper , have autofocus and be better for general purpose use.
After a difficult start its good to see the Meyer Optik brand back, its a real niche product.

 

[freejay]

Yeah.. there is one problem though, technology moved on. Using a manual lens because you don't need to nail focus every-time, sounds a bit weird for a lens to be slapped on a Canon R5 etc which boasts exceptional focusing capabilities.

These lenses are nothing more than fake 'exotics' for the 'retro' hipster photographer. I really can't see the point buying one, if you own a modern camera.

It's always nice to know that there are some people out there who know, that there are no other needs than theirs and everybody who wants something different is an idiot. (sarcasm off)

 

[Del Paso]

It's always nice to know that there are some people out there who know, that there are no other needs than theirs and everybody who wants something different is an idiot. (sarcasm off)

Nobody said or even thought that...
But I wrongly thought diverging opinions were allowed, seems I was wrong!
Sorry if we hurt your tender feelings.

 

[cayenne]

As someone who loved shooting Leica "street" photography but doesn't have the brain space to manage two separate systems any more, I'm open to the idea of small, moderate-spec, MF primes that are sturdy and have beautiful images even if not high technical sharpness.

But having taken a look, I don't think I care for the images much. Both the 35 and 75 seem to give OOF highlights behind the subject a sharp edge, which I don't find at all attractive. (My limited understanding is that lenses with sharp-edged OOF highlights on one side of the subject have typically smooth highlights on the other, and the RF100Mac even lets you choose which way to lean. Given that OOF backgrounds are so much more common, though, I'm surprised a lens wouldn't be biased towards making those smooth.) Here's the 75 from their website but many other shots are arguably far worse.

View attachment 204871

Well, that's the great thing about having lots of choices....to fit everyones' tastes.

I happen to be a BIG fan of the bubble bokeh in an image like you posted above.

It's not right for EVERY shot, no....but it is unique and I do like to throw it into my repertoire from time to time, when it fits.

Awhile back I bought a used mint condition newer 100mm version of the Meyer-Optics lens, I got it in M mount, to work on my M10M, and eventually will also adapt to my future RF camera.

 

[cayenne]

OK, if you like bubble bokeh the best I've seen is the RF100mm macro, which has a control for spherical aberration. Here's three versions from dpreview showing the maximum plus (bubble) , minus (soft) and neutral (disk-like) settings. I really, really like this lens's bokeh (even in neutral--perfect circular disks from center to corner at f/4.5) and in fact am ordering one tomorrow.

Canon RF 100mm F2.8 L IS Macro sample gallery

View Canon RF 100mm F2.8 L IS Macro sample gallery from DPReview.

www.dpreview.com

Wow..that's interesting for sure.
I've not really seen true bubble bokeh like this before on more modern lenses.

I'll file this away for future exploration.

 

[Nemorino]

I like the SAC of the RF 100!

 

[Johnw]

well hopefully these never sell. Manual my ass, at those prices!

Even if you are not a fan, more third party RF lenses selling would be a good thing for the mount, not a bad thing.

 

[bergstrom]

Even if you are not a fan, more third party RF lenses selling would be a good thing for the mount, not a bad thing.

again, MANUAL? At THOSE prices?

 

[Ozarker]

again, MANUAL? At THOSE prices?

Well, Zeiss. So yes.

 

[Rocky]

Well, Zeiss. So yes.

Has anyone compare the ferformance of Meyer Optik Görlitz against Ziess ?? The lenses from this company used to be way below Ziess.