| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:18 pm Post subject: Fast Takumar or slow sonnar ? |
 |
|
Rusty wrote:
Tested my c/y Zeiss Sonnar 2.8 135mm against the Tak 135/2.5 and something struck me as weird, obviously the sonnar is a bit sharper than the tak wide open BUT.....
The Tak is more than a stop faster at 2.8 , With the exact same setup i can stop the Tak down to f4 and get the same shutter speed compared to the sonnar at 2.8
HuH ???.... is'nt the famous *T coating supposed to be super efficient and let more light through , or is the stated 2.8 a bit optimistic for the sonnar
Anybody with similar experience with the 135 sonnar?
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
egidio
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 222
Location: slovenia
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
egidio wrote:
are you sure the sonnar isnt 3.5 wide open?
_________________
I use: Flektogon 2.8/20, Flektogon 2.8/35, planar 50mm/1.4, Takumar 1.4/50mm, Takumar 1.9/85, MIR 24H, Mir1v, Industar-50-2, Helios-44-2, Pentacon 2.8/135, cyclop 85 1.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CarbonR
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 1969
Location: Clermont-Ferrand, France
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CarbonR wrote:
Transmitted light (f/stop) shloudnt be dependent on the coating, you dont say what woating you have to you light meter to determine the right exposure 
_________________
Cameras : Canon 5D, Pentax K100D, Pentax 6x7, Spotmatic
Lenses : 15mm to 1000mm (24x36)
My websites : [FR & ENG]Takumar - the eyes of the Spotmatic : info about all Takumar lenses // Kogaku - My photo site
I am selling : Takumar lenses and rare Pentax bodies, pm me if you're interested in something [MFLenses feed-back]
Information on Takumar lenses with samples :
Wide angle : Takumar 15/3.5 15mm, Takumar 17/4 17mm, Takumar 18/11 18mm, Takumar 20/4.5 20mm, Takumar 24/3.5 24mm, Takumar 28/3.5 V1 28mm, Takumar 28/3.5 V2 28mm, Takumar 35/2 V1 35mm, Takumar 35/2 V2 35mm, Takumar 35/2.3 35mm, Takumar 35/3.5 35mm, Takumar 35/4 35mm
Standard : Takumar 50/1.4 V1 50mm, Takumar 50/1.4 V2 50mm, Takumar 50/3.5 50mm, Takumar 50/4 50mm, Takumar 55/2 55/1.8 55mm, Takumar 55/2.2 V1 55mm, Takumar 55/2.2 V2 55mm, Takumar 58/2 58mm, Takumar 58/2.4 58mm
Short tele : Takumar 83/1.9 83mm, Takumar 85/1.8 85/1.9 85mm, Takumar 85/1.8 85mm, Takumar 100/2 100mm, Takumar 100/3.5 100mm, Takumar 100/4 100mm, Takumar 105/2.8 V1 105mm, Takumar 105/2.8 V2 105mm, Takumar 120/2.8 120mm
Telephoto : Takumar 135/2.5 V1 135mm, Takumar 135/2.5 V2 135mm, Takumar 135/3.5 V1 135mm, Takumar 135/3.5 V2 135mm, Takumar 150/4 V1 150mm, Takumar 150/4 V2 150mm
Long tele : Takumar 200/3.5 200mm, Takumar 200/4 200mm, Takumar 200/5.6 200mm, Takumar 300/4 V1 300mm, Takumar 300/4 V2 300mm, Takumar 300/4 V3 300mm, Takumar 300/6.3 300mm, Takumar 400/5.6 400mm, Takumar 500/4.5 500mm, Takumar 500/5 500mm, Takumar 1000/8 V1 1000mm, Takumar 1000/8 V2 1000mm
Zoom : Zoom-Takumar 45~125/4 , Zoom-Takumar 70~150/4.5 , Zoom-Takumar 85~210/4.5 , Zoom-Takumar 135~600/6.7
Achromatic : Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar 85/4.5 , Ultra-Achromatic-Takumar 300/5.6 300mm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
Well ... the lens is a 2.8/135 zeiss sonnar in contax mount , but it surely behaves like 3.5 wide open at 2.8  
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
| CarbonR wrote: |
| Transmitted light (f/stop) shloudnt be dependent on the coating, you dont say what woating you have to you light meter to determine the right exposure |
the test was done with the camera internal meter (average of whole scene) , constant light source , constant subject, constant framing , on tripod
the camera will then give the same shutter speed with the sonnar set at 2.8 and the tak set at 4
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57849
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
They are not in same league surely Contax Sonnar.
_________________
-------------------------------
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 |
|
|
eeyore_nl
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 837
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
eeyore_nl wrote:
My vote is for the Sonnar. Even if it is a slower lens.
_________________
Fujifilm X-Pro2 / Fujifilm X-T1 / some Sonnar & Takumar lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 7448
Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
"Fast Takumar or slow sonnar ?"
It's got to be a slow Sonnar - if we could make lenses faster than their widest apertures we'd all be very rich by now!
1.4/50 Super-Takumar - actually opens to 1.2. Buy It Now $1,000 
Are the Sonnar's blades opening fully? My Pancolar 1.8/50 sticks around 2-2.4 sometimes.
_________________
Peter - Moderator |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
| peterqd wrote: |
"Fast Takumar or slow sonnar ?"
It's got to be a slow Sonnar - if we could make lenses faster than their widest apertures we'd all be very rich by now!
1.4/50 Super-Takumar - actually opens to 1.2. Buy It Now $1,000
Are the Sonnar's blades opening fully? My Pancolar 1.8/50 sticks around 2-2.4 sometimes. |
Blades are fully open and optics are crystal clear...No you don't get a lens that is faster than it's max aperture but you might get one that is slightly faster in real life than it's indicated max aperture
Maybe the 2.8 indication on the sonnar is optimistic and the tak is a bit faster than the indicated 2.5
How about......tak 135/2.5 twice as fast as sonnar 135/2.8 Buy It Now $1,000 !!
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
| eeyore_nl wrote: |
| My vote is for the Sonnar. Even if it is a slower lens. |
I agree....The sonnar is probably an all round better lens , but i am not comparing the two except for the amount of light transmitted through them at a certain stop
In my view the actual f stop reading on the lens must be a reasonablygood indication of the actual transmission of light through the lens and in the sonnar's case compared to the tak it is not
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
F16SUNSHINE
Joined: 20 Aug 2007
Posts: 5486
Location: Left Coast
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
F16SUNSHINE wrote:
OK, I'm going to let an expert come along and go into detail but give you this to begin with.
A lenses F stops have to do with a relation between the FL and Opening. An f1 50mm lens has an opening of 50mm at it's max aperture.
You can have 2 different 135mm lenses and at the same aperture have differnt light transmition.
The method to measure light transmition is referred to as T stop.
For folks like us that shoot stills we don't really care about such things as much.
Maybe Klaus or Abbaz will be by to give a finer tuned explanation. Or you can google for more.
IMHO the Sonnar has a personality that will be different than the Tak but not better. I would choose it but others may not.
_________________
Moderator |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
no-X
Joined: 19 Jul 2008
Posts: 2495
Location: Budejky, Czech Republic
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
no-X wrote:
Which model of Takumar 135/2.5 do you have? Super (V1), S-M-C (V1) or S-M-C (V2)?
_________________
(almost) complete list of Helios lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spleenone
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
Posts: 1130
Location: Slovakia
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
spleenone wrote:
| F16SUNSHINE wrote: |
OK, I'm going to let an expert come along and go into detail but give you this to begin with.
A lenses F stops have to do with a relation between the FL and Opening. An f1 50mm lens has an opening of 50mm at it's max aperture.
You can have 2 different 135mm lenses and at the same aperture have differnt light transmition.
The method to measure light transmition is referred to as T stop.
For folks like us that shoot stills we don't really care about such things as much.
Maybe Klaus or Abbaz will be by to give a finer tuned explanation. Or you can google for more.
IMHO the Sonnar has a personality that will be different than the Tak but not better. I would choose it but others may not. |
T stops are using in professional film photography. They are much precise because of light metering not as with F stops which are geometrical measured. It means (but I don't know about theese lenses) that light transmited through the lens is abstracted inner structure. Lenses compared in T stops are giving same result in light transfer but with F stops it needn't to be equivalent. I thing that it can be happen in photography as well but hard to believe that with full one stop... imho =) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scsambrook
Joined: 29 Mar 2009
Posts: 2167
Location: Glasgow Scotland
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
scsambrook wrote:
Daniel -
Do the lenses give differently exposed results when used at the same shutter/aperture combinations? If so, one lens is certainly letting more light through than the other. Unless the Pentax lens has internal fogging which will cause light scatter, make the meter think it's getting more light than is actually the case, and lower the contrast in the resulting exposure. But if the exposures at similar settings give identical results, then we have to look for a metering error in the camera. Although the cause of it might not be easy to identify.
An intriguing issue .
_________________
Stephen
Equipment: Pentax DSLR for casual shooting, Lumix G1 and Fuji XE-1 for playing with old lenses, and Leica M8 because I still like the optical rangefinder system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 10471
Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
| Rusty wrote: |
| is'nt the famous *T coating supposed to be super efficient and let more light through , or is the stated 2.8 a bit optimistic for the sonnar |
the contax is 2.7 at 2.8
http://www.reocities.com/ilprode/135f28.htm
_________________
T* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
| no-X wrote: |
| Which model of Takumar 135/2.5 do you have? Super (V1), S-M-C (V1) or S-M-C (V2)? |
Super takumar (43801 on am switch) serial 2507622
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
| F16SUNSHINE wrote: |
OK, I'm going to let an expert come along and go into detail but give you this to begin with.
.........For folks like us that shoot stills we don't really care about such things as much............... |
Then i presume no one on this forum owns a 50mm/1:1.2 or that no one would mind after spending a lot of money on such lens , that when they get home and see that it is just as fast as the 50mm/1.8 that they already have?
In my view the t stop and the normal f stop values should be closely related
If they are not , a lens should be marketed with the max aperture related to the amount of light it transmits
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
| scsambrook wrote: |
Daniel -
Do the lenses give differently exposed results when used at the same shutter/aperture combinations? If so, one lens is certainly letting more light through than the other. Unless the Pentax lens has internal fogging which will cause light scatter, make the meter think it's getting more light than is actually the case, and lower the contrast in the resulting exposure. But if the exposures at similar settings give identical results, then we have to look for a metering error in the camera. Although the cause of it might not be easy to identify.
An intriguing issue . |
Stephen
I am going to test again with exactly the same settings on the cam for both lenses (manual mode) en then see what the histogram shows
or maybe just plug a light meter into the back of the lenses and compare readings ?
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 10471
Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
| Rusty wrote: |
| plug a light meter into the back |
terrific idea!
_________________
T* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6624
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Do either of the adapters have chips in? Whatever value is programmed into them may have quite an effect on exposure, especially with Canon...
_________________
Graham - Moderator 
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
| Shrek wrote: |
| Do either of the adapters have chips in? Whatever value is programmed into them may have quite an effect on exposure, especially with Canon... |
The adapter on the tak is an older non programmable , the one on the sonnar a newer one with the FL programmed......hmmm ,something to think about
here are further test
The camera on manual shutter speed 125/sec both lenses on f4 photographing whitr lcd screen at same distance
rgb value on sonnar=150 (+-) rgb value on tak =190 (+-)
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kansalliskala
Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Posts: 5028
Location: Southern Finland countryside
Expire: 2016-12-30
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kansalliskala wrote:
You need a third lens to compare?
_________________
MF: Kodak DCS SLR/c; Samsung NX10; OM-10; Canon T50
Zuiko 28/3.5, Distagon 35/2.8; Yashica ML 50/2;
Zuiko 50/1.4; S-M-C 120/2.8; Zuiko 135/3.5; 200/5;
Tamron AD1 135/2.8, Soligor 180/3.5; Tamron AD1 300/5.6
Tamron zooms: 01A, Z-210
Yashicaflex C; Київ 4 + Юпитер 8, 11; Polaroid 100; Olympus XA; Yashica T3
Museum stuff: Certo-Phot; Tele-Edixon 135; Polaris 90-190; Asahi Bellows; Ixus IIs
Projects: Agfa Isolette III (no shutter), Canon AE-1D (no sensor),
Nikon D80 (dead), The "Peace Camera"
AF: Canon, Tokina, Sigma Video: JVC GZ-MG275E |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty
Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 435
Location: Mosselbay, South Africa
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rusty wrote:
| poilu wrote: |
| Rusty wrote: |
| plug a light meter into the back |
terrific idea! |
Only have an old Weston Master 2  but used it anyway
The reading between the sonnar and the tak is very small in favour of the tak wide open (2.5) and the sonnar wide open (2.7 ?)
There can therefore not be that much transmission difference between the two lenses......I have no idea why the sonnar will expose darker with exactly the same camera settings ? there is nothing else the camera can change , iso is set, shutter is set and aperture is set . The only variable is the amount of light that hits the sensor
If the amount of light is the same, the exposure must be exactly the same ?
_________________
Daniel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scsambrook
Joined: 29 Mar 2009
Posts: 2167
Location: Glasgow Scotland
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
scsambrook wrote:
This is interesting stuff ! Daniel, another question - does the difference occur at smaller apertures as well?
It also occurs to me that putting the Weston up to the lens MIGHT give you a false reading - if the rear elements are a different size physically then the amount of light reaching the cell could also be different. I'm sorry but I'm not familiar with the mechanical construction of the two.
_________________
Stephen
Equipment: Pentax DSLR for casual shooting, Lumix G1 and Fuji XE-1 for playing with old lenses, and Leica M8 because I still like the optical rangefinder system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6624
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
On Canon, my adapter with the chip overexposes more than the one without, as soon as the f stop is smaller than what's programmed on the chip.
For example, my chip is set to f1.4 and at f3.5 I would need to underexpose by half a stop or so, or else the shutter speed would be artificially slow. The only way around this (I believe) is to buy an adapter with a chip that you can program to the aperture you are shooting at, or buy a manual focus screen and set the camera accordingly. Or buy an adapter without a chip
_________________
Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
