View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 5883 Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:44 am Post subject: Three 105's compared |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
I thought I'd compare a SMC Takumar 105mm f/2.8, a Soligor T4 mount 105/2.8, and for fun, a SMC Takumar 50/1.4 with a generic 2x tele converter.
Much to my surprise the Soligor walked away with the prize, at least among my samples of the lenses. Production and life time experience will make every lens somewhat different. The Tak 105 I'd bought from Eric Henderson, so it should be in good condition though.
The 50 + converter pics are invariably warmer than with the other two lenses - this probably the effect of remaining yellowing in the 50/1.4. The combo got reasonably good results closed down, and at the wider openings gave a nice vintage glow look that can be useful.
The shots are all Av mode, +2 EV, AWB, K100D. Oh, and I focused, with the confirmation light lit, on the back wall, so the rail and chair are in front of the focus plane. Not ideal, but more interesting than showing the wall. In retrospect, I'd put the chair or something in the center to focus on. However, the results are similar when I did a different series of comparisons on a central object surrounded by distant objects.
Soligor 105 at f/8
Takumar 105 at f/11
Tak 50 + 2x converter at f/4
Lens order in crops: Soligor, Tak105, Tak50+2x
100% crops at f/2.8
100% crops at f/4
100% crops at f/11
JPEG file sizes:
Soligor 105:
f2.8 = 2.14mb, f4 = 2.33mb, f5.6 = 2.58mb, f8 = 2.60mb, f11 = 2.47mb
Tak 105:
f2.8 = 1.91mb, f4 = 2.15mb, f5.6 = 2.37mb, f8 = 2.3mb, f11 = 2.52 mb
Tak 50 +TC
f2.8 = 1.75mb, f4 = 1.88mb, f5.6 = 2.04mb, f8 = 2.18mb, f11 = 2.42mb
(click on images to get to the flickr pages, where full size versions of the 100% crops is available) _________________ -Jussi
Camera photos
Print Photographica
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Spotmatic
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 Posts: 4045 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Spotmatic wrote:
I think it's obvious that the Takumar was focused on a different point. This is not lens softness but OOF softness. You can actually see it in the windows: the left windows of the Tak are sharper than the Soligor windows... So, the focus plane is different I think. _________________ Peter - Moderator
Pentax K-5 + Pentax 645 + Canon 5D + Bessa RF 10,5cm Heliar, and a 'little' bag full of MF lenses. The lens list is * here *.
My fast 80s: Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 83mm f/1.9 - Super-Takumar 85mm f/1.9 - FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited - Cyclop 85/1.5 (Helios-40 innards) - Komura 80mm f/1.8 - Meyer Görlitz Primoplan 7,5cm 1:1.9 - Carl Zeiss Jena 80mm f/1.8 Pancolar - Canon 85mm f/1.8 S.S.C. - Canon 85mm f/1.2 S.S.C. Aspherical |
|
Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
I don't find where the soligor was focused.
Anyway, the tak 105 is a great lens, and this test shows it clearly. _________________ Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 5883 Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
As I explain in the text - for all three I focused on the center of the frame, i.e. the back wall, so that the focus confirm light in the K100D was lit. This however could produce a difference in absolute focus - I agree the Tak 105 is probably focused further out than the Soligor. They were all a smidge short of infinity in this shot.
But similarly, you can look at the back wall in each case.
With digital crop cameras, this focus issue can be thorny indeed.
My main objective was met however - seems to me the Soligor is at least the equivalent to the SMC Takumar.
And the 50 + 2x is a useful tool for special effects. _________________ -Jussi
Camera photos
Print Photographica
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Spotmatic
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 Posts: 4045 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Spotmatic wrote:
Nesster wrote: |
As I explain in the text - for all three I focused on the center of the frame, i.e. the back wall, so that the focus confirm light in the K100D was lit. |
And that's where the problem may lie: in my experience, the focus confirmation of our Pentaxes with MF lenses leaves (at least to me!) a lot to be desired. Especially with subjects further away it's almost impossible to have two cameras focus on exactly the same subject. Live View helps a lot here, but the K20D's live view is very mediocre at best, and your K100D cannot do it.
Thanks for the tests, however! _________________ Peter - Moderator
Pentax K-5 + Pentax 645 + Canon 5D + Bessa RF 10,5cm Heliar, and a 'little' bag full of MF lenses. The lens list is * here *.
My fast 80s: Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 83mm f/1.9 - Super-Takumar 85mm f/1.9 - FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited - Cyclop 85/1.5 (Helios-40 innards) - Komura 80mm f/1.8 - Meyer Görlitz Primoplan 7,5cm 1:1.9 - Carl Zeiss Jena 80mm f/1.8 Pancolar - Canon 85mm f/1.8 S.S.C. - Canon 85mm f/1.2 S.S.C. Aspherical |
|
Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008 Posts: 6627 Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
Ditto on the focus issue, even if the focas plane or object selected is the same, the Pentax focus confirm works across a range of values for "focused", and you can get different focus points on several attempts even if everything else is constant. Thats why I try to bracket focus.
I think the same problem exists with other focus confirm systems, the confirm logic (and autofocus logic) has to work on the basis of "good enough" rather than "perfect", otherwise the thing may hunt forever.
In any case, the Takumar 105 seems to have better contrast than the Soligor, though its probably going to be difficult to judge them on sharpness. The Soligor may be sharper indeed.
I have the Vivitar version of the T4 105, which seems to be the same Tokina lens, and I find it very sharp. _________________ I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nemesis101
Joined: 25 Mar 2008 Posts: 2050 Location: Oregon USA
Expire: 2015-01-22
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nemesis101 wrote:
I'd agree!
I have a split image wedge on my K10D and when it shows sharp, the confirm light does not - and the other way around.. as I said in a previous post, I tried out the F4 SELF-autofocus (i.e. the lens itself does the focus thing using built-in mechanism irrespective of the camera used) Tamron Adaptall-2 70-210 lens I got from DOF - and when it said it was sharp, it agreed with the wedge, not the MF confirm lamp - so it would appear that there is a generic problem here?
Odd as I said, how an autofocus lens has rescued a manual focus fanatic lol
Could the wedge upset the AF on the Pentax? I might try and replace the original plain glass screen - but that looked sharp no matter what, on most MF lenses!
Doug.
Spotmatic wrote: |
Nesster wrote: |
As I explain in the text - for all three I focused on the center of the frame, i.e. the back wall, so that the focus confirm light in the K100D was lit. |
And that's where the problem may lie: in my experience, the focus confirmation of our Pentaxes with MF lenses leaves (at least to me!) a lot to be desired. Especially with subjects further away it's almost impossible to have two cameras focus on exactly the same subject. Live View helps a lot here, but the K20D's live view is very mediocre at best, and your K100D cannot do it.
Thanks for the tests, however! |
_________________ Lenses and cameras:
Amateurs worry about equipment
Pros worry about money,
Masters worry about light. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 5883 Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
Thank you all - I was debating whether to post these due to the problems, but I'm glad I did. Lots of good info in the discussion, you guys are great! _________________ -Jussi
Camera photos
Print Photographica
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Farside
Joined: 01 Sep 2007 Posts: 6549 Location: Ireland
Expire: 2013-12-27
|
Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Farside wrote:
nemesis101 wrote: |
Could the wedge upset the AF on the Pentax? I might try and replace the original plain glass screen - but that looked sharp no matter what, on most MF lenses!
|
This isn't the first time I've read this, but I find the screen on mine snaps into and out of focus very well, even in room lighting. Double checking it with the confirm light, it's always backed up exactly (well, as exactly as reasonable for one of these). I suspect the PO set this camera up or had Pentax or somebody who knew about them do it properly. Otoh, maybe I've just been lucky with the lenses I've used on it so far... _________________ Dave - Moderator
Camera Fiend and Biograph Operator
If I wanted soot and whitewash I'd be a chimney sweep and house painter.
The Lenses of Farside (click)
BUY FRESH FOMAPAN TO HELP KEEP THE FACTORY ALIVE ---
Foma Campaign topic -
http://forum.mflenses.com/foma-campaign-t55443.html
FOMAPAN on forum -
http://www.mflenses.com/fs.php?sw=Fomapan
Webshop EU
http://www.fomafoto.com/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wormhandler
Joined: 19 May 2008 Posts: 106 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wormhandler wrote:
I do have the regular screen for my k10D and have the same problem. When I see it as sharp, the AF-confirm light doesn't.
If I go by the assist, pictures will not be focussed correctly.
/ Jan _________________
Those which I use:
Carl Zeiss Jena:Tessar 5cm 3,5 Tessar 2,8 50mm (3 versions), Sonnar 135mm 3,5, Tessar 135mm 4,5 (Compur), Flektogon 35mm 2,4, Sonnar 180mm 2,8, Sonnar 300mm 4
Cosina Voigtländer:125mm 2,5 Macro APO Lanthar.
Enna Werk Munchen:Tele-zoom 85-250mm
Ernst Leitz Wetzlar:Voort 90mm 4, Hektor 135mm 4,5
Helios:Helios 44-4 (& 44-2) 58mm 2
Industar:Industar 5cm 3,5, Industar-22 5cm 3,5-rangefinder
Isco Göttingen:Tele Westanar 180mm 4
Meyer Optik Görlitz:Lydith 30mm 3,5, Domiplan 50mm 2,8, Primotar 50 3,5, Orestor 135mm 2,8, Telemegor 150 5,5, Telemegor 180mm 5,5, Orestegor 200mm 4 Telemegor 400mm 5,6.
Mir:Mir 1B 37mm 2,8
Nikon:
Nikkor 35 1.4, Nikkor 85 2, Series E 35mm 2,5, Nikkor 35mm 2, Micro Nikkor 55mm 2,8, Series E 100mm 2,8, Nikkor 135m 2,8, Zoom-Nikkor 35-105mm.
Olympus:F-Zuiko Auto-S 50mm 1.8 (m42), E-zuiko Auto-T 135mm 2,5 (m42), Zuiko 85mm 2 MC (OM)
Panagor (Same as vivitar i Guess):28mm 2,5, 200mm 3,5
Pentacon29mm 2,8, 50mm 1,8, 135mm 2,8
Pentax:Auto takumar 35mm 3.5
SMC-takumar 28 3.5, SMC-Takumar 50mm 1.4, SMC-takumar 135mm 3.5, Takumar (bayonet) 135mm 2.5,Takumar 500mm 4
SMC M 35mm 3.5, SMC M 40 2.8, SMC M 50mm 2, SMC M 50mm 1.7, SMC A 50mm 2, SMC M 100 2.8, SMC M 100mm 4 Macro, SMC M 135mm 3,5 SMC M 200mm 4, SMC M 80-200mm 4,5
Shacht af Ulm:Edixa travenar 50mm 2,8, Edixa Travenar 135mm 3,5
Schneider KreuznachXenar 50mm 3,5, Xenar 50mm 2,8, Radionar 80mm 2,9 (Folder), Radionar 10,5cm 4,5 (Folder), Tele-Xenar 135mm 3,5, Symmar 150mm 5,6, Tele-Xenar 200mm 5,5.
Soligor:100-300mm 5 C/D.
Steinheil:Actinar 10,5cm 4,5 (Prontor)
Tamron:Adaptall2 28mm 2.5, Adaptall2 35-70 3.5, Auto Tamron 28 2.8, Auto.tamron 105 2.5, Auto-tamron 135 2.8, Auto Tamron 200 3.5, Auto Tamron 300 5.6 Tamron SP 70-210 3.5-4
Tokyo Koki:Tele-Tokina 135mm 2.8, Tele-Tokina 135mm 3.5 (brand kennex), Tele-Tokina 300 5.5.
Vivitar:Series 1 70-210 (Kiron)
Yashica:
Auto Yashinon-DX 50mm 1.7, Auto Yashinon-DX 50mm 2, Yashica ML 50mm 1.7, Yashica ML 50mm 2 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 5883 Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
Here's one sample of the other comparison I did, at f/5.6, the focus match is a bit better (though I think the Tak is a bit further back focused than the Soligor), but the exposures aren't precisely the same...
Gives a better feel for the Soligor/Tokina cool tone vs. Takumar, and shows the two lenses about equal, in my eyes anyway.
Click on pic to go to flickr where a 100% size - actual pixels, no post processing - is available for those interested in peeping. _________________ -Jussi
Camera photos
Print Photographica
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Spotmatic
Joined: 18 Aug 2008 Posts: 4045 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Spotmatic wrote:
nemesis101 wrote: |
Could the wedge upset the AF on the Pentax? |
No; the viewfinder has nothing to do with the AF function as the sensor is located below the mirror. So even if you take out the ground glass screen the camera will still do AF. _________________ Peter - Moderator
Pentax K-5 + Pentax 645 + Canon 5D + Bessa RF 10,5cm Heliar, and a 'little' bag full of MF lenses. The lens list is * here *.
My fast 80s: Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 83mm f/1.9 - Super-Takumar 85mm f/1.9 - FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited - Cyclop 85/1.5 (Helios-40 innards) - Komura 80mm f/1.8 - Meyer Görlitz Primoplan 7,5cm 1:1.9 - Carl Zeiss Jena 80mm f/1.8 Pancolar - Canon 85mm f/1.8 S.S.C. - Canon 85mm f/1.2 S.S.C. Aspherical |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|