Quantaray

[BobbyR]

I just put a bid in on a Quantaray 75-200 f2.8
lens.

Any idea who made this lens as it is an odd size.
Bobby

 

[Dan Fromm]

Stigma.

 

[Christopher Walrath]

But I have a couple of MD mount Quantaray's over the years that performed well and were very durable ('course I didn't use'm as boat anchors or anything). Good lenses. GO for it.

 

[John Koehrer]

Stigma.

I thought it was Smegma!

 

[copake_ham]

Depending on your needs, Quantaray/Sigma lenses can be a good choice.

I have one that I often use with a low-end Nikon N-75 plasti-camera when I want a lightweight "second" shooter SLR combo. Also good to tote when I am planning on taking mainly "family snappies" and don't want to lug around the heavier "real gear".

A 2.8 at that f/l range sounds like a nice arrow for the quiver when circumstances don't demand a super quality lens.

 

[Dan Fromm]

John, Stigma is less of a stretch, a worse insult, and not as obnoxious over all.

 

[rembrant]

A 2.8 zoom won't be a mass market design,in addition to being faster-I'd expect higher overall quality than on the items that compete as he low budget option. I have a 2 ft x 3 ft poster print shot with my 30 yr old Sigma tele...It looks pretty good.

 

[BobbyR]

I contacted Sigma and they at least do take the time to answer a e-mail about used lenses.
They no longer make lenses for Quantatray, but that one is theirs.

The lens cost me eighty bucks including shipping from the UK, I eagerly await its arrival.

The same week I acquired a Soligor CD 70-222 partly because that particular lens and with its odd size has intrigued me since I first saw it decades ago, plus from reading on the net, it is a good deal above average.
Bobby

 

[Russ - SVP]

I contacted Sigma and they at least do take the time to answer a e-mail about used lenses.
They no longer make lenses for Quantatray, but that one is theirs.

The lens cost me eighty bucks including shipping from the UK, I eagerly await its arrival.

The same week I acquired a Soligor CD 70-222 partly because that particular lens and with its odd size has intrigued me since I first saw it decades ago, plus from reading on the net, it is a good deal above average.
Bobby

The Soligor "CD" lenses were put out at the time to compete with the Tamron SP, Kiron and Vivitar Series 1 lenses. They are usually pretty good.

KK

 

[BobbyR]

My Quantaray lens arrived and it looks good but it is not a 2.8 but a 2.8-3.5.

Ususally I keep correspondence with sellers but sadly I erased the one where he
said it was a 2.8 constant aperture.
I am not really that annoyed as it cost eighty bucks, but lying is lying.

I bought it from moimoimoi_toys, so be heads-up if you buy from him.
Bobby

 

[Dan Fromm]

Bobby, why oh why do you look for sleepers when you can buy good lenses in the mounts you want for much the same price?

Back when, in the case of Kalimar, and even now in the case of Quantaray, their lenses were cheapies sold to people who didn't know better or who couldn't find decent used OEM lenses. I don't know what mount system(s) you're invested in these days, but unless it is Leica "real" lenses are cheap enough.

Some Vivitar Ser. I lenses and a few Soligor C/D lenses really were competitive with OEM, but most weren't.

For the record, tastes vary. If you're happy chasing junk, then I'm happy too. But I can't help thinking that you'd be better off chasing known good gear.

Cheers,

Dan

 

[BobbyR]

Bobby, why oh why do you look for sleepers when you can buy good lenses in the mounts you want for much the same price?

Back when, in the case of Kalimar, and even now in the case of Quantaray, their lenses were cheapies sold to people who didn't know better or who couldn't find decent used OEM lenses. I don't know what mount system(s) you're invested in these days, but unless it is Leica "real" lenses are cheap enough.

Some Vivitar Ser. I lenses and a few Soligor C/D lenses really were competitive with OEM, but most weren't.

For the record, tastes vary. If you're happy chasing junk, then I'm happy too. But I can't help thinking that you'd be better off chasing known good gear.
Cheers,
Dan

Now don't go thinking I am addicted to cheap and odd, I am just addicted to odd and odder.

I usually do a thorough a check on these items as I can and the Soligor was highly rated.
In the bunch of mags I just found and fortunately did not throw away as I thought I had, there are numerous articles saying very good things about some of the off brand lenses.
Two makes I mentioned in another thread Access and Rokinon had high speed short zoom lenses before the big boys did and Modern Photo said that they were not bad lenses, and some were down right good.(If any one ever wants to get rid off Modern Photo from about '65 to their end, I will gladly relieve one of them)
I do not know who made them but often times the actual maker was NOT fly by night.
YES--YES--YES, there were some nasty clunkers, Albinar and Makinon seem to flourish in that category, but to dismiss them all is not accurate.

IF--IF it will make you a bit more happy, I did just get a Canon 85-300 for a bit over 380 dollars shipped from Europe and I also bought aother Tamron SP 70-350.
I have decided to use mainly zooms as I do not want to carry around a lot of primes, and I will be selling off some fairly good ones, but I am as of now still trying to get a Nikon 105 f1.8, and a few other top line items, but I sadly am not bidding during the lulls such items suddenly sell quite cheaply.

I have decided to use only Canon and Nikon so my Olympus and Topcon, plus some very good Ricoh tools will be going after I get them photographed.

 

[cotdt]

what are you guys talking about? Quantaray made some of the best prime lenses that I've ever used...

 

[Dan Fromm]

Bobby, read your MPs more closely. They changed their standards from time to time, especially for longer lenses. As a result, MP's verbal ratings can't always be compared from test to test. The greater the time span between tests, the less safe it is to compare verbal ratings.

Their resolution measurements, were, I think, always taken the same way; but older tests published only words with no numbers. IMO, the only comparisons that can be made safely between an MP test and and an MP tests are combined resolution and contrast, IF both tests have that detail. AFAIK, once MP set up to measure contrast (at fairly low resolution) they didn't change that procedure.

If you want a complete set of MP, your best bet may be to get a microfilm reader and buy as many years of MP on microfilm as you can afford. I think University Microfilms still has 'em, could be mistaken.

I'll tell you again. If you're happy with what you have and are doing, I'm happy too. That said, IMO even two incompatible mount systems is one too many. This because what can be done in one can be done in all and sticking with just one eliminates a lot of redundant weight. I started with Nikon, stuck with it for convenience and economy, not because of Nikon's alleged superiority. If any mount system's bodies and lenses were as superior as fanatic supporters claim, there'd be no others.

So you'll know that I'm not entirely consistent, when I was shooting movies I used to lug around two Beaulieu bodies (different capabilities), at least one Canon (310XL, light, cheap, cheerful, within its limits shoots better than either Beaulieu but outside of its limits ... ) and a dive camera (initially a Canon with Ikelite housing, later a self-housed Eumig). The Canons and Eumig had fixed zoom lenses, the Beaulieus were C-mount.

 

[nuno campos]

Quantaray is just a stamp.
Sigma used to make some lenses, maybe also Cosina.

The Quantaray 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 is made by Tokina. It is the same as the Tokina version that has some good reviews.

 

[Russ - SVP]

My Quantaray lens arrived and it looks good but it is not a 2.8 but a 2.8-3.5.

Ususally I keep correspondence with sellers but sadly I erased the one where he
said it was a 2.8 constant aperture.
I am not really that annoyed as it cost eighty bucks, but lying is lying.

I bought it from moimoimoi_toys, so be heads-up if you buy from him.
Bobby

Bobby

I'm curious. I'd love to see a pic of it.

Kiron Kid

 

[benjiboy]

John, Stigma is less of a stretch, a worse insult, and not as obnoxious over all.

As long as It's not Craptica. !

 

[BobbyR]

Bobby

I'm curious. I'd love to see a pic of it.

Kiron Kid

I will try to get one for you, as I am going to start photographing my items for ebay soon,--hopefully --and I will shoot a photo of it also.
Actually I should photograph all I have for insurance purposes and nostalgia.

While one gent is a bit befuddled by my attraction of off-brand items, I have noticed that even on ebay, top of the line off-off-brand (i.e. non vivitar, soligor) items are more rare that some limited production top lenses from the big boys.
Bobby

PS--At the "manual focus lenses" forum, I did some back searching in their for sale area, and was a bit amazed at how desirable the Super Pentacon is.
When I first returned to photography last year there was a Super Pentacon and a motor drive for it for sale, at what I thought were way too high prices (I did not know at that time that price were going up and not all things were as cheap as I expected) and now I am very, very sad I did not acquire it.
Live and learn.