Need suggestion, Meyer Orestor 100/2.8 or Trioplan 100/2.8?

[kl122007]

<p>A same post was post in another forum, but I wish someone help me to make a decision.<br>

There were two semi-telephoto lens I met in this morning. One is Trioplan and one ith Orestor. Both of them having 100mm and f/2.8 and in exakta mount. Because of their mount, they are rather cheaper than that of m42. <br />I have seen plenty of user support Trioplan but very little on Orestor. <br>

Is Orestor performs badly? And what are their differences in construction ?</p>

[subbarayan_prasanna]

<p>Hi! You may want to browse the pictures taken with both lenses on <www.MFlenses.com> in their Gallery section and under German lenses. The Orestor was also sold later as Pentacon 100mm. You will be able to decide better after viewing the pictures. regards, sp.</p>

[h._p.]

<p>My experience of the Meyer lenses has always been positive. Very sharp, good mechanics and nice barrel designs. I'd recommend them.</p>

[kl122007]

<p>Thank you. I just checked the website. The boken effect is much more in Trioplan which I really don't enjoy it. <br />I notice there is many overlapping in lens production, as <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3667779">Subbarayan </a> mentioned, quite a number of lens changed their name and lossing the original informal. So how could I tell which Pentacon is Meyer originally?</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>Presuming you've got an Exakta mount camera if you're considering these lenses, also consider the Topcor 100/2.8 lens. Small, razor-sharp, good contrast, great build quality. Of course, it will be completely manual aperture operation.</p>