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

1977 Pop Photo Normal Lens tests (32 of them)
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:52 am    Post subject: 1977 Pop Photo Normal Lens tests (32 of them) Reply with quote
These are loaded in the download files...
http://www.mflenses.com/Downloads/index.php

popfoto_normal_lenstest_1977.rar

The magazine tested normal lenses from makes with at least 4 such - Canon, Konica, Leica, Minolta, Olympus, Pentax, Vivitar. The usual has the ultra fast 50 (1.2), the fast 50 (1.4), regular 50 (1.7-2), and a macro 50.

Some interesting bits from the article - they checked a few macros at close range vs infinity, but could not see any difference between the distances - so the macros were measured at infinity. This is interesting as I've seen claims about certain macros being better close than far.

Anyway, the graphs are very interesting - they show the bar (range) for each lens category and where the tested lens measures in %contrast @50 line pairs per mm and in %flare.

I won't comment beyond: draw your own conclusions & check out your favorite lenses, then please post your comments - this could be educational for all of us.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
.rar file? What's that?


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks like a form of zip - I have to thank Attila for helping me out with the files. I downloaded the rar this morning and it opened up fine, but complained that I'd have to buy the software in a month Or Else ;0


Anyway, the Pentax lenses are interesting, as they are the K lenses with the 52 mm filter size.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xpres wrote:
.rar file? What's that?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rar


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rar is just another compression file format. You can use 7zip to open them, it is freeware and open source I guess.
Thanks for sharing Wink


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Downloading... Thanks!


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hmm... at work I can't open this with winzip, but at home there was no problem.

It is interesting to see the relative performance, there are differences especially wide open and towards the edges with the different lenses. How well these measurements correlate to experience and word-of-mouth reputation, who knows? Smile


PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
thanks for sharing. they are good reference for MF.

Last edited by djmike on Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:21 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for sharing. great info

patrickh


PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I cut and pasted the lenses in the same category together - and did post these on flicr. Click on the image for a large (readable) size.

50mm f/1.8 lenses, and 50mm macros




PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very valuable info, they measured things like the amount of axial CA and the transmittance, which you don't often see today.


PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank's a lot...


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="Nesster"]I cut and pasted the lenses in the same category together - and did post these on flicr. Click on the image for a large (readable) size.


Thank's a lot.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks like the Leica lens came in first in most measures, and the Nikkor did poorly. Why am I not surprised?


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
A Big thanks fo this! But there is only 50/1.4 and 50 macro. Please, if someone can update the archive link or place other 50s tests.
Merci!


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks but erm looks a bit complicated, couldn't someone do a rough summary of the winners and 2nds.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The results looks as the same lens was tested! I bet you can't collect 10 Helios 2/58mm lenses that would be so close Smile.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
the pronounced winner in POP is the summilux 50 1.4 at the (between the f1.4 lenses)
the zuiko and the rokkor could share the 2nd place where the zuiko is a more consistant performer in micro contrast but in some specific conditions ( @f2 and 2\3 out of the center of the frame ) the rokkor beats it, and seems as higher in contrast off center but not in the edges.... it came out too complicated now..

another interesting few facts from this test is their zuiko and smc takumar lenses are measuring f1.49 (zuiko) f1.47 (takumar) and not f1.4 as it is stated on the lens.

the lens with most flare is the zuiko, and with the least flare share nikkor and smc takumar.

and the brightest, as tested, lens was the nikkor with a measured f-stop of 1.42 and 95.3% light transmission. and the loser was the zuiko with an f1.49 and light transmission of only 85%

the least barrel distortion was measured with the smc takumar most with the nikkor

and im gonna finish here... becouse there is much info in those charts and i only summed up a part of the 50 1.4 test results.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Smoli4 wrote:
the pronounced winner in POP is the summilux 50 1.4 at the (between the f1.4 lenses)
the zuiko and the rokkor could share the 2nd place where the zuiko is a more consistant performer in micro contrast but in some specific conditions ( @f2 and 2\3 out of the center of the frame ) the rokkor beats it, and seems as higher in contrast off center but not in the edges.... it came out too complicated now..

another interesting few facts from this test is their zuiko and smc takumar lenses are measuring f1.49 (zuiko) f1.47 (takumar) and not f1.4 as it is stated on the lens.

the lens with most flare is the zuiko, and with the least flare share nikkor and smc takumar.

and the brightest, as tested, lens was the nikkor with a measured f-stop of 1.42 and 95.3% light transmission. and the loser was the zuiko with an f1.49 and light transmission of only 85%

the least barrel distortion was measured with the smc takumar most with the nikkor

and im gonna finish here... becouse there is much info in those charts and i only summed up a part of the 50 1.4 test results.


Thanks, but you can't beat real life shots and in the past I can remember the Amateur photographer magazine who always used the same ship (with crops) on the Thames for their lens tests.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:

Thanks, but you can't beat real life shots and in the past I can remember the Amateur photographer magazine who always used the same ship (with crops) on the Thames for their lens tests.


Yes, indeed they did and it was often very useful for providing real life shots, as you say. The downside to those tests was that the weather on the day of testing sometimes - literally - clouded the picture Very Happy Lenses always tended to look better when the photos were taken on a clear sunny day, and at their worst when it was dull. And depending on the accuracy of the camera's viewfinder, sometimes the edge positioning of the ship was not very far from the centre!

Somewhere, I have some of these old tests, I'll try to dig them out and scan some of them. Let's hope i don't get prosecuted for copyright violation though !


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here you go


Leica M 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Minolta 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Konica 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Nikon 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Olympus 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Pentax 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Vivitar 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Canon 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


32 Normal Lenses Test 1977 by Nesster, on Flickr


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have been saying the Leicaflex lens was better by far than the Nikkor of this era, but you would not believe me. Well, here's the proof.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
FluffPuppy wrote:
I have been saying the Leicaflex lens was better by far than the Nikkor of this era, but you would not believe me. Well, here's the proof.


Though these are the rangefinder Leica lenses Wink


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nesster wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote:
I have been saying the Leicaflex lens was better by far than the Nikkor of this era, but you would not believe me. Well, here's the proof.


Though these are the rangefinder Leica lenses Wink


Ooops! Well I'm sure the Leicaflex Summilux-R lens would rank at the top too. It seems odd that they didn't test it. But you will note how poorly the Nikkor did in these tests. It seems only the Takumar was worse.

It would have been nice to see the Zeiss Contax lenses tested. And why bother with Konica? You can't be serious! They were already irrelevant by 1977.

Last edited by FluffPuppy on Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:24 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
and this time ENORMOUS THANKS, Nesster!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2