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

High Q/P value Petri 55mm/1.8 on SD15
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:37 pm    Post subject: High Q/P value Petri 55mm/1.8 on SD15 Reply with quote

Bought this lens via eBay for just 16.99 EUR (including postage)! Didn't expect that its image quality is that good! What's your view on this budget lens?


































Last edited by ferrick on Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:35 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Put on any 50mm lens and you will get minimum same result, 50mm and close distance, many lens is better I didn't see any worst.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
Put on any 50mm lens and you will get minimum same result, 50mm and close distance, many lens is better I didn't see any worst.


Yes, I heard many people said that before. Is it really true that there is no poor quality standard lens? Question Question
Perhaps I should do some comparisons to confirm that when I have time. Smile Smile


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well it should be High Q/P value then, not P/Q ... Wink


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kds315* wrote:
Well it should be High Q/P value then, not P/Q ... Wink


Sorry! Yes, I meant high Q/P ratio. What a result from a 16.99 EUR lens. Very Happy Very Happy


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are many versions of the Petri standard lens, not sure who made them, the early M42 ones are marked Petri Orrikor, not tried one of those, the next version uses Petri's own bayonet mount and is an excellent lens, very similar to the contemporary Takumar, Mamiya and Yashica 1.8/55s. After they dropped their own bayonet mount they were buying in their lenses.

This one looks good but not great, contrast doesn't seem as high as it could be. As Attila says, any 50mm lens at close distance should perform very well, I have a shot of an insect on a flower head taken with the humble Tessar 2.8/50 that is razor sharp, for instance.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ferrick wrote:
kds315* wrote:
Well it should be High Q/P value then, not P/Q ... Wink


Sorry! Yes, I meant high Q/P ratio. What a result from a 16.99 EUR lens. Very Happy Very Happy


Unfair test. You're cheating using a Foveon sensor. There is no Bayer blur.

Even 10 cent scratched plastic lens takes good photos on that camera! Wink Very Happy

On Bayer camera your new lens might not produce such good result.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
There are many versions of the Petri standard lens, not sure who made them, the early M42 ones are marked Petri Orrikor, not tried one of those, the next version uses Petri's own bayonet mount and is an excellent lens, very similar to the contemporary Takumar, Mamiya and Yashica 1.8/55s. After they dropped their own bayonet mount they were buying in their lenses.

This one looks good but not great, contrast doesn't seem as high as it could be. As Attila says, any 50mm lens at close distance should perform very well, I have a shot of an insect on a flower head taken with the humble Tessar 2.8/50 that is razor sharp, for instance.


Thanks for the information. Very Happy


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

guardian wrote:
ferrick wrote:
kds315* wrote:
Well it should be High Q/P value then, not P/Q ... Wink


Sorry! Yes, I meant high Q/P ratio. What a result from a 16.99 EUR lens. Very Happy Very Happy


Unfair test. You're cheating using a Foveon sensor. There is no Bayer blur.

Even 10 cent scratched plastic lens takes good photos on that camera! Wink Very Happy

On Bayer camera your new lens might not produce such good result.


Your comments are correct in general. But I am not sure if a 10 cent scratched plastic lens can really takes good photos on that camera? Wink Question


PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Love the Foveon colors in these.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ferrick wrote:
guardian wrote:
ferrick wrote:
kds315* wrote:
Well it should be High Q/P value then, not P/Q ... Wink


Sorry! Yes, I meant high Q/P ratio. What a result from a 16.99 EUR lens. Very Happy Very Happy


Unfair test. You're cheating using a Foveon sensor. There is no Bayer blur.

Even 10 cent scratched plastic lens takes good photos on that camera! Wink Very Happy

On Bayer camera your new lens might not produce such good result.


Your comments are correct in general. But I am not sure if a 10 cent scratched plastic lens can really takes good photos on that camera? Wink Question


Acknowledged. All right. I was exaggerating a teeny bit in effort to make my point; maybe too much.

Sigma Foveon camera like yours is terrible to use, very antiquated, and only for professional. Its sole advantage is it takes phenomenal photos. I concede you show us a very distinctive and impressive combination of camera and lens.


PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seems okay to me . . . the flowers look lovely. It might be nice to see a section of the original of one of them. For 17 Euros includng shipping it's certainly a good bargain.

As for the contrast not being what it might be . . . aww, c'mon folks, this is the digital era - we can tweak that anytime in processing. A bit like we did with black-and-white film when we used vigorous developers and a harder grade of paper. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

guardian wrote:
ferrick wrote:
guardian wrote:
ferrick wrote:
kds315* wrote:
Well it should be High Q/P value then, not P/Q ... Wink


Sorry! Yes, I meant high Q/P ratio. What a result from a 16.99 EUR lens. Very Happy Very Happy


Unfair test. You're cheating using a Foveon sensor. There is no Bayer blur.

Even 10 cent scratched plastic lens takes good photos on that camera! Wink Very Happy

On Bayer camera your new lens might not produce such good result.


Your comments are correct in general. But I am not sure if a 10 cent scratched plastic lens can really takes good photos on that camera? Wink Question


Acknowledged. All right. I was exaggerating a teeny bit in effort to make my point; maybe too much.

Sigma Foveon camera like yours is terrible to use, very antiquated, and only for professional. Its sole advantage is it takes phenomenal photos. I concede you show us a very distinctive and impressive combination of camera and lens.



Couldn't agree with you more! SD15/Foveon sensor is terrible to use! That's why I seldom use it. The cameras that I use more often are K20D, GH1 and Pentax-Q. Smile Smile


PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

scsambrook wrote:
Seems okay to me . . . the flowers look lovely. It might be nice to see a section of the original of one of them. For 17 Euros includng shipping it's certainly a good bargain.

As for the contrast not being what it might be . . . aww, c'mon folks, this is the digital era - we can tweak that anytime in processing. A bit like we did with black-and-white film when we used vigorous developers and a harder grade of paper. Wink



Thank you! This is a section of the original of two of the images. Smile Smile






PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Remarkable stuff.

Props.


PostPosted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

guardian wrote:
Remarkable stuff.

Props.


Thank you! Very Happy Very Happy