| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 4:16 pm Post subject: 85mm monkey portrait test |
 |
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
I've been promising to do a basic 85mm portrait lens test for a while now, and was hoping to get outside today to do so. But I had a heavy night last night and have been feeling a bit rough  So I performed a test inside 
Lenses are as follows:
1. Samyang 85/1.8 Aspherical IF (Canon EF mount - this is my latest lens - yay!)
2. Vivitar 85/1.8 preset (M42 T-Mount)
3. Jupiter 9 85/2 alu version (M39 mount)
4. Olympus OM 85/2 (OM mount)
5. Steinheil Culminar 85/2.8 (M42 mount)
Here they are:
Now before I start, I will give you some background. The monkey was positioned on top of a Henry the Hoover with wine bottles behind to give some bokeh. The camera was my Canon EOS 40D on an old Velbon tripod. All shots were taken using liveview, and there was bright sunlight coming from both windows behind the monkey. All lenses had a hood fitted.
I somehow managed to cock up the focusing with the Samyang - I shot from f4 to f2.8 (which was fine) but must have knocked the tripod and as a result the f2 and f1.4 shots are front focused. I only noticed afterwards, so later on took a few more and have displayed the correctly focused crops.
Anyway...
Samyang @ f1.4
Samyang @ f1.4 - crop (from 2nd photo shoot)
Vivitar @ f1.8
Vivitar @ f1.8 - crop
Jupiter @ f2
Jupiter @ f2 - crop
Olympus @ f2
Olympus @ f2 - crop
Samyang @ f2
Samyang @ f2 - crop (from second shoot)
Samyang @ f2.8
Samyang @ f2.8 - crop
Vivitar @ f2.8
Vivitar @ f2.8 - crop
Jupiter @ f2.8
Jupiter @ f2.8 - crop
Olympus @ f2.8
Olympus @ f2.8 - crop
Steinheil @ f2.8
Steinheil @ f2.8 - crop
Samyang @ f4
Samyang @ f4 - crop
Vivitar @ f4
Vivitar @ f4 - crop
Jupiter @ f4
Jupiter @ f4 - crop
Olympus @ f4
Steinheil @ f4
Steinheil @ f4 - crop
Summary
The Samyang is an incredible lens - I paid £180.00 for it new, including shipping. An absolute steal in my opinion! The Olympus OM 85/2 is also a cracker. Best value for me is the Jupiter 9 85/2, which I feel also put in a string performance. The Steinheil really struggled against the bright light and Vivitar performed adequetly.
Not the worlds most scientific test, and an outdoors test would give a better idea about bokeh, but it's certainly interesting to test them all out either way 
_________________
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 |
|
 |
patrickh
Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Posts: 8551
Location: Oregon
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
patrickh wrote:
Olympus by a long way for my money
patrickh
Nice samples/test - thanks
_________________
DSLR: Nikon D300 Nikon D200 Nex 5N
MF Zooms: Kiron 28-85/3.5, 28-105/3.2, 75-150/3.5, Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AIS // MF Primes: Nikkor 20/4 AI, 24/2 AI, 28/2 AI, 28/2.8 AIS, 28/3.5 AI, 35/1.4 AIS, 35/2 AIS, 35/2.8 PC, 45/2.8 P, 50/1.4 AIS, 50/1.8 AIS, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 AIS micro, 55/3.5 AI micro, 85/2 AI, 100/2,8 E, 105/1,8 AIS, 105/2,5 AIS, 135/2 AIS, 135/2.8 AIS, 200/4 AI, 200/4 AIS micro, 300/4.5 AI, 300/4.5 AI ED, Arsat 50/1.4, Kiron 28/2, Vivitar 28/2.5, Panagor 135/2.8, Tamron 28/2.5, Tamron 90/2.5 macro, Vivitar 90/2.5 macro (Tokina) Voigtlander 90/3.5 Vivitar 105/2.5 macro (Kiron) Kaleinar 100/2.8 AI Tamron 135/2.5, Vivitar 135/2.8CF, 200/3.5, Tokina 400/5,6
M42: Vivitar 28/2.5, Tamron 28/2.5, Formula5 28/2.8, Mamiya 28/2.8, Pentacon 29/2.8, Flektogon 35/2.4, Flektogon 35/2.8, Takumar 35/3.5, Curtagon 35/4, Takumar 50/1.4, Volna-6 50/2.8 macro, Mamiya 50/1.4, CZJ Pancolar 50/1,8, Oreston 50/1.8, Takumar 50/2, Industar 50/3.5, Sears 55/1.4, Helios 58/2, Jupiter 85/2, Helios 85/1.5, Takumar 105/2.8, Steinheil macro 105/4.5, Tamron 135/2.5, Jupiter 135/4, CZ 135/4, Steinheil Culminar 135/4,5, Jupiter 135/3.5, Takumar 135/3.5, Tair 135/2.8, Pentacon 135/2.8, CZ 135/2.8, Taika 135/3.5, Takumar 150/4, Jupiter 200/4, Takumar 200/4
Exakta: Topcon 100/2.8(M42), 35/2.8, 58/1.8, 135/2.8, 135/2.8 (M42), Kyoei Acall 135/3.5
C/Y: Yashica 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, Zeiss Planar 50/1.4, Distagon 25/2.8
Hexanon: 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 40/1.8, 50/1.7, 52/1.8, 135/3.2, 135/3.5, 35-70/3.5, 200/3.5
P6 : Mir 38 65/3.5, Biometar 80/2.8, Kaleinar 150/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8
Minolta SR: 28/2.8, 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 45/2, 50/2, 58/1.4, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, 200/3.5
RF: Industar 53/2.8, Jupiter 8 50/2
Enlarg: Rodagon 50/5,6, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, Vario 44-52/4, 150/5.6 180/5.6 El Nikkor 50/2,8,63/2.8,75/4, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, 135/5.6 Schneider 60/5.6, 80/5.6, 80/4S,100/5.6S,105/5.6,135/5.6, 135/5.6S, 150/5.6S, Leica 95/4 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vulko
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vulko wrote:
Nice test. if you could post some pix of Helios 40 and CZ it would be just perfect
Why does Olympus have CA even at f4? Jupiter does too, but it costs much less.
Samyang is the best here in sharpness and CA level. Bokeh is also very smooth, better than the others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spotmatic
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Posts: 4045
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Spotmatic wrote:
Interesting test, thanks for sharing!
As for the Olympus and CA: I have the SMC Pentax-M 85mm f/2 which is optically similar, and it shows CA as easily as the Olympus. They have the same optical scheme, so...
_________________
Peter - Moderator
Pentax K-5 + Pentax 645 + Canon 5D + Bessa RF 10,5cm Heliar, and a 'little' bag full of MF lenses. The lens list is * here *.
My fast 80s: Asahi-Kogaku Takumar 83mm f/1.9 - Super-Takumar 85mm f/1.9 - FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited - Cyclop 85/1.5 (Helios-40 innards) - Komura 80mm f/1.8 - Meyer Görlitz Primoplan 7,5cm 1:1.9 - Carl Zeiss Jena 80mm f/1.8 Pancolar - Canon 85mm f/1.8 S.S.C. - Canon 85mm f/1.2 S.S.C. Aspherical |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
francotirador
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Posts: 894
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
francotirador wrote:
It is possible that the Steinheil has a Coating problem? Or a glass with oil?
Greetings
_________________
Canon 5D II-Sony nex 6
Canon L 80-200 f 2.8 - Canon L 135 f2 - Canon FD 135/2.5 convert to EOS - Yashica 50 1.4 ML - Canon FD 50 1.2 - Distagon 35mm 2.8 T AEJ - Minolta MC 24mm f 2.8 - Canon LTM 85 1.9- Canon LTM 85mm 1.9 convert to EOS - Rodenstock Heligon 50 1.9 - Color Skopar 50 2.8 & MAte Box & filters 4X4
Contax RTS II y Minolta SRT 303 - 28-135 3.6 Tokina - Minolta MD 45 f2.0 - Minolta Zoom 80 200 4.5 (Leica)
www.isgleasphoto.com
The life is more easy with this forum .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Himself
Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 3240
Location: Montreal
Expire: 2013-05-30
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Himself wrote:
Samyang rocks!
f4 is stunning! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 6602
Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
The Samyang is definitely the best of that lot by a large margin. Some of this no doubt is the result of better coatings.
Very impressive, very interesting test.
A shootout between the Samyang and some of the other legendary MF portrait lenses would complete the comparison, the Biotar 75, the Helios 40, Takumar 85's, etc.
_________________
I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Himself
Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 3240
Location: Montreal
Expire: 2013-05-30
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Himself wrote:
Samyang rocks!
f4 is stunning! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Himself
Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 3240
Location: Montreal
Expire: 2013-05-30
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 11:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Himself wrote:
Samyang rocks!
f4 is stunning! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Himself
Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 3240
Location: Montreal
Expire: 2013-05-30
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Himself wrote:
Samyang rocks!
f4 is stunning! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
Samyang's crops with a lot of CA. Very strong to me Purple at the front and green at the background - look at the 1,4 crop-. It's a pity. The samyang pícs have a very good resolution, but the very strong CA kills the colour response of the lens.
For portrait my lens of the tested, is the J9.
Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kathmandu
Joined: 09 Dec 2009
Posts: 1479
Location: (Kathmandu,Nepal. Currently)Pacific Northwest, USA
Expire: 2012-04-08
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kathmandu wrote:
after looking at your images - all of them look nice, specially the Samyang, but the crops of the different lenses tell a different story- the Jupiter image crops look a little better, less aberration. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fourmix
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 111
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fourmix wrote:
Samyang look nice  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
| estudleon wrote: |
| Samyang's crops with a lot of CA. Very strong to me Purple at the front and green at the background - look at the 1,4 crop-. It's a pity. The samyang pícs have a very good resolution, but the very strong CA kills the colour response of the lens. |
It's a logical consequence of the higher contrast. If there was as much veiling flare (and unsharpness) as the other lenses, the longitudinal CA would not show so strongly. You can easily see that throughout the whole series, the Samyang by far has the best contrast.
"CA kills the colour response" are very strong words. I have seen plenty of samples where the CA of the Samyang is not problematic and the images have a lot of pop because of the great contrast. Your J9 will not achieve this look. If you prefer soft looking portraits with glow and low contrast, then I'm sure the Jupiter will be a better choice.
At f/2.8 and f/4, the Samyang is not focused at the eyes, but in front of them. If it wasn't refocused with the change of aperture, then there is focus shift here.
The Oly definitely looks sharpest to me, but contrast is inferior to the Samyang (and also the bokeh at f/2). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JohnBee
Joined: 11 Mar 2010
Posts: 179
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
JohnBee wrote:
The J-9 MC has much better performance than what is seen here.
Though it doesn't come in as wide as the Samyang, I'm thinking it may do better in terms of CA and sharpness at f2 and beyond. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
| AhamB wrote: |
| estudleon wrote: |
| Samyang's crops with a lot of CA. Very strong to me Purple at the front and green at the background - look at the 1,4 crop-. It's a pity. The samyang pícs have a very good resolution, but the very strong CA kills the colour response of the lens. |
It's a logical consequence of the higher contrast. If there was as much veiling flare (and unsharpness) as the other lenses, the longitudinal CA would not show so strongly. You can easily see that throughout the whole series, the Samyang by far has the best contrast.
"CA kills the colour response" are very strong words. I have seen plenty of samples where the CA of the Samyang is not problematic and the images have a lot of pop because of the great contrast. Your J9 will not achieve this look. If you prefer soft looking portraits with glow and low contrast, then I'm sure the Jupiter will be a better choice.
At f/2.8 and f/4, the Samyang is not focused at the eyes, but in front of them. If it wasn't refocused with the change of aperture, then there is focus shift here.
The Oly definitely looks sharpest to me, but contrast is inferior to the Samyang (and also the bokeh at f/2). |
Hi.
I said that i did about the samyang at F/1,4 because i look for this aperture if the lens has it. If I buy a lens with F/1,4 aperture, why will I have to use it at F/2,8 or 4 to take a good pic. And so F/1,4 what for?
I know the samyang and I found in others examples the same problem, the CA.
In portrait lenses I don't think that a strong constrast should be a good thing, I like the medium, normal contrast. This let me work with PP in a better way. The contrastier lenses are more limited to the PP to me. The goal in PP works is a lens with high resolution power and neutral constrast.
At least, I see in that way. Regards, Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joosep
Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Posts: 305
Location: Estonia, Tallinn
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joosep wrote:
| estudleon wrote: |
In portrait lenses I don't think that a strong constrast should be a good thing, I like the medium, normal contrast. This let me work with PP in a better way. The contrastier lenses are more limited to the PP to me. The goal in PP works is a lens with high resolution power and neutral constrast.
At least, I see in that way. Regards, Rino. |
It all depends on YOU. What YOU want. Either digital or film. PP or no PP.
If I want less contrast, Ill use Superia400 (or Profoto, if I want less speed). Alot of contrast would be Kodak400BW. If I want to do bigger prints, usually use Reala. When I go out, I know what I want to do.
Overall, if PP is important, contrast is actually bad, but mightier RAWs handle it fine anyhow....
_________________
The future is analogue.
23 cameras, 25 lenses and counting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
| estudleon wrote: |
If I buy a lens with F/1,4 aperture, why will I have to use it at F/2,8 or 4 to take a good pic. And so F/1,4 what for?
The goal in PP works is a lens with high resolution power and neutral constrast. |
As far as I'm concerned f/1.4 is perfectly usable in most cases with the Samyang. I don't think this test setup is representative of most portrait situations.
The Canon 85L has even slighty higher contrast than the Samyang, and it also has CA problems (blue fringing worse than Samyang). I don't have to tell you how popular the 85L is as a portrait lens. I don't think most photographers will be struggling with the contrast of the 85L, and portrait photgraphers (esp. fashion) often do a lot of PP anyway to make skin/hair look better, etc.
Although I kind of know what you mean, technically speaking there is no such thing as neutral contrast. There is only a varying degree of veiling glare. Veiling glare lifts the shadows with "false" light from internal reflections, so it reduces the dynamic range with non-image information. I guess that there are still some (seemingly) practical benefits in that.
Personally I prefer to use a lens that requires as little PP as possible. The more you have to squeeze contrast/saturation out of your files, the more chance that it will get a 'digital', manipulated look. Usually I do use the Neutral camera profile on my 5D though because "Standard" pumps up the contrast/saturation too much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjphoto
Joined: 17 Mar 2009
Posts: 410
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jjphoto wrote:
Good test, thanks for posting.
I'm surprised how much CA there is with the Samyang.
JJ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kram
Joined: 06 Feb 2010
Posts: 1344
Location: Portland, OR
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kram wrote:
| patrickh wrote: |
Olympus by a long way for my money
Nice samples/test - thanks |
+1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
