Contax Planar 1.4/85 and Canon EF 2/100 Blind test

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Here's a blind test for you to try.

Here you have two images:

http://www.orio.ws/temp/lens1.htm
http://www.orio.ws/temp/lens2.htm

They are both taken with the same camera, but the lenses are different.
They are both tele lenses, one is autofocus the other is manual focus.
The focal lenght is not the same, I recomposed the view to let the images have the same proportions, but the fact that one lens is slightly longer than the other creates a difference in the DOF (like you know, with the same aperture, a longer focal lens will have a shallower DOF than a shorter focal lenght.).
Anyway please make your guess and tell what you think lens A is and what you think lens B is.
Smile

And it would be interesting if you could also give a reason for your guess.

The images have NOT been sharpened, not even a minimum, so keep in mind that what you are seeing is the output from a camera through an antialiasing filter that has not been compensated for. The final images are supposed to be a little sharper than this.

Both photos were taken at f/5.6

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

On this subject I can't make any difference,perhaps A is sharper and better.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

lahnet · Joined: 10 Apr 2007 Posts: 1164 Location: Denmark

I can not tell what is MF.

But I like the first picture the most. Better shadows and sharper.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

I have to add something about the shooting.
I forgot to disable the AWB (automatic white balance).
So if there were differences in the colour renditions, the camera would have zeroed them.
In this kind of tests one has to use a fixed white balance value on both images, this would let the differences in colour surface.

poilu · Expire: 2019-08-29

1 is AF, 2 is manual because 1 is cold & high contrast et 2 is warm & smooth
Hum Confused

what is the price Laughing

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Nobody else interested in guessing? Sad

Jesito · Expire: 2015-01-07

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

I find 1 to be more analytical, and definitely sharper. The difference in boke is partly due to the DOF - with the #2 being longer focal length. #1 is MF and #2 is AF. As for make - no idea.

patrickh

hacksawbob · Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 1293 Location: LANCS UK

I honestly couldn't tell you, I have studied them at length and I Cant say which I prefer, I would say that the foreground section of the rubber shoulder pad is better (resolution) on 1 and 1 has more contrast but 2 has more tonal range, I may prefer the bokeh on 2 slightlyas well. as for the lens I am going to stick my neck out and say 2 is russian and therefore 1 is af and Japenese. How about 2 is a jupiter 11A/37 as a stab in the dark and the 1 AF? well a canon EF maybe?

LucisPictor · Expire: 2013-12-03

Really hard to say...

No.1 is sharper and shows more details.
No.2 has a much creamier bokeh.

Thus I also would say No.1 is the AF-lens and No.2 the MF-lens.

But, to be honest, I wouldn't bet on that. It rather is a wild stab in the dark.

But what I can tell is that even people who deal with lenses a lot cannot tell the difference between a modern AF and an old MF lens. This is quite telling, isn't it.
So, help me, what was the reason again to spend hundreds of Euros for an AF lens? Wink

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Ok I give the solution to the quiz Smile

Lens 1 is Contax Planar 1.4/85
Lens 2 is Canon EF 2/100

Comments?

Farside · Expire: 2013-12-27

A. is definitely sharper and contrastier and has more of an pleasing quality.
As to what the lenses are, I haven't a clue - there's so many they could be.

<edit>
Hah, you posted the answer a minute before I posted. Nice to see I did prefer the MF Smile

hacksawbob · Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 1293 Location: LANCS UK

almost right then just the wrong way around!, interesting to compare like this gives an honest approach with out "baggage" of your predjudice

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Borges · Joined: 09 Mar 2007 Posts: 646 Location: Moers, Germany

I think I have to do a second test with ef 2/100 and helios 40 1.4/85. My EF is too contrasty, too sharp and too cold for my taste. Very Happy

Michael

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

OK since nobody comments for now, I'll add my own.

I think that the main difference between the two lenses is the low contrast of the Canon lens.
I don't know if any of you remembers my comments about some pictures I took with this lens in the first Sunday of the Carnival. I said that although detailed, the photos taken with the AF lens looked "flat" to me compared to my manual lenses.
I think that these two photos prove that, and the fact that many of the blind comments were made in that direction, proves I think that this was not prejudice, but a valid judgement.

In my opinion, the Zeiss lens here wins thanks to the superior T* coating.
The T* coating is the technology that Zeiss is most proud about, and I think we can see why.
The Planar photo appear more solid and dimensional compared to the Canon photo.
And it's not only a matter of macrocontrast, it also has to do with the microcontrast.
Please compare areas of the image where you have tiny details hit by the lateral sunlight. A good point is the back of the leather strap, but there are others that you can compare. The higher microcontrast in the Planar lens gives the feeling of more "relief", especially if you look at the whole picture these parts seem to "pop out" more compared to the Canon image.
This is nothing but the famous "Zeiss 3D effect". It exists, it is not a fairytale. Look at the metal rivets. The higher microcontrast makes the metal more "alive" and it makes you feel like if you could feel the beveling of the metal and the insertion into the leather. In the Canon picture, this impression is there also but it's much weaker.
Finally, the sharpness, I have seen the images after the standard sharpening and the differences are not so big, although the Planar still remains sharper. So why everyone perceived more sharpness in the Planar in these unsharpened images? Rightly because of the microcontrast. I don't know the resolvance figures of these two lenses, but I would bet that the Canon's not that much inferior to the Planar lens. But because of the flatter tones, it looks less detailed than it actually is.

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

Hey Orio - you're not the only swift one Laughing

patrickh · Expire: 2011-11-18

Quite agree with your analysis Orio. The "3D" effect is actually quite marked with only a few truly top of the class lenses and that Zeiss has to be one of them.

LucisPictor · Expire: 2013-12-03

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

Well, I'm sorry I missed the quiz last night. I spent all Thursday night at the local hospital Accident & Emergency unit with a suspected broken shoulder blade. Luckily it turned out to be bruising, but it's still very painful.

Anyway, there's no way I would have got it right. I correctly worked out from the DOF that the longer focal length was No 2 and for a minute I thought it might be taken with Jupiter-21 because the lens case in the picture looks familiar (except brown v black). However, the colour and contrast are definitely not J-21 quality, so I was stuck. As for No 1 I guessed it might be one of your Oberkochen or Leica lenses, but that was as far as I got.

Nice idea Orio.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04