Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,218   Posts: 1,532,215   Online: 869
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    252

    Arsat 35mm/f2.8 PC lens for Nikon AI?

    Hi!

    Has anybody used the Arsat 35mm/f2.8 PC (tilt & shift)? Preferably in Nikon mount, but I guess most of the lens working details are the same regardless of mount.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Hertfordshire
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    82

    Arsat 35mm/f2.8 PC

    Hi. Think I have a review somewhere? Let me look, I'll get back to you.

    B.

  3. #3
    Mongo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    960
    I used to own the shift version of this lens in the Nikon mount. It's the same optically as the tilt/shift lens, without the tilting base.

    It was about what you'd expect from an ex-Soviet factory...solid, heavy, very pretty coatings, with oddities that you just don't expect in modern lenses (in this case, no click-stops on the aperture ring which made it easy to knock the aperture away from where you'd set it, no indication on the lens barrel of which way was "up" for mounting the lens, and an aperture ring that would slide upward on the lens barrel pretty easily necessitating a visual check to make sure it was where it was supposed to be for each shot).

    The biggest issue that I had with the lens was flare. Even though it had gorgeous coatings, it tended to flare at the first sign of a bright light anywhere near the image area. With a bright light actually in the image, it exhibited the worst veiling flare I'd ever seen in any 35mm lens (none of my old single-coated lenses flared this badly). Those coatings looked great, but apparently weren't helping much. Since I wanted to use the lens for things that would generally include sky (lighthouses, trees, and the like), I couldn't work with the lens. Too many shots ruined by veiling flare. I wanted to love the lens, but in the end I just couldn't work with it.
    Film is cheap. Opportunities are priceless.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    Concerning flare, note that Soviet (now Russian and Ukrainian) lens lines often change coatings without warning -- that is, on one year's production the coating may be one thing and the next year it may be another. I have no personal experience with this lens specifically, but it's conceivable you (that is, Mongo) got one from a production run with a particularly bad coating. OTOH, it could be they're all like this; I really don't know. I'd advise sanderx1 to look into this specific issue in more detail. Do you (Mongo) know the serial number of your lens? Many Soviet/Russian/Ukrainian lenses and cameras have serial numbers in which the first two digits are the year of manufacture. That could help sanderx1 decide whether to buy one of these lenses, particularly if he can find a summary of coating changes to this lens over time.

  5. #5
    Mongo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by srs5694
    Do you (Mongo) know the serial number of your lens?
    Unfortunately, the lens did not have a serial number. The front of the lens (inside of the filter ring) read "35mm PCS ARSAT H 1:2.8". I no longer have the lens, but I have plenty of pictures of it (from when I was selling it) and there's not a serial number to be found on it. Sorry I couldn't help. I can tell you that the coating was a very deep purple on the front and back elements, and that just about every other color under the sun was reflected internally in the lens. The coating on the front was well applied with no voids or thick areas; the colored reflections were perfect from any angle.
    Film is cheap. Opportunities are priceless.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    252
    I have never actually seen veiling flare on a lens before so it has been a bogeyman to me so far... But yeah, I want to be fairly sure I will get a lens I can later use as otherwise there is no point in paying any money for it.

  7. #7
    Mongo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    960
    I think the deciding factor would be what you wanted to use the lens for. If you would be photographing images with a lot of bright sky or reflections of the sun, you might find the contrast in the images greatly reduced by the veiling flare if your lens acted like mine. If, on the other hand, you interest is in table-top photography (you mentioned that you're looking at the tilt-shift version, not the version that's shift only, so this is a possibility) or if you want to take it into the woods to do near/far compositions close to the ground, the lens might be just fine for you. (And, of course, it might just have been my lens that was bad.)

    When bright light sources weren't in the image or near the edge of the image, my lens was capable of capturing very nice images. Shifting up to 7mm was accomplished without noticeable vignetting.

    Depending on the camera on which you intend to mount this lens, you might be able to find a deal on a used lens on eBay. It's worth keeping an eye out as sometimes the Nikkor lenses go for much less than you'd expect. (And, of course, sometimes bidding wars drive the prices through the roof...such is eBay.)

    Good Luck.
    Dave
    Film is cheap. Opportunities are priceless.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin