Kilfitt Makro-Kilar 40mm Lens Review - Popular Photography's 1955 Dream Lens (as close as it gets)

[Durlacher]

Hi Everyone,

Including the link below to my latest video review of Kilfitt Makro-Killar 40mm f2.8 and f3.5 lenses, which I hope you find interesting.

Proclaimed by Popular Photography's 1955 review as being as close as it gets to one's 'Dream Lens'.

Unquestionably historically significant, although such a claim seems somewhat farfetched upon analysis – it’s a fantastic lens nonetheless.

Six months in the making, the video has lots of detail and information included, some of which had not previously been revealed among Kilfitt discussion forums.

i.e. did anyone know that Kilfitt Optical was purchased by United States Itek Corporation in 1961 and that there are four model types - Type D, Type E, Type A and Type P?

Hope you enjoy and as always, greatly value any constructive feedback provided to help improve intended future reviews.

 

[dynachrome]

Many years ago I borrowed a 40/3.5 Macro Kilar D from Ken Hansen. If I remember the details, the lens was in M42 mount and I had an adapter for using it on a Konica. The experience was frustrating and disappointing. On the D version, the aperture ring is concentric with the focusing ring. I would focus first and then try to adjust the aperture. Every time I moved the aperture ring, the focusing ring would move. How good was the lens? Closed down a few stops is was sharp in the center. For photographing a round flower, it was good. It was not a flat field lens.

Some years later I would get a 55mm f/3.5 Konica Macro Hexanon, a much better lens. Now I have a large selection of Macro lenses in the 50-60mm range. They are all better than the Macro Kilar. I have not been tempted to add a Kilar to my collection. The concept of the Kilar was good but the execution, already by the standards of the late 1960s and early 1970s, was not very good.

 

[Durlacher]

Many years ago I borrowed a 40/3.5 Macro Kilar D from Ken Hansen. If I remember the details, the lens was in M42 mount and I had an adapter for using it on a Konica. The experience was frustrating and disappointing. On the D version, the aperture ring is concentric with the focusing ring. I would focus first and then try to adjust the aperture. Every time I moved the aperture ring, the focusing ring would move. How good was the lens? Closed down a few stops is was sharp in the center. For photographing a round flower, it was good. It was not a flat field lens.

Some years later I would get a 55mm f/3.5 Konica Macro Hexanon, a much better lens. Now I have a large selection of Macro lenses in the 50-60mm range. They are all better than the Macro Kilar. I have not been tempted to add a Kilar to my collection. The concept of the Kilar was good but the execution, already by the standards of the late 1960s and early 1970s, was not very good.

Many thanks for your comment, couldn't agree more with your findings. The ease in which the focus can be shifted when adjusting the aperture is one of the main limitations. The often-cited recomendation is to set the aperture first before making critical focus adjustments. Works fine in application for mirrorless application, however for SLR's where stop down metering is essential, its somewhat counter logical.

No question at all that newer macro lenses are superior in application and rendering. I think the worthiness of the Kilfitt as a noteworthy lens is that it was the first! It's also noteable that many of the positive reviews from users of these lens are made in reference to their non-macro application. As per your findings, it's not a lens I would recomend today for macro application - there are better options. It's appeal lies elsewhere.

 

[dynachrome]

A feature of most macro lenses which have their own focusing mounts is that they can be used very close up, from either 1:2 or 1:1, all the way to infinity. Purists will note that some macro lenses are optimized for a certain magnification range. The 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor P, for example, is optimized for 1:10. This doesn't mean it can't be used outside of that range and frequently was/is. My favorite quirky general purpose lens with close focusing must be the 35mm f/3.5 Noflexar. I wrote about it in an old issue of Camerashopper. I think some people who have that lens do not know about its close focus capabilities.

Some macro lenses in the 50-60mm range are also quite good at greater distances. My favorites of these include the 55/2.8 Vivitar, the 50/2.8 Sigma, the 50/3.5 Canon FD and New FD, the Minolta MC and MD 50/3.5s, the Minolta Maxxum 50/2.8, the 55/2.8 AIS Nikkor and the 50/3.5 Zuiko. The last two and maybe also the Sigma employ floating element groups. The 50/2.8 Maxxum lens actually has two floating element groups. Why did I not include the 60/2.8 AF Nikkor and Nikkor D? These are very good close up (I have the first version) but are not thought to be as good for more distant subjects. An honorable mention should also go to the 55/2.8 Yashica ML. I know I have left out many other macro lenses in this range but these are lenses I own and use and have experience with. The two versions of the Micro Nikkor Auto (silver front and black front) are also thought to be optimized for 1:10 but are not as good for distant subjects as the later Micro Nikkor P.

At some point I would like to get the 40mm Nikkor Macro lens for use with a non-film Nikon APS format camera.

 

[ic-racer]

This would be a great addtion to an Exacta collection!

 

[Kino]

I have the 40mm, E 3.5f variant, but it unfortunately does not have the mount adapter, so it just sits on a shelf...

 

[Ian Grant]

It is interesting to see the design, it's so close to a Tessar.

Around the same time Kodak Ltd, here in the UK, were selling 2043mm f7.7 Ektar lenses with their Half Plate Kodak Specialist 2 cameras, for general use and to 1+1. The Ektar was a coated Dialyte. Kodak sold kits for Police/Forensic work, Medical/Dental, Scientific, and general use.

These Kiltar lenses though were legendary

This would be a great addtion to an Exacta collection!

Better for a Praktina

Ian

 

[Dan Fromm]

It is interesting to see the design, it's so close to a Tessar.

Ian, your comment moved me to look at the video. The lenses are reversed tessar types, not that rare among high performance macro lenses, mainly for use above 1:1. Examples include the 100/6.3 Reichert Neupolar, which is very competitive with the 100/6.3 Zeiss (BRD) Luminar, and several of the longer Zeiss (DDR) Mikrotars.

The 100/6.3 Neupolar covers 4x5 close up. I use mine on 2x3, have shot it at distance to see how it would do. Covered perhaps 6x6, very sharp.

What's surprising about the Makro-Kilars and, for that matter, the 50/3.5 mm Elmar, is their speed.