I found this interesting, and kudos to you for being willing to re-consider and re-evaluate. Good variety in your sample shots, although a bit much in the B&W area IMO - but it's your channel, your photos, so your choice - meaning it isn't "wrong".
Good to see this corrected and honest view - and I honor this video! Actually it is a matter of perspective: Would I expect the same performance of a lens construction, which is more than 100 years (!) old, if I compare with my latest Nikkor lens? When I tried an original, more than 60 years old copy of that lens (adapted from M42 on a Z6), I was disappointed. But then I took the challenge and so explored the artistic look. Call it "dreamy", call it "soap bubble bokeh", whatever you name it: it is special. And yes, it requires certain (back) light, certain accuracy in focusing, and definitely it requires quite a bit of post processing to make stunning photos at 2.8. But all that given, I get photos that I cannot produce with modern lenses at all. Does it replace my Nikkor Z MC 105mm f2.8 VR S? No not at all. Does it complement my equipment? Yes, totally! I even use it for macro (with bellows and extension rings), even at f2.8 with focus stacking. I would love to have a much lower minimum focus distance, but that's it. This lens is made for close distance or even macro, but that requires additional gear. 2 cents about the price: First of all it is manufactured in Germany. I am a German and know my own salary. So I find the price reasonably fair. Secondly I believe that my new copy of that lens will survive me and last forever. This will definitely not be true for my (highly recommended) Nikkor Z MC 105mm f2.8 VR S, where the electronics will (!) die in some decades. The Trioplan 100mm provides me challenges, new looks & ideas, many stunning photos - and a lot of fun.
This is a test, not a photoshoot. I’ve done plenty with this lens since the functional one arrived. Unfortunately the vast audience doesn’t care as much about photography as much as they do gear and pixel peeping hence why I haven’t been putting out much content lately, because I don’t enjoy taking meaningless photos for the sake of content anymore. On the other hand, you should consume content that you enjoy instead of leaving passively nasty comments on the videos you don’t enjoy. Merry Christmas douche nugget 🎁
I got me a pristine original one decades ago from former East Germany. According to the serial number it is made in 1952. It was included with original leather pouch, lens cap and extension tubes, all in EXA mount. Price was peanuts (it was before the 'vintage lenses hype' started). The lens still has no scratches, aluminum is beautiful, no fungus or dust inside). So, It was the best acquisition in vintage lenses I ever made. The lens is sharp wide open and by far not as hazy as yours. I pick it up every now and then when I see a subject that fits the lens' character. I missed the soap bubbles that this lens is famous for in your review (although I have other lenses that can do similar bubble bokeh). I used the lens on my Nikon D7000, later on my X-Pro2 where is does the best job and now also om my M10-R. I would not recommend using focus peaking. That really sucks with shallow depth of field. Even my modern 35mm f/0.95 on the X-Pro2 or the Summilux (pre-asph) 50mm on the M10-R focus peaking sucks. I usually look carefully or use digital zoom of the EVF, although mostly not. And yes I'm an old man of 65 and vision is getting worse and wearing glasses. Still I'm pretty fast in manual focussing (last wedding shoot I scored 79% 'keepers' while manual focussing my M10-R with the lux mostly wide open). Over 40 years of experience 😅. Check out these: flic.kr/p/2aemK1k, flic.kr/p/2aRR13t, flic.kr/p/26eKWi1, flic.kr/p/26e7vMw, flic.kr/p/2aMtD6W, flic.kr/p/28vPqvY, flic.kr/p/HN6yzH. Enjoy!
I ended up switching to tripod in studio. That’s the only way to REALLY test sharpness unless I’m rocking 1/1000 haha. Gotta be as fair as possible. I too, while I dont LOVE this lens, have a lot of respect for Mayer Optik for working to make things right.
I’d focus with it at the aperture you’re shooting at, as there may be a bit of focus shift going on. It’s on old optical design and it looks like a great performer to me. Try one on a film camera.
Hello, thank you for your video. It shows a good test. We have different views on sharpness - but you showed everything I wanted to know. It's a very nice lens and I'm glad you have a good one now. The wide open bokeh and blur are why a lot of people buy lenses like this. I would love to have one but it's way too expensive for me. It has a very old design and Meyer is a pretty famous lens factory. Trioplan is an old design. I have the following type Domiplan which is a redesign of the earlier Trioplan and is basically the same but with 50mm. Meyer made a lot of interesting lenses, but shortly after reunification the company was closed down. Later Meyer Görlitz resumed operations after a few other attempts that ended in bankruptcy. The last one took them over and they have to find the money to keep things going. Only I don't have enough. The special quality of the rendering images has made them famous. Some like the bukeh, some don't. PS: I would add a sun visor, that eliminates problems with sidelight. I wish you all the best and more good lenses. I got a TTArtisan 2,8/100 which is very similar.
Thanks for watching. For me sharpness isn't everything. There are different types of sharpness, and the first copy was the only type of sharpness that is "BAD" sharpness. And thats muddy unsharp. As we discovered here, it was clearly broken. haha
I have the Trioplan 35II, which is sharp from f5.6 and shows perfect contrasts. I have given up using the lens on my Z 9. The camera is heavy and it is hard to focus accurately. On the Z 7II it looks quite different. This camera is perfect for manual focusing. I also advise against using focus peaking. It's way too inaccurate. The camera loupe, on the other hand, magnifies where the camera focus point is, and allows for sure focusing. My two lenses from Meyer Optik - besides the one above, it's the great Primoplan 75/f1.9 - give repeatable results this way.
I think manual focus is best done with a good viewfinder... and it's still a tough call - move the slightest bit and it's off! I have found focus peaking to be inaccurate on my Pentax K-1 so I just use the viewfinder, all my lenses are manual focus. I had problems and suspected a faulty camera, so I set up a tripod and a strip with various focus markers going away from the camera and even with tiny depth of field the markers were in focus, so the problem was me! I'd forgotten what a skill manual focus is.
Focus parking on Nikon is pretty good, WHEN there is information being sent to the camera. I haven’t confirmed, but with every job CPU contact lens I’ve had the hit rate has been significantly worse.
Well having never seen your first review you caught my attention in the fact you were challenged by the manufacturer. The results wide open reminded me of putting a soft focus filter on a lens, stopped down it looked decent as you stated with sharpness and contrast and bokeh was good at f4 as well. I know in terms of your final analysis of this lens it was as advertised basically with the replacement lens but if it is at $1,000.00 as you stated that is way too high. for $50.00 more I can buy the Z mount 105mm f2.8 Macro which is an awesome lens and I'll stick with that.
Thanks for watching Jeff. Yea I think 2-300 dollars less is more appropriate, but who knows what the manufacturing cost is 🤷♂️ maybe there isn’t room who knows
the sole purpose of this lens is to achieve the popular bubble bokeh. any dimming is completely pointless with this old construction. the lens can only be used for artistic purposes. Original old Trioplan lenses fetch amazing prices. this new edition is technically far superior to the old lenses. As far as I know, it was not built to get sharp pictures.
I have the 50 f2.9 Trioplan with the front being able to focus for close ups Only shooters with a trioplan will understand this, you can't miss focus! 😂 😂 😂
Well the first one I had was straight up broken. lol I promised Meyer Optik that I’d take down that scathing review if their free replacement was indeed proof that the original was broken ha
The lens design is not made for sharpness… if your looking for sharpness wide open go for modern lenses… bought a TtArtisan for $200cad much cheaper than Meyer Optik and love the bokeh. My friends were amaze with pictures… sharpness is not that important with this kind of lens… Bokelicioussss!
@@ZWadePhoto True, and I agree. However it has zero impact on image quality - which is the only reason I would watch a TH-cam video about a lens. I wouldn’t have commented but box-commentary went on long enough for me to say that to myself. I rarely throw shade, and perhaps should have kept my thought to myself. Chalk it up as poorly expressed constructive criticism: Yea, mention the box if it’s a cool one but remember that your audience is all about what’s inside it.
@@joecunningham_mpls you would probably prefer the original video, rather than this, which is a revisit of this lens. While we are talking audiences, really what everyone wants is a dance monkey dance for nothing experience. Go look at the last question i asked the community if you don’t believe me. If you want requests fulfilled or a tailored experience, please consider membership. Otherwise, I make videos in a style that I would consume if I were on your end. Thank you sir.
I found this interesting, and kudos to you for being willing to re-consider and re-evaluate. Good variety in your sample shots, although a bit much in the B&W area IMO - but it's your channel, your photos, so your choice - meaning it isn't "wrong".
I appreciate you watching my duuuude. I’m all about fairness. Because sometimes something like this happens 🤷♂️ always willing to be proved wrong
Good to see this corrected and honest view - and I honor this video!
Actually it is a matter of perspective: Would I expect the same performance of a lens construction, which is more than 100 years (!) old, if I compare with my latest Nikkor lens?
When I tried an original, more than 60 years old copy of that lens (adapted from M42 on a Z6), I was disappointed. But then I took the challenge and so explored the artistic look. Call it "dreamy", call it "soap bubble bokeh", whatever you name it: it is special. And yes, it requires certain (back) light, certain accuracy in focusing, and definitely it requires quite a bit of post processing to make stunning photos at 2.8.
But all that given, I get photos that I cannot produce with modern lenses at all.
Does it replace my Nikkor Z MC 105mm f2.8 VR S? No not at all.
Does it complement my equipment? Yes, totally! I even use it for macro (with bellows and extension rings), even at f2.8 with focus stacking.
I would love to have a much lower minimum focus distance, but that's it. This lens is made for close distance or even macro, but that requires additional gear.
2 cents about the price: First of all it is manufactured in Germany. I am a German and know my own salary. So I find the price reasonably fair.
Secondly I believe that my new copy of that lens will survive me and last forever. This will definitely not be true for my (highly recommended) Nikkor Z MC 105mm f2.8 VR S, where the electronics will (!) die in some decades.
The Trioplan 100mm provides me challenges, new looks & ideas, many stunning photos - and a lot of fun.
Thank you for watching Renke
This lens is gorgeous, you should actually try taking some real photos with it instead of an underexposed banana...
This is a test, not a photoshoot. I’ve done plenty with this lens since the functional one arrived.
Unfortunately the vast audience doesn’t care as much about photography as much as they do gear and pixel peeping hence why I haven’t been putting out much content lately, because I don’t enjoy taking meaningless photos for the sake of content anymore.
On the other hand, you should consume content that you enjoy instead of leaving passively nasty comments on the videos you don’t enjoy. Merry Christmas douche nugget 🎁
I got me a pristine original one decades ago from former East Germany. According to the serial number it is made in 1952. It was included with original leather pouch, lens cap and extension tubes, all in EXA mount. Price was peanuts (it was before the 'vintage lenses hype' started). The lens still has no scratches, aluminum is beautiful, no fungus or dust inside). So, It was the best acquisition in vintage lenses I ever made. The lens is sharp wide open and by far not as hazy as yours. I pick it up every now and then when I see a subject that fits the lens' character. I missed the soap bubbles that this lens is famous for in your review (although I have other lenses that can do similar bubble bokeh). I used the lens on my Nikon D7000, later on my X-Pro2 where is does the best job and now also om my M10-R. I would not recommend using focus peaking. That really sucks with shallow depth of field. Even my modern 35mm f/0.95 on the X-Pro2 or the Summilux (pre-asph) 50mm on the M10-R focus peaking sucks. I usually look carefully or use digital zoom of the EVF, although mostly not. And yes I'm an old man of 65 and vision is getting worse and wearing glasses. Still I'm pretty fast in manual focussing (last wedding shoot I scored 79% 'keepers' while manual focussing my M10-R with the lux mostly wide open). Over 40 years of experience 😅. Check out these: flic.kr/p/2aemK1k, flic.kr/p/2aRR13t, flic.kr/p/26eKWi1, flic.kr/p/26e7vMw, flic.kr/p/2aMtD6W, flic.kr/p/28vPqvY, flic.kr/p/HN6yzH. Enjoy!
Its good to see a manufacturer that actually cares.
I wouldn't expect a lens of that design to be very sharp.
A Tripod would be more steady...🦘
I ended up switching to tripod in studio. That’s the only way to REALLY test sharpness unless I’m rocking 1/1000 haha. Gotta be as fair as possible. I too, while I dont LOVE this lens, have a lot of respect for Mayer Optik for working to make things right.
I’d focus with it at the aperture you’re shooting at, as there may be a bit of focus shift going on. It’s on old optical design and it looks like a great performer to me. Try one on a film camera.
There are no Z film cameras at the moment lol or ZTF adapters at that 🤔
Hello, thank you for your video. It shows a good test. We have different views on sharpness - but you showed everything I wanted to know. It's a very nice lens and I'm glad you have a good one now.
The wide open bokeh and blur are why a lot of people buy lenses like this. I would love to have one but it's way too expensive for me.
It has a very old design and Meyer is a pretty famous lens factory. Trioplan is an old design. I have the following type Domiplan which is a redesign of the earlier Trioplan and is basically the same but with 50mm.
Meyer made a lot of interesting lenses, but shortly after reunification the company was closed down. Later Meyer Görlitz resumed operations after a few other attempts that ended in bankruptcy. The last one took them over and they have to find the money to keep things going. Only I don't have enough.
The special quality of the rendering images has made them famous. Some like the bukeh, some don't.
PS: I would add a sun visor, that eliminates problems with sidelight.
I wish you all the best and more good lenses.
I got a TTArtisan 2,8/100 which is very similar.
Thanks for watching. For me sharpness isn't everything. There are different types of sharpness, and the first copy was the only type of sharpness that is "BAD" sharpness. And thats muddy unsharp. As we discovered here, it was clearly broken. haha
I have the Trioplan 35II, which is sharp from f5.6 and shows perfect contrasts. I have given up using the lens on my Z 9. The camera is heavy and it is hard to focus accurately. On the Z 7II it looks quite different. This camera is perfect for manual focusing. I also advise against using focus peaking. It's way too inaccurate. The camera loupe, on the other hand, magnifies where the camera focus point is, and allows for sure focusing. My two lenses from Meyer Optik - besides the one above, it's the great Primoplan 75/f1.9 - give repeatable results this way.
Right on . Thanks for commenting Christian !
I think manual focus is best done with a good viewfinder... and it's still a tough call - move the slightest bit and it's off! I have found focus peaking to be inaccurate on my Pentax K-1 so I just use the viewfinder, all my lenses are manual focus. I had problems and suspected a faulty camera, so I set up a tripod and a strip with various focus markers going away from the camera and even with tiny depth of field the markers were in focus, so the problem was me! I'd forgotten what a skill manual focus is.
Focus parking on Nikon is pretty good, WHEN there is information being sent to the camera. I haven’t confirmed, but with every job CPU contact lens I’ve had the hit rate has been significantly worse.
Well having never seen your first review you caught my attention in the fact you were challenged by the manufacturer. The results wide open reminded me of putting a soft focus filter on a lens, stopped down it looked decent as you stated with sharpness and contrast and bokeh was good at f4 as well. I know in terms of your final analysis of this lens it was as advertised basically with the replacement lens but if it is at $1,000.00 as you stated that is way too high. for $50.00 more I can buy the Z mount 105mm f2.8 Macro which is an awesome lens and I'll stick with that.
Thanks for watching Jeff. Yea I think 2-300 dollars less is more appropriate, but who knows what the manufacturing cost is 🤷♂️ maybe there isn’t room who knows
the sole purpose of this lens is to achieve the popular bubble bokeh. any dimming is completely pointless with this old construction. the lens can only be used for artistic purposes. Original old Trioplan lenses fetch amazing prices. this new edition is technically far superior to the old lenses. As far as I know, it was not built to get sharp pictures.
Thanks for watching! Glad I got my hands on a better copy. The first one was baaaaaad
f2.8 might look good in early morning fog shots.
This is factual. It's not on video, but i've taken some foggy shots and they look spooky and cool.
can u please compare with Helios 44-2?
@@airfilm_it I do not have that lens to do the comparison, sorry 🤙
Хороший объектив!
В России они очень популярны для художественного фото!
Спасибо за интересный обзор! 👍
I don’t understand as I do not speak the language. But thanks for commenting!
I have the 50 f2.9 Trioplan with the front being able to focus for close ups
Only shooters with a trioplan will understand this, you can't miss focus! 😂 😂 😂
Well the first one I had was straight up broken. lol I promised Meyer Optik that I’d take down that scathing review if their free replacement was indeed proof that the original was broken ha
Never heard of this German Lens >> If I go German >> its Zeiss or Leica or go home
The name has been around since before 1900! Zeiss and Leica are another league entirely lol
The lens design is not made for sharpness… if your looking for sharpness wide open go for modern lenses… bought a TtArtisan for $200cad much cheaper than Meyer Optik and love the bokeh. My friends were amaze with pictures… sharpness is not that important with this kind of lens…
Bokelicioussss!
@@Baruk1993 the original copy I got was REAL bad
cool lens
Not too bad. Thanks for watching my friend
@@ZWadePhoto I think because I don't worry about sharpness much. I also just like using different brand lenses.
Myer Optik along with Kickstarter are just scammers. Lost $, therefore I would never support the company. However, thank you for your review.
Lots of people did I’m sure. That whole story is kind of wild. Sorry you lost money, but you’re welcome
Send it back.
Haven’t heard back from OPC yet haha
Who gives a rat's bottom-part about boxes things arrive in?
High quality packaging shows pride in the product and a care of how it arrives.
@@ZWadePhoto True, and I agree. However it has zero impact on image quality - which is the only reason I would watch a TH-cam video about a lens. I wouldn’t have commented but box-commentary went on long enough for me to say that to myself. I rarely throw shade, and perhaps should have kept my thought to myself. Chalk it up as poorly expressed constructive criticism: Yea, mention the box if it’s a cool one but remember that your audience is all about what’s inside it.
@@joecunningham_mpls you would probably prefer the original video, rather than this, which is a revisit of this lens.
While we are talking audiences, really what everyone wants is a dance monkey dance for nothing experience. Go look at the last question i asked the community if you don’t believe me.
If you want requests fulfilled or a tailored experience, please consider membership. Otherwise, I make videos in a style that I would consume if I were on your end.
Thank you sir.