Comparison 58mm f/2 Takumar against CZJ 5,8cm f/2 Biotar

[Spotmatic]

A short and quick comparison between:

- Asahi 58mm f/2 Takumar (Sonnar-type, very rare)
- Carl Zeiss Jena 5,8cm f/2 Biotar (early postwar type in heavy chromed brass, not aluminium)

Photos were converted from RAW; I did some highlight repair but not contrast enhancement etc. Also the pictures were not sharpened after resizing them. All photos wide open. Hoods were fitted to the lenses.

BTW: I take back my words that the Biotar is sharper than the Takumar. It's the other way round!

[RenseH]

Peter, you're right, the Takumar is sharper indeed, at least in these photos....
Nice wheather

I love the first one with the Tak!

[Nesster]

They both do out of focus, and subject glow, verry verry well. You, sir, are a fortunate man, though I know collecting is work.

[djmike]

Tak won here at F2, IMO. But I would like to see at F4 or F5.6. Mike

[Scheimpflug]

Looking at these photos, I can't help but think that these two lenses have slightly different depth of field... and that there may have been slight focus differences between them as well. Certainly not a criticism of the test, just a fact of life with manual focus lenses.

In the first shots of the plants in the window, look at the leaves on the right side of the left plant, paying attention to the veins that run lengthwise in the leaves. In the Tak, all are in focus. In the Biotar, some are quite visible (almost as good as the Tak), while others (such as the lowest "big" leaf) are not discernible at all.

In the second set of shots, look at the leaves in the upper left corner. In the Biotar image, you can clearly see the veins in the leaves - detail that is not present in the Tak's image...

The third set of images have some heavy JPEG artifacts... would you be able to post those two with less compression?

[fish4570]

Agreed. That Takumar is sharp as a Tak ...