View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
CarbonR
Joined: 31 Dec 2008 Posts: 1969 Location: Clermont-Ferrand, France
|
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 11:11 am Post subject: Telephoto lenses for shooting tits : 10 lenses compared |
|
|
CarbonR wrote:
About 10 paper rolls tested with a dummy bird :
Ultra Achromatic Takumar rocks everything, even with its cracked front lens, confirming the "field" feeling I had of it
300/4 V2 and V3 manage well at corners
500/4.5 bleeds red, a bit disapointed
400/4 confirms my feeling about being a very good lens
Donuts factory is quite good at center but does nots seems to be good outside _________________ 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 |
|
|
hasenbein
Joined: 15 May 2020 Posts: 93
|
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hasenbein wrote:
Reading the topic title, I had hoped for something else... disappointed! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10462 Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Bird photography is bird photography. lol
Thanks for test! Those Takumars look great! Is that 4.5/500 the S-M-C? _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
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
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
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
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
CarbonR
Joined: 31 Dec 2008 Posts: 1969 Location: Clermont-Ferrand, France
|
Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2020 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CarbonR wrote:
I got fooled too many times and did want to take revenge
Yes taht is the S-M-C. I am not sure about this result, I did not see something like this previously. _________________ 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 |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3751 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Occasionaly doing my own tests, I'm well aware of the difficulties relates to such a task. Tele lenses are especially prone to problems - be it slight movments of the camera/lens setup (mirror ans/or shutter), air turbulences, haze in the air, and defining the focus point (longitudinal CAs).
I'm not familiar with Canons DSLRs (apart from a EOS 1D MkII here), and therefore I don't know why you got these "???" images. Whenever I do tests, however, I immediately do control each image, therefore preventing such "???" images !
Before you do any future work, it might be worth to find out what went wrong with theses "???" images, e. g. by shooting a series of identical images and trying to find out what provokes these unsharp images.
Apart from that - if you have quite a few completely unsharp images where one would expect good performance, of course I ask myself if some of the other images simply are slightly unsharp. That compromises the validity of the entire test.
I know very well how much work it is to compare that many lenses, especially tele lenses. Nevertheless I would suggest that you
1) find out waht has caused theses obviously unsharp images
2) re-run the entire telephoto test
Stephan
PS I know than my venerable Sony A900 even when using mirror lock up (2 s) and a solid tripod can produce obvious blurring with tele lenses >200mm. Using the in-body stabilizer reduces these difficulties, but doesn't avoid them completely. However, that works only with chipped lenses. Therefore, for all my lens testing I'm using the A7II / A7RII, either with electronic first shutter, or with completely electronic shutter. _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CarbonR
Joined: 31 Dec 2008 Posts: 1969 Location: Clermont-Ferrand, France
|
Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CarbonR wrote:
The 6D is a 20 Mpix full frame body with liveview (used at x10 to do the focus). 20 Mpix is very demanding so that's why I do not expect a super sharpness at 100% and on some tests I only used 50% crops.
At f/8 I was at 1/100s so on tripod with wireless trigger this should be OK.
I know that I should redo all but... this already took me hours to do this (getting all the gear outside the house, setting the bird in place, shooting, sorting all the gear in the lab, taking all the screens to publish the comparison...) and this comparison, despite being "uncomplete", already brings me what Ineeded : enough datas to see what lenses I want to keep and what lenses I will sell. For the lenses I will keep for use, I will do more precise tests with more aperture settings _________________ 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 |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3751 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
CarbonR wrote: |
The 6D is a 20 Mpix full frame body with liveview (used at x10 to do the focus). 20 Mpix is very demanding so that's why I do not expect a super sharpness at 100% and on some tests I only used 50% crops.
At f/8 I was at 1/100s so on tripod with wireless trigger this should be OK. |
I'm not os sure. My experience - although with Sony A900 and not with Canon gear - the SLRs are quite tricky, especially if no in-body stabilization is available. Even the mechanical shutter of the A7 series can cause considerable pain when testing long focal lengths. Therefore all my testing with such lenses is done with the electronical shutter.
Sometimes also the ground on which the tripod stands can be mving slightly if you move. Grass/earth and even concrete paving slabs may move slightly if you yourself move around the tripod - and induce some oscillations.
Certainly worth trying to find the problem, and tell us what it was!
I remember well testing the Minolta AF 200mm lenses for Sony (2008) - I had lots of problems getting really reproducible results. Finally it was not one, but a whole bunch of small things together causing the troubles! Among them were air turbulences, back-/frontfocus (remember those ...? pre live-view times!!), some reversible de-centering of zoom groups (depending on how i did turn the zoom ring!), and 2-3 more things I don't recall at the moment. Shutter vibrations were ceratinly a factor, too - in spite of using MLU.
CarbonR wrote: |
I know that I should redo all but... this already took me hours to do this (getting all the gear outside the house, setting the bird in place, shooting, sorting all the gear in the lab, taking all the screens to publish the comparison...) |
Oh yes, I know very well ... and getting precise and reproducible results is even more worrysome.
To be very clear: I tried many times to get reproducible results with ten 400mm ... 600mm lenses. I never managed ... and I never published a test comparing 400mm lenses. Usually weather (wind / air turbulences) was the biggest problem.
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gerald
Joined: 25 Mar 2014 Posts: 1196 Location: Brazil
|
Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gerald wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
PS I know than my venerable Sony A900 even when using mirror lock up (2 s) and a solid tripod can produce obvious blurring with tele lenses >200mm. Using the in-body stabilizer reduces these difficulties, but doesn't avoid them completely. However, that works only with chipped lenses. Therefore, for all my lens testing I'm using the A7II / A7RII, either with electronic first shutter, or with completely electronic shutter. |
Yes, EFCS (Electronic First Curtain Shutter) or a total electronic shutter are very effective in reducing vibration for speeds in the range of 1/4 to 1/30 sec.
In fact, IBIS (In-Body Image Stabilization) works well with chipped lenses, but it is very important that the chip be programmed for the same focal length of the lens. Sadly, most chipped adapters are programmed for 50mm focal length only, so the IBIS is completely useless for focal length of, say, 135mm or more. For example, with a 200 mm lens, IBIS will compensate for only 25% of the vibration, so the blur in the final image would still be 75% of the blur without any image stabilization. Likewise, a 50mm chipped adapter will introduce huge overcompensation for a 20mm lens, so it would be better to turn off image stabilization for wideangle lenses. _________________ If raindrops were perfect lenses, the rainbow did not exist. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|