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

Seven different lenses compared at f/2.8
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 8:50 am    Post subject: Seven different lenses compared at f/2.8 Reply with quote

More or less spontaneous boke' test. I chose f/2.8 because I wanted to see what sort effect each lens's aperture blades would have on the boke' - and interestingly despite the variety of formulas here probably the most noticeable difference between them all is the effect the blades have on OOF highlights.









With the exception of the Yashinons all of the lenses are Planar derivatives. The Yashinon 2.8 is a tessar clone, and the f/2 is an ultron type. The Vivitar and Petri Orikkor are both 7 element planar derivatives - although they are quite different from each other.

Despite these differences each lens renders remarkably similar to each other lens. The Yashinon f/2 give a slightly softer effect, and the Petri gives a bit more sparkle, but that is about all I can see. In terms of obtrusiveness of the effect of the aperture blades the Petri 1.8/55 seems to give the most prominent effect. All the other lenses you have to look more closely for it. The Yashinon 2.8 of course gives perfectly circular highlights as it is wide open - it also gives the lowest contrast of the bunch.

Of course when shot wide open the differences are magnified, and different environments may bring out more character.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 10:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would like to know if you have keep the camera setting for all of the photos(AWB and shutter speed etc.). Have you do any PP to the photos?

Thanks,


PostPosted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 11:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No PP other than resizing. The Xenon and Vivitar both required slightly shorter exposures than the other lenses. Perhaps a fault with the apertures, or perhaps just better light transmission. Otherwise all settings were the same for all photos.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for sharing your results. The differences are very subtle but to my eye I found the Xenon, the Vivitar and the Orikkor to be ever so slightly crisper. They all seem to be great choices.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JJB wrote:
Thank you for sharing your results. The differences are very subtle but to my eye I found the Xenon, the Vivitar and the Orikkor to be ever so slightly crisper. They all seem to be great choices.

Xenon and Vivitar were my picks too.