Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

6x Shootout: Biotar Pancolar Oreston Primoplan Helios v6 v7
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 12:57 pm    Post subject: 6x Shootout: Biotar Pancolar Oreston Primoplan Helios v6 v7 Reply with quote

6 lenses compared on 5DMkII:

Zeiss Biotar 2/58mm
Zeiss Pancolar MC (electric) 1.8/50mm
Meyer-Optik Oreston 1.8/50mm
Meyer-Optik Primoplan (light gold) 1.9/58mm
Helios-44M-6 2/58mm
Helios-77M-4 1.8/50mm


Whole test done wide-open for all lenses. All lenses healthy and clean.
Here the contenders:



Last edited by Pancolart on Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:05 am; edited 6 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here fixed WB so color is influenced by lens. Catching last daylight. Average Exposure time 1/125s on ISO 800.
Focus isn't always exactly on the flower so don't judge sharpness here it will come later.

Zeiss Biotar 2/58mm


Zeiss Pancolar MC (electric) 1.8/50mm


Meyer-Optik Oreston 1.8/50mm


Meyer-Optik Primoplan 1.9/58mm


Helios-44M-6 2/58mm


Helios-77M-4 1.8/50mm


Last edited by Pancolart on Tue Aug 10, 2010 9:14 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sharpness and detail test photos using oversized gallery: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1057412.html#1057412


PostPosted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:37 pm    Post subject: Re: 6x Shootout: Biotar Pancolar Oreston Primoplan Helios v6 Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
6 lenses compared on 5DMkII:

Zeiss Biotar 2/58mm
Zeiss Pancolar MC (electric) 1.8/50mm
Meyer-Optik Oreston 1.8/50mm
Meyer-Optik Primoplan 1.9/58mm
Helios-44-6 2/58mm
Helios-44-7 1.8/50mm


The last one is Helios-77M-4 Wink


PostPosted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you Dimitry. I made this mistake a while ago and just memorize it wrong.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zeiss Biotar 2/58mm

Zeiss Pancolar MC 1.8/50mm

Meyer-Optik Oreston 1.8/50mm

Meyer-Optik Primoplan 1.9/58mm

Helios-44M-6 2/58mm


Helios-77M-4 1.8/50mm


WB set to auto so colors pretty similar.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bokeh and color rendering. New detail and resolution samples in oversized gallery: http://forum.mflenses.com/pancolar-biotar-oreston-primoplan-helios-t31241.html

Zeiss Biotar 2/58mm

Zeiss Pancolar MC 1.8/50mm

Meyer-Optik Oreston 1.8/50mm

Meyer-Optik Primoplan 1.9/58mm

Helios-44M-6 2/58mm

Helios-77M-4 1.8/50mm


PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:36 am    Post subject: Brilliant work! Reply with quote

Great lenses too.......


PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would be glad if someone can point out to some areas where the differences between these lenses can be obsereved. Meanwhile apart from FL and color tints I cannot see much differences.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess we are talking here about demystification of the idea that differences are anywhere more then subtle. To be a bit crude and sarcastic: if someone doesn't see any difference it doesn't really matter which lens he owns for photography purpose Smile. Wide-open use of course. Aperture blades design changes things a bit.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
I guess we are talking here about demystification of the idea that differences are anywhere more then subtle. To be a bit crude and sarcastic: if someone doesn't see any difference it doesn't really matter which lens he owns for photography purpose Smile. Wide-open use of course. Aperture blades design changes things a bit.


Wonderful comparison.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
I guess we are talking here about demystification of the idea that differences are anywhere more then subtle. To be a bit crude and sarcastic: if someone doesn't see any difference it doesn't really matter which lens he owns for photography purpose Smile. Wide-open use of course. Aperture blades design changes things a bit.

I feel a bit relieved Smile I was starting to worry about my eyes. Sure, there are slight differences, but I'd have hard times telling which one is better. Different characters, similar quality.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ylyad wrote:
I feel a bit relieved Smile I was starting to worry about my eyes. Sure, there are slight differences, but I'd have hard times telling which one is better. Different characters, similar quality.


Yes! There are many tests out there that gives opposite impression. Mostly due to lenses with defects. And really thorough explanation is given to justify specific lens "discrimination" Wink.

Funny thing is it was very hard for me to see anything meaningful at the beginning. It's only after going through different test photos few times to get some feeling. Momentary i favor Oreston warmth. Pancolar sharpness and detail at infinity (reaching edges). If in mood for poetry i would always choose Primoplan where Biotar express confidence and discipline Smile.

I already tried swirl comparison but results aren't good enough to post. I'll try to make better samples.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
I guess we are talking here about demystification of the idea that differences are anywhere more then subtle.

Nothing has been demystified, as far as I'm concerned. In your test all lenses are indeed quite close, which is not so surprising because you picked lenses that do not have vast differences in their designs and age.
I have seen plenty of other tests of ~50/1.2 and 85mm lenses and others though where the differences in rendering style are very significant and easily noticeable. It all depends on the scene you're shooting and the camera (full-frame or crop often makes a big difference) and processing settings you use.


Last edited by AhamB on Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:49 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Results of both helios lenses and biotar are close, because they share the same optical design.

But Primoplan is very different, I'm sure I'd recognize it in the first set, probably even in ther 3rd set. As for the 2nd set, I wouldn't be sure, maybe.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
I guess we are talking here about demystification of the idea that differences are anywhere more then subtle.


Yes, this is true especially for 50mm lenses, because as we saw, most of them are basically the same lens, and the counstruction principle is so standard, and the glass requirements are so easy (no big magnification, and no wide perspective stretching, therefore no need for expensive high refraction glass or aspherical elements to correct aberrations), that we can really say most are de facto the same lens.

But if you test 20mm lenses or 300mm lenses, of course, things change, considerably.


PostPosted: Sat May 28, 2011 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I love these kinds of comparisons... they are indeed very similar to one another. Yes, I can see slight differences between them... but for the most part, they give the same impression. What is interesting is the price differences between them. Isn't the Biotar much more expensive than say the Helios?


PostPosted: Sat May 28, 2011 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you would also see more noticeable differences comparing 50mm F1.4 lenses, a much more difficult design to execute.


PostPosted: Sun May 29, 2011 4:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In terms of design the Primoplan is the oddball here, as it is not a Double-Gauss type, but an advanced Triplet development.

For the longest time it has been much maligned, but when seen individually it is not half bad.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've found a nice condition Helios 77m-4, like the one reviewed, however with a slightly different label. It's in Russian ГЕЛИОС, and since it's my first manual on a digital body, I'm a bit afraid of mounting it to a 5d mk2.

I couldn't find 77m-4 mc Helios in any compatibility charts for 5d, so just to make sure - will it fit? It works very nice on a eos rebel 450D, but will it damage the mirror on 5d? By the looks of it, it seems it should work, and it mounts well, I just didn't click the shutter.



edit: for some reason it doesn't show the pic: forum.mflenses.com/userpix/201110/4776_helios_1.jpg


PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

andrej wrote:



edit: for some reason it doesn't show the pic: forum.mflenses.com/userpix/201110/4776_helios_1.jpg


Hi and welcome to the forum ... This is an anti-spam feature for users with one post only ...

I'm not sure about the 5D, but on the 5D MkII you have a 0.7mm clearance between the bottom of the lens and the mirror ...


PostPosted: Fri Oct 07, 2011 2:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks!

yes, I searched for some more articles on whether it will cause too much damage if not suitable and finally pressed the shutter Smile
it works all good on 5D mark II, focus to infinity and all.

I really like the 'swirly bokeh' it produces, and image quality is more than fine for the money spent.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 07, 2011 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MoonPix wrote:
I love these kinds of comparisons... they are indeed very similar to one another. Yes, I can see slight differences between them... but for the most part, they give the same impression. What is interesting is the price differences between them. Isn't the Biotar much more expensive than say the Helios?


The Helios 44 was the kit lens on the Zenit cameras and the Soviets made a LOT of them. There were probably a hundred Helios 44 manufactured for every Biotar.

Lucky for us it's such a well-made Biotar clone and so cheap!


PostPosted: Fri Oct 07, 2011 11:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks for the comparison.
the differences are only visible by seeing them side by side.
still, imo the pancolar renders nicer than the others.



regards


PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2013 12:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Pancolar gives a good account of itself.