david_klaffenbach Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 <p>Hi,</p><p>I've recently acquired a Tokina RMC 135mm f/2.8 lens to play with, and I'm curious about the specifications of the lens and its history but I can't find much at all on the web.</p><p>Anyone have any old literature on this lens?</p><p>Not that I really need it to use the lens, but I'm curious.</p><p>Thanks</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdm Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 <p>What are you trying to find out about it? Do you need to know if its a good lens?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_klaffenbach Posted September 29, 2012 Author Share Posted September 29, 2012 <p>Well, I own it now and am forming my opinion on it, but was curious about it's design and its history.</p> <p>So far I can say that it is not useful at f/2.8 (low contrast and loss of definition, glassy looking), but is decent from f/4. Not quite as good as my 85/1.8 AF-D or 180/2.8 AF, but those are tough competition. Focus ring is quite smooth with about 190 degrees of travel. Very compact (about the same size as a Nikon Series E 135/2.8).</p> <p>I got it for when I want to have a very lightweight kit - something to go with a Vivitar 19/3.8 and a Nikkor 50/1.8 AF-D.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosmin_saveanu Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 <p>I found the Tokina excellent until some oil migrated between the diaphragm blades. My first impressions are described in a Flickr discussion (<a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/365610@N21/discuss/72157607237001091">link</a>). The lens compares favorably with the older Nikkor 135mm and is more compact. (see this <a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/365610@N21/discuss/72157612060167473">discussion</a> for sample images). Everything from the APS-C size digital camera point of view.<br> Conclusion: as long as it works and you have a good copy, it is an excellent 135mm lens. Unfortunately, this lens is not a "classic" or "famous" one, and I could find no specific information either on the web or elsewhere.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_klaffenbach Posted September 30, 2012 Author Share Posted September 30, 2012 <p>Hi Cosmin,</p> <p>I had read those threads and looked at your comparison shots - thanks for putting that up there. About all I found digging was an old B&H advertisement from 1981 listing a Tokina 135 2.8 for $67.95, and an Olden Camera ad in the same magazine listing the Nikon 135 2.8 for $208.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdm Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 <p>Ahhh... , gotta love that <strong>N</strong>ever <strong>I</strong>nexpensive <strong>KON</strong> Equipment. :D<br /> I have not owned that particular lens (a Tokina RMC 135mm) ; In-fact the only Tokina lens I have ever possessed is the RMC 80-200mm f4 lens.<br /> I think that you won't find too much difference between most third party 135mm 2.8 lenses and they will all preform pretty well. It's a simple design and construction that doesn't need much tweaking.<br /> I purchased a Tamron 135mm lens last year and I have to say I think it's so cool looking, with the gloss black finish and vertically written brand name on it's retractable leans hood. That was the main reason I got it. But it has performed very well also, although I think I over payed for it (@ $32 with shipping).</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starshooter Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 <p>Dan Mar ... takes actual photos with his camera equipment? I got the impression from his post he just stares it all day long like a beautiful vista at sunset and tries to look cool carrying it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdm Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 <p>Yes, you are correct. I do try to look cool carrying my equipment too, but alas, it doesn't work :-(<br> I still look like a camera geek.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now