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

28mm test:CONTAX 28 f2, NIKON 28 f1.4, YASHICA 28 f2.8,CANON
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:39 am    Post subject: 28mm test:CONTAX 28 f2, NIKON 28 f1.4, YASHICA 28 f2.8,CANON Reply with quote

Yesterday, I did a fast test in order to evaluate the sharp performance of my 28mm.
This is a mini-test , nothing to professional. Even because is the first time that I posted a test Smile

Settings:
- canon 5D Mk III
- RAW
- photoshop CS6 (just to open, convert and crop)
- iso 100
- tripod
- canon faithful image style
- manual focus
- all crop are 100%

Lenses tested:
- contax 28 f2 AE mat 588xxx
- contax 28 f2 AE mat 608xxx (my defected copy that i'm using for boken)
- yashica ML 28 f2.8
- Nikon 28 f1,4
- canon 24-70 L mk I at 28mm


Last edited by malsano on Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:03 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikon 28 f1,4 @f1,4



Contax 28 f2 @f2 mat 588xxx



Contax 28 f2 @f2 mat 608xxx (defected) but fantastic for boken



Yashica ML 28 f2,8 @f2,8



Canon 24-70 L mk I f2,8 @28mmF2,8



PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

the "defected" contax 28 even looks to have a little more barrel thant the older 28 mat 588xxx

From my side I'm surprised about the Nikon: the reputation is not good, but from my side is the better of these.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excuse me, but at this size it's an unuseful effort... we need at least some crop, better if at the same f: Smile


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Crops would be nice, I am interested in a real world test like this!


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikon 28 f1,4 @1,4 center crop



Contax 28 f2 @f2 mat 588xxx center crop



Contax 28 f2 @f2 mat 608xxx center crop



Yashica ML @f2,8 center crop



Canon 28 @28mm f2,8 center crop



PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

guys give me time Smile) i'm uploading everything. I'll write once I'll finish everything.

thanks


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikon 28 f1,4 @1,4 CORNER CROP



Contax 28 f2 @f2 mat 588xxx corner crop



Contax 28 f2 @f2 mat 608xxx corner crop



Yashica ML 28 @f2,8 corner crop



Canon 24-70 L mk I @28mm f2,8 corner crop



PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikon 28 f1,4 @5,6



Contax 28 f2 @f5,6 mat 588xxx



contax 28 f2 @5,6 mat 608xxx



Yashica 28 f2,8 @5,6



Canon 24-70 @28mmf5,6



PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikon 28 f1,4 @5,6 center crop



Contax 28 f2 @5,6 mat 588xxx center crop



Contax 28 f2 @5,6 mat 608xxx center crop



Yashcia 28 @5,6 center crop



Canon 24-70 L mkI f2,8 @28mm f5,6 center crop



PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nikon 28 f1,4 @5,6 corner crop



Contax 28 f2 @5,6 mat588xxx corner crop crop



Contax 28 f2 @5,6 mat608xxx corner crop



Yashica 28 f2,8 @5,6 corner crop



Canon 24-70 L f2,8 @28mm f5,6 corner crop



PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Finish Smile))

Let's go to comment it


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The "old" canon 24-70 did well his job. I supposed it will be the worst one , but It showed good performance respect the fix lenses.
This is one of the latest copies ( mat UZ) and it's better of my previous ( US)

Thanks


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you, great work!

Comments:

-you have a great copy of Canon Wink
-Nikkor is a real surprise, the winner to me too!
-Distagon is still an awesome lens
-Yashinon is a cheap shortcut to an acceptable quality, when stopped a little


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

malsano wrote:

From my side I'm surprised about the Nikon: the reputation is not good, but from my side is the better of these.


You must be kidding, I always read good things about the nikkor 28/1.4 every where, well known for its high performance.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How did you focus? The non-broken Contax is much more worse than I expected.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Manual in live view with 10X ...

I have a personal opinion about these lenses...
I tried 4 different rings + even laitax new bayonet and my sensation is that these two lenses need to be more close to the Canon sensor .
few months ago I even got another copy of 28 f2 AE and the performances where in the middle of my two copies that I still have.

I even discovered that 5d mk III is worst than 5d mk II in terms of mirror tolerances (in fact my 18 AE doesn't work). 1dX same problem.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is the reason why i'm still keeping (and i'll never sell) my "defected "copy of contax 28 f2 mat608xxx



Last edited by malsano on Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:14 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote



PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 7:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Canon looks superb to me Shocked


PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wait, Nikon not having reputation? I thought the reputation is that this is one the best Nikkor lenses ever. Some years after they stopped producing it, the price got higher than for a new lens. It sure is amazing, so sharp at f/1.4... It's very tempting to sell some lenses and get this Nikon. What's the bokeh like?

About the broken Contax...is it a floating element design? By the looks from the photo it could be that the "floating distance" is not calibrated. I can easily get this kind of effect if I mess with my Kiron 28mm f/2


PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, it has floating system. For sure it has calibration problem (infinity mostly).

About Nikon, I've just gotten it and it's my first test. I read about it before and the lens wasn't appreciate by everyone (like canon 50 1,0, .... BUT NOT like canon 200 1,8 . This to say that not all legendary lenses are loved...).

I did a test in the night :
- Nikon 28 1,4
- canon 24 1,4 mk II
- contax 28 f2 mat 588xxx (the good one)
- contax 35 f1,4 mat 586xxx

and the Nikon, in terms of coma , was the best one.

ciao


PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 9:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ManualFocus-G wrote:
The Canon looks superb to me Shocked


If you like arch-shaped buildings, perhaps yes Confused

malsano wrote:

and the Nikon, in terms of coma , was the best one.
ciao


It's almost impossible to visually detect coma in almost all of modern day lenses, they're all well corrected for it. You may find it in those
cheap chinese wide extensions for video cameras Rolling Eyes but hardly in a Nikon, Canon, or Contax lens.
Do not confuse coma for the bokeh highlights distortion, which is caused by oblique astigmatism. More about it here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/geoopt/coma.html


PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ciao Orio,

to be honest I've ever seen discussion about Coma. like http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/50mm-f12-coma.htm

May you kindly give some pictures as exemplum about the differences between coma and light distorcion? Now you get me noise about...

Why a lens, like Nikon 58 1,2 noctilus, projected to avoid Coma in film era it didn't have light distortion?

Thanks


PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Coma is, when a light sources look as tiny comets pointing towards the center of the lens, right? This also produces the "exploding bokeh" in extreme examples. The more commonly seen aberation in modern wides is astigmatism - the small arcs on the light sources.
For these abberations the Nikon is extremely well corrected. For comparison, I seen some wideopen photos of Canon 24mm L at 1.4 and the amount of astigmatism seen there makes it useless for night photography or milky way photography. As I read, the Nikon 28mm was by purpose made to deal the best with these situations, somehow like a modern counterpart of Noct Nikkor.