View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Srdjan
Joined: 11 Apr 2012 Posts: 316 Location: Nis
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 1:08 pm Post subject: The biGGest Test of prime normal lens |
|
|
Srdjan wrote:
Hi everyone I have plans to make one of the biggest test of prime normal manual lens. I have big collection I will have time to make test and then to sell them. Unfortunately I have Canon 60d with crop sensor so test will not give information on the corners of picture. So I not sure how to test lenses so everyone can give me some suggestions to test them as much as I can, because I will not have them for long, summer is near and I ned money for vacation
My collection is:
Carl Zeiss Tessar 2.8 50 , M42 silver version,
---------------------2.8 50 , M42 silver version, written made in German
---------------------2.8 50, M42 later version, 2 semples
Carl Zeiss Biotar 2.8 58 T, M42 silver version
Carl Zeiss Pancolar 1.8 50, M42 zebra 8 blades yellow glass version
--------------------------------------zebra 6 blades normal glass version
--------------------------------------MC red
--------------------------------------MC red electric
-------------------------------------MC white
--------------------------------------MC white electric
Carl Zeiss Planar 1.8 50 Planar HFT, Rollei/Voitlander, made in Singapour
Voitlander color-ultron 1.8 50, Rollei/Voitlander , made in Singapour
Voitlander color-ultron 1.8 50, Rollei/Voitlander, made in Rollei Singapour
Yashica ML 50 1.7, Yashica /Contax
and probably
Carl Zeiss Planar 1.4 50 T*, Yashica /Contax
and if I find somehow money
Carl Zeiss Flektogon 4 50, Pentacon Six, MC version
maybe I forgot something, but thats all i think _________________ Perfection is just another type of anomaly |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aspen
Joined: 15 Dec 2010 Posts: 307 Location: Maryland, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
aspen wrote:
Hi Srdjan, good luck with your plans!
I, personally, am not interested in head-to-head comparisons of these particular lenses. They are all well known, I think, and they each have a different set of characteristics which distinguish them apart from one another. If your intent is to sell them, then I am more interested, primarily, in the condition of the lens. So, photos of the lens is important.
Of course, the samples are nice also. The tessars stopped down shine. I would like to see the Ultrons and the f1.8 Rollei Planar shot open all the way; would be interesting to see a comparison there _________________ Cameras; Sony Nex5n Lenses; Konica Hexanons; 21mm f2.8, 40mm f1,8, 50mm f1.4, 50mmf1.7,57mm f1.4, 100mm f2.8, 135mm f3.2, 200mm f4, MC Helios 77M-4 50mm f1.8, Jupiter 8 50 f2, Super Takumar 85mm f1.9, Vivitar Series 1 90mm f2.5 (Macro), Steinheil Munchen Culminar 85mm f2.8, Steinheil Munchen Exagon 35mm f2.8, Jupiter 37A 135mm, Astra Berlin 135mm f3.5, Angenieux 180mm f4 , Tair 3-PhS 300mm f4.5 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ghost2501
Joined: 26 Apr 2012 Posts: 102 Location: Belgium
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ghost2501 wrote:
Wow, that's a lot of 50's. _________________ Nikon D7000 + Sony NEX-3 + Vivitar 24mm f2, Rexagon 28mm f2.8, Pentor 35mm f2.8, Konica Hexanon 50mm f1.4 + Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AI, Helios 44M 58mm f2, Jupiter-9 85mm f2, Helios 100mm f2 from T3C-2, Kaleinar 100mm f2.8, Makinon 135mm f2.8, Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f3.5 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Ghost2501 wrote: |
Wow, that's a lot of 50's. |
The 50s stage is a stage we have all been through, you start with them because they're cheap and then before you can even notice it,
you're sucked into the black hole.
50s are the sirens that lure everyone in _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fermy
Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 2877
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fermy wrote:
Ghost2501 wrote: |
Wow, that's a lot of 50's. |
Not that many. I think I have 13 50s, 19 if I include 52-58mm. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Orio wrote: |
Ghost2501 wrote: |
Wow, that's a lot of 50's. |
The 50s stage is a stage we have all been through, you start with them because they're cheap and then before you can even notice it,
you're sucked into the black hole.
50s are the sirens that lure everyone in |
Hmmm, I thought 135mm was the sucker lens. It was with me. _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
You don't have a lot of 50s until you have too many to keep count of, I have no idea how many I have but it's a lot _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 3693 Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 6:50 pm Post subject: Re: The biGGest Test of prime normal lens |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Srdjan wrote: |
Hi everyone I have plans to make one of the biggest test of prime normal manual lens. I have big collection I will have time to make test and then to sell them. Unfortunately I have Canon 60d with crop sensor so test will not give information on the corners of picture. So I not sure how to test lenses so everyone can give me some suggestions to test them as much as I can, because I will not have them for long, summer is near and I ned money for vacation
My collection is:
Carl Zeiss Tessar 2.8 50 , M42 silver version,
---------------------2.8 50 , M42 silver version, written made in German
---------------------2.8 50, M42 later version, 2 semples
Carl Zeiss Biotar 2.8 58 T, M42 silver version
Carl Zeiss Pancolar 1.8 50, M42 zebra 8 blades yellow glass version
--------------------------------------zebra 6 blades normal glass version
--------------------------------------MC red
--------------------------------------MC red electric
-------------------------------------MC white
--------------------------------------MC white electric
Carl Zeiss Planar 1.8 50 Planar HFT, Rollei/Voitlander, made in Singapour
Voitlander color-ultron 1.8 50, Rollei/Voitlander , made in Singapour
Voitlander color-ultron 1.8 50, Rollei/Voitlander, made in Rollei Singapour
Yashica ML 50 1.7, Yashica /Contax
and probably
Carl Zeiss Planar 1.4 50 T*, Yashica /Contax
and if I find somehow money
Carl Zeiss Flektogon 4 50, Pentacon Six, MC version
maybe I forgot something, but thats all i think |
Promising big tests in advance isn't good idea. One just builds pressure upon himself instead of doing it when it feels so that is for fun and curiosity. Well at least in my case. _________________ ---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57849 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 7:56 pm Post subject: Re: The biGGest Test of prime normal lens |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Pancolart wrote: |
Srdjan wrote: |
Hi everyone I have plans to make one of the biggest test of prime normal manual lens. I have big
maybe I forgot something, but thats all i think |
Promising big tests in advance isn't good idea. One just builds pressure upon himself instead of doing it when it feels so that is for fun and curiosity. Well at least in my case. |
+1 enjoy your photo walk and take great shoots, keep those what you like and sell rest of it. Simple and joy unlike silly tests.. I have count less 50mm lenses I buy try them and let them go if I need money to cover next purchases. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10543 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
A really useful comparison test involves use of laboratory-grade MTF measurements; rather expensive equipment is required for that.
Photo examples of the lens used in regular photo-making can also be useful for distinguishing lens qualities in differing situations, with different types of subjects, etc.. These can be positive additions to the collection of example images from the same lens as used by others.
Direct comparisons are imho extremely difficult; I don't remember ever seeing a comparison where the focus point is accurately maintained over images from only 2 different lenses, in an attempt to compare "sharpness", for example. Lens comparisons take a lot of hard work and much time to do properly, if that's even possible. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 8:57 pm Post subject: Re: The biGGest Test of prime normal lens |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Attila wrote: |
Pancolart wrote: |
Srdjan wrote: |
Hi everyone I have plans to make one of the biggest test of prime normal manual lens. I have big
maybe I forgot something, but thats all i think |
Promising big tests in advance isn't good idea. One just builds pressure upon himself instead of doing it when it feels so that is for fun and curiosity. Well at least in my case. |
+1 enjoy your photo walk and take great shoots, keep those what you like and sell rest of it. Simple and joy unlike silly tests.. I have count less 50mm lenses I buy try them and let them go if I need money to cover next purchases. |
+10 my favourite 50mm lenses are not ones that have the best technical specifications but those that touched my heart. For instance, I really love the 1959 Industar-50 3.5/50 collapsible and the Meyer Primotar 3.5/50 and those are lenses overlooked by many due to being of lesser technical specs but I love the images they produce, for me it's more about the character than the tech specs. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Srdjan
Joined: 11 Apr 2012 Posts: 316 Location: Nis
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2012 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Srdjan wrote:
Thank you everyone for advices. My idea is somehow to contribute to this forum, instead just to use it to sell lenses (that I will have to do at the end). At this time really I don't have too much time but I wanted to compare this lenses and give somehow guide to people who is new with manual lenses (more or less like me) with yours help. I didn't have intentions to make the best of, and I understand that I have just small collection of 50mm lenses. I m not collector, my collection is result of trying to find best lens for me, and I was thinking to someone else help not to spent a lot of money like me I m child of digital photography and I m learning about advances and joy of manual lenses. I don't wont to make silly test, but probably it is true I m not the expert in this field of testing lenses. My second job is photographer, and my hobby is to fix manual lenses (probably like most of people here). For some kind of test I really need support what is the best way to do it, but if there is no interest in that udea I m fine with it. Idea is was to compare lenses, most of them Carl Zeiss during of history. I m perfectionist and all of them are in very good and mint condition, and carefully picked. One photo of lenses
_________________ Perfection is just another type of anomaly |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pontus
Joined: 18 Dec 2011 Posts: 1471 Location: Jakobstad, Finland
Expire: 2016-08-25
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2012 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pontus wrote:
I would be interested in a comparison. Pick a nice subject, put the camera on a tripod and shoot away with all the lenses. Everyone understands that the lighting will change during the shoot but it would be fun to see the different characters of the lenses. _________________ Follow this link for my FOR SALE list (partially updated 19.11.2015) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BRunner
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2012 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
BRunner wrote:
From my own experiences on 5DmkII:
Rollei Planars/Ultrons 1.8/50 are equal in performance. Very slight differences in color and contrast rendering - newer lenses have better contrast.
C/Y Planars 1.4/50 and 1.7/50 vs. Rollei Planar/Ultron 1.8/50 vs. CZ Planar 1.4/50 ZE
All these lenses are very close in performance. Rollei Planar/Ultron is sharpest wide-open in center area. C/Y Planar 1.7/50 is best in field uniformity sharpness at wider apertures. C/Y Planar 1.4/50 and new ZE version are equal in sharpness, C/Y version is slightly colder in colors and very slightly lower contrast. Corner sharpness at same aperture slightly lags behind 1.7/50 and is about equal to 1.8/50. I have no problem use any of this lenses.
Yashica 1.4/50 ML is overall slightly behind it's Planar equivalent in all areas. Especially contrast is lower.
CZJ Pancolar 1.8/50 has more copy variability, than variability between versions. Overall at wide apertures it can't match Planars contrast and sharpness. Stopped down to f8 the corner sharpness still lags even behind Planar 1.4/50 at same aperture.
CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 is soft up to f5.6 even on crop cameras. It never reaches the crispness of Pancolar at smaller apertures. I've not tested it on FF yet.
CZJ Biotar 2/58 is comparable to Pancolar, but corners lack at comparable apertures. Again only crop observations. _________________ .: APO-Maniac :. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jethro Tull
Joined: 31 Dec 2010 Posts: 68 Location: SCOTLAND
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2012 11:15 pm Post subject: big lens cap test |
|
|
Jethro Tull wrote:
Suppose no'one's interested in my project " The Worlds Biggest Plastic Lens Cap Test" ? after spending 5 years testing plastic quality and spring clip tension
Oh well i might aswell continue sorting my vast collection of used Bic Biro Pens and my imitation tortoise shell plastic combs once complete i intend opening a Pen and Comb Museum................
ps does anyone have a blue plastic cap for a 1984 Biro? (the one with orange plastic body and multi faceted sides to stop it rolling off ones desk) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5019 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
****CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 is soft up to f5.6 even on crop cameras. It never reaches the crispness of Pancolar at smaller apertures. I've not tested it on FF yet.***
Well I have on a film camera and there are better nifty fifty's lenses.....cheaper or a few £££s more so why would anyone buy one I'll never understand (erm probably because of the magic word "Tessar" so it must be good ). _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Excalibur wrote: |
****CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 is soft up to f5.6 even on crop cameras. It never reaches the crispness of Pancolar at smaller apertures. I've not tested it on FF yet.***
Well I have on a film camera and there are better nifty fifty's lenses.....cheaper or a few £££s more so why would anyone buy one I'll never understand (erm probably because of the magic word "Tessar" so it must be good ). |
Well, I'm sorry, but that's just not true, the Tessar 2.8/50 is a great lens and no way is it soft at any aperture, I have owned at least 10 copies in all flavours and they were all sharp from 2.8 onwards.
'Better' is subjective, the Tessar has all the sharpness anyone could need and makes great pictures, there are faster lenses and lenses with smoother bokeh, but honestly, if you can't take great pictures with a Tessar you need to keep practising. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ramiller500
Joined: 20 Nov 2007 Posts: 124 Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ramiller500 wrote:
I use a Canon FL Macro 50mm/3.5 lens, which is a Tessar by another name, and it's outstanding in all respects.
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/fl/data/19-85/fl_m50_35.html
Auction prices for these are very reasonable. _________________ Sincerely,
Bob Miller |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BRunner
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BRunner wrote:
There are many great Tessar based lenses. CZJ Tessar 3.5/50, CZJ Tessar 4.5/40, Macro Takumar and Pentax-M 4/50... Unfortunately, the 2.8/50 version seems slightly overstretched to me. They just tried to do it too fast. _________________ .: APO-Maniac :. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I repeat, I have had at least 10 copies of the 2.8/50 and all of them were sharp at all apertures, inc 2.8. I still have a few copies, if you have a Tessar that wasn't sharp it was faulty, no doubt about it.
Zebra version in Exakta, at 2.8:
Zebra version in M42, at 2.8:
Silver 1950s version in M42, at 2.8:
All black 1980s version in M42, at 5.6:
All black 1980s export version marked aus Jena T, at f4:
_________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5019 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
Excalibur wrote: |
****CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 is soft up to f5.6 even on crop cameras. It never reaches the crispness of Pancolar at smaller apertures. I've not tested it on FF yet.***
Well I have on a film camera and there are better nifty fifty's lenses.....cheaper or a few £££s more so why would anyone buy one I'll never understand (erm probably because of the magic word "Tessar" so it must be good ). |
Well, I'm sorry, but that's just not true, the Tessar 2.8/50 is a great lens and no way is it soft at any aperture, I have owned at least 10 copies in all flavours and they were all sharp from 2.8 onwards.
'Better' is subjective, the Tessar has all the sharpness anyone could need and makes great pictures, there are faster lenses and lenses with smoother bokeh, but honestly, if you can't take great pictures with a Tessar you need to keep practising. |
erm you missed my point and that is, re-phrased :- If you want to spend under £30 for any make of nifty fifty (because you have a nex or any film camera) what would you choose? For starters:- on the bay for completed listing Konica tc-x and tc both with 50mm f1.8 lens each for under £18... same good prices for Olympus, Canon, Minolta, Fuji etc etc etc I'd know which lens I would choose and it wouldn't be a CZJ 50mm f2.8 Tessar, _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 3693 Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
All those Tessars Ian counted reach 50 EUR on Ebay if trustworthy seller and lens in mint state. They were all made in series of millions so not rare at all. That says something. My experience of sharpness wide open is also positive. _________________ ---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57849 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
BRunner wrote: |
CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 is soft up to f5.6 even on crop cameras. It never reaches the crispness of Pancolar at smaller apertures. I've not tested it on FF yet.
|
I think your copy had an issue. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Excalibur wrote: |
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
Excalibur wrote: |
****CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 is soft up to f5.6 even on crop cameras. It never reaches the crispness of Pancolar at smaller apertures. I've not tested it on FF yet.***
Well I have on a film camera and there are better nifty fifty's lenses.....cheaper or a few £££s more so why would anyone buy one I'll never understand (erm probably because of the magic word "Tessar" so it must be good ). |
Well, I'm sorry, but that's just not true, the Tessar 2.8/50 is a great lens and no way is it soft at any aperture, I have owned at least 10 copies in all flavours and they were all sharp from 2.8 onwards.
'Better' is subjective, the Tessar has all the sharpness anyone could need and makes great pictures, there are faster lenses and lenses with smoother bokeh, but honestly, if you can't take great pictures with a Tessar you need to keep practising. |
erm you missed my point and that is, re-phrased :- If you want to spend under £30 for any make of nifty fifty (because you have a nex or any film camera) what would you choose? For starters:- on the bay for completed listing Konica tc-x and tc both with 50mm f1.8 lens each for under £18... same good prices for Olympus, Canon, Minolta, Fuji etc etc etc I'd know which lens I would choose and it wouldn't be a CZJ 50mm f2.8 Tessar, |
I wasn't being derogatory at all, and what you say is true, but I've never bought a Tessar, they always came with a camera, and I really like the Tessar, it can be relied on to produce good results, always sharp, always good contrast, it's just very reliable, I also like how it renders. I also love the Pancolar and Biotar and don't feel the Tessar is any less good, just different. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BRunner
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BRunner wrote:
Attila wrote: |
BRunner wrote: |
CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 is soft up to f5.6 even on crop cameras. It never reaches the crispness of Pancolar at smaller apertures. I've not tested it on FF yet.
|
I think your copy had an issue. |
I don't think so, I have/had about 6 different silver versions, one zebra and one last black version. They are not unsharp as bad copies, they just render the smallest details not as crisp as older Tessar 3.5/50 or other/newer CZJ 50mm lenses. The 2.8 Tessar needs to be stopped down more than other versions to get usable corners. _________________ .: APO-Maniac :. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|