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

Does the smc tak win again ?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 11:45 am    Post subject: Does the smc tak win again ? Reply with quote
Maybe someone with good eyes can answer this one ?

Took some test shots with all my 135mm lenses this morning
35-135mm ef canon zoom, 135mm/2.8 soligor,135mm/3.5smc tak, 135mm/3.5 olympus

First observation : al the crops are diff size if the same object is cropped out (which lens is the true 135mm?)
Second observation : the soligor is real bad open ,is this because of slight overexposure (cam can not go faster than 1/8000) or is it faulty lens





all taken from exactly the same position on tripod without shifting the cam
Is there a clear winner here ?


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
they are all sub standard for me, did you shot in jpeg small quality?
that look more like p&s quality


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think the Tak is the winner. And with that apertures, the 2nd best is Olympus, 3rd soligor and 4th is Canon (the only zoom so that was expected). However, I am disapointed with the performance of Olympus.
Nice work! I have 2 135mm but none of those.

Last edited by Rodrigo on Sun Nov 30, 2008 2:40 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
May I use this Topic to post the results of my 2 Carl Zeiss Sonnar (T*2.8 and Jena 3.5)?

Edit:

Well the weather didn't help but we can have some conclusions. All shots were taken in RAW converted to JPEG in Lightroom. The shots are 100% crops in the center of the image:

CZJ 135mm F3.5


CZ T* 135mm F2.8


CZJ 135mm F4.0


CZ T* 135mm F4.0


Well I'm disapointed about the weather that screwed the results a little. Even so, I can conclude that the Sonnar T* is sharper and has a lot more contrast. Never had compared them before but this comes to verify what I expected by my experience with each one.

Last edited by Rodrigo on Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:28 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I see no problem , post them.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rodrigo wrote:
... I can conclude that the Sonnar T* is sharper and has a lot more contrast.

Definitely so!


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
poilu wrote:
they are all sub standard for me, did you shot in jpeg small quality?
that look more like p&s quality

Now you have me worried ! Sad
all shot in raw canon20d converted to jpg withps2 no proccessing no resizing all actual pixel crops ( 100%)

Maybe i am doing something wrong?
Daniel


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rusty wrote:
Now you have me worried !

Don't worry Rusty, I use to say freely what I think but I am often wrong
I cannot understand this level of noise look like 800iso except if you was badly underexposed and the level of detail look like from behind a hot air stream
Again don't worry, if I am the only one to think that, I am probably at the last level of my pixel peeper illness


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 2:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
poilu wrote:
Rusty wrote:
Now you have me worried !

Don't worry Rusty, I use to say freely what I think but I am often wrong
I cannot understand this level of noise look like 800iso except if you was badly underexposed and the level of detail look like from behind a hot air stream
Again don't worry, if I am the only one to think that, I am probably at the last level of my pixel peeper illness

Hi Poilu Now that you mention that . I can see a "wavyness" like hot air distortion on all the straight lines It is hot where i am, but there is a cool breeze coming from the sea, so maybe where the two temperatures meet, like a heat mirage? and iso was 400 by accident
I am going to shoot a closer subject on 100 iso and redo test

Thanks! and well spotted
Daniel


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bly te kenne!

The pics may be wonky but I'd swap the weather. It's 2 degrees above freezing here.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 4:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
martinsmith99 wrote:
Bly te kenne!

The pics may be wonky but I'd swap the weather. It's 2 degrees above
freezing here.


Baie dankie Martin !

We are just hitting the summer holiday season (hundreds of well oiled tanned bodies (of the female kind) Laughing are allready filling up the beach below my home , Plenty foto ops ! Twisted Evil Twisted Evil
But we dont have any snow....EVER.... Sad
Cheers
Daniel


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Redid the test with the tak ,oly and soligor
The soligor will have to find a new home now Embarassed
These crops will hopefully give a more accurate indication




PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Oly seems to have REALLY smooth bg blur, just like i like it! Smile It's one I'm still missing. I hope the Contax 135/2.8 on it's way to me from Germany right now has a similar "even-ness" to it's rendering, I would be really pleased if I could get the Contax sharpness with this bokeh... Smile I have yet to finish my Mamiya 135/2.8....


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rusty wrote:
Redid the test with the tak ,oly and soligor
The soligor will have to find a new home now Embarassed
These crops will hopefully give a more accurate indication




The Soligor looks very soft at F4. Confused It dosent look like a very good performer.

I like the Oly and the Tak. Perhaps the Tak is my favorite of the group.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 11:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
About the Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm 2.8, I can show some photos for you to see the bokeh of the lens. I love bokehs so I really tested it before in that matter.

Here they are:








For me it has a great bokeh, great definition, great contrast,.. what can I say, it's one of my fave lenses!


PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 1:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you Rodrigo, this confirms what I have been seeing and hearing about the Contax... Smile
For me the absence of bright outlining is fairly important in a people/portrait/dreamy lens, but the Contax is the first 135 I've seen that I would gladly use for "sharpness" based photography too...! The Mamiya should be good too, but I think I will wait with putting work into that one until after the Sonnar arrives. I allways seem to postpone work on the Mamiya, wonder why? Maybe a shootout later? Very Happy
The Tak 3.5 has never lured me as the Nikkors perform almost the same - and easier for me - a Nikon guy, but from the photos above it confirms that it clearly has got "it" in the sharpness department.... But I would think that's common knowledge.

Thank you, Rusty too, for this very good comparison.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
And I almost forgot...! Regarding the original question of the thread, Rusty:
At far/infinity focus - the tak. Easy.
At the second comparison (closer/close focus) - Even between the tak and the Oly. I see no remarkable difference here, except in the bg blur - I would probably prefer the Oly for close range photos.

Sorry for hijacking the thread btw (about the Contax bokeh)... But this seems indeed to be a friendlier forum than most. I even got nagged upon last week on a local forum for owning all of FIVE fiftys... (?! which combined have cost me ~300€) They though I was "obsessive" and "manical" Shocked hehe... Well, well.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
the_Suede wrote:
And I almost forgot...! Regarding the original question of the thread, Rusty:
At far/infinity focus - the tak. Easy.
At the second comparison (closer/close focus) - Even between the tak and the Oly. I see no remarkable difference here, except in the bg blur - I would probably prefer the Oly for close range photos.

Sorry for hijacking the thread btw (about the Contax bokeh)... But this seems indeed to be a friendlier forum than most. I even got nagged upon last week on a local forum for owning all of FIVE fiftys... (?! which combined have cost me ~300€) They though I was "obsessive" and "manical" Shocked hehe... Well, well.


Not a problem at all (hijacking) Laughing It is much more interesting to have more comparisons and ideas in the thread
I agree about the tak and oly the oly's bokeh has a softer look
Only 5 Fifty's.....Heh...heh Crying or Very sad

Daniel

ps: Post some pics as soon as you receive the contax please !


PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rodrigo said:
Quote:
For me it has a great bokeh, great definition, great contrast,..


I agree.....must get one when the budget allows.... Twisted Evil
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1