| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009
Posts: 385
Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2010 9:18 pm Post subject: Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 2.8/135mm versus Yashica ML 2.8/135mm |
 |
|
metallaro1980 wrote:
Everybody, finally we can understand the differences between a lens labelled Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 2.8/135 and a lens labelled Yashica ML 2.8/135mm
Today I have made a test 1/500 at f:8
Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 2.8/135mm
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33530174@N05/4990689120/sizes/o/in/photostream/
Yashica ML 2.8/135mm
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33530174@N05/4990089681/sizes/o/in/photostream/
and here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/33530174@N05/4990165899/sizes/o/in/photostream/
the crops!
On a 21 megapixel digital camera the differences are more visible!
_________________
Olympus OM: 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 Made in Japan
Contax: 50 1.4, 85 1.4
Zeiss: 135 2.0 Apo-Sonnar ZE
Leica-R: 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt-R (Leitax)
Rollei QBM: 135 2.8 Rolleinar (Leitax), 50 1.4 HFT
Canon: 50 1.8, 40 2.8
M42: Helios 50 2.0, Jupiter-37A, Jupiter-21 200 4.0
Binocular: Hensoldt & Wetzlar DF 8x30
http://andreaverdi.altervista.org/ Vivaldi lives in my lenses.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29545
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2010 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Zeiss slightly better along the edges, as it was to be expected.
Center performance is identical to my eyes. Zeiss maybe just a tiny bit contrastier.
P.S. Yashica shot is slightly front-focused.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 10472
Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
I see better clarity & microcontrast for the Zeiss, the metals shine more and the walls are cleaner
but I don't expect that 2 lenses at F8 will show lot of differences
if you check this more scientific test, ML & T*, you will see that differences should be more visible at F2.8
_________________
T* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
magkelly
Joined: 06 Jul 2010
Posts: 182
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
magkelly wrote:
Yes, the Sonnar is definitely better, but also you have to look at the price difference and consider that too. I don't think the ML is bad for a lens that costs what it does as compared to the Zeiss lenses, but the Zeiss lenses were the top of the line and you paid considerably more for that, still do. If you can afford the Zeiss, sure, go for it, but I actually think the ML looks pretty respectable considering it's the "middle" lens in terms of quality, though honestly I don't think the DSB/YUS is bad to start with. It's like the difference between tourist class, business class and 1st class. Each one has it's purpose, and it's price tag. You want leg room and champagne it's 1st class all the way, but if you can't afford that and still want to be able to breathe at least, you fly business class.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29545
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
| magkelly wrote: |
| Yes, the Sonnar is definitely better, but also you have to look at the price difference and consider that too. I don't think the ML is bad for a lens that costs what it does as compared to the Zeiss lenses, but the Zeiss lenses were the top of the line and you paid considerably more for that, still do. If you can afford the Zeiss, sure, go for it, but I actually think the ML looks pretty respectable considering it's the "middle" lens in terms of quality, though honestly I don't think the DSB/YUS is bad to start with. |
Poilu nailed it in my opinion: at f/8 in the center all lenses are good (except for some AF trashbin stuff). The challenge is wide open.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 2:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
Guys, that's f/8 for Christ sake! Try 2.8 or 4, add some background, and watch the in-out of focus transition closely. The Zeiss is by no means APO, but it shows way less loCA than the Yashica lens.
Contax Zeiss Sonnar 135/2.8 at f/2.8:
Yashica ML 135/2.8 (1st gen, non-"C") at f/2.8:
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| 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
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
