Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Two 35mm lens comparison
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Sep 28, 2008 9:31 pm    Post subject: Two 35mm lens comparison Reply with quote

Hey, the title is too ambitious. Just simply compare/shoot the same scene
and add comments. One of lenses is AF only, so it was too difficult to focus
the exactly same point, more or less.

Left side: CZ G-planar 2/35mm with G2 (manual aperture and shutter setting)
Right side: CV Ultron 1.7/35mm with Bessa-R4M (manual only)
The film used is FUJI Reala (ISO 100), and scanner is V700 with 2,400 dpi no USM.
Each photo were auot-colour adjusted by PSE (PS Element), no other PP were done except for resizing.

NOTE: if photos not showed LEFT & RIGHT, the top is G-Planar 35 and the bottom is Ultron 35.

@f2 At this wide aperture, aberration seems to worse for Ultron 35, even though it is sharper than G-Planar 35.


@f5.6 More or less same sharpness to me,


@f2 again Outer area of G-Planar shot is much softer than Ultron 35's, which was expected (by me)


@f2 too (somehow exposure was fairly different, G-Planar photo was adjusted to match Ulron's)


@f2 this one is not good, they were focused totally different place (see only colour please)


G-Planar 35 is considerably wider field of view than Ultron, and has consistently more colour saturation.
One thing I noticed is G-Planar seems to have deeper DoF at the same aperture, though my focusing might be faulty too.

Generally Ultron 35mm is sharper lens at wider apertures, but less saturated colour (comparing to Zeiss' by the way),
I cannot tell which has nicer drawing in general. My conclusion is that it is very hard to compare lenses. Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy

One thing I forgot to say, or two. G-Planar can focus to 50cm while Ultron can go only to 90cm. And CV Ultron 35mm is
faster lens with F1.7, which may be useful for some. YMMV


PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 1:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think I'd be happy with either one, both seem to be very good performers!
If I had to pick one, I'd probably go with the Planar for its closer focusing
abilities, rather than speed.

Nice shots, BTW, Koji-san! Smile

Bill


PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice idea of comparison, Koji.
Although the detail is comparable, the two lenses seem to perform differently with regards to the character of the bokeh.
It is difficult to express an opinion about colours because the photos were colour-corrected by the software.
Same about the detail without detail enlargements.
Overall it's possible to say that both lenses are good, and the difference between them is mostly a matter of individual preference.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 6:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The point of focus are too different to make comparison
The G2 made good focus but the Ultron seems back focused
Anyway when I am in doubt, I always choice the Zeiss


PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's so nice to shoot in a city! I wish I could do that more often!


PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for all the comments, guys.

It is better to use each lens for its own sake and enjoy shooting,
comparing lenses is beyond my ken and not so fun neither. Sad


PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Orio"]Nice idea of comparison, Koji.
Although the detail is comparable, the two lenses seem to perform differently with regards to the character of the bokeh.
It is difficult to express an opinion about colours because the photos were colour-corrected by the software.
Same about the detail without detail enlargements.
Overall it's possible to say that both lenses are good, and the difference between them is mostly a matter of individual preference.[/quote]

I think as Orio.

Both are OK, taste quid.

Rino.