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

ISCO Göttingen Westromat 35/2.8 EDIXA
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Gallery MF
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2011 10:12 pm    Post subject: ISCO Göttingen Westromat 35/2.8 EDIXA Reply with quote
Some snapshots from a vintage ISCO Göttingen Edixa 35/2.8 Westromat in Zebra outfit I bought the other day in M42 mount.

The images are mostly boring snapshots, but I'd like to share some results with this lens. It is hard to believe how creamy the bokeh is, and it is only 35mm. It almost feels like I have a FF sensor now since the background is more blurred than I'm used to on APS-C. The performance is quite mediocre at 2.8 in terms of sharpness and ghosting, but it behaves very good from f4 where I tend to use it mostly. I toss in some comparison shots with the famous Flektogon 35/2.4 MC at similar f-stop.
I'm also happy to conclude that the CA and PF performance of the Westromat is even better than the already good Flektogon.

All shots between f/2.8 and 4.

Over sharpened (edge halos) but that's not what is important here...






This is not sharp due to hand shake, but look at the focus transition instead.


Sweet eyes...


Bokeh shots, first @ f2.8. As can be seen, ghosting is quite severe, but bokeh is really nice, like a painting.


Now @f/4. Nice and round highlight rings despite stopping down with only 5 blades in the iris. The hand painted texture from f/2.8 is more or less gone, but the overall appearance is very nice.


Now really unscientific bokeh comparison with Flektogon.
First Flek @f/4. E.g. look at the Ford sign or green wall at far back/right.


Now ISCO @f/4 focused approximately at the same distance

I have sen that the ISCO is much more creamy/blurry at f/4 than the Flek is even wide open.

Now sharpness/contrast comparison with Flektogon (infinity focus).
First Flek @f/4


Now ISCO @f/4

No big issues here, quite similar results on corner/center sharpness, contrast etc. The Westramat seems a tad wider.

Comment on that?

Last edited by torbod on Mon Nov 07, 2011 10:29 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
A pity that this thread was left unanswered. Really nice and surprising samples from this lens!


PostPosted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
A pity that this thread was left unanswered. Really nice and surprising samples from this lens!


+10!

#2 and #3 are Shocked


PostPosted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 12:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm guessing the ISCO infinity is at a longer distance than the Flek, thus the better bokeh in the first comparison set. How does MFD compare?


PostPosted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I missed this topic.
woodrim wrote:
I'm guessing the ISCO infinity is at a longer distance than the Flek, thus the better bokeh in the first comparison set. How does MFD compare?

+1 I would like to see comparison in closest distance too
I have Isco westrocolor 50/1,9, it looks has same character with this lens


PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have missed your replies on this. Unfortunately I have sold the lens, but let med recall my findings from old brain cache.

woodrim wrote:
I'm guessing the ISCO infinity is at a longer distance than the Flek, thus the better bokeh in the first comparison set. How does MFD compare?


I have not focused with infinity in any image, rather by eyesight with both lenses. But at the infinity shot samples I think both hit the infinity stop. From what I remember both had similar and quite good infinity calibration.

As for the first bokeh comparison shot, non is of course focused to infinity. Focus is set on portrait distance, approximately 1 meter, so I don't really understand you comment?
So, how can I know both are focused at the same distance. Well it was a part of my testing when I bought the lens. As I said, non scientific, but this is how it was:
The guy (seller) in the image is leaning against my car. I stood at the front door in both shots and to reproduce as identical focusing distances as possible (since he had to leave suddenly). I set the focus at the rear part of the car where he stood. So I would assume a maximum focusing difference of 20 cm. 20 cm can be much for OOF rendering at MFD, but the focus is set far from that. The results are representative for the difference, I promise. I have done a lot of A/B switching with these lenses in test shooting since I was so impressed with results I got on an APS-C sensor. As I wrote, the bokeh was blurrier at f/4 with the ISCO than the Flek was at wide open. I have not experienced anything like it before, especially not with anything as wide as 35mm. I can post some more images with it if anyone is interested, but I have no more A/B comparison shots.

Cheers
T

Last edited by torbod on Mon Nov 07, 2011 10:27 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
IAZA wrote:
I missed this topic.
woodrim wrote:
I'm guessing the ISCO infinity is at a longer distance than the Flek, thus the better bokeh in the first comparison set. How does MFD compare?

+1 I would like to see comparison in closest distance too
I have Isco westrocolor 50/1,9, it looks has same character with this lens


Look at my reply above, bots lenses are focused at close distance, not MFD but 1 meter or so.

Cheers
/T
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Gallery MF
Page 1 of 1