Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Changes of resolution of 50mm F2 lenses
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Nov 30, 2015 5:09 pm    Post subject: Changes of resolution of 50mm F2 lenses Reply with quote
I found a table of resolutions of 50mm F2 lenses published by Shashin Kōgyō(写真工業)( http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Shashin_K%C5%8Dgy%C5%8D ) , issue 1979 Dec. Below in the link to the table:

http://nikonfan.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2009/01/50mmf2-59b9.html

Here is the link of the data show in charts:
http://nikonfan.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2010/04/305050mmf2-72e3.html

Update: Please scroll down to see more tables and charts. Thanks koji for uploading the images here! Like 1 small

I have made the follow translation to make the table more readable. Please let me know if there is any mistakes(I know nothing about Japanese Alphabet).

Year(32=1957, 42=1967 etc.), Category, Camera, F No., F length(mm), Group, Element, Type(4/6 Gauss or Gauss variance), Resolution lp/mm(full open(center highest,screen/picture average), F5.6(center highest,screen/picture average))

キヤノン Canon
フジカ Fujica フジノン Fujinon
コニカ Konica ヘキサノン Hexanon
ライカ Leica ズミクロン Summicron
マミヤ Mamiya セコール Sekor オートメトラ Auto Metra
ミノルタ Minolta ロッコール Rokkor スーパー Super
ミランダ Miranda
ニコン Nikon ニッコール Nikkor
オリンパス Olympus ズイコー Zuiko
ペンタックス Pentax タクマー Takumar
リコー Ricoh リケノン Rikenon デラックス Deluxe
トプコン Topcon トプコール Topcor
ヤシカ Yashica オートヤシノン Yashinon

ライツミノルタ Leitz Minolta オート Auto

Note: I don't know have the information what is the standard they used for testing and how they calculated the resolution.

Last edited by calvin83 on Tue Dec 01, 2015 5:54 pm; edited 4 times in total


PostPosted: Mon Nov 30, 2015 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you!

Thanks calvin83 for the kanji -- to help us to spot these on Japan web sites.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 30, 2015 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Unfortunately, the vast majority of published resolution figures are meaningless. I no longer waste time with them. When those measurements were made using photographic film, the resolution values often reflected more the film limitations than the lens performance. See, for example, the table below that shows the resolution values of a Pentacon 50mm F1.8 lens, as measured by Modern Photography in 1978. Modern Photography was a prestigious magazine, and at that time MP had set up an advanced laboratory to test lenses and cameras.



Note that the measured resolutions in the center are always equal to 48 lines per mm for all apertures! Who is minimally knowledgeable in lenses knows that this is an absurd. What probably happened was that someone at MP used a Tri-X film to test the Pentacon lens. Tri-X is an improper film to test photographic lenses. In the end, what MP measured was simply the resolution of the film, not the lens.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 30, 2015 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Zeiss tests using film were valid. They used microfilm that was capable of 150lp/mm or more.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2015 5:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Shashin Kōgyō was one of the most well-known magazine in Japan which have good reputations. I think they know how to test lenses in a proper way.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2015 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
Note: I don't know have the information what is the standard they used for testing and how they calculated the resolution.



calvin83 wrote:
Shashin Kōgyō was one of the most well-known magazine in Japan which have good reputations. I
think they know how to test lenses in a proper way.


You have no idea how they test lenses, but you believe they know what they are doing. I understand, it is a question of faith.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Gerald wrote:
calvin83 wrote:
Note: I don't know have the information what is the standard they used for testing and how they calculated the resolution.



calvin83 wrote:
Shashin Kōgyō was one of the most well-known magazine in Japan which have good reputations. I
think they know how to test lenses in a proper way.


You have no idea how they test lenses, but you believe they know what they are doing. I understand, it is a question of faith.

I don't know how they figures out these number don't implies that they are not doing in a proper way to get these numbers... Similarly, I don't how the clock in my local observatory works but I have to believe the time information they provided are accurate.

The lenses included in the list are not uncommon. If the members have some of the lenses in the list, it might be a good idea to check if the numbers on the chart is consistent to the real world results.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2015 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Source of all those infos:






Last edited by koji on Tue Dec 01, 2015 4:35 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2015 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you, koji. You are my hero. Like 1 Thank You Dog


PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2015 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Whatever other people came up with, this series of tests does not seem to make the usual mistakes, as there are distinctions among evn the best lenses here.
It does look like the test procedure loses "resolution" at high performance levels, there being distinct plateaus. This is probably inevitable one way or another.
BTW, it seems these are lenses on RF cameras.
The 35SE with a 45/1.9 seems to be something of a standout.

In digital we also have sensor limits (like film limits) where differences between lenses become irrelevant beyond certain values.
I'm a rather lax and laid back sort, so the point of a lens test in my case is whether it's "good enough" and not a total turkey. Even the test on tri-x would have satisfied me., and most pthers too. In the day it would even have satisfied most news photographers. When I was hanging out with the AP pool, thirty years ago, they were shooting bags and bags of tri-x. If someone told them their Nikkors were less capable than some Zeiss, they would have shrugged and wandered off. It was not that important.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2015 9:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes. It is most important that the lens can provide enough resolution on the sensor(film). Most lenses can have pretty decent resolution when close the aperture to F5.6 even they perform not so good wide open.

There are some other useful information in the tables above. For those who like to know more about the performance on lenses on fixed lens RF camera, it may be worth to spend sometime to study the tables.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1