Comparing Cyclop 85mm 1.5 (Helios 40) with Canon 85mm 1.2 II

[MoonPix]

Hello. Recently I have found myself really getting into MF lenses. I started with the Meyer Trioplan and recently bought the Cyclop 85mm 1.5 (very similar to the Helios 40 85mm 1.5). The Cyclop 85mm 1.5 is said to be the same glass as the Helios 85mm 1.5, but without the ability to change the aperture. The Helios and the Cyclop are know for their "swirly" bokeh.

Perhaps my favorite lens is the Canon 85mm 1.2 II. It is highly regarded as a portrait lens and I could not agree more. It produces absolutely beautiful images with buttery bokeh. It is also very, very sharp wide open as you will see.

This comparison is not clinical or scientific. Except for the first image, both lenses were shot wide open. All shots were hand-held. I wasn't really comparing sharpness since I am still learning how to use the Cyclop 85mm 1.5. With the adapter, it throws the focus off and it can be challenging - especially with the razor thin depth of field. My main intention was to compare the bokeh, however, when I seem to have nailed the focus, I did provide some cropped images for you to see detail.

One major flaw with this "test" was I did not set the shutter speeds to the same setting. This is why you will see the Canon appear to be darker in some images. The only one where the shutter speed was the same, was the very first image. This is a good representation, since I set the Canon to 1.4 to closely match the Cyclop's native 1.5 aperture. It also represents my findings that the Canon definitely is sharper, with higher contrast and better color. It also is a good representation of the "swirly" bokeh produced by the Cyclop.

I made no color, brightness, contrast, or any other adjustments to the images. They were shot in RAW and converted to Jpeg.

For more comparison images, go to;

http://johncarnessali.com/uncategorized/2439







_________________
Click Here to View My Website and Blog

[Orio]

I have to laugh whenever I see all that horrible green/purple fringing in today's top L line lenses and zero AF digital lens users out of 100 actually noticing that.
I mean we are talking of a top-of-the-line L(uxury) Canon AF lens here.
Has the cheap standard of quality of AF lenses in the digital era really lowered the expectations of pro/dedicated amateur photographer that much?
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html

[MoonPix]

[Orio]

[MoonPix]

[nixland]

Well done!

I too have them both, and love them both. Well, not Cyclop but Helios 40-2




_________________
Carl Zeiss Jena: Biotar 58/2 1Q, DDR Pancolar 80/1.8 MC, Biotar 75/1.5, Biotar 10cm/2, DDR Sonnar 135/3.5 MC
Carl Zeiss C/Y: Planar 50/1.4 T*, Planar 85/1.4 T*, Planar 100/2 T*, Sonnar 135/2.8 T*
Leica: Summicron-R 35/2 v1, Summicron-R 50/2, Summilux-R 80/1.4, Summicron-R 90/2
Pentax: A 50/1.2
Minolta: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 85/1.7, Rokkor MC 100/2, MD 200/2.8
Olympus: Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Zuiko MC Auto-T 85/2, Zuiko Auto-T 100/2
Nikon: Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikkor 105/1.8, 300/2.8 ED (Ais)
Canon: FD 50/1.2 L, FD 85/1.2 L
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Jupiter: 85/2 Alu
Cyclop: 85/1.5
Meyer-Optic: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5
Samyang: 8/3.5 FE, 14/2.8, 85/1.4, 85/1.4 UMC
FOR SALE
Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 10cm/2 || Carl Zeiss ZE Distagon 28/2 || Minolta Rokkor MD 35/1.8 || Rokkor-X MC 85/1.7 || Rokkor MD 85/1.7 || Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2 || Olympus 100/2 || Nikon Nikkor 35/1.4 || Canon: FD 55/1.2 || Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 VMC || Tamron: 90/2.5 SP

[nixland]

This one is for Orio ... hahaha


_________________
Carl Zeiss Jena: Biotar 58/2 1Q, DDR Pancolar 80/1.8 MC, Biotar 75/1.5, Biotar 10cm/2, DDR Sonnar 135/3.5 MC
Carl Zeiss C/Y: Planar 50/1.4 T*, Planar 85/1.4 T*, Planar 100/2 T*, Sonnar 135/2.8 T*
Leica: Summicron-R 35/2 v1, Summicron-R 50/2, Summilux-R 80/1.4, Summicron-R 90/2
Pentax: A 50/1.2
Minolta: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 85/1.7, Rokkor MC 100/2, MD 200/2.8
Olympus: Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Zuiko MC Auto-T 85/2, Zuiko Auto-T 100/2
Nikon: Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikkor 105/1.8, 300/2.8 ED (Ais)
Canon: FD 50/1.2 L, FD 85/1.2 L
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Jupiter: 85/2 Alu
Cyclop: 85/1.5
Meyer-Optic: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5
Samyang: 8/3.5 FE, 14/2.8, 85/1.4, 85/1.4 UMC
FOR SALE
Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 10cm/2 || Carl Zeiss ZE Distagon 28/2 || Minolta Rokkor MD 35/1.8 || Rokkor-X MC 85/1.7 || Rokkor MD 85/1.7 || Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2 || Olympus 100/2 || Nikon Nikkor 35/1.4 || Canon: FD 55/1.2 || Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 VMC || Tamron: 90/2.5 SP

[Orio]

[BRunner]

Yes, it means, that newer Canon L lens is better corrected for spherical aberration and other low order aberrations. These hide higher order aberrations (CAs), but the price you pay is field sharpness.
Good example are Leica pre-APO lenses vs. Zeiss CY lenses. Zeiss lenses usually show better sharpness in the field (lower spherical aberration) and more CAs. Contrariwise Leica lenses usually has lower CA, but needs to be stopped down more to get comparable field sharpness (curvature of focal plane is hidden by depth of field). Before special glass with high refraction index and low dispersion was developed, this was one of main tasks for designer to balance all these aberrations well.
Only way from this are apochromatically corrected lens, where the designer suppress not only basic third order aberrations, but fifth and even higher order aberrations too.
_________________
.: APO-Maniac :.

[Geoff C. Bassett]

Personally, I would rather have a lens be less sharp than having to deal with high CA. Nothing is more annoying to me in editing than heavy CA.
_________________
Opticlust.com

[MoonPix]

CA have never bothered me with the Canon... though I think they may be comparatively high compared to other lenses...

In fact, I have never had a client or person complain or even notice any kind of CA in their images. In all but the most extreme case, one would have to print a really large image to even come close to seeing any kind of CA.

I think sometimes as photographers, we can be guilty of pixel peeping and over analyzing.... myself included.

I LOVE the Canon... it is my favorite lens along with the Canon 35mm 1.4
_________________
Click Here to View My Website and Blog

[pat donnelly]

Just remember the Cyclops can be stopped down with waterhouse stops?


I haven't taken mine apart to do so, but it should be possible as the original of the design, the Helios has an iris?

Excellent demonstration pics of these lenses faults and properties!

_________________
---------------------------------
EP-1, E-410, E-300, D100, D1,
C-Mt: 25mm 1.9, 75mm 1.4, 75mm 1.3, 75mm 1.9, Ultra wides, one inch sensor, 20+ c-mount zooms

OM 350mm f2.8, Nikkor 180 f2.8, Exa 180 f2.8,
Tamrons: 90mm f2.5, 500mm f8 x3, 135 f2.5, 200 f3.5, 24mm 2.5, 28mm 2.5 x8,

FD 500mm mirror lens

[MoonPix]

Thanks. Yes, I have heard that you can modify the lens to make an aperture ring. I personally don't know how this is done.
_________________
Click Here to View My Website and Blog

[Attila]

[filmish]

how do you know you will have the good version?