| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 10:20 pm Post subject: 300mm CA test |
 |
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
One of the biggest problems I have with my 300mm lenses is the amount of CA visible when shot wide open. Although usually recoverable, it's annoying to have to fix every time. So I thought I'd run a basic test to see which were the worst offenders (it's usually Tamron for me!).
Please remember this is not a scientific test, some shots are overexposed and different shutter speeds were needed for different lenses. All were shot at ISO 100 and all focused using liveview on the Canon EOS 40D mounted on a tripod, apart from the Rubinar 300/4.5 mirror which I needed to mount on my 5D because of the sheer size of the damn thing!  I threw in the Tamron Adaptall 2 104A just for fun at f4.5 and f8.
Hopefully my neighbour doesn't mind me using his lovely car as a subject 
Sankor 300/4.5 @ f4.5
100% crop
MC Rubinar 300/4.5 mirror @ f4.5 (full frame)
crop
Sankor 300/4.5 @ f5.6
Crop
Tamron Adaptall 2 75-250/3.8-4.5 @ 250mm @ f4.5
Crop
Soligor 300/5.5 @ f5.5
Crop
Chinon 300/5.6 mirror @ f5.6
Crop
Tamron SP 60-300/3.8-5.4 @ f5.4
Crop
Tamron SP 300/5.6 @ f5.6
Crop
Sankor 300/4.5 @ f8
Crop
Soligor 300/5.5 @ f8
Crop
Tamron Adaptall 2 75-260/3.8-4.5 @ f8
Crop
Tamron SP 60-300/3.8-5.4 @ f8
Crop
Tamron SP 300/5.6 @ f8
Crop
Conclusions
The Sankor is a lovely collectors item, but ultimately is too heavy and soft to be of any real use. All my telephotos tested here showed CA wide open, with the Tamrons the worst offenders. But then, they are also the most contrasty and sharp! The 104A shows less CA at f4.5 than f8...very odd!
The real winners wide open in this test were the mirror lenses, in particular the Rubinar 300/4.5 which is sharp, contrasty and CAless! The Chinon 300/5.6 mirror lens also performed well, although is not quite as sharp as the Rubinar. For info - the Chinon looks the same as my Super Travenon and Mitakon lenses of the same style.
The Soligor (H serial) put in a good show throughout, and wins the award for least amount of CA wide open among the 300mm lenses, but has a huge minimum focusing distance, so may need to be used with a short extension tube (thanks for the tip Luis!). Very impressive either way for a lens of its age!
Once stopped down to f8, most of the lenses do well. The Tamron SP 60-300mm excels at f8!
_________________
Graham - Moderator 
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g
Last edited by ManualFocus-G on Sat Jun 05, 2010 10:58 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
eccs19
Joined: 15 May 2010
Posts: 118
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eccs19 wrote:
I'm impressed with how sharp that 300mm mirror is. Everyone knocks mirrors, but I think that shot proves a lot.
_________________
Camera(s) - Pentax *istD & K7
Takumar Lenses - 28mm f3.5, 55mm f1.8, 100mm f4.0 1:2 macro, 105mm f2.8, 200mm f3.5, 85-210 Zoom f4.5
Tamron - 300mm f5.6, 500mm mirror f8
Pentax 50mm f2.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Yep, seriously impressed by the Rubinar! Here is the results of the last test I did with that one...need to start using it more!
http://forum.mflenses.com/mc-rubinar-300-4-5-test-t26894.html
The Chinon mirror does well too, and in hindsight looks sharper than the Super Travenon. I should test them together to be sure.
The Soligor 300/5.5 is the same as this one:
http://forum.mflenses.com/caspeco-old-tokina-300-5-5-preset-t2-mount-t12261.html
_________________
Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
francotirador
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Posts: 894
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 11:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
francotirador wrote:
| ManualFocus-G wrote: |
Yep, seriously impressed by the Rubinar! Here is the results of the last test I did with that one...need to start using it more!
l |
+1
_________________
Canon 5D II-Sony nex 6
Canon L 80-200 f 2.8 - Canon L 135 f2 - Canon FD 135/2.5 convert to EOS - Yashica 50 1.4 ML - Canon FD 50 1.2 - Distagon 35mm 2.8 T AEJ - Minolta MC 24mm f 2.8 - Canon LTM 85 1.9- Canon LTM 85mm 1.9 convert to EOS - Rodenstock Heligon 50 1.9 - Color Skopar 50 2.8 & MAte Box & filters 4X4
Contax RTS II y Minolta SRT 303 - 28-135 3.6 Tokina - Minolta MD 45 f2.0 - Minolta Zoom 80 200 4.5 (Leica)
www.isgleasphoto.com
The life is more easy with this forum .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
symphonic
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 550
Location: SE Europe, Croatia
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
symphonic wrote:
Thank you for this test! I was just looking for some decent mirrors and this shines more light to it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nelson
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 618
Location: close to Paris, France
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nelson wrote:
once again, i am not convinced by the 300 5.6 SP
_________________
DSLR : EOS 350D, 300D, 7D, 5D
Pentacon 50 f1.8, 135 f2.8, 200 f4;
TAIR 3S
Helios 44/2
Meyer Optik Orestegor 200mm f4 Orestegor 300mm f4
Tamron 24mm f2.5 01B, 300mm f5.6 670Au, 75 250, 300mm f5.6 SP 54B, 500mm f8 SP 55B, SP 70 210 3.5, SP 60 300
my MF lenses
EF 50 1.8 I, EF 100macro f2.8, EF 70-200 F4 L is, EFS 17-55 f2.8 is, Sigma 10-20 EX, 18-50 2.8 EX, 300 f4 hsm, 400 5.6 hsm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Posts: 7555
Location: Hong Kong
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
The result of MC Rubinar 300/4.5 is impressive.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cheve
Joined: 31 Mar 2009
Posts: 182
Expire: 2011-12-06
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
cheve wrote:
@ManualFocus-G: just wondering what is the approximate distance to the subject?
_________________
Adaptall-2: 17/3.5(51B),80-210/3.8-4(103A),60-300/3.8-5.4(23A) C/Y: CZ 35-70/3.4,RMC Tokian 80-200/4.5
EXk: Topcor Re Auto 35/2.8(broken),135/3.5, Steinheil Culminar 135/4.5 Leitz-R: 50/2,90/2,180/4,180/3.4,Angenieux 35-70/2.5-3.3
M42: pentacon 135/2.8,135/2.8(preset),Super-Takumar 55/1.8,Meyer-Optik 50/1.8 FD: Voigtlander 125/2.5 SL
K: smc 50/1.2, porst 55/1.2, Takumar(Bayonet) 135/2.5 Minolta: rokker 58/1.4,58/1.2 nikkon: Nikkor H Auto 300/4.5
OM: 21/2,21/3.5,28/3.5,50/1.2,300/4.5,500/8,35-70/3.6, viv 17/3.5,viv 28/1.9,viv 135/2.3
Rollei: Voigtlander Color-Ultron 55/1.4 AR T: Tele-Astranar 135/3.5
EF: 30/1.4(Sigma),50/1.8,28-70L,80-200L,24-105L,70-300DO,18-200OS(Sigma)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scheimpflug
Joined: 06 Feb 2010
Posts: 1888
Location: New Zealand / USA
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:03 am Post subject: Re: 300mm CA test |
|
|
Scheimpflug wrote:
| ManualFocus-G wrote: |
| One of the biggest problems I have with my 300mm lenses is the amount of CA visible when shot wide open. Although usually recoverable, it's annoying to have to fix every time. So I thought I'd run a basic test to see which were the worst offenders (it's usually Tamron for me!). |
This is a great test, but I have two questions that you're probably not going to like... 
1) Which lens has the best image after the CA is corrected? (Do the rankings change?)
2) Are any lenses particularly easy or particularly hard to correct? (Complex CA, lens decentering, etc?)
_________________
Sigma DP1, Nikon D40 (hers  ), Polaroid x530, Pentax P30t, Pentax P50, (P30t/P50 K-A to Nikon F body mount conversion)
Nikon: 18-55/3.5-5.6 "G ED II DX" (F) Soligor: 28/2.8 (FL->F converted), 135/3.5 (F), 3x TC (F, modified) Kalimar: 28-85/3.5 (F)
Vivitar: 70-210/2.8-4.0 Version 3 (F), Tele 500/6.3 Preset (F), 19/3.8 (F) Minolta: 300/5.6 (SR/MC/MD pending F conversion)
Tamron: 28/2.8 (Adaptall) Panagor: 28/2.5 (FD) Aetna: 300/5.6 (F) Osawa: MC 28/2.8 (F)
Vintage Lenses: Dallmeyer: 1940s A.M. 14in 356mm f4 (ULF->M42) 1930s Adon Telephoto Taylor, Taylor & Hobson: 1880s Rapid Rectilinear 8 1/2 x 6 1/2 11.31in f/8 (LF->?)
Parts Lenses: Nikon 35-135/3.5-4.5 (F), Sigma 70-210/4.5 (F), Nikon 50/1.8 Series E (F) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edumad
Joined: 11 Feb 2009
Posts: 348
Location: Esposende, Portugal
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
edumad wrote:
The tamrons really suffer from fringins...
Mirrors, as expected...
_________________
TWAPSI - The World As Photography Sees It |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JohnBee
Joined: 11 Mar 2010
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
JohnBee wrote:
| calvin83 wrote: |
| The result of MC Rubinar 300/4.5 is impressive. |
I am also blown away by the sharpness and IQ of this lens. If only it didn't have the dreaded donut bokeh(arg)!!!! I would be all over that like white on rice...
Would make an amazing birding lens too |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nemesis101
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 2050
Location: Oregon USA
Expire: 2015-01-22
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nemesis101 wrote:
Apparently we should not be quite so amazed given the manufacturer's pedigree?
* One of the main Russian military force device producers.
* One of the main Russian producer of all optical devices for space investigations and space ships.
* One of the main Russian producer for astronomy.
Primary mirror of 2m telescope for the Royal Greenwich Observatory (Great Britain)
Set of astronomical mirrors for Chinese Academy of Space Technology
Primary mirror of 1.23m telescope for Max Plank Institute in Heidelberg (Germany)
Primary mirror of 2.6m telescope for VST project (Italy)
Primary mirror of 2.3m telescope for the National Observatory in Athens (Greece).
Doug
| JohnBee wrote: |
| calvin83 wrote: |
| The result of MC Rubinar 300/4.5 is impressive. |
I am also blown away by the sharpness and IQ of this lens. If only it didn't have the dreaded donut bokeh(arg)!!!! I would be all over that like white on rice...
Would make an amazing birding lens too |
_________________
Lenses and cameras:
Amateurs worry about equipment
Pros worry about money,
Masters worry about light. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008
Posts: 6950
Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
Great test. I only have the 300 Tamron and CA is shocking but fixable. Softness isn't.
Watch the prices of Rubinars rocket now. And see how many hate the bokeh and offload them.
_________________
Casual attendance these days |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr.AK
Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Posts: 122
Location: Bedburg, NRW, Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dr.AK wrote:
That Rubinar really impressed me. I want one now, haha.
_________________
Check out my Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JohnBee
Joined: 11 Mar 2010
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
JohnBee wrote:
Is it just me or is the leading contender of the pack the SP 60-300...
I am truly impressed with this lens tbh, especially since it's a zoom lens( ).
I read in another post where someone called the 60-300 a zoom that thinks its a prime :p - which holds true here because it's practically neck in neck with the SP 300mm(with less CA). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pat donnelly
Joined: 19 Jan 2010
Posts: 666
Location: Brisbane, Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 11:03 am Post subject: CA and 300mm |
|
|
pat donnelly wrote:
All quite good, although the softness of the non-Russian mirrors was a little disappointing.
I understand that all mirror lenses cannot attract CA, but that most software can overcome it. Still relevant for those who insist on film! I am glad I have the Tamron zoom.
Useful test. I still prefer the mirror lens in the field as it is so light and useable compared to the others. On a tripod though ......
_________________
---------------------------------
EP-1, E-410, E-300, D100, D1,
C-Mt: 25mm 1.9, 75mm 1.4, 75mm 1.3, 75mm 1.9, Ultra wides, one inch sensor, 20+ c-mount zooms
OM 350mm f2.8, Nikkor 180 f2.8, Exa 180 f2.8,
Tamrons: 90mm f2.5, 500mm f8 x3, 135 f2.5, 200 f3.5, 24mm 2.5, 28mm 2.5 x8,
FD 500mm mirror lens |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:59 pm Post subject: Re: 300mm CA test |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
| Scheimpflug wrote: |
| ManualFocus-G wrote: |
| One of the biggest problems I have with my 300mm lenses is the amount of CA visible when shot wide open. Although usually recoverable, it's annoying to have to fix every time. So I thought I'd run a basic test to see which were the worst offenders (it's usually Tamron for me!). |
This is a great test, but I have two questions that you're probably not going to like...
1) Which lens has the best image after the CA is corrected? (Do the rankings change?)
2) Are any lenses particularly easy or particularly hard to correct? (Complex CA, lens decentering, etc?) |
OK, to address the CA correction issue I have taken crops and done my best to fix with Adobe RAW. I then took the "fixed" image and post processed again by turning saturation of blue and magenta down to zero. This completely removes fringing, but also loses some detail and of course is dangerous if you actually need blue in your image
Sankor with RAW CA correction @ f4.5
Sankor with RAW CA correction and de-saturated @ f4.5
Soligor with RAW CA correction @ f5.5
Soligor with RAW CA correction and de-saturated @ f5.5
Tamron 104A with RAW CA correction @ f5.6
Tamron 104A with RAW CA correction and de-saturated @ f5.6
Tamron SP 300/5.6 with RAW CA correction @ f5.6
Tamron SP 300/5.6 with RAW CA correction and de-saturated @ f5.6
Tamron SP 60-300 with RAW CA correction @ f5.4
Tamron SP 60-300 with RAW CA correction and de-saturated @ f5.4
Chinon mirror lens with no post-processing @ f5.6
The last photo should indicate whether any detail is missing after processing the other images.
_________________
Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008
Posts: 6950
Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
I have never had any luck with the lens correction in ACR so I just pull the magenta and purple down a bit.
A CPL seemed to help but the tip of UV has not had an effect so far.
_________________
Casual attendance these days |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
torbod
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 379
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
torbod wrote:
Nice test.
Could you please take one of the worst (e.g. SP 300 @ 5.6) of the crops and show how well the defringe option works?
BR
Tobbe
_________________
For Sale or Trade: Pick from the list below.
Manual Lenses: CV 15 4.5 | MIR-20H 20 3.5 | Elmarit-R 28 2.8 | Flektogon MC 35 2.4 | S-M-C Tak 50 1.4 | Rollei 50 1.8 HFT | Helios 44-3 MC 58 2 | MC ROKKOR-X 58 1.2 | MacroPlanar 60 2.8 | Vega-12b 90 2.8 | Tamron 52B 90 2.5 | CZJ 135 3.5 | Jupiter-21A 200 4 | Tair-3s 300 4.5 | KOHBEPTEP K-1 | Takumar x2 |
Camera: Sony Nex 5N |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
OK, this is the SP 300/5.6 with the definge option enabled. Makes a slight difference on some of the lenses, but not so much with this one...
Note: At f8, the lens behaves much better. The 60-300 @ f8 is faultless.
_________________
Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
torbod
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 379
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
torbod wrote:
Thanx.
That lens certainly needs bigger ammo for defringing. But the sharpness is very good at least.
BR
/Tobbe
_________________
For Sale or Trade: Pick from the list below.
Manual Lenses: CV 15 4.5 | MIR-20H 20 3.5 | Elmarit-R 28 2.8 | Flektogon MC 35 2.4 | S-M-C Tak 50 1.4 | Rollei 50 1.8 HFT | Helios 44-3 MC 58 2 | MC ROKKOR-X 58 1.2 | MacroPlanar 60 2.8 | Vega-12b 90 2.8 | Tamron 52B 90 2.5 | CZJ 135 3.5 | Jupiter-21A 200 4 | Tair-3s 300 4.5 | KOHBEPTEP K-1 | Takumar x2 |
Camera: Sony Nex 5N |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
