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

1977 Pop Photo Normal Lens tests (32 of them)
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks but erm looks a bit complicated, couldn't someone do a rough summary of the winners and 2nds.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The results looks as the same lens was tested! I bet you can't collect 10 Helios 2/58mm lenses that would be so close Smile.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
the pronounced winner in POP is the summilux 50 1.4 at the (between the f1.4 lenses)
the zuiko and the rokkor could share the 2nd place where the zuiko is a more consistant performer in micro contrast but in some specific conditions ( @f2 and 2\3 out of the center of the frame ) the rokkor beats it, and seems as higher in contrast off center but not in the edges.... it came out too complicated now..

another interesting few facts from this test is their zuiko and smc takumar lenses are measuring f1.49 (zuiko) f1.47 (takumar) and not f1.4 as it is stated on the lens.

the lens with most flare is the zuiko, and with the least flare share nikkor and smc takumar.

and the brightest, as tested, lens was the nikkor with a measured f-stop of 1.42 and 95.3% light transmission. and the loser was the zuiko with an f1.49 and light transmission of only 85%

the least barrel distortion was measured with the smc takumar most with the nikkor

and im gonna finish here... becouse there is much info in those charts and i only summed up a part of the 50 1.4 test results.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Smoli4 wrote:
the pronounced winner in POP is the summilux 50 1.4 at the (between the f1.4 lenses)
the zuiko and the rokkor could share the 2nd place where the zuiko is a more consistant performer in micro contrast but in some specific conditions ( @f2 and 2\3 out of the center of the frame ) the rokkor beats it, and seems as higher in contrast off center but not in the edges.... it came out too complicated now..

another interesting few facts from this test is their zuiko and smc takumar lenses are measuring f1.49 (zuiko) f1.47 (takumar) and not f1.4 as it is stated on the lens.

the lens with most flare is the zuiko, and with the least flare share nikkor and smc takumar.

and the brightest, as tested, lens was the nikkor with a measured f-stop of 1.42 and 95.3% light transmission. and the loser was the zuiko with an f1.49 and light transmission of only 85%

the least barrel distortion was measured with the smc takumar most with the nikkor

and im gonna finish here... becouse there is much info in those charts and i only summed up a part of the 50 1.4 test results.


Thanks, but you can't beat real life shots and in the past I can remember the Amateur photographer magazine who always used the same ship (with crops) on the Thames for their lens tests.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:

Thanks, but you can't beat real life shots and in the past I can remember the Amateur photographer magazine who always used the same ship (with crops) on the Thames for their lens tests.


Yes, indeed they did and it was often very useful for providing real life shots, as you say. The downside to those tests was that the weather on the day of testing sometimes - literally - clouded the picture Very Happy Lenses always tended to look better when the photos were taken on a clear sunny day, and at their worst when it was dull. And depending on the accuracy of the camera's viewfinder, sometimes the edge positioning of the ship was not very far from the centre!

Somewhere, I have some of these old tests, I'll try to dig them out and scan some of them. Let's hope i don't get prosecuted for copyright violation though !


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here you go


Leica M 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Minolta 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Konica 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Nikon 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Olympus 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Pentax 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Vivitar 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


Canon 50s 1977 Lens Test by Nesster, on Flickr


32 Normal Lenses Test 1977 by Nesster, on Flickr


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have been saying the Leicaflex lens was better by far than the Nikkor of this era, but you would not believe me. Well, here's the proof.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
FluffPuppy wrote:
I have been saying the Leicaflex lens was better by far than the Nikkor of this era, but you would not believe me. Well, here's the proof.


Though these are the rangefinder Leica lenses Wink


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nesster wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote:
I have been saying the Leicaflex lens was better by far than the Nikkor of this era, but you would not believe me. Well, here's the proof.


Though these are the rangefinder Leica lenses Wink


Ooops! Well I'm sure the Leicaflex Summilux-R lens would rank at the top too. It seems odd that they didn't test it. But you will note how poorly the Nikkor did in these tests. It seems only the Takumar was worse.

It would have been nice to see the Zeiss Contax lenses tested. And why bother with Konica? You can't be serious! They were already irrelevant by 1977.

Last edited by FluffPuppy on Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:24 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
and this time ENORMOUS THANKS, Nesster!


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nesster wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote:
I have been saying the Leicaflex lens was better by far than the Nikkor of this era, but you would not believe me. Well, here's the proof.


Though these are the rangefinder Leica lenses Wink


Nesster,

Will you by any chance have also the Feb. 1999 issue of Popular Photography that contains the infamous comparative test: "The Great 50/1.4 Shootout" (p. 66), that includes Contax(C/Y),Canon, Leica, Minolta, Nikon, Pentax, and Schneider lenses Wink


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Keysersoze27 wrote:

Nesster,

Will you by any chance have also the Feb. 1999 issue of Popular Photography that contains the infamous comparative test: "The Great 50/1.4 Shootout" (p. 66), that includes Contax(C/Y),Canon, Leica, Minolta, Nikon, Pentax, and Schneider lenses Wink


Laughing I would not... I don't think... Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nesster wrote:
Though these are the rangefinder Leica lenses Wink
if you look at it propperly, you´ll find that there IS a Summilux compared;)
Keysersoze27 wrote:
Nesster,

Will you by any chance have also the Feb. 1999 issue of Popular Photography that contains the infamous comparative test: "The Great 50/1.4 Shootout" (p. 66), that includes Contax(C/Y),Canon, Leica, Minolta, Nikon, Pentax, and Schneider lenses Wink
according to this PR document Zeiss has won the test

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/CLN11e/$File/cln11e.pdf


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nesster wrote:
Keysersoze27 wrote:

Nesster,

Will you by any chance have also the Feb. 1999 issue of Popular Photography that contains the infamous comparative test: "The Great 50/1.4 Shootout" (p. 66), that includes Contax(C/Y),Canon, Leica, Minolta, Nikon, Pentax, and Schneider lenses Wink


Laughing I would not... I don't think... Laughing


Yeah, a lot of these (the ones tested in 1977) are of lesser interest than the ones you mention (tested in 1999). And why didn't they test the Zeiss Contarex lenses in 1977? Why Konica? You cannot be serious!

Last edited by FluffPuppy on Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:34 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I just asked since it's imposible to find any info about it...(except for the final top3 )

Thanks for the 1977 scans ... I have read them 3 years ago !!!!


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
berraneck wrote:


http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/CLN11e/$File/cln11e.pdf


Yes the top 3 was :

1) Contax Planar
2)Canon EF
3)Summilux-R


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Keysersoze27 wrote:
berraneck wrote:


http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/CLN11e/$File/cln11e.pdf


Yes the top 3 was :

1) Contax Planar
2)Canon EF
3)Summilux-R


Then in 1998, Leica introduced a second-generation 50mm Summilux-R which is better still. Maybe I'll get one some day. LOL

If the old one (the one I own) came in third in 1999, at 30 years of age, against much more recent designs, it's still pretty good!


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
FluffPuppy wrote:
Keysersoze27 wrote:
berraneck wrote:


http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/CLN11e/$File/cln11e.pdf


Yes the top 3 was :

1) Contax Planar
2)Canon EF
3)Summilux-R


Then in 1998, Leica introduced a second-generation 50mm Summilux-R which is better still. Maybe I'll get one some day. LOL

If the old one (the one I own) came in third in 1999, at 30 years of age, against much more recent designs, it's still pretty good!


They apparently tested the v1 Lux but it's not 100% confirmed ....

The C/Y Planar that came no1 is an early 70s design too so.... Wink

Good luck getting the E60 ... the price will get even higher in the future.....


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
FluffPuppy wrote:
Nesster wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote:
I have been saying the Leicaflex lens was better by far than the Nikkor of this era, but you would not believe me. Well, here's the proof.


Though these are the rangefinder Leica lenses Wink


Ooops! Well I'm sure the Leicaflex Summilux-R lens would rank at the top too. It seems odd that they didn't test it. But you will note how poorly the Nikkor did in these tests. It seems only the Takumar was worse.

It would have been nice to see the Zeiss Contax lenses tested. And why bother with Konica? You can't be serious! They were already irrelevant by 1977.


On my tests recently, there wasn't much difference between the Hexanon 50mm f1.7 and a Canon FDn 50mm f1.4 in crops....erm are you going to say "why bother with Canon" as well Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote:
Nesster wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote:
I have been saying the Leicaflex lens was better by far than the Nikkor of this era, but you would not believe me. Well, here's the proof.


Though these are the rangefinder Leica lenses Wink


Ooops! Well I'm sure the Leicaflex Summilux-R lens would rank at the top too. It seems odd that they didn't test it. But you will note how poorly the Nikkor did in these tests. It seems only the Takumar was worse.

It would have been nice to see the Zeiss Contax lenses tested. And why bother with Konica? You can't be serious! They were already irrelevant by 1977.


On my tests recently, there wasn't much difference between the Hexanon 50mm f1.7 and a Canon FDn 50mm f1.4 in crops....erm are you going to say "why bother with Canon" as well Rolling Eyes


No, I mean Konica cameras were on the way out at that time. Not a major player. Canon and Minolta were ascendant, Konica was fading fast.

I am surprised how poorly the f/1.4 Takumar did. It was even worse than the Nikkor! Very strange!

But I think you will all agree now that my criticisms of the Nikkor 50s are borne out by the tests.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
AR-mount SLRs

Konica's second series of SLR cameras began with 1965's Auto-Reflex. This line came to an end in 1987 when Konica abandoned the SLR market.

Konica Auto-Reflex (1965–1968) Known as the Autorex in Japan.
Konica Auto-Reflex P (1966–1968) Known as the Autorex P in Japan.
Konica Autoreflex T (1968–1970)
Konica Autoreflex A (1968–1971)
Konica Autoreflex T2 (1970–1973)
Konica Autoreflex A2 (1971–1972)
Konica Autoreflex A1000 (1972–1973)
Konica Autoreflex T3 (1973–1975)
Konica Autoreflex A3 (1973-?)
Konica Autoreflex T3N (1975–1978)
Konica Autoreflex TC (1976–1982)
Konica Autoreflex T4 (1978–1979)
Konica FS-1 (1979–1983)
Konica FC-1 (1980–1983)
Konica FP-1 (1981–1983)
Konica FT-1 (1983–1987)
Konica TC-X (1985–1987) Built by Cosina.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
A good photographer could take excellent pictures with all these lenses and many others. The differences would matter in very few situations.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Pentaxes were the K's, not the Takumars. In '77 it is true Konica was starting to run out of steam; but they were still considered strong on the back of their auto exposure innovation.

The article makes the point that they were limiting their tests to makes/mounts that had all 4 types represented, just to narrow things down a bit. Interestingly Vivitar made that list.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
FluffPuppy wrote:


I am surprised how poorly the f/1.4 Takumar did. It was even worse than the Nikkor! Very strange!



How exactly did you concluded that the K50 is worst than the Nikkor 50 in this test?????


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Keysersoze27 wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote:


I am surprised how poorly the f/1.4 Takumar did. It was even worse than the Nikkor! Very strange!



How exactly did you concluded that the K50 is worst than the Nikkor 50 in this test?????


Don't you know how to read the test?


PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
FluffPuppy wrote:
Keysersoze27 wrote:
FluffPuppy wrote:


I am surprised how poorly the f/1.4 Takumar did. It was even worse than the Nikkor! Very strange!



How exactly did you concluded that the K50 is worst than the Nikkor 50 in this test?????


Don't you know how to read the test?




Rolling Eyes

Keyboard jockey at it's finest ....
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2