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

25+ "normal lenses" test, comparison
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:06 pm    Post subject: 25+ "normal lenses" test, comparison Reply with quote

this is the only time of the year I have chance to do such a crazy thing and had a busy day yesterday till late and this morning:

and made comparison pics for sharpness of 25 "normal" lenses between 50mm and 58mm ( + threw in "Pen-F" 38mm, 40mm and 60mm ) wide open, f2, f2.8, f4, f5.6, f8 and f11
taken on NEX5N in RAW, converted in LR3.5 at default settings ( without any editing )

and uploaded the whole thing, with hopefully useful tags, to my flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections/72157632455712332/

cheers,
andreas

edit: lenses used and their resp. sets:

Auto Rokkor-PF f1.8 55mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632479299442/
Auto Takumar f1.8 55mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632479410384/
Auto Takumar f1.8 55mm "zebra": http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632457897728/
Auto Takumar f2 55mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632451740155/
Auto Yashinon-DX f1.7 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632453587003/
Auto Yashinon f2 5cm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632456187326/
CZJ Sonnar f1.5 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632456417634/
CZJ Pancolar f1.8 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632458117006/
F.Zuiko Auto-S f1.8 38mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632458302340/
G.Zuiko Auto-S f1.4 40mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632458515044/
G.Zuiko Auto-T f1.5 60mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632458665660/
Helios 103 f1.8 53mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632452241613/
Helios 44-2 f2 58mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632479549534/
Industar 50-2 f3.5 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632475135229/
Jupiter-8 f2 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632458723276/
Nikkor-S Auto f1.4 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632454755909/
Macro Takumar f4 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632454397803/
Mamiya Sekor f1.8 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632458952330/
MC Rokkor-PG f1.4 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632458991684/
OM Zuiko Auto-S f1.8 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632459239514/
Pentax M f1.4 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632454918305/
Pentax A f1.7 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632456013986/
Pentax M f1.7 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632454969831/
RE.Auto-Topcor f1.8 58mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632459576026/
Super Takumar f1.4 50mm V1: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632455370343/
Super Takumar f1.4 50mm 'hybrid': http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632455332545/
Super Takumar f1.4 50mm V2: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632455404311/
S-M-C Takumar f1.4 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632459658078/
SMC Takumar f1.4 50mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632455249069/
Super Takumar f1.8 55mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632459831208/
Takumar f2 58mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632457532739/
Takumar f2.4 58mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632461956982/

each set starts with the series of wide open, f2, f2.8, f4, f5.6, f8 and f11 showing the full photo,
than a near center crop,
next near top right corner crop
and last towards lower left corner crop

2nd edit: ( 4 more lenses added to the list above, and: )
for better comparison there are also sets with the photos of each lenses at a certain f stop, for the full photo and each crops, e.g.:
full photo @ f2: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632460038525/
wide open center crops: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632464617142/
f2.8 low left corner crop: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632471750006/


Last edited by kuuan on Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:17 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's a lot of info there - and some unexpected (for me) results.
Thanks for the great effort you put into this, now I have to spend my day comparing the results Wink


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very nice, thanks a lot.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aanything wrote:
There's a lot of info there - and some unexpected (for me) results.
Thanks for the great effort you put into this, now I have to spend my day comparing the results Wink


inombrable wrote:
Very nice, thanks a lot.


happy to know that this finds interest Smile

the lenses used



obviously very Takumar / Pentax heavy, there will be some 'dilution' but it will be interesting which lenses, over time, also crops and f stops, will be checked out the most Wink


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Huge amount of work here !
Thank you !

Looking at the f/1.4's and the Sonnar f/1.5, it seems to me that the only significant distinguishing characteristic as far as sharpness is the edge performance. The center performance wide open seems identical or nearly so.

Am I mistaken in that the best lens for edge performance wide open is the SMC Takumar ?
And the worst is the Sonnar f/1.5 ?

Nikon and Minolta seem to come second place to several Takumar and Pentax models.

Also interesting is that the V1 Super Takumar (8-element) is worse on the edge than the V2 Super Takumar. I thought from some other tests I've seen that the 8-element was better on the edge.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This should keep us quiet for days, or we could start arguing? Wink

I haven't looked at the posts yet, but I certainly will. It looks like a lot of effort, thank you. Cool


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice comparisons. I'll be clicking through for a while. I think this set really does demonstrate how little difference there is in sharpness between any decent lenses at "normal" apertures. Even wide open only a few of the lenses are really better than the rest in the center. Most are about the same. In the corners you see the most difference, but even here most lenses only show a minimal difference by f5.6. The only one that surprised me so far was the Pancolar which I expected to be much sharper in the corners.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Crazy indeed , lot of work!


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Woooooooooowwwwwwwwww.

Titanic!!!!!


F.Zuiko Auto-S f1.8 38mm. Sourprised to me. Very good.

The corners of the 8 elements ST are consistent with my experience with it.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:38 pm    Post subject: Re: 25+ "normal lenses" test, comparison Reply with quote

kuuan wrote:
this is the only time of the year I have chance to do such a crazy thing

You must have been extremely bored to take this on Andreas. Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah but which one smelt the best Laughing

Monster effort tho dude Razz


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 5:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lots of work there... Impressive but I wish you had Canon FD 50mm 1.4 also included... This lens impress me.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 5:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, what a lot of work!
Thanks for sharing, for sure it will be watched and analysed but... Which conclusion did you draw?. Is there a clear "winner"?. Wink


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 7:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm would also be interested in your conclusion. Did you conduct this test in order to decide which ones to keep or for some other reason? Which one's are your personal favourites, and why?


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Superb test !!!
I was looking for bokeh comparisons like that ... Cool


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Impressive work.

Wish I could have some time for myself Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thank you guys, I am very happy that some find this useful.

Now I feel embarrassed, specially because in the end it amounted to quite some work, that I did not set up the whole thing more carefully. It kind of 'happened'. Taking the photos and editing didn't take all that much time, well, taking the pics took about 2 and a half hours, editing and naming the files about the same or a bit more. Uploading, organizing, tagging was most time consuming but I didn't stop until the whole thing was done at about 5 o'clock in the morning. I had started 1:30 noon, so I worked, with few short breaks, some 16 hours in a stretch.

It's set in a 'winter garden', a small terrace like room with glass covering the 2 walls behind which makes for good, even lighting. This day was extremely dull though.
My mind was set to a sharpness test but not with 'a brick wall' but mostly 3 dimensional objects. The set up leaves a lot of space for background but the interior of the room is not good for background. Nevertheless now I think that I should have done more than just covering the radiator with some cloth but e.g. put a plant and lamps or something reflective there to incl. bokeh information. Keysersoze27 you would like to have a bokeh test. If time permits I may do that. Hopefully I'll find a more effective way to do the uploading / organizing / tagging but to save time most likely would include less lenses. So please tell me, anybody, which lenses you are most interested in and please give me ideas how to best make a set up.


Some asked me for my opinion of performances. After uploading I took a good day "off" the computer and I have not yet compared results.
While working on the files my impression seemed to confirm ideas I had of the lenses already, that is I like my Takumars / Pentax lenses not only for their handling Wink
Quite new for me are the Yashinon, the Mamiya, the Helios 103 which looks very nice but I really should check the results more carefully before I forward more observations. Specially looking at the Nikkor and Rokkor, two lenses which I had bought very cheaply, the Nikkor from a 'junk' basket, I would say that sample variation will play a big role.
The Pentax M 1.4/50 came from a box in a flea market, it was very dirty, even the outside covered with mud. Cleaning it felt like a rescue mission with uncertain outcome, the more satisfying that it turns out to be such a great performer.
I am also very happy with the "hybrid" Super Takumar f14/50 I presented in another thread. A lucky find, possibly it outperforms both the V1 and V2. That also points to sample variation, on the other hand the various f1.4 Pentax / Takumars do perform very consistently.
The OM again proves a very strong performer. The only other OM I have experience with is a f2.8/24 which also has, out of a handful of 'famous' 24mm, the best corners. The edges of the OM 1.8/50 shine too which makes me wonder if corner performance is a characteristic strengths of OM lenses.

For sure, because of the very amateurish setting or other shortcomings, some will scoff at me and my efforts. But I don't care and I am not afraid to share these files. Therefore I humbly ask anybody who looks through some files, please don't be shy and please share your observations!

for better comparison there are new sets now with the samples of each less at a certain f stop, also for each crop, e.g. "the wide open center crop" set:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632464617142/
viewing as a slideshow:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632464617142/show/
to see the lens used click: "show info" on the right top corner

as mentioned organizing, tagging asf. proved to be most work and I am sure that there still will be some mistakes. Please tell me if you find a certain sample missing in a certain set or any other mistake.

btw.:
of course tripod used
no remote but 2 sec. self timer, only one take each
distance to subject about pretty exactly 125 cm, or 1.25 m only
focusing with enlarged live view on the LCD on the crown on the forehead of the bronze statue:


cheers,
andreas


Last edited by kuuan on Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:41 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kuuan wrote:
Keysersoze27 you would like to have a bokeh test. If time permits I may do that. Hopefully I'll find a more effective way to do the uploading / organizing / tagging but to save time most likely would include less lenses. So please tell me, anybody, which lenses you are most interested in and please give me ideas how to best make a set up. the interior is not good for background.



Andreas,

Of course I would like to have a more specific Bokeh test Cool

I used your main photo test picture to compare the bokeh and IMHO the best one is the Tak 2/58(Logical since it is a Sonnar) . Second best in my opinion is the Pentax-M 1.4/50 . Quite strange since I usually get the impression from many other Pentax equipment owners that is has a slightly worst bokeh than the previous optical design of the Super,S-M-C,SMC,K 1.4/50 ones that are optically slightly different that the -M???
Overall the -M 1.4/50 it is my favorite in your mega test !!!
You used to have a dirty -K 1.4/50 some time ago.Since I own it and it's one of my favorite ones and sharper than my S-M-C I would like to see a -K vs -M battle Wink
Best from the 1.7~1.8s was the Pentax A for me. But they can't compare with the 1.4s for bokeh smoothness by design anyway.

Also my surprise in the bokeh department was between the S-M-C and the SMC with the latter been worst but having exactly the same optical design . That was unexpected.
Finally the Yashinon 5cm one was also very good for it's sharpness but this had an effect in the bokeh part typical for a 6/4 design ...

Cheers,
Alexandros


Last edited by Keysersoze27 on Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:35 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you very much!! I have bookmarked the lenses that i have myself, great work!!


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great resource, thanks for the comprehensive test! That is alot of 50s!


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kuuan, thank you so much!

tromboads wrote:
Yeah but which one smelt the best Laughing


Smelt is fishy...


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nicely done job!!!


PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Keysersoze27 wrote:

Also my surprise in the bokeh department was between the S-M-C and the SMC with the latter been worst but having exactly the same optical design . That was unexpected.
Finally the Yashinon 5cm one was also very good for it's sharpness but this had an effect in the bokeh part typical for a 6/4 design ...

Cheers,
Alexandros


The Yashinon is actually a 6/5 ultron type, and in my experience delivers some of the smoothest boke' one could hope for from a fast normal of that vintage.





That's the primary reason it has become my main lens for 35mm.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mos6502 wrote:


The Yashinon is actually a 6/5 ultron type,



That will be very interesting to be true but I can only find 6/4 design references for it in the internet . Any references for a 6/5 design will be nice Wink

I'm only judging the test pics from Kuan with the bokeh produced from this lens in that short distance. The bokeh is to busy for my taste Smile

Update: I see its has similarities externally with the to 2.2/55 and 2.0/55 Auto Taks..


PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thank's again guys for your words of appreciation Very Happy

Keysersoze27 wrote:

Andreas,

Of course I would like to have a more specific Bokeh test Cool

Cheers,
Alexandros


Alexandros do you have any hints as how best to conduct a bokeh test?
You just mentioned the short distance..hm..if I was to do that not in a smallish room but at open air I will have to have very good luck with better weather soon ( before I hit 'the road again' and won't have access to most of my lenses )