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

Minolta MD 35/1.8 vs Canon FDn 35/2.8 vs Samyang FE 35/2.8
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:46 pm    Post subject: Minolta MD 35/1.8 vs Canon FDn 35/2.8 vs Samyang FE 35/2.8 Reply with quote
Yes, an AF has seack in the test, has aspherics and high refractive lenses. It does not seem fair, but the life is like that. The photos are JPGs direct from camera, all -1/3 EV exp, neutral settings and AWB. The automatic corrections of vignetting, aberration and distortion have been deactivated in the Samyang in all shots.

Minolta MD 35/1.8 at f/2.8

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3703682

Canon FDn 35/2.8 at f /2.8

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3703684

Samyang FE 35/2.8 at f/2.8

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3703686

I expected better results from the Samyang in the extremes and better contrast, but simply can not against the Canon. Minolta is left behind even in the middle zone.

Minolta MD 35/1.8 at f/2.8 100% crop


Canon FDn 35/ 2.8 at f/2.8 100% crop


Samyang FE 35/2.8 to f/2.8 100% crop


At f/8 very minimal differences and all are personal preferences. But I still see more contrast in Canon. If we activate the corrections in the Samyang, we will obtain a visible loss of contrast from f/2.8 that disappears progressively until f/8. Without corrections, Samayang's vignetting does not completely disappear at f/8, its opponents have no problems at f/5.6.

Minolta MD 35/1.8 at f/8

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3703696

Canon FDn 35/2.8 at f/8

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3703697

Samyang FE 35/2.8 at f/8

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3703698

What about the Minolta? Well, wide open in the center is sharp as the others and makes very beautiful images. I never worry about the edges especially, in my city I almost never use f/2.8, just to play, there is a lot of light, too much. The test is incomplete, does not include shots at different distances and light conditions ... possibly its main attractions are a nice image interpretation and the soft bokeh it produces at f/1.8 in close shots.

Minolta MD 35/1.8 at f/1.8

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3696598

Minolta MD 35/1.8 at f/4

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3696601

In my opinion, in this fight, Canon wins. No wonder, because I had previously read this comparison, where a Sony Zeiss Sonnar 35 / 2.8 does not win against a FDn 35/2.8.
https://towarzystwonieustraszonychsoczewek.blogspot.com.es/2017/10/sony-zeiss-sonnar-t-fe-35-mm-f28-za-vs.html#more

Happy shots!


PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ciao Anktonio -

sorry to disturb your peace a little bit Wink

When looking at the 100% crops from the first test subject (palm trees at f2.8) it is obvious that the Minolta is fucused differently from the Canon (and the Samyang). Obviously the Minoltas' focus is far behind the palm tree shown in the crop, while the Canon seems to be spot-on. I don't know how you've been focusing; but whenever you see such results you should re-run the test before publishing Wink

Right now im far away from my vintage gear, and therefore i can't re-do your test myself; but i'm quite sure that something in your test is not entirely as it should be. Maybe you can re-do your own "palm tree test" using
1) a proper tripod and
2) careful focusing at the working aperture (i. e. f2.Cool, and then
3) publish these new results here again?

Thank you and greetings from Rome / Italy Wink

Stephan


PostPosted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
Ciao Anktonio -

sorry to disturb your peace a little bit Wink

When looking at the 100% crops from the first test subject (palm trees at f2.8) it is obvious that the Minolta is fucused differently from the Canon (and the Samyang). Obviously the Minoltas' focus is far behind the palm tree shown in the crop, while the Canon seems to be spot-on. I don't know how you've been focusing; but whenever you see such results you should re-run the test before publishing Wink

Right now im far away from my vintage gear, and therefore i can't re-do your test myself; but i'm quite sure that something in your test is not entirely as it should be. Maybe you can re-do your own "palm tree test" using
1) a proper tripod and
2) careful focusing at the working aperture (i. e. f2.Cool, and then
3) publish these new results here again?

Thank you and greetings from Rome / Italy Wink

Stephan


I noticed the same thing.

And from personal experience I know it can be extremely difficult to get the focus plane exact on some lenses, even with tripod, live view and 10x zoom.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 3:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The MD will not be as good as the other slower lens in the corners. But it should not be as bad as you say, at least in my copy.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lenses have different focal lengths! Samyang wider than Canon wider than MD.

Edit: different field curvatures...


PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The MD35/1.8 is quite a bit worse than the MD35/2.8 and I'd expect the nFD35/2.8 to be on par with the Minolta f/2.8

http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-nfd35-2-vs-minolta-md35-1-8-and-md35-2-8-update-t75831.html

I've heard good things about the Samyang (complaints are mostly about the AF). The size & price are quite attractive, a well-done comparison with some good manual 35's (like the nFD35/2.Cool would be very interesting.

I've been thinking about getting one (currently ~280€) but the FE28/2 seems like a safer bet (not as tiny but no AF issues and known IQ).
There's a good chance that Amazon will have the FE28 on sale on their next "Cyber Monday", they sold it for 319€ last "Prime Day".
I'd prefer the Samyang for it's size but there's just not enough reliable info out there yet.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Visualopsins ... yes!

Calvin83, I think the defect is in my copy.

Stephan, congratulations, you are in one of the most beautiful cities in the world, perhaps the most beautiful. To make me forgive mistakes, I followed all your instructions Laughing

You're right, I should have been more careful when shooting and checking, I tried to focus on the fisherman but I certainly did not do this with precision. Thank you for your observation. The Minolta is an MD II, penultimate version. Now I have used a tripod with cable and I have disabled stabilization, AF and corrections. All at f2.8. Focus on the lady with the white hat (x12 on EVF) ... sometimes it's not easy as blotafton says.

Samyang

100 % crop

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3704128

Minolta

100 % crop

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3704129

Canon

100 % crop

Original: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9073487821/download/3704130

Mmm... After all it seems that I did not focus so badly the first time :/

I still see problems in the MD in the left border and adjacent area. I think my copy is bad, I do not see these problems in the right border. This is curious, I never noticed it before. At f8, I do not see anything relevant, all are very similar, maybe the Samyang shows something of less contrast than the others.

Greetings from the only subtropical zone in Europe Smile
Happy shots!


PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
anktonio wrote:

...
Mmm... After all it seems that I did not focus so badly the first time :/

I still see problems in the MD in the left border and adjacent area. I think my copy is bad, I do not see these problems in the right border. This is curious, I never noticed it before.
...


This might well be the explanation, and i'm glad that you have found out.

Another, more "philosophical" question is focusing of lenses that have either field curvature or focus shift when stopping down, or both. Obviously fast wideangles are especially prone to this. In my tests, i usually do focusing a) wide open and b) in the center of the image. One might also choose another approach, e. g. focusing somewhere in the field (to find a good "average" between center and corner, in the case of lenses with field curvature), or focusing at the used aperture (for lenses with focus shift). Honestly, i don't know which one is better, but certainly it is useful to state how one done one's tests.

Thank you very much for repeating the test - i will do a similar test with my Minolta MC and MD 1.8/35mm, MC 2.8/35mm [7/7] and MD 2.8/35mm [5/5], and with the AF 2/35mm as soon as i'm back home, at the beginning of december.

Stephan


PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
anktonio wrote:

...
Mmm... After all it seems that I did not focus so badly the first time :/

I still see problems in the MD in the left border and adjacent area. I think my copy is bad, I do not see these problems in the right border. This is curious, I never noticed it before.
...


This might well be the explanation, and i'm glad that you have found out.

Another, more "philosophical" question is focusing of lenses that have either field curvature or focus shift when stopping down, or both. Obviously fast wideangles are especially prone to this. In my tests, i usually do focusing a) wide open and b) in the center of the image. One might also choose another approach, e. g. focusing somewhere in the field (to find a good "average" between center and corner, in the case of lenses with field curvature), or focusing at the used aperture (for lenses with focus shift). Honestly, i don't know which one is better, but certainly it is useful to state how one done one's tests.

Thank you very much for repeating the test - i will do a similar test with my Minolta MC and MD 1.8/35mm, MC 2.8/35mm [7/7] and MD 2.8/35mm [5/5], and with the AF 2/35mm as soon as i'm back home, at the beginning of december.

Stephan


Interesting! So we should be focusing at taking aperture, preferably using visual means to place the dof onto the subject? Hey! That's what I do!


PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
visualopsins wrote:

...
Interesting! So we should be focusing at taking aperture, preferably using visual means to place the dof onto the subject? Hey! That's what I do!


Wink ... for practical photography, of course, its best to find the "middle way". My Canon TS-E 4/17mm L, for instance, give much better corner resolution when i focus at about 65% of the distance between center and extreme corner - and center resolution remains very good (compared to focusing in the center). Using the lens on the A7 series requires this somewhat strange focusing method even when the lens ist stopped down to f11 or f16 (fully shifted).

If, however, i want to see (show) how good the lensmaker has corrected faults like field curvature or spherical aberrations/focus shift, i prefer to focus in the middle of the image.

Stephan


PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Unexpectedly. nFD were the leaders. Modern Samyang clearly worse. Thank you for the test.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
There is field curvature on A7 but it is sharp enough WO for close ups.

http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-md-w-rokkor-x-35mm-f1-8-on-sony-a7-t73617.html
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1