Nikkor 35mm f2 and Mir24N close up comparison

[Richard_D]

Not really an extensive test, or one carried out under contrlled conditions but some close up shots from each lens. Just for fun I'll reveal which was which later:

Lens A at f2:

Lens B at f2:



Lens A at f2.8:




Lens B at f2.8:


_________________
Richard

The interesting bit:

Nikkors: 20mm f2.8 AIS, 24mm f2.8 AIS, 28mm f2.8 AIS, 35mm f2.8 AIS, 50mm f1.4 AI, 50mm f1.48AI, 50m f2 AI,
55mm f3.5 AI'd, 105mm f4 AI, 135mm f2.8 AI'd, 135mm f3.5 AI'd, 200mm f4 AI'd, 300mm f4.5 AIS .
Nikon E Series: 100mm f2.8 .
Soviet Nikon Mount: Jupiter 9 (85mm f2), Mir-24N (35mm f2),
Tair-11a (135mm f2.8 ) .
Other: Meyer-Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm f2.8 (M42), Asahi Super Takumar 55 mm f2 (M42) ,Tokina 17mm f3.5 (AIS), Tamron 300mm f5.6 SP, Tamron 500mm f8 SP, Tamron 70-210 3.5(constant) .

DSLR: Nikon D200. 35mm SLRsNikon FE, Nikon EL2, Pentax S1a.

Sub-Minature: Pentax Auto 110, 18mm f2.8, 24mm f2.8, 50mm f2.8.

More to come...

[Seymore]

I suspect A is the MIR and B is the Nikkor.



so what do I win Richard?
_________________
Seymore...
- smugmug

"One axiom I discovered proved to be of great value: the client seldom, if ever, knows exactly what he wants from the photographer. However, his pride does not allow him to give you any such ridiculous impression. The desire and need for interpretative work is usually uninformed and the client often looks to the professional for guidance in this respect.
Ansel Adams - An Autobiography

[poilu]

I don't see difference except the focus point changed between each shot. You really need a liveview
How was the spaghetti and the wine ?
I don't have any of those lens so I guess
I prefer B=nikkor but would be happy with A=mir
_________________
Have a nice day

[Orio]

It is very difficult to tell which is what, for a number of reasons:

- small resize (100% size is essential to any predicting)
- artificial light (kills colour subleties and colour is a key factor for MIR)
- automatic white balancing in the machine evening out colour differences
- machined tools as subjects (it's easier to judge on natural objects, machined tools make all lenses look equally sharp)
- simple background (no objects in bg to evaluate)
- #2 has different focus points so direct comparison impossible

Based solely on the quality of the blur in the first image (without the other parameters described above), I'd say Mir=A - but it's more a hazard than an educated guess.

-
_________________
_
ХОРИОС-61 ( ώρεος ) : Lens sana in corpore sano

Main Tools:
LENSES: Russian, Zeiss, Leitz, old Nikkors.
DSLR: Canon 5D, 400D. SLR: Voigtländer Bessaflex TM, Nikon FM2, Canon 50E, Contax 167MT.
RANGEFINDERS: Contax G2, Canonette QL17. MEDIUM FORMAT: Pentacon 6, Zeiss Super Ikonta.
Read Full List HERE
www.timelessphotography.eu
www.oriofoto.net

"Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. " (George Orwell)
_

[Richard_D]

[Richard_D]

[Richard_D]

[Orio]

[Richard_D]

[Richard_D]

I forgot to say yes A was the Mir24n...
_________________
Richard

The interesting bit:

Nikkors: 20mm f2.8 AIS, 24mm f2.8 AIS, 28mm f2.8 AIS, 35mm f2.8 AIS, 50mm f1.4 AI, 50mm f1.48AI, 50m f2 AI,
55mm f3.5 AI'd, 105mm f4 AI, 135mm f2.8 AI'd, 135mm f3.5 AI'd, 200mm f4 AI'd, 300mm f4.5 AIS .
Nikon E Series: 100mm f2.8 .
Soviet Nikon Mount: Jupiter 9 (85mm f2), Mir-24N (35mm f2),
Tair-11a (135mm f2.8 ) .
Other: Meyer-Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm f2.8 (M42), Asahi Super Takumar 55 mm f2 (M42) ,Tokina 17mm f3.5 (AIS), Tamron 300mm f5.6 SP, Tamron 500mm f8 SP, Tamron 70-210 3.5(constant) .

DSLR: Nikon D200. 35mm SLRsNikon FE, Nikon EL2, Pentax S1a.

Sub-Minature: Pentax Auto 110, 18mm f2.8, 24mm f2.8, 50mm f2.8.

More to come...

[LucisPictor]

Despite the AWB the MIR shots seem warmer to me...
_________________
"Schnäppchenjäger" | "KAPCTEH" | "Karusutenu" | "Carsten" | T-shirt?
Cams in use: EOS 40D, EOS 350D, EOS500, Spotmatic SPII, Yashica-24, EXA I & 1c, Zenit EM; Oly 35RC,Minolta Hi-Matic E & F, Ricoh 500RF, Yashica Electro 35 GS, FED-3b and some others...
Lenses in use:
Asahi Pentax: 2.8/28;3.5/35;1.4/50;1.7/50;2.8/105;28-80
Canon (AF):1.8/50;17-85;75-300
Former GDR: Pentacon 3.5/30; Pentaflex 1.8/50; CZJ 2.8/50; CZJ 4/135; Pentacon 4/200
Fujinon: 43-75
Hanimex: 3.5/23; 4/100;80-200
Hoya: 25-42;80-205
Kiron: 2/28;70-210
Leica: Elmarit-R 2.8/35
Minolta: 1.7/50
Nikkor: 2.8/24;2/35;2/50;1.2/55;1.8/85;3.5/135
West German: Ludwig 2.9/50; Meyer 2.8/100; Will 4.5/105; Enna 3.5/135; Zeiss 4/135;Isco 4/135; Enna 4.5/240
Olympus: 3.5/28;1.4/50;3.5/135
Rikenon: 1.7/50;35-70
Rollei/Voigtländer: 1.4/55;1.8/50
Russian: Peleng3.5/8;Zenitar2.8/16;MIR2.8/37;Volna2.8/50;Industar3.5/50;Industar3.5/5cm;Helios2/50;Helios2/58;Volna2.8/80;Jupiter2/85;Kaleinar2.8/100;Tair2.8/135;Jupiter3.5/135;Jupiter4/135;Telear3.5/200;Jupiter4/200;Tair4.5/300;RF: Jupiter2.8/35;Industar2.8/53
Sigma: 28-85;28-105(AF);17-70(AF)
Soligor: 28-105;35-200;70-220
Tamron: 2.5/24;2.5/135;2.8/135;60-300;70-210
Tokina: 28-105;80-200;12-24(AF);70-210(AF);
Vivitar: 3.5/17;2/24;2/28;2.5/28;2.8/28
Yashica: 1.7/50;2/5cm
Other Japanese:Cosina3.8/20;Petri2.8/28;Albinar2.8/28;Porst1.8/35,2.8/135;Tomioka1.4/55;Weltblick3.5/135;Opticam2.8/135;Beroflex 8/500;Spiratone28-200;Maginon70-210
Green are the lenses I shoot the most.
More? http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65

[Flor27]

Any lens comparison test should include a basic distortion test and corners performance (shot ot a brick wall or something flat and with vertical & horizontal lines) this is especially usefull for wide angle lenses

Yesterday in the train, I did this test and I was shocked to see that a Takumar 55/2 had a very pronounced barrel distortion side by side an Helios-44-2 58/2 ...
_________________
Switching from M42 to Minolta MD & Contax/Yashica

[Seymore]

[Orio]

I look again and again and I can not see any difference in the colouring. They seem identical to me. only difference is that the Nikkor photos are fractionally darker.
_________________
_
ХОРИОС-61 ( ώρεος ) : Lens sana in corpore sano

Main Tools:
LENSES: Russian, Zeiss, Leitz, old Nikkors.
DSLR: Canon 5D, 400D. SLR: Voigtländer Bessaflex TM, Nikon FM2, Canon 50E, Contax 167MT.
RANGEFINDERS: Contax G2, Canonette QL17. MEDIUM FORMAT: Pentacon 6, Zeiss Super Ikonta.
Read Full List HERE
www.timelessphotography.eu
www.oriofoto.net

"Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. " (George Orwell)
_

[patrickh]

I think the Mir does uncommonly well in the comparison, from what one can determine with the two shots. Remember the 35/2 nikkor is one of their more highly regarded lenses - I know I love mine. Then also - compare prices and do the value for money thing.


patrickh

PS down the road I am certainly going to try the Mir.
_________________
DSLR: Nikon D70 Nikon D200 Canon 40D
MF Zooms: Kiron 28-85/3.5, 28-105/3.2, 75-150/3.5, Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AIS // MF Primes: Nikkor 20/4 AI, 24/2 AI, 28/2 AI, 28/2.8 AIS, 28/3.5 AI, 35/1.4 AIS, 35/2 AIS, 35/2.8 PC, 45/2.8 P, 50/1.4 AIS, 50/1.8 AIS, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 AIS micro, 55/3.5 AI micro, 85/2 AI, 100/2,8 E, 105/1,8 AIS, 105/2,5 AIS, 135/2 AIS, 135/2.8 AIS, Nikkor 200/4 AI, 200/4 AIS micro, 3004.5 AI, 300/4.5 AI ED, Kiron 28/2 Panagor 135/2.8, Tamron 28/2.5, Tamron 90/2.5 macro, Vivitar 90/2.5 macro (Tokina) Voigtlander 90/3.5 Vivitar 105/2.5 macro (Kiron) Kaleinar 100/2.8 AI Tamron 135/2.5, Vivitar 135/2.8CF, 200/3.5, Tokina 400/5,6
M42: Flektogon 35/2.4, Curtagon 35/4, Arsat 50/1.4, Volna-6 50/2.8 macro,Mamiya 50/1.4, CZJ Pancolar 50/1,8, Oreston 50/1.8, Industar 50/3.5, Helios 58/2, Jupiter 85/2, Helios 85/1.5, Jupiter 135/4, Jupiter 135/3.5, Tair 135/2.8 Jupiter 200/4
C/Y: Yashica 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8
P6 : Mir 38 65/3.5, Kaleinar 150/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8