Why do you need a Trioplan?

Being locked up for so long I needed a new diversion so I bought a really beaten up Meyer Optik Primotar 1:3.5, 135mm.
I tend to think that if something is that beaten up it must have seen a lot of use - and therefore it is likely to be a good 'un.
So far, I haven't been disappointed. The glass is very good and it all works properly.

1. Who needs a trioplan when you've got one of these?



2. You can have big bold bubbles or you can have restrained bubbles like these.



3. Or no bubbles at all, (this one looks best with a completely black background).



4. Finally, I decided to blow up a tangerine in the kitchen. I ate it when it came back down.



(No, it isn't suspended in any way shape or form !)

The bokeh circles on those are so similar to the Trioplan - nicely done David, but you're not going to tempt me to hunt for a Primotar 135 like you did with the Jupiter 21M

I hope your last image doesn't start a "blowing up fruit" trend on the forum - that could lead to carnage

Good results. Different enough to demonstrate just what can be done through "other" glass. Almost print like appearance.

Best regards

Just buy one of those new ones, they're only €1000...

Or the vintage, M42 one I bought off Lennybloke and am thinking of selling on (to fund something else)...

Lennybloke wrote, "I hope your last image doesn't start a "blowing up fruit" trend on the forum - that could lead to carnage."

No meat = no carnage - it could lead to a few pulpitations however?

Two tom's and a cymbal fell of a cliff...

...ba dum pshhh.

In all seriousness I loved your pun.

All great David, but the first two are special - flower bouquet against bubble bokeh, wonderful.