| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
anktonio
Joined: 20 Oct 2012
Posts: 219
Location: Spain
Expire: 2017-02-22
|
 Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 9:45 am Post subject: DOGFIGHT: Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.8 vs MC ROKKOR-PF 55/1.7 |
 |
|
anktonio wrote:
I enjoy myself occasionally making disrespectful lens tests with no scientific basis. But they are the same subject and in the same conditions of real life 
Today Osaka against Oberkochen, all photos are unedited direct JPG ... start the match!
Rokkor
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7361/8721733465_59451955e6_o.jpg
Planar
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7317/8722857384_7a92e8ca6c_o.jpg
Rokkor
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7321/8721743161_e7dc36d521_o.jpg
Planar
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7381/8721744955_d3548a9c94_o.jpg
Rokkor
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7281/8722845224_6454cb2eb9_o.jpg
Planar
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7459/8721726535_38254527d4_o.jpg
Rokkor (at f/1.7 bokeh test)
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7332/8721728249_c79b44e5f1_o.jpg
Planar (at f/1.8 bokeh test)
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7441/8722850434_ba8b66241b_o.jpg
Rokkor
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7424/8722859510_c923166632_o.jpg
Planar
Full resolution: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7329/8721741325_f1e334c5b3_o.jpg
Rokkor (100% crop)
Planar (100% crop)
And the winner iiissssssss... I swear I do not know :/
Last edited by anktonio on Thu May 09, 2013 3:20 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 3693
Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Very nice comparison. I cannot easily decide which to prefer too.
_________________
---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
parabellumfoto
Joined: 06 Apr 2013
Posts: 413
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
parabellumfoto wrote:
I still don't think I am experienced enough to judge but I think Planar is marginally better. This is from a Minolta Rokkor fan. Difference in colour rendition is very slight.
_________________
Minolta MC Rokkor f1.4 50mm
Minolta MD Zoom Macro 35-105mm f3.5-4.5
Nikon Nikkor 50mm F2
Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-S Auto 5cm F2
Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-Q Auto 135mm F2.8
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm F1.8G
http://www.parabellumfoto.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Posts: 2877
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 10:02 am Post subject: Re: DOGFIGHT: Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.8 vs MC ROKKOR-PG 55/1. |
|
|
fermy wrote:
Right! Both are dogs.
 
_________________
Many lenses and some film bodies for sale here: http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-fd-minolta-md-c-mounts-m42-pentax-and-more-t50465.html
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/96060788@N06/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011
Posts: 2201
Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
Me too, a really slight preference for the planar, but give me any of them and I'll be happy.
_________________
C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5019
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
Very interesting but a blowup crop would be nice to decide which is the winner for resolution.
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6624
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
I prefer the Rokkor's bokeh in the flower shot.
_________________
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 |
|
|
skut
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 4
Location: Batangas
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
skut wrote:
i also prefer that soft bokeh balls of rokkor on the flower shot |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
koji
Joined: 21 Jul 2008
Posts: 2106
Location: Hiroshima, Japan
Expire: 2012-12-27
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
koji wrote:
Just to nick pick: Isn't this name "MC ROKKOR-PG 55/1.7" by mistyping of "MC ROKKOR-PF 55/1.7"?
Minolta's MC/MD 55mm's are all ROKKOR-PFs.
_________________
Our Home Page has 18,200 photos in 575 directories today.
Lenses: https://www.pbase.com/kkawakami/top_level_my_lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mir
Joined: 07 Feb 2011
Posts: 976
Location: Montreal, Canada
Expire: 2017-09-30
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mir wrote:
koji wrote:
| Quote: |
Just to nick pick: Isn't this name "MC ROKKOR-PG 55/1.7" by mistyping of "MC ROKKOR-PF 55/1.7"?
Minolta's MC/MD 55mm's are all ROKKOR-PFs. |
Thank you !
That explains why i searched and found a zillion PF, some pretty cheap, and no PG....
Could the mount be swapt on those PFs ??
_________________
"Obsta principiis, finem respice"
"There is a fine line between hobby and mental illness"
MISC: Tamron SP 35-80 (01A), Auto Chinon Tomioka 1.4/55, Tokina AT-X 2.5/90, Tamron SP 5,6/300 (54B)
ZEISS: WG Distagon 2.8/25, WG Distagon 2.8/35 HFT, WG Planar HFT 1.4/50, Ultron 1.8/50, WG Sonnar 2.8/85, WG Sonnar HFT 2.8/135
VOIGTLÄNDER : Ultron Aspherical 1.8/21, Ultron 2/28, Nokton Aspherical 1.2/35, Nokton Classic 1.4/40, Nokton Aspherical 1.5/50, Color-Heliar 2.5/75
MINOLTA: MD 3.5/35-70 Macro, MD 1.2/50, MC Rokkor-X 1.2/58, MD Macro 3.5/50
LEITZ: SUMMICRON-R 2/35 (II), SUMMICRON-R 2/50 (II), TELE ELMARIT-M 2,8/90 (Thin)
CANON RF: 2.8/28, 2/35, 1.2/50, 1.4/50, Serenar 1.8/50, 2/85, 2/100, 3.5/100
LTM : KMZ Jupiter-8 2/5cm, TOKYO KOGAKU Topcor-S 2/5cm, CHIYOKO SUPER ROKKOR C 2/5cm, Nippon Kogaku NIKKOR-H.C 2/5cm, FUJI FILM CO. FUJINON L 2/5cm
And a small Minolta AF set: 2.8/20, 1.4/35, 1.4/50, 2/100, 4.5/100-200
@we3fotography
@7plus_pictures
@_whats.that.car_ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nurkov
Joined: 21 Feb 2013
Posts: 711
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-03-09
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nurkov wrote:
excellent results from both
_________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/34787419@N08/
Minolta and Canon user |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anktonio
Joined: 20 Oct 2012
Posts: 219
Location: Spain
Expire: 2017-02-22
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
anktonio wrote:
| koji wrote: |
Just to nick pick: Isn't this name "MC ROKKOR-PG 55/1.7" by mistyping of "MC ROKKOR-PF 55/1.7"?
Minolta's MC/MD 55mm's are all ROKKOR-PFs. |
Thank you for your accuracy! He is MC ROKKOR-PF 55/1.7 certainly. I've fixed the title.
Happy shots! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tervueren
Joined: 18 May 2011
Posts: 1177
Location: West Sussex, United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-08
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tervueren wrote:
Nothing in it really but much prefer the bokeh from the Rokkor without the outline the Planar has |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57849
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Leica Summilux is better buy one 1000 USD only and compare .... (will be same than this )
Great test, it shows well, if subject , light right and smart people behind camera , basically no matter what lens do you have in 50mm focal length.
Differences usually pops up more in bad light, Zeiss will still shinny and Minolta require to fix contrast just a few click , but most people lazzy to do it.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SonicScot
Joined: 01 Dec 2011
Posts: 2698
Location: Scottish Highlands
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 8:29 pm Post subject: Re: DOGFIGHT: Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.8 vs MC ROKKOR-PG 55/1. |
|
|
SonicScot wrote:
| fermy wrote: |
Right! Both are dogs.
|
Trust you
_________________
Gary
Currently active gear....
Sony a7
E-M1 Mkll
Rubinar 1000/10 + 2x matched extender
Tamron 500/8 55BB
Sigma 100-300/4
Vivitar Series 1.... 200/3, 70-210/3.5 (V1 by Kiron), 135/2.3, 105/2.5 macro, 90/2.5 macro (Bokina), 90-180/4.5 Flat Field Macro, 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5
Carl Zeiss.... 180/2.8, 135/3.5, 85/1.4, 35/2.4 Flektagon, 21/2.8 Distagon
Nikon.... 55/3.5 micro, 50/1.2
Elicar 90/2.5 V-HQ Macro
Zhongyi Speedmaster 85/1.2
Jupiter-9 85/2
Helios.... 58/2 44-3
Hartblei 45/3.5 Super-Rotator TS-PC
Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye
Samyang 8/3.5 fisheye
Nodal Ninja 4, Neewer leveling tripod base
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/gazsus/ Website http://garianphotography.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dnas
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 488
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 11:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dnas wrote:
Bokeh on the Minolta is very, very nice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
frenched
Joined: 16 Feb 2013
Posts: 395
Location: MD USA
Expire: 2014-06-17
|
| Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
frenched wrote:
I really like both. Zeiss may be a little bit sharper. Biggest difference to me is in the bokeh, but I like both of those too. That's my "scientific" analysis.
Since they're so close, maybe try more demanding conditions as Attila suggested. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ForenSeil
Joined: 15 Apr 2011
Posts: 2726
Location: Kiel, Germany.
|
| Posted: Fri May 10, 2013 1:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
ForenSeil wrote:
Very good comparision!
Old Zeiss 50/1.8 has better colors and is slightly sharper but Minolta has better bokeh.
I would simply buy one which is better than both 
Price-wise I would recommend the Minolta
@Atilla Old Summilux is indeed nothing special and I guess not better than these two but the more modern Aspherical Summilux should kill both.
_________________
I'm not a collector, I'm a tester
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Samyang 12/2.8, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Samyang 135/2, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Celestron C8 2000mm F10
Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4, Nikon 200/2 ED
My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 390
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Fri May 10, 2013 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
simbon4o wrote:
The rokkor is just better in bokeh!
_________________
10-300мм 4.0 - 1.2 - 4.5  NIKON&Sony bodies / Sony 10-18, Pentax 28 2.8 II, CZJ 35 2.4, Nikkor DX 35 1.8, Samyang 35 1.4, KMZ 50 1.7, FDn 50 1.2 L, Nikkor 55 2.8, Rokkor 58 1.2, Soligor 85 1.8 Preset, Samyang 85 1.4, Canon FDn 85 1.2 L, Tokina AT-X 90 2.5, Canon FDn 135mm 2.0, Nikkor 180 2.8 ED, Tair 300 4.5
________
snimo.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Giorgio
Joined: 17 Jan 2016
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Giorgio wrote:
I do not own a Planar but it seems to me that your Planar is either a Rokkor PF or you forgot to switch lenses on your camera during the comparison test. All pictures look like they were shot by the same Rokkor PF on Aperture Priority mode.
Last edited by Giorgio on Sat Apr 30, 2016 4:13 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Basilisk
Joined: 21 Mar 2013
Posts: 356
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Basilisk wrote:
Would expect the bokeh to be slightly more pronounced on the Rokkor (10% more magnification, 6% larger aperture) but it is significant how much bigger the OOF spots are. Definitely a winner for that sort of photography. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roka
Joined: 18 Mar 2016
Posts: 133
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Expire: 2017-04-07
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Roka wrote:
I'm a big Rokkor fan so I had to suspend my prejudices while looking at the pictures. I think the Zeiss was better on the 1st (flower) shot but other than that I think they were about equal. And even though they're quite different I like the bokeh both produce.
Thanks for posting this test. I've done comparison lens testing for myself, maybe I'll post some of those results too.
_________________
Camera
Fujifilm X-T20
Lenses
Vivitar 55mm f/2.8 Macro (1:1)
Canon FD 200mm f/4
Canon FD 300mm f/5.6
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 784
Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
A nice fun comparison. Same subjective thoughts, I like the Minolta's bokeh more, the Planar's color better. Both are very satisfactory. Nice pics.
But I think to eliminate the extra 5mm of focal length, the Minolta MC Rokkor-X 50mm f1.7 would be a closer comparison.
_________________
"The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anktonio
Joined: 20 Oct 2012
Posts: 219
Location: Spain
Expire: 2017-02-22
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2016 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
anktonio wrote:
Say! This thread has reemerged from the depths... thanks to all for all the answers, old and new, and your good humor. I agree with most, the differences are very small or unnoticeable. But those 5 mm, as VNG555 says, give advantage to Rokkor for a softer and diffuse bokeh, which prefer almost all.
| Giorgio wrote: |
| ..."seems to me that your Planar is either a Rokkor PF or you forgot to switch lenses on your camera during the comparison test"... |
You see that the viewing angle of Rokkor more narrow than the Planar, your response indicates the similarity between the two.
| Roka wrote: |
| ..."I've done comparison lens testing for myself, maybe I'll post some of those results too"... |
Please, do it. We will be happy to see it. I wait.
For my part, I thought of another dogfight, now in a FF ring, between other two, Planar 50/1.4 and Canon nFD 50/1.4... the ultimate test, the fight of the century! 
Happy shots! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 1658
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2016 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
The Pf is Warmer in color rendition.
The Planar (rollei or zeiss?) is more sharp.
Neither are close to 2/50 summicron (R/M).
I had the three.
I think that the japaneses 1,8/55 are in the same league.
The summicron, Planar c/y and Pancolar, are a Step over them |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
