 |
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Shiladitya
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 21
Location: New Delhi, India
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:18 pm Post subject: 200/f4 comparison - Nikkor AIS and Pentax SMC |
 |
|
Though the shots are taken on a moving subject but I find very negligible difference wrt bokeh, contrast and colour rendition. Both shots on Kodak elitechrome 100, f/4, 1/250. No PP done except resize, convert to JPG (scanned in large TIFF) and cropped a little of the plastic slide mount out of the frame  for posting.
Pentax SMC M 200/f4 (Focus a little off from the squirrel)
Nikkor AIS 200/f4
_________________
Camera: Nikon F4s, Nikon FG, Nikon FE2, Pentax ME Super, Pentax MZ5
Lenses: Nikkor- 2.8/55 Micro, 1.4/50 AIS, 1.2/55 Pre AI, 2.8/24 AIS, 4/200 AIS
Pentax K: SMC 2/50, 2.8/24, 3.5/135, 4/200 & 4.5/80-200 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Shiladitya
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 21
Location: New Delhi, India
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Both shots are hand held
_________________
Camera: Nikon F4s, Nikon FG, Nikon FE2, Pentax ME Super, Pentax MZ5
Lenses: Nikkor- 2.8/55 Micro, 1.4/50 AIS, 1.2/55 Pre AI, 2.8/24 AIS, 4/200 AIS
Pentax K: SMC 2/50, 2.8/24, 3.5/135, 4/200 & 4.5/80-200 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 13288
Location: Budapest,Hungary
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I see no difference, this is my opinion too based on my experience. A scanned picture mostly shows the scanning quality than lens quality.
_________________
Olympus E-1,Nikon FA,Pentax MX,Praktica VLC3,Olympus-OM2N,Yashica Eletro 35 GN,Exakta Varex IIb,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Zeiss Jena:Flektogon 2.8/20mm,4/25mm,2.4/35,2.8/65mm,4.5/4cm Tessar
Pancolar 1.4/55mm,1.8/50mm,1.8/80mm,Tessar 2.8/50mm,Biotar 2/58mm,1.5/75mm,1.5/7,5cm
Carl Zeiss: Sonnar 2.8/135,2.8/180mm,Tessar 4/135mm
Nikon: 3.5/20mm,2.8/28mm,1.4/35mm,1.4/50mm,1.2/50mm,2/50mm,1.8/105mm,2.5/105mm,2.8/180mm,4/200mm macro,4.5/300mm
Pentax: Pentax 1.2/50mm,1.8/85mm,4/200mm
Helios: Helios-40 1.5/8,5cm,Helios-44-1 2/58mm,Helios-44-2 2/58mm
Olympus OM: 3.5/18mm,3.5/21mm,1.4/50mm,3.5/55mm macro,2.8/135mm,2/90mm macro,35-70mm,60-250mm
Meyer: 4.5/35mm Primagon,Primoplan 1.9/58mm,1.9/75mm,2.8/100mm,Orestegor 2.8/135mm,4.5/40 Helioplan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 2469
Location: Greece
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow! great shots Shiladitya & on film
the 2 lenses have superb colors and are impressive wide open
_________________
Have a nice day
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shiladitya
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 21
Location: New Delhi, India
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Attila wrote: | | I see no difference, this is my opinion too based on my experience. A scanned picture mostly shows the scanning quality than lens quality. |
True... but since these are scanned in the same batch, should eliminate any bias. Having said that future slides with a 8X Loupe did not bring any significant difference. So both these lenses are great. I have been using the SMC for 15 years and the nikkor for a year, but the Pentax is somehow my favourite (maybe just nostalgia).
Thanks
Shiladitya
_________________
Camera: Nikon F4s, Nikon FG, Nikon FE2, Pentax ME Super, Pentax MZ5
Lenses: Nikkor- 2.8/55 Micro, 1.4/50 AIS, 1.2/55 Pre AI, 2.8/24 AIS, 4/200 AIS
Pentax K: SMC 2/50, 2.8/24, 3.5/135, 4/200 & 4.5/80-200 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shiladitya
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 21
Location: New Delhi, India
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| poilu wrote: | Wow! great shots Shiladitya & on film
the 2 lenses have superb colors and are impressive wide open |
Thnaks poilu, I always judge a lens with its performance wide open, specially a tele as thats how I shoot.
_________________
Camera: Nikon F4s, Nikon FG, Nikon FE2, Pentax ME Super, Pentax MZ5
Lenses: Nikkor- 2.8/55 Micro, 1.4/50 AIS, 1.2/55 Pre AI, 2.8/24 AIS, 4/200 AIS
Pentax K: SMC 2/50, 2.8/24, 3.5/135, 4/200 & 4.5/80-200 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 13288
Location: Budapest,Hungary
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shiladitya wrote: | | Attila wrote: | | I see no difference, this is my opinion too based on my experience. A scanned picture mostly shows the scanning quality than lens quality. |
True... but since these are scanned in the same batch, should eliminate any bias. Having said that future slides with a 8X Loupe did not bring any significant difference. So both these lenses are great. I have been using the SMC for 15 years and the nikkor for a year, but the Pentax is somehow my favourite (maybe just nostalgia).
Thanks
Shiladitya |
My experience with these lenses are same, both are very good quality lenses I not see any difference on my digital images too.
But try sometimes a Carl Zeiss lens Jena or Oberkochen doesn't matter...
You will won't shoot again with other lenses...
_________________
Olympus E-1,Nikon FA,Pentax MX,Praktica VLC3,Olympus-OM2N,Yashica Eletro 35 GN,Exakta Varex IIb,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Zeiss Jena:Flektogon 2.8/20mm,4/25mm,2.4/35,2.8/65mm,4.5/4cm Tessar
Pancolar 1.4/55mm,1.8/50mm,1.8/80mm,Tessar 2.8/50mm,Biotar 2/58mm,1.5/75mm,1.5/7,5cm
Carl Zeiss: Sonnar 2.8/135,2.8/180mm,Tessar 4/135mm
Nikon: 3.5/20mm,2.8/28mm,1.4/35mm,1.4/50mm,1.2/50mm,2/50mm,1.8/105mm,2.5/105mm,2.8/180mm,4/200mm macro,4.5/300mm
Pentax: Pentax 1.2/50mm,1.8/85mm,4/200mm
Helios: Helios-40 1.5/8,5cm,Helios-44-1 2/58mm,Helios-44-2 2/58mm
Olympus OM: 3.5/18mm,3.5/21mm,1.4/50mm,3.5/55mm macro,2.8/135mm,2/90mm macro,35-70mm,60-250mm
Meyer: 4.5/35mm Primagon,Primoplan 1.9/58mm,1.9/75mm,2.8/100mm,Orestegor 2.8/135mm,4.5/40 Helioplan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shiladitya
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 21
Location: New Delhi, India
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Attila wrote: | | Shiladitya wrote: | | Attila wrote: | | I see no difference, this is my opinion too based on my experience. A scanned picture mostly shows the scanning quality than lens quality. |
True... but since these are scanned in the same batch, should eliminate any bias. Having said that future slides with a 8X Loupe did not bring any significant difference. So both these lenses are great. I have been using the SMC for 15 years and the nikkor for a year, but the Pentax is somehow my favourite (maybe just nostalgia).
Thanks
Shiladitya |
My experience with these lenses are same, both are very good quality lenses I not see any difference on my digital images too.
But try sometimes a Carl Zeiss lens Jena or Oberkochen doesn't matter...
You will won't shoot again with other lenses... |
Have not been exposed to Zeiss Optics so far  (except for my eye glasses  ). It is actually hard to get by in India where I live. But thanks to the *bay, hope to try them out in the near future.
The GAS for Zeiss Optics would definately end in a divorce which I have been tactfully avoiding
_________________
Camera: Nikon F4s, Nikon FG, Nikon FE2, Pentax ME Super, Pentax MZ5
Lenses: Nikkor- 2.8/55 Micro, 1.4/50 AIS, 1.2/55 Pre AI, 2.8/24 AIS, 4/200 AIS
Pentax K: SMC 2/50, 2.8/24, 3.5/135, 4/200 & 4.5/80-200 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 13288
Location: Budapest,Hungary
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ebay is an easy and great resource , don't hesitate take some.
_________________
Olympus E-1,Nikon FA,Pentax MX,Praktica VLC3,Olympus-OM2N,Yashica Eletro 35 GN,Exakta Varex IIb,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Zeiss Jena:Flektogon 2.8/20mm,4/25mm,2.4/35,2.8/65mm,4.5/4cm Tessar
Pancolar 1.4/55mm,1.8/50mm,1.8/80mm,Tessar 2.8/50mm,Biotar 2/58mm,1.5/75mm,1.5/7,5cm
Carl Zeiss: Sonnar 2.8/135,2.8/180mm,Tessar 4/135mm
Nikon: 3.5/20mm,2.8/28mm,1.4/35mm,1.4/50mm,1.2/50mm,2/50mm,1.8/105mm,2.5/105mm,2.8/180mm,4/200mm macro,4.5/300mm
Pentax: Pentax 1.2/50mm,1.8/85mm,4/200mm
Helios: Helios-40 1.5/8,5cm,Helios-44-1 2/58mm,Helios-44-2 2/58mm
Olympus OM: 3.5/18mm,3.5/21mm,1.4/50mm,3.5/55mm macro,2.8/135mm,2/90mm macro,35-70mm,60-250mm
Meyer: 4.5/35mm Primagon,Primoplan 1.9/58mm,1.9/75mm,2.8/100mm,Orestegor 2.8/135mm,4.5/40 Helioplan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zewrak
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 643
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Zeiss and such are indeed fine lenses. I won't argue that. But if you calculate bang per buck, I'd say alot of Pentax lenses are ontop. The quality difference between Zeiss and Pentax is not big enough to justify the big differences in price, in my humble opinion. Ofcourse, if I could afford, I would have every Zeiss there is, but I can't.
The SMC-M 200/4 I have I bought for 30€, with original caps and bag in a near mint condition. How much is a Zeiss 200mm?
_________________
My Flickr - We saved paradise, by introducing the serpent.
PENTAX K10D, Spotmatic
Asahi Super Takumar 20/4.5 50/1.4 55/1.8 85/1.9 105/2.8 135/3.5 150/4 200/4
Asahi S-M-C Takumar 35/3.5 300/4
Asahi S-M-C Macro-Takumar 50/4
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 13288
Location: Budapest,Hungary
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
200 EUR at least if Jena lens, if Oberkochen Contax more. Compare with crappy AF lenses and DSLR bodies not high priced at all.
_________________
Olympus E-1,Nikon FA,Pentax MX,Praktica VLC3,Olympus-OM2N,Yashica Eletro 35 GN,Exakta Varex IIb,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Zeiss Jena:Flektogon 2.8/20mm,4/25mm,2.4/35,2.8/65mm,4.5/4cm Tessar
Pancolar 1.4/55mm,1.8/50mm,1.8/80mm,Tessar 2.8/50mm,Biotar 2/58mm,1.5/75mm,1.5/7,5cm
Carl Zeiss: Sonnar 2.8/135,2.8/180mm,Tessar 4/135mm
Nikon: 3.5/20mm,2.8/28mm,1.4/35mm,1.4/50mm,1.2/50mm,2/50mm,1.8/105mm,2.5/105mm,2.8/180mm,4/200mm macro,4.5/300mm
Pentax: Pentax 1.2/50mm,1.8/85mm,4/200mm
Helios: Helios-40 1.5/8,5cm,Helios-44-1 2/58mm,Helios-44-2 2/58mm
Olympus OM: 3.5/18mm,3.5/21mm,1.4/50mm,3.5/55mm macro,2.8/135mm,2/90mm macro,35-70mm,60-250mm
Meyer: 4.5/35mm Primagon,Primoplan 1.9/58mm,1.9/75mm,2.8/100mm,Orestegor 2.8/135mm,4.5/40 Helioplan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zewrak
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 643
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Attila wrote: | | 200 EUR at least if Jena lens, if Oberkochen Contax more. Compare with crappy AF lenses and DSLR bodies not high priced at all. |
No, no its not expensive compared to new lenses. But if you want to get a collection going, starting with Zeiss glass will be very very expensive. I think I am on a good track with the Super Takumars. They are all cheap considering what they do for me. So was this SMC-M. Spending 4-5 times more on a Zeiss would have stopped me from getting other lenses. And 30$ is really _nothing_ for the SMC-M 200/4, considering its quality. I doubt that the Zeiss glass is reall 7 times better then the Pentax, as the price might get one to think.
I have not done this collecting buisness for long and I am still amazed about the quality of almost every lens I have had so far. But to be really honest, I can't really make that much of a difference from a lens and another, sure they give different "personality" to pictures. But I can't see why Pentax, Meyer or such is acctually sometimes 10 times cheaper then Zeiss, they are not at all ten times worse then Zeiss.
I am happy with all my Pentaxes and Takumars. And I do believe that if Pentax gives me 90% quality and Zeiss 100% quality, that the best thing for a starting collector is to get a decent collection of 90% lenses and upgrade when they are statisfied with the lenses they have. It will be alot easier for me to justify an upgrade from SMC-M 200 to Zeiss 200 when I have all the other lenses I need and can take it in a slower pace, perhaps one lens per month or two.
 I hope you see what I mean, I tend to entangle myself too much in english and never get to the point. *grin*.
To make it short: I pay 30$ for 90% bang and 170 more for 10% extra. That makes the first 90% very cheap, per %. 
_________________
My Flickr - We saved paradise, by introducing the serpent.
PENTAX K10D, Spotmatic
Asahi Super Takumar 20/4.5 50/1.4 55/1.8 85/1.9 105/2.8 135/3.5 150/4 200/4
Asahi S-M-C Takumar 35/3.5 300/4
Asahi S-M-C Macro-Takumar 50/4
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 13288
Location: Budapest,Hungary
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess I started as collector as you , now I changed I try to get better and better lenses.
_________________
Olympus E-1,Nikon FA,Pentax MX,Praktica VLC3,Olympus-OM2N,Yashica Eletro 35 GN,Exakta Varex IIb,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Zeiss Jena:Flektogon 2.8/20mm,4/25mm,2.4/35,2.8/65mm,4.5/4cm Tessar
Pancolar 1.4/55mm,1.8/50mm,1.8/80mm,Tessar 2.8/50mm,Biotar 2/58mm,1.5/75mm,1.5/7,5cm
Carl Zeiss: Sonnar 2.8/135,2.8/180mm,Tessar 4/135mm
Nikon: 3.5/20mm,2.8/28mm,1.4/35mm,1.4/50mm,1.2/50mm,2/50mm,1.8/105mm,2.5/105mm,2.8/180mm,4/200mm macro,4.5/300mm
Pentax: Pentax 1.2/50mm,1.8/85mm,4/200mm
Helios: Helios-40 1.5/8,5cm,Helios-44-1 2/58mm,Helios-44-2 2/58mm
Olympus OM: 3.5/18mm,3.5/21mm,1.4/50mm,3.5/55mm macro,2.8/135mm,2/90mm macro,35-70mm,60-250mm
Meyer: 4.5/35mm Primagon,Primoplan 1.9/58mm,1.9/75mm,2.8/100mm,Orestegor 2.8/135mm,4.5/40 Helioplan
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zewrak
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 643
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Attila wrote: | | I guess I started as collector as you , now I changed I try to get better and better lenses. |
Well I will stick with the Super Takumars, because I think they look aaa. I'll go Zeiss when I get a mediumformat thing going.
Anyways, great shots of the squirrel. I'm sure you will be happy with a digital body
_________________
My Flickr - We saved paradise, by introducing the serpent.
PENTAX K10D, Spotmatic
Asahi Super Takumar 20/4.5 50/1.4 55/1.8 85/1.9 105/2.8 135/3.5 150/4 200/4
Asahi S-M-C Takumar 35/3.5 300/4
Asahi S-M-C Macro-Takumar 50/4
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob Leslie
Joined: 20 Mar 2007
Posts: 621
Location: UK Swindon
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have the M42 Super Takumar f4 200mm. Is the SMC any better?
I find the Super Tak good but no better than the Tamron Adaptall 2 f3.5 200mm or even the Tamron f3.5 19AH SP 70-210. So I don't use it these days.
I must agree about the scanning point.
One often has to judge by the weakest link in the chain.
_________________
Pentax K10D & K100D. Retired film cameras, Nikon and Pentax. Tamron Adaptall SP lenses, Fujinon f4.5 400mm. A loved Lens Baby 2, Lubitel triplet and many many others. Digital user.
http://roblesliephotography.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Rss feed
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
