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

Bokina (Viv S1) vs Nikkor-P 105/2.5 Sonnar quick test
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:50 am    Post subject: Bokina (Viv S1) vs Nikkor-P 105/2.5 Sonnar quick test Reply with quote

Owning both of these highly regarded lenses, I thought I´d pit them against each other, to see what differences one could find between them. What I tried to test/compare was: sharpness, bokeh and flare resistance (knowing beforehand that the Bokina is quite poor in this regard), wide open and at f/5.6. The camera (Fuji X-E1) was mounted to a tripod and a bare flash was set to camera left firing into the ceiling for bounce lighting. Flash output was set manually and was equal for both lenses (of course increased for the f/5.6 shots as compared to the f/2.5 ones). Shutter speed was set at 1/125 for all shots. Ambient light was constant (clear sky) for all the shots. The camera was moved back for the Nikkor shots, to get the same framing (almost, anyway). The "model" was chosen for her uncanny ability to sit perfectly still for endless stretches of time...

Here are the results:


Bokina wide open by scepticswe, on Flickr


Bokina @ 5.6 by scepticswe, on Flickr


Nikkor 105/2.5 wide open by scepticswe, on Flickr


Nikkor 105/2.5 @ 5.6 by scepticswe, on Flickr

Finally, 100 % crops of the doll's right eye:

Bokina vs Nikkor 105/2.5 by scepticswe, on Flickr

To me, there is no clear winner. The Bokina "wins" on better sharpness wide open (stopped down they´re pretty much equal) and nicer bokeh stopped down (the Nikkor's six-bladed aperture shows quite well). The Nikkor handles flare much better though, despite being only single coated. Vivitar's VMC is really the Bokina's weakest link, IMHO.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It will be very interesting to see this battle between bokina and AIS nikkor 105 2.5 Wink which is better than the old one. The bokina wins from now in sharpness but bokeh... it will be interesting Smile


PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 8:02 am    Post subject: Re: Bokina (Viv S1) vs Nikkor-P 105/2.5 Sonnar quick test Reply with quote

sceptic wrote:

To me, there is no clear winner. The Bokina "wins" on better sharpness wide open (stopped down they´re pretty much equal) and nicer bokeh stopped down (the Nikkor's six-bladed aperture shows quite well). The Nikkor handles flare much better though, despite being only single coated. Vivitar's VMC is really the Bokina's weakest link, IMHO.

A nice test. While I generally agree with your conclusion (the macro lens should be well sharper at this distance than the non-macro Nikkor), your wide open shot taken with the Nikkor appears slightly misfocused. I can tell by the shape of the white reflection in your model's eye. Also, wide open contrast appears a little higher with the Nikkor.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You may very well be right, thanks for noticing. I'll reshoot when I get the time. It would be interesting to try the Tokina AT-X version, to see how better coatings affect the result.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

А very deep hood improves the vivitar performance a lot. And yes the nikkor's file is a little miss focused. The real test for those will be portrait shot from bigger distance than this one, with more stiff to show the bokeh. And other test - something on very close distance like macro - than you will see the resolution of the vivitar. At portrait distance you have to test them on at least 24mp crop sensor to see any difference in sharpness but when you shoot macro the lens with more sharpness in reserve will show it. I think that I am going to get 105 2.5 AIS for portraits and keep the bokina for macro. They both are great lenses for their purposes.